100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: States starting to Require Drug Testing for Welfare | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
I'd wager that our government assistance programs cost over 1000x as much as the total congressional salaries. In 2009: $13,686,420.83 in wages was paid to State Senators and Representatives in Illinois alone. In 2009: $65.6 million was paid out in Welfare to the entire U.S. This according to CBS News. You do the math, my friend. I was deliberately speaking of our total assistance programs, not just welfare. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
heavenlyboy34
on
Wed 01/04/12 07:40 PM
|
|
Someone in Gov must be reading the forums and seeing a lot of POed folks not wanting their tax dollars supporting idiots who want to stay loaded. I am reading all over the net that Florida, Kentucky, and Missouri are requiring drug testing to get welfare. IMO, that will cut a big chunk of money tax payers money that goes to supporting their habits. So long weed smokers and other dopers. "Florida is the first state that will require drug testing when applying for welfare (effective July 1st)! Some people are crying this is unconstitutional. How is this unconstitutional yet it's okay that every working person had to pass a drug test in order to support those on welfare? Who else thinks all 50 states should apply this law? _______________________________________________________________ Open them FEMA Camp gates.   FEMA camps and federal mandates like you mention are unconstitutional (except when applying for federal benefits. The FEMA camps should be torn down. SSI unemployment and disability are currently local everywhere last I checked). It would be fine for states to implement drug testing, though. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is just another way of humiliating them. It should only offend the dopers. 10 to 1 they won't even show for the test. If someone is truly needy, they won't be dopin'. It's not about offending anyone...it's about what's fair. There are MANY government checks that go out each month...we should test ALL who get a check, not just poor people getting welfare. Ever have an addiction willing? There ya' go. You bet. I'd do any drug/alcohol test. Test anyone on any program that the person hasn't paid into. Welfare isn't a right. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It isn't just congress massage. There are a gazillion (exaggeration) different government checks...we are zeroing in on strictly food stamp and tanf recipients. I don't drug and I don't get welfare, doesn't affect me either way. I'm just seeing this scream unfair! We are singling out the very poor and assuming the worst about them..because they are poor. Other wise disability, SSI..etc. recipients would have to also test. Really, there are people pushing for testing of welfare but not of SSI, disability? I'm sure some people are assuming the worst about the poor because they are poor, but I'm not. You know, its not uncommon for the sad, destitute looking person panhandling outside the fancy restaurant to actually have a nice warm bed and plenty of money for food - while the quiet, clean, over-suntanned guy sitting all day in the corner at the library has literally no money, sleeps on pavement and is too proud to ask for help. My point is, its the problem isn't poor people, its people who take advantage of our desire to help poor people. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Sin_and_Sorrow
on
Wed 01/04/12 07:46 PM
|
|
I'd wager that our government assistance programs cost over 1000x as much as the total congressional salaries. In 2009: $13,686,420.83 in wages was paid to State Senators and Representatives in Illinois alone. In 2009: $65.6 million was paid out in Welfare to the entire U.S. This according to CBS News. You do the math, my friend. I was deliberately speaking of our total assistance programs, not just welfare. So, you tack on your few extra numbers. Either way.. Almost 14 mil to State Reps and Senators Just in Illinois. We'll say 1 billion in total across the States. Saying that each state has 14 mil. 14 x 50 = 700 Million. ..and that's still not all the politicians. I'm merely pointing out that 1000x is a bit of an overkill exaggeration; that's all. More yes, but 1000x more? o.O Oh and ps. Only a few things on your list weren't in my calculations. :X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Test anyone on any program that the person hasn't paid into. Thats an interesting distinction. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is just another way of humiliating them. It should only offend the dopers. 10 to 1 they won't even show for the test. If someone is truly needy, they won't be dopin'. It's not about offending anyone...it's about what's fair. There are MANY government checks that go out each month...we should test ALL who get a check, not just poor people getting welfare. Ever have an addiction willing? There ya' go. You bet. I'd do any drug/alcohol test. Test anyone on any program that the person hasn't paid into. Welfare isn't a right. So what other 'welfare' programs should we be testing for drug use besides the poor with children? