Florida governor signs welfare drug-screen measure....Good or Bad?

[essential1]

Originally Posted by Cedric Ceballos 1995 Lakers

maybe it's just me but im far more concerned with big corporations doing shady fraudulent activities that involve real money than a few poor people abusing the little handout they get.

aside from that, the money it's going to cost to do these drug screenings isn't worth it.

plus crime probably will go up as well, if you pull the plug on the little these dudes are getting on their welfare checks, what do you think their going to do to get money and take care of their habits. dudes are going to be in the street robbing and stealing.

And that's the way the cookie crumbles

 

[-Red-]

Originally Posted by PoloLax

  Do you understand how ludicrous that is and what an invasion to privacy that constitutes?  And how much taxpayer money it would cost to establish and maintain such a far-reaching system?  And what about alcohol or cocaine, substances that can leave your system in a matter of a day or two, if not hours?  Do we give people a test every day?  What about people who work for corporations that get government money - their salary is being paid for or at least subsidized by the government.  Do we test every worker in a company with 2,000 workers?

I'm just trying to get an understanding of how you envision such a system to work and what type of public benefit you think it will provide.

Would it cost alot to drug test? I don't know the specific numbers so I can't say. What I will say is look at it from an ideological standpoint. Do people who are out abusing drugs deserve to receive money that will in return just go to support that habit?

I don't think they do. Call me crazy, call me whatever. There was thread made about this months ago and some NT members called me "spoiled." I'm not even close to spoiled. I just was taught don't do drugs. Period.

To me it's not about whether or not people "deserve" to receive public aid if they use drugs.  People deserve adequate affordable housing, health care, living wage employment, quality education, subsidized day care, etc.  I don't even like the concept of "welfare" nor how it manifests itself in this country but this is the reality that we're living in.  If we approached the aforementioned things as rights in this country there would be no need for "welfare" and I would be ALL for that.

This is a great article about the irrationality, ineffectiveness, and unconstitutionality of mandatory drug testing for welfare recipients:

http://www.aclu.org/drug-...ts-condition-eligibility

Originally Posted by thadangerousmind

Originally Posted by red mpls


You do realize that there's a FIVE-YEAR LIFETIME LIMIT on "welfare" right?  There is no such thing as a "career welfare recipient" you clown.

Y'all are talking straight out your @$! holes

There is no limit on Food Stamps and Medicaid though. The taxpayers have to take care of her mistakes for as long as she can make them. I don't feel bad for anybody with 5-6 kids that are living off of the govt. She didn't have to have those kids there were options.

I'm fully aware of that.  Nor should there be a limit.  Food and access to medical care are basic human rights.  It's not about "feeling bad" for anyone, it's about ensuring that the human rights of every citizen in this country are respected.  What would be the alternative to food stamps and Medicaid?  Little kids starving and dying of simple asthma attacks as routine occurrences?  If anything both programs should be expanded...

 

[-Red-]

Originally Posted by PoloLax

  Do you understand how ludicrous that is and what an invasion to privacy that constitutes?  And how much taxpayer money it would cost to establish and maintain such a far-reaching system?  And what about alcohol or cocaine, substances that can leave your system in a matter of a day or two, if not hours?  Do we give people a test every day?  What about people who work for corporations that get government money - their salary is being paid for or at least subsidized by the government.  Do we test every worker in a company with 2,000 workers?

I'm just trying to get an understanding of how you envision such a system to work and what type of public benefit you think it will provide.

Would it cost alot to drug test? I don't know the specific numbers so I can't say. What I will say is look at it from an ideological standpoint. Do people who are out abusing drugs deserve to receive money that will in return just go to support that habit?

I don't think they do. Call me crazy, call me whatever. There was thread made about this months ago and some NT members called me "spoiled." I'm not even close to spoiled. I just was taught don't do drugs. Period.

To me it's not about whether or not people "deserve" to receive public aid if they use drugs.  People deserve adequate affordable housing, health care, living wage employment, quality education, subsidized day care, etc.  I don't even like the concept of "welfare" nor how it manifests itself in this country but this is the reality that we're living in.  If we approached the aforementioned things as rights in this country there would be no need for "welfare" and I would be ALL for that.

This is a great article about the irrationality, ineffectiveness, and unconstitutionality of mandatory drug testing for welfare recipients:

http://www.aclu.org/drug-...ts-condition-eligibility

Originally Posted by thadangerousmind

Originally Posted by red mpls


You do realize that there's a FIVE-YEAR LIFETIME LIMIT on "welfare" right?  There is no such thing as a "career welfare recipient" you clown.

