2007-08-19 17:07:25 · 17 answers · asked by Illene Dover 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
They should have to pass in order to receive their bi-monthly assistance. I can see it now, most will fail and we could finally use those taxes on people who are worth it. Who else thinks this is an excellent idea?
2007-08-19 17:11:18 · update #1
I think that having drug tests would not be a bad idea. If you think about it, we have to get drug tests in order to get a job now days. They could take a strand of hair each time some one came in to do paper work. From what I hear it stays in your hair for months.
They could save allot of money by discontinuing service to those who abuse drugs.
I am not normally supportive of drug testing in all cases but this is a situation where they are giving you money to help support children. If I was giving money to some one for the kids, I would want to know that they were not using it to buy drugs.
2007-08-19 18:06:50 · answer #1 · answered by letfreedomring 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Looks good in theory, but people that abuse drugs tend to have mental illness issuses. Therefore, more rehab and less prisons is the way to go. Nation like Untied States should try to reduce the prison population of drug offenders, and use that space for sexual predators that are lot more dangerous to society. Sex education should be consulpltory in schools, and welfare system is abused by 10% of of the population that need such services. Therefore, drug testing only works to catch pot smokers, and not cokeheads, methusers because the drugs leaves the system quicker. You wont save that much money with drug testing, and it better to abolished the minimum wage, and reduce taxation on the lowest incomes.
2007-08-19 20:35:37 · answer #2 · answered by ram456456 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No. no longer all jobs require drug try. i does no longer comply with it. That subject is being fastened with the recent type debit taking part in cards. you have make almost no longer something to get nutrition stamps. Technically, the do take a drug try whilst word for Medicaid. you decide on extra homeless on the line? a minimum of the infants have a house. The nutrition stamp card in no longer a Visa or credit card debit card.
2016-10-08 21:14:07 · answer #3 · answered by castellano 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We would save a LOT more - hundreds of billions more - if we required corporations to prove why they needed tax breaks, government hand-outs, abatements and bail-outs before handing all that money out like candy just because the companies made campaign contributions. The money we pay out in social welfare programs is a drop in the bucket compared to the hundreds of billions we give away in corporate welfare programs.
-RKO- 08/19/07
2007-08-19 17:17:43 · answer #4 · answered by -RKO- 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I agree if the people are doing illegal drugs then they should not be allowed to get food stamps or welfare. The catch is if they have kids and most of them do. How do we deal with that problem other than taking them out of the home. Overall I agree with you.
2007-08-19 17:16:32 · answer #5 · answered by Prof. Dave 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Unfortunately, most people qualify for government assistance because they are classified as drug and/or alcohol addicts. I have a friend who was in the hospital dying with cancer, unable to work (though he had worked for 25 + years before the cancer) he had lost everything he had worked for in bankruptcy due to medical bills. He had to hire a lawyer(his own money) to get government assistance. He had a neighbor who got a check every month just for being a certified alcoholic. ( and yes he bought beer with it).
2007-08-22 08:16:04 · answer #6 · answered by jarodgirl 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think it's a bad idea at all but I think it's awfully small minded of you to assume that most people who need public assistance are drug abusers, because that is certainly not the case.
2007-08-19 17:31:39 · answer #7 · answered by Jackie Oh! 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
They had a show about that on nightline I believe it could save billions
As I understand it, here in Texas you can only collect for three years then you are cut off for five years. unless you are on SSI then it is on a conditional basis.
If you have had any drug related criminal charges you are denied forever.
2007-08-19 17:11:41 · answer #8 · answered by Robert F 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The problem is to get welfare (TANF), you need to have children. If we don't take the children away and cut off TANF, we are penalizing the children. If we do take the children away, we spend the same money aiding the foster parents.
2007-08-19 17:55:08 · answer #9 · answered by Tmess2 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I love the way Conservatives are all for more and bigger government when it comes to violating the US Constitution and inflicting misery on people.
Is there a ‘traitor’ gene or is it just religious/conservative brainwashing that turns so many Americans against their nation?
2007-08-19 17:17:45 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