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Someone in Gov must be reading the forums and seeing a lot of POed folks not wanting their tax dollars supporting idiots who want to stay loaded. I am reading all over the net that Florida, Kentucky, and Missouri are requiring drug testing to get welfare. IMO, that will cut a big chunk of money tax payers money that goes to supporting their habits. So long weed smokers and other dopers. "Florida is the first state that will require drug testing when applying for welfare (effective July 1st)! Some people are crying this is unconstitutional. How is this unconstitutional yet it's okay that every working person had to pass a drug test in order to support those on welfare? Who else thinks all 50 states should apply this law? _______________________________________________________________ Open them FEMA Camp gates. FEMA camps and federal mandates like you mention are unconstitutional (except when applying for federal benefits. The FEMA camps should be torn down. SSI unemployment and disability are currently local everywhere last I checked). It would be fine for states to implement drug testing, though. Yes, SSI is local. I believe State checks are issued. What I have heard, SSD is Federal. Before direct deposit, folks were getting Federal checks. As far as FEMA Camps, can't states request use of them to hold non-violent, drug related offenders and offer them drug rehab/counseling, job training and work release programs. I understand, there will be those who will just work the system til they are cut loose. They can be profiled and randomly tested. However, as I stated before. Any one who knows they would fail probably wouldn't show and they could automatically be dropped from the role. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is just another way of humiliating them. It should only offend the dopers. 10 to 1 they won't even show for the test. If someone is truly needy, they won't be dopin'. It's not about offending anyone...it's about what's fair. There are MANY government checks that go out each month...we should test ALL who get a check, not just poor people getting welfare. Ever have an addiction willing? There ya' go. You bet. I'd do any drug/alcohol test. Test anyone on any program that the person hasn't paid into. Welfare isn't a right. So what other 'welfare' programs should we be testing for drug use besides the poor with children? Any program that said State has authority over. I'd suggest testing State Gov workers also. Including their politicians. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It isn't just congress massage. There are a gazillion (exaggeration) different government checks...we are zeroing in on strictly food stamp and tanf recipients. I don't drug and I don't get welfare, doesn't affect me either way. I'm just seeing this scream unfair! We are singling out the very poor and assuming the worst about them..because they are poor. Other wise disability, SSI..etc. recipients would have to also test. Really, there are people pushing for testing of welfare but not of SSI, disability? I'm sure some people are assuming the worst about the poor because they are poor, but I'm not. You know, its not uncommon for the sad, destitute looking person panhandling outside the fancy restaurant to actually have a nice warm bed and plenty of money for food - while the quiet, clean, over-suntanned guy sitting all day in the corner at the library has literally no money, sleeps on pavement and is too proud to ask for help. My point is, its the problem isn't poor people, its people who take advantage of our desire to help poor people. There has always and will always be those who take advantage.. I think it's important we stay human. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Sin_and_Sorrow
on
Wed 01/04/12 07:53 PM
|
|
Ugh..
You all keep categorizing "Welfare" with "Poor". Did you know: That in my area, almost everybody in the "Welfare Projects" drives? Where I, who works, can't afford the insurance, gas, etc on my vehicle. So there it sits. Plus maintaining it. Also, and furthermore; In those same projects you will find parked outside of their houses: 16 BMW's. 5 Hummers. 7 Motorcycles. 3 Custom Lincoln Continentals (Huge rims). And those really big black trucks (FBI style) with custom rims. All have loud sound systems. For the PR Day Parade; they rented out the football stadium for 50K. Their kids wear designer clothing; most of them have three pairs of Nikes. Granted, that's not all of them, but when I think 'poor', I'm not thinking any of those things should be in the same sentence. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My point is, its the problem isn't poor people, its people who take advantage of our desire to help poor people. What he said. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'd wager that our government assistance programs cost over 1000x as much as the total congressional salaries. In 2009: $13,686,420.83 in wages was paid to State Senators and Representatives in Illinois alone. In 2009: $65.6 million was paid out in Welfare to the entire U.S. This according to CBS News. You do the math, my friend. I was deliberately speaking of our total assistance programs, not just welfare. So, you tack on your few extra numbers. Either way.. Almost 14 mil to State Reps and Senators Just in Illinois. We'll say 1 billion in total across the States. Saying that each state has 14 mil. 14 x 50 = 700 Million. ..and that's still not all the politicians. I'm merely pointing out that 1000x is a bit of an overkill exaggeration; that's all. More yes, but 1000x more? o.O Oh and ps. Only a few things on your list weren't in my calculations. :X It looks to me that you just showed that the 1000x number (which I did truly just pull out of my ***!) happens to be right. I originally said: I'd wager that our government assistance programs cost over 1000x as much as the total congressional salaries. And now you've estimated congressional salaries to be around 700 million, and this graphic shows our total aid to be 650 billion. 1000x is within the margin of error for your estimate. I said "1000x" thinking I could easily be wrong by a whole order of magnitude. Its a lot closer than I expected. Yeah, I didn't originally have in mind [a]all of the aid programs on that list (I wasn't thinking EIC, MWP, nor TARP)... But based on the numbers in the graphic, and the numbers you are giving, it looks like I was right on the money. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Furthermore...