Y'all are talking straight out your @$! holes

There is no limit on Food Stamps and Medicaid though. The taxpayers have to take care of her mistakes for as long as she can make them. I don't feel bad for anybody with 5-6 kids that are living off of the govt. She didn't have to have those kids there were options.

I'm fully aware of that.  Nor should there be a limit.  Food and access to medical care are basic human rights.  It's not about "feeling bad" for anyone, it's about ensuring that the human rights of every citizen in this country are respected.  What would be the alternative to food stamps and Medicaid?  Little kids starving and dying of simple asthma attacks as routine occurrences?  If anything both programs should be expanded...

 

[crcballer55]

Originally Posted by red mpls

Originally Posted by PoloLax

  Do you understand how ludicrous that is and what an invasion to privacy that constitutes?  And how much taxpayer money it would cost to establish and maintain such a far-reaching system?  And what about alcohol or cocaine, substances that can leave your system in a matter of a day or two, if not hours?  Do we give people a test every day?  What about people who work for corporations that get government money - their salary is being paid for or at least subsidized by the government.  Do we test every worker in a company with 2,000 workers?

I'm just trying to get an understanding of how you envision such a system to work and what type of public benefit you think it will provide.

Would it cost alot to drug test? I don't know the specific numbers so I can't say. What I will say is look at it from an ideological standpoint. Do people who are out abusing drugs deserve to receive money that will in return just go to support that habit?

I don't think they do. Call me crazy, call me whatever. There was thread made about this months ago and some NT members called me "spoiled." I'm not even close to spoiled. I just was taught don't do drugs. Period.

To me it's not about whether or not people "deserve" to receive public aid if they use drugs.  People deserve adequate affordable housing, health care, living wage employment, quality education, subsidized day care, etc.  I don't even like the concept of "welfare" nor how it manifests itself in this country but this is the reality that we're living in.  If we approached the aforementioned things as rights in this country there would be no need for "welfare" and I would be ALL for that.

This is a great article about the irrationality, ineffectiveness, and unconstitutionality of mandatory drug testing for welfare recipients:

http://www.aclu.org/drug-...ts-condition-eligibility


Please elaborate on your view of the difference between what you stated above as "rights" and welfare.  The only "rights" we are guaranteed in America were those stated in the Constitution.  Everything else has just been added on over time.

 

[crcballer55]

Originally Posted by red mpls

Originally Posted by PoloLax

  Do you understand how ludicrous that is and what an invasion to privacy that constitutes?  And how much taxpayer money it would cost to establish and maintain such a far-reaching system?  And what about alcohol or cocaine, substances that can leave your system in a matter of a day or two, if not hours?  Do we give people a test every day?  What about people who work for corporations that get government money - their salary is being paid for or at least subsidized by the government.  Do we test every worker in a company with 2,000 workers?

I'm just trying to get an understanding of how you envision such a system to work and what type of public benefit you think it will provide.

Would it cost alot to drug test? I don't know the specific numbers so I can't say. What I will say is look at it from an ideological standpoint. Do people who are out abusing drugs deserve to receive money that will in return just go to support that habit?

I don't think they do. Call me crazy, call me whatever. There was thread made about this months ago and some NT members called me "spoiled." I'm not even close to spoiled. I just was taught don't do drugs. Period.

To me it's not about whether or not people "deserve" to receive public aid if they use drugs.  People deserve adequate affordable housing, health care, living wage employment, quality education, subsidized day care, etc.  I don't even like the concept of "welfare" nor how it manifests itself in this country but this is the reality that we're living in.  If we approached the aforementioned things as rights in this country there would be no need for "welfare" and I would be ALL for that.

This is a great article about the irrationality, ineffectiveness, and unconstitutionality of mandatory drug testing for welfare recipients:

http://www.aclu.org/drug-...ts-condition-eligibility


Please elaborate on your view of the difference between what you stated above as "rights" and welfare.  The only "rights" we are guaranteed in America were those stated in the Constitution.  Everything else has just been added on over time.

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by eddiehouse5

Right. And everyone who doesn't support is an advocate for drug use. What point are you making? That this law isn't perfect? It's a start, and its better than what we previously had. Follow this laws of this country, and you'll get your benefits.

This is how I feel no one is saying the law is perfect but mutha#%$#$ its about time someone made an attempt to do something about how welfare funds are being abused in this country.

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by eddiehouse5

Right. And everyone who doesn't support is an advocate for drug use. What point are you making? That this law isn't perfect? It's a start, and its better than what we previously had. Follow this laws of this country, and you'll get your benefits.

This is how I feel no one is saying the law is perfect but mutha#%$#$ its about time someone made an attempt to do something about how welfare funds are being abused in this country.

