I got an email of an article addressing this issue, and I thought it was fantastic. How many of us go to jobs that require random drug testing? A great portion of our taxes go to food stamps and welfare cash for people who DON'T have to take random drug tests. Usually (not always, but usually) those are the people who have drug and alcohol problems that they use their welfare check to keep funding! Those people don't work because they would rather do drugs, and nobody stops them. Think of how much money our society would save if those people all had to be drug tested to keep getting their checks. What does everyone think of this?!
2007-01-25 07:18:37 · 8 answers · asked by Sara 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
OK, so apparently most of you have never lived in the ghetto and seen how many unemployed people mill around doing nothing but selling crack on the corner while they keep collecting our money in the mailbox every week. Great.
Those of you who are simultaneously saying "we barely spend money on them", and then whine about the extra cost of a urine test... what? Seriously? We pay those people each over $1000 a month, a urine test would cost probably less than $15... yeah, that makes sense! /rolleyes
If my tax dollars have to go to crackheads with no job, then they sure as crap better be getting drug tested too... they don't even work for their money!
2007-01-25 08:40:10 · update #1
boy, how much more will it cost to add a pee line and run tests on all of them?
if it isn't "usually", you just made the whole thing cost 3 times as much. congrats! oh, and good luck testing for alcohol.
"Those of you who are simultaneously saying "we barely spend money on them", and then whine about the extra cost of a urine test... what? Seriously? We pay those people each over $1000 a month, a urine test would cost probably less than $15... yeah, that makes sense! /rolleyes"
oh lord... that's my entire point. you say they're all on crack... how do you test for crack? oh, if you don't do it for 3 to 5 days, there isn't any in your pee. those tests are randomized at people's jobs because they're there every day and that's the only way they work. when you get welfare, you make an appointment with your caseworker. which gives you ample time not to do any crack. see how this makes sense? you say they go once a month so thats $15 times a lot every month to bust no one but the really really dumb ones that probably just miss their appointments anyway.
2007-01-25 07:29:27 · answer #1 · answered by uncle osbert 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Do you also think that euthanasia is a good way to get rid of the elderly and the handicapped and sick too? Anyone in the world is on some pill, even if it is an herbal tea or caffeine or a vitamin?
The money we spend here on our people in need is so minor in comparison to the money we send in aid to foreigners it is pathetic? We don't even have a health care plan at an affordable rate for our people that work. And we are losing our jobs here and we are starving here. Do you think we should waste money for a guy who smokes weed? I worked for a company that tested people? Do you know how much that would cost per person if the government did that? millions upon millions! All the people I know are against any control by any government. I do not take illegal drugs. But I sure know plenty of big business folks hooked on anti-depressants and that is on the real. If you know about the insurance companies that rule the world along with oil, and telecommunication systems. The insurance companies wanted to be able to give all medical records out to big businesses so they could discriminate for hiring people? Not for drug usage but for illnesses? Discrimination for Diabetes, Liver disease, heart problems, Glaucoma, etc., Because they wanted to cut costs on the people then. And if they have no jobs they get no health care. Why don't you read how much money the insurance companies pay at the Lobbies in DC to stop health care by discriminating? Billions? Do you know that they don't just test for drugs in the urine? Diabetes etc., and that they would if they had their way make you a clone? Fight against the government and the insurance companies and don't be silly about this penny ante expense of welfare for our own people and then you will support the illegals and the foreigners? What about the War spending?
Even Great Britain takes care of their drug addicts and they employ them as well if they can. No one is perfect, and i know a lot of people that got hooked in Viet Nam and never kicked it thanks to our government?????hmmmmm a different twist huh?
And they also lost arms and legs, hands and eyes, what should we do with those people eh? Everyone has a personal problem and not one of us is above it and we should not judge others for our penny ante complaints. That check that anyone gets our tax dollars don't even cover a penny. That is paid off by our big business taxes. So I would not worry about your wallet if I were you or that penny ante check of maybe 600 dollars or 1000? Care about the numbers with 6 zeros that come monthly to these greedy thieves in government?
2007-01-25 07:56:30 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Wouldn't it be much easier to get rid of "public assistance" rather than constatnly trying to fix it? There are thousands of private charities that are willing to do the job. The private sector gives us a choice. If I give my money to the Red Cross, and they waste it then I can stop giving to them, and give to United Way instead. With government programs, I have no choice and no freedom. I have to pay my taxes (or go to jail) and when the government wastes it I can't do anything. How is that a good system? Competition improves everything, even helping the less fortunate.
2007-01-25 07:36:42 · answer #3 · answered by Aegis of Freedom 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Relax darlin'; the total welfare budget represents less than 1% of the total, national budget deficit!
Think of all the money we would save if the US would pull out of Iraq..today!
Think of all the money the US would have if we would deny Georgy-boy his presidential pension once he leaves office!
2007-01-25 07:35:18 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
instead of enforcing urine testing to people on public assistance...why don't you spend your time fighting urine testing for all people.
No one should be subject to this.
If your employer feels as though you might be on drugs...and has cause to think so...then yes.
But I should not have to prove to anyone that I am not on drugs...just because.
You are looking at this the wrong way!
2007-01-25 07:29:20 · answer #5 · answered by Susan S 1 · 3⤊ 2⤋
I hope your swastika doesn't rub off in the shower, Sara.
2007-01-25 08:01:19 · answer #6 · answered by Panama Jack 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I don't like it , its a silly idea
2007-01-25 07:39:47 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
absolutely!
2007-01-25 07:36:30 · answer #8 · answered by slabsidebass 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