ODB was on Welfare. He was multi millionaire. Is there loopholes? Bet'cher anus.! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'd wager that our government assistance programs cost over 1000x as much as the total congressional salaries. In 2009: $13,686,420.83 in wages was paid to State Senators and Representatives in Illinois alone. In 2009: $65.6 million was paid out in Welfare to the entire U.S. This according to CBS News. You do the math, my friend. I was deliberately speaking of our total assistance programs, not just welfare. So, you tack on your few extra numbers. Either way.. Almost 14 mil to State Reps and Senators Just in Illinois. We'll say 1 billion in total across the States. Saying that each state has 14 mil. 14 x 50 = 700 Million. ..and that's still not all the politicians. I'm merely pointing out that 1000x is a bit of an overkill exaggeration; that's all. More yes, but 1000x more? o.O Oh and ps. Only a few things on your list weren't in my calculations. :X It looks to me that you just showed that the 1000x number (which I did truly just pull out of my ***!) happens to be right. I originally said: I'd wager that our government assistance programs cost over 1000x as much as the total congressional salaries. And now you've estimated congressional salaries to be around 700 million, and this graphic shows our total aid to be 650 billion. 1000x is within the margin of error for your estimate. I said "1000x" thinking I could easily be wrong by a whole order of magnitude. Its a lot closer than I expected. Yeah, I didn't originally have in mind [a]all of the aid programs on that list (I wasn't thinking EIC, MWP, nor TARP)... But based on the numbers in the graphic, and the numbers you are giving, it looks like I was right on the money. ..that's not all of the politicians... Not even close. :O |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There has always and will always be those who take advantage.. I think it's important we stay human. I agree. Its just that the difference between 'actually poor' and 'apparently poor' is important to me, having interviewed many hundreds of poor people, street people, panhandlers, travelers, etc. I was shocked to learn how some of the travel kids out there live essentially off of nothing, scavenging their clothes and eating from dumpsters, while some of the skilled and capable panhandlers actually had higher standards of living than I did. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..that's not all of the politicians... Not even close. :O Why do you keep going on about that? The topic to our little tangent (in which you showed me how surprisingly accurate my baseless speculation was) was congressional salaries. Even when I'm pulling random numbers out of my *** I try to say what I mean. So... wow! It looks like the actual salaries of congresspeople is only 1/1,000 the costs of all our aid programs. Remaining question is: should we be drug testing anyone and everyone who benefits from any of those aid programs? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Sin_and_Sorrow
on
Wed 01/04/12 08:08 PM
|
|
To prove that this whole topic is pointless to debate.
Unless you are gonna do what about? Have a party? March to DC? I just don't get why people argue on and on about politics. It's a useless machine. We are their tools. There's ways to pass a drug test. So if you truly think the whole idea is going to work? Have fun telling yourself that. Oh, and I gave my piece. That's just the one you kept referring me with. So don't blame me. :O |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Ladylid2012
on
Wed 01/04/12 08:14 PM
|
|
There has always and will always be those who take advantage.. I think it's important we stay human. I agree. Its just that the difference between 'actually poor' and 'apparently poor' is important to me, having interviewed many hundreds of poor people, street people, panhandlers, travelers, etc. I was shocked to learn how some of the travel kids out there live essentially off of nothing, scavenging their clothes and eating from dumpsters, while some of the skilled and capable panhandlers actually had higher standards of living than I did. Well, I have no problem with testing the welfare recipients as long as we are testing ALL who receive ANY government checks. It's only fair. Other wise we are just degrading the poor, more. We could have fed the world with the 270 million dollars we spent every single day for the last 9 1/2 years on war. I guess it's all about what really matters... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Sin_and_Sorrow
on
Wed 01/04/12 08:10 PM
|
|
Plus:
1 Billion 700 Million That's only 300 m difference. So, idk where you got that? Just saying. I'm out of this thread. |
|
|
|
|