 

[mez 0ne]

Originally Posted by eddiehouse5

You can type all the paragraphs, and essays you want. The fact still remains; if you're not on drugs, this has no effect on you.

If you're on drugs, and you're receiving welfare, maybe you should stop. What's the argument here?

These drugs tests scope for marijuana moreso since the stonger stuff is out of your system after a week.
So people who smoke marijuana should NOT get assistance? Weed is better for you than the common aspirin dude, and I don't even smoke.

This just gives people the incentive to use the stronger stuff.

 

[mez 0ne]

Originally Posted by eddiehouse5

You can type all the paragraphs, and essays you want. The fact still remains; if you're not on drugs, this has no effect on you.

If you're on drugs, and you're receiving welfare, maybe you should stop. What's the argument here?

These drugs tests scope for marijuana moreso since the stonger stuff is out of your system after a week.
So people who smoke marijuana should NOT get assistance? Weed is better for you than the common aspirin dude, and I don't even smoke.

This just gives people the incentive to use the stronger stuff.

 

[cedric ceballos 1995 lakers]

drugs are bad mmmmmmmmmmkay

 

[cedric ceballos 1995 lakers]

drugs are bad mmmmmmmmmmkay

 

[jewseejay]

what will they do if Florida becomes a medicinal state tho... this seems like cutting off the nose to spite the face

 

[jewseejay]

what will they do if Florida becomes a medicinal state tho... this seems like cutting off the nose to spite the face

 

[mez 0ne]

They would still do it because the government is backwards.

The whole "medicinal marijuana" is just comical to me, yet they want to put people in jail for using the stuff if its not labeled "medicinal", or issued by the government.

 

[mez 0ne]

They would still do it because the government is backwards.

The whole "medicinal marijuana" is just comical to me, yet they want to put people in jail for using the stuff if its not labeled "medicinal", or issued by the government.

 

[-Red-]

Originally Posted by crcballer55

Originally Posted by red mpls

Originally Posted by PoloLax



Would it cost alot to drug test? I don't know the specific numbers so I can't say. What I will say is look at it from an ideological standpoint. Do people who are out abusing drugs deserve to receive money that will in return just go to support that habit?

I don't think they do. Call me crazy, call me whatever. There was thread made about this months ago and some NT members called me "spoiled." I'm not even close to spoiled. I just was taught don't do drugs. Period.

To me it's not about whether or not people "deserve" to receive public aid if they use drugs.  People deserve adequate affordable housing, health care, living wage employment, quality education, subsidized day care, etc.  I don't even like the concept of "welfare" nor how it manifests itself in this country but this is the reality that we're living in.  If we approached the aforementioned things as rights in this country there would be no need for "welfare" and I would be ALL for that.

This is a great article about the irrationality, ineffectiveness, and unconstitutionality of mandatory drug testing for welfare recipients:

http://www.aclu.org/drug-...ts-condition-eligibility

Please elaborate on your view of the difference between what you stated above as "rights" and welfare.  The only "rights" we are guaranteed in America were those stated in the Constitution.  Everything else has just been added on over time.

Well, to elaborate I'm referring to the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights enacted in 1948 with the support of the United States.  I'm talking about human rights, NOT civil rights.  This is a full-text version of the UDHR (see specifically Articles 22, 23, 25, and 26):

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by eddiehouse5

Right. And everyone who doesn't support is an advocate for drug use. What point are you making? That this law isn't perfect? It's a start, and its better than what we previously had. Follow this laws of this country, and you'll get your benefits.

This is how I feel no one is saying the law is perfect but mutha#%$#$ its about time someone made an attempt to do something about how welfare funds are being abused in this country.

And just how are they being "abused?"  Enlighten us, please.

 

[-Red-]

Originally Posted by crcballer55

Originally Posted by red mpls

Originally Posted by PoloLax



Would it cost alot to drug test? I don't know the specific numbers so I can't say. What I will say is look at it from an ideological standpoint. Do people who are out abusing drugs deserve to receive money that will in return just go to support that habit?

I don't think they do. Call me crazy, call me whatever. There was thread made about this months ago and some NT members called me "spoiled." I'm not even close to spoiled. I just was taught don't do drugs. Period.

To me it's not about whether or not people "deserve" to receive public aid if they use drugs.  People deserve adequate affordable housing, health care, living wage employment, quality education, subsidized day care, etc.  I don't even like the concept of "welfare" nor how it manifests itself in this country but this is the reality that we're living in.  If we approached the aforementioned things as rights in this country there would be no need for "welfare" and I would be ALL for that.

