gidet Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 http://www.sunshinestatenews.com/story/welfare-drug-test-challenge-legal-long-shotDiscuss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad324 Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 LOVE it, every state should do it/thread Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kent2406 Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 ACLU-Florida executive director Howard Simon said, "What [scott] is doing is giving ugly legitimacy to an unfortunate stereotype that has been in this country for a couple of decades -- that all welfare recipients are a bunch of drug abusers."So basically what this guy is saying, is that all employed persons are drug abusers since most employers conduct random drug testing. Weak argument! All welfare recipients should be drug tested across the nation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gidet Posted June 8, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 LOVE it, every state should do itAgreed!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beegreenstrings Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 LOVE it, every state should do it/threadDamn straight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadyone Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 Should have been that way from the beginning everywhere.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron505 Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 If we, the (employed) people that are paying for people to be on welfare have to be tested, then why shouldn't they?All states should be doing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bkizz Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 I'm all for this!! Why is hasn't been a requirement from the beginning is beyond me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anden Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 I agree with this whole heartedly. But now these drugged out fucks will be driven to crime to feed their families. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jporter12 Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 I love it! I've been agreeing with anyone that says this needs to be done for a long time! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r1crusher Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 I agree with this whole heartedly. But now these drugged out fucks will be driven to crime to feed their families.We already have a fix in place for that situation. It's call CCW. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redkow97 Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 I would like to add mandatory birth control to the list as well. The injection kind for women, so they can't just "forget" to take it. Obviously there would be medical exemptions for those who are allergic to that particular drug, or whatever, but if you can't cover your own expenses, adding a child to the budget is beyond counter-intuitive 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 I'd pay someone welfare rate to wipe my ass and clean my bikes (not using the same rag), and I wouldn't drug test.#icreatejobs #smallbusinessideas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casper Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 I'd pay someone welfare rate to wipe my ass and clean my bikes (not using the same rag), and I wouldn't drug test.#icreatejobs #smallbusinessideasI'll actually +1 this. I have quite a bit of work around the house needing done. I'd gladly pay welfare rates, but I can't afford to pay minimum wage. *cough* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casper Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 LOVE it, every state should do it/threadDitto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Butters Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 inb4jrmmiiislibtardasstrollsyouall Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casper Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 inb4jrmmiiislibtardasstrollsyouallI <3 you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gen3flygirl Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 I think this one of the few things almost everyone agrees upon. Florida FTMFW!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jblosser Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 I'm against it. I don't think the FedGov/StateGov has the power to violate anybody's right to privacy. I also don't feel they have the power to steal my money and give it to some punk bitch asshole that won't work for their drugs. The only favorable solution' date=' that doesn't violate any rights at all, is to completely abolish the entitlement.. altogether.[/quote']that works, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redkow97 Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 I'm against it. I don't think the FedGov/StateGov has the power to violate anybody's right to privacy. I also don't feel they have the power to steal my money and give it to some punk bitch asshole that won't work for their drugs. The only favorable solution' date=' that doesn't violate any rights at all, is to completely abolish the entitlement.. altogether.[/quote']I'm not anti-welfare. I think there are legitimate situations where it's necessary. I highly doubt that most recipients would meet my requirements, but that's a separate argument. As for privacy, I don't see the issue. No one is forcing people to accept welfare benefits. The drug test is a (very valid) condition which the government lays out for the recipient to get their benefits. Frankly, Uncle Sam could be a LOT more unreasonable, and I don't think they'd be out of line.It's like me charging someone $10,000/day to rent my bike. Totally unreasonable, but I'm not forcing them to accept my offer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YSR_Racer_99 Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 I agree with this whole heartedly. But now these drugged out fucks will be driven to crime to feed their families.They don't support them now. We do... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 The only favorable solution' date=' that doesn't violate any rights at all, is to completely abolish the entitlement.. altogether.[/quote']I count unemployment, medicare, and social security/disability as entitlement programs as well. Unemployment insurance is an unfair burden on 'right to work' employers. So, as long as we're abolishing entitlements.... which is fine as long as we all agree upfront and the rules are known. Don't come to the younger generation or the business owners that you have to work your entire life because you can't afford your prescription meds because you want to eat chinese buffet and not run 10ks everyday to stay healthy and in shape, you (or your grandpa, grandma, aunt uncle, sister, brother, family member/friend) are laid off because you can't compete with the new 'whippersnappers' who do things faster and better than you.And it's a lot easier to say when you are employed, medically fit and able-bodied, and not over age 65.It's also funny how everyone considers themselves "winners" as compared to the general populace. Not being a 'loser' as you define it, does not make you a winner by default. !losing != winning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redkow97 Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 I don't hate unemployment. I've never had to use it, but the people I stayed with in California accepted unemployment benefits for a few weeks to avoid missing a rent payment and effing their credit.CA cost of living is a lot different than here, but Beth and Tim had signed a lease, and then Tim immediately lost his job. I am nearly certain he accepted 3 or 4 unemployment checks before he got hired at In-N-Out Burger. Tim worked there for 10 months before getting another job as an engineer. As far as I'm concerned, that is exactly how unemployment is supposed to work. It keeps you from being late on rent, car, credit payments while you find a new job. Yes, you should have enough savings to cover that, but if I'm being honest, I just paid $6300 in tuition, and I'm about to drop another $6,000+ on a new roof. Our savings account is several thousand lower than I'd like it to be. If I lost my job tomorrow, unemployment would be a nice little cushion until I could find another full-time gig, even if it were only fast-food. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jporter12 Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 Almost.You don't count. Now get back to work. We all heart you Pauly (no homo, or is it all homo?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReconRat Posted June 8, 2011 Report Share Posted June 8, 2011 screw the reasons... shake the damn tree and let the rotten ones fall out... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.