This is a great article about the irrationality, ineffectiveness, and unconstitutionality of mandatory drug testing for welfare recipients:

http://www.aclu.org/drug-...ts-condition-eligibility

Please elaborate on your view of the difference between what you stated above as "rights" and welfare.  The only "rights" we are guaranteed in America were those stated in the Constitution.  Everything else has just been added on over time.

Well, to elaborate I'm referring to the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights enacted in 1948 with the support of the United States.  I'm talking about human rights, NOT civil rights.  This is a full-text version of the UDHR (see specifically Articles 22, 23, 25, and 26):

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by eddiehouse5

Right. And everyone who doesn't support is an advocate for drug use. What point are you making? That this law isn't perfect? It's a start, and its better than what we previously had. Follow this laws of this country, and you'll get your benefits.

This is how I feel no one is saying the law is perfect but mutha#%$#$ its about time someone made an attempt to do something about how welfare funds are being abused in this country.

And just how are they being "abused?"  Enlighten us, please.

 

[antonlavey]

^^^Don't play dumb with me, you may not think so but myself and many others have witnessed this first hand. You shouldn't be buying drugs and having 12 children if you're on govt assistance.

 

[antonlavey]

^^^Don't play dumb with me, you may not think so but myself and many others have witnessed this first hand. You shouldn't be buying drugs and having 12 children if you're on govt assistance.

 

[-Red-]

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

^^^Don't play dumb with me, you may not think so but myself and many others have witnessed this first hand. You shouldn't be buying drugs and having 12 children if you're on govt assistance.

It has nothing to do with "playing dumb."  Please provide us with some reputable figures that speak to these abuses.  Sorry, your personal anecdotal stories of how you've seen people "abuse" welfare don't matter.  Please come better than that, Mr. Empirical Evidence Scientist.

 

[-Red-]

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

^^^Don't play dumb with me, you may not think so but myself and many others have witnessed this first hand. You shouldn't be buying drugs and having 12 children if you're on govt assistance.

It has nothing to do with "playing dumb."  Please provide us with some reputable figures that speak to these abuses.  Sorry, your personal anecdotal stories of how you've seen people "abuse" welfare don't matter.  Please come better than that, Mr. Empirical Evidence Scientist.

 

[an dee 51o]

Originally Posted by red mpls

It has nothing to do with "playing dumb."  Please provide us with some reputable figures that speak to these abuses.  Sorry, your personal anecdotal stories of how you've seen people "abuse" welfare don't matter.  Please come better than that, Mr. Empirical Evidence Scientist.

You are playing dumb. If you've spent time in the hood, you've seen people buying liquor, cigarettes, gambling, etc with welfare checks.

I'm against this drug-screening, but I don't know how you're arguing that welfare doesn't get abused.

 

[an dee 51o]

Originally Posted by red mpls

It has nothing to do with "playing dumb."  Please provide us with some reputable figures that speak to these abuses.  Sorry, your personal anecdotal stories of how you've seen people "abuse" welfare don't matter.  Please come better than that, Mr. Empirical Evidence Scientist.

You are playing dumb. If you've spent time in the hood, you've seen people buying liquor, cigarettes, gambling, etc with welfare checks.

I'm against this drug-screening, but I don't know how you're arguing that welfare doesn't get abused.

 

[mints]

The argument that people don't want to see their tax dollars wasted on welfare never seems to take into account that even more tax dollar will be wasted on identifying the small subset of people on welfare that are abusing drugs. Although the FL law is different from pervious attempts to pass laws like this, in that the recipient must fund the test themselves, I still don't think it's going to pass judicial scrutiny. So not only will the state of FL have a crappy law passed designed to hurt the poor, but then it's going to have to spend god knows how much defending the law in courts.

It's already been said here that pretty much the only people drug tests are going to catch are pot heads, most other drugs leave your system quickly enough to not show up on urine screeners (and let's not kid ourselves, there's no way the state is going to pony up for hair tests/blood work) so the people that do get caught are going to end up being potheads.

 

[mints]

The argument that people don't want to see their tax dollars wasted on welfare never seems to take into account that even more tax dollar will be wasted on identifying the small subset of people on welfare that are abusing drugs. Although the FL law is different from pervious attempts to pass laws like this, in that the recipient must fund the test themselves, I still don't think it's going to pass judicial scrutiny. So not only will the state of FL have a crappy law passed designed to hurt the poor, but then it's going to have to spend god knows how much defending the law in courts.

It's already been said here that pretty much the only people drug tests are going to catch are pot heads, most other drugs leave your system quickly enough to not show up on urine screeners (and let's not kid ourselves, there's no way the state is going to pony up for hair tests/blood work) so the people that do get caught are going to end up being potheads.