Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Drug testing in order to get government money

65 posts in this topic

Posted

just make all drugs legal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Some states have tested welfare recipients for drugs (Florida most recently) and quickly stopped because they found that 1) people on welfare use drugs at a lower rate than the general population (drugs are expensive) and 2) it costs more money for the state to test them than they would be losing in the first place.

You mean a government run operation is losing money? Of course it costs money, but it shouldn't be looked at as a buisness. Welfare isn't there to make money.

I just speak from a working citezins point of view I'm sure someone on welfare would have a different perspective. From my perspective, the one actually paying the bill, I'd rather pay for someone who is planning on getting a job rather than one who can't.

You have to take into account that there are also a LOT more LEGIT people on welfare now. The results would be much different in a different economy.

But let's not derail the fact and the fact is passing a drug test is a must for 90% of jobs in America, and is required in order to pay the welfare checks (for the people who have a job and pay taxes), so why is everyone ok with testing the worker but not the receiver?

I dunno, just seems fuged up to me. The economy has flooded people on welfare by a huge drastic percentage so I believe that is a big part of it not only being a low percent but also a very expensive program. I am still behind the idea of it though because as someone already stated there are quite a bit of people that exploit government welfare for drugs, I have been exposed to i as well.

There are some jobs like piolets for example that I believe must be tested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Have welfare people pay for their own drug test or don't get welfare....They will get the money.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

speaking of drugs what the hell did you just try to say there

I don't get my check, I don't get no drug, PERIOD!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

But it's already proven that welfare recipients use drugs at a lower rate than non welfare recipients, and to test them takes more of your money.

So it sure sounds to me like people are willing to give up more of their tax money in order to pick out a few welfare people to further ostracize.

I am also a little sick of people saying that "people who work have to get tested, why don't welfare recipients?" - the reason you get tested for work is for insurance purposes and is a lot more cost effective for companies to get it done based on what they would lose if an employee had an accident while on drugs and the insurance company would not cover it or at least raise their rates.

The other reason people are tested before work is for security purposes, and I don't think people on welfare generally fit in that category.

I would be for initial testing for welfare recipients if it was done at our expense, and for the purpose of discovering if their need for welfare is based partially on drug abuse - but of course that's socialism in action and we can't have that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

But it's already proven that welfare recipients use drugs at a lower rate than non welfare recipients, and to test them takes more of your money.

So it sure sounds to me like people are willing to give up more of their tax money in order to pick out a few welfare people to further ostracize.

I would be for initial testing for welfare recipients if it was done at our expense, and for the purpose of discovering if their need for welfare is based partially on drug abuse - but of course that's socialism in action and we can't have that.

Sounds like the fuzzy math system. You must look to the bottom line.

Removing 1 doper from the welfare system will cover the cost of hundrends of test, effectively removing more and more. I can see a great savings here for taxpayers. Savings for taxpayers do not come along often. This one should be grabbed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Sounds like the fuzzy math system. You must look to the bottom line.

Removing 1 doper from the welfare system will cover the cost of hundrends of test, effectively removing more and more. I can see a great savings here for taxpayers. Savings for taxpayers do not come along often. This one should be grabbed.

and then what, they end up in jail? what's more expensive, welfare or prison?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Once we make it legal to have drugs, but illegal to do them while on welfare, this will be an awesome idea - rich people can do all the drugs they want, and poor people can't! Yay!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Once we make it legal to have drugs, but illegal to do them while on welfare, this will be an awesome idea - rich people can do all the drugs they want, and poor people can't! Yay!

finally something we agree on...

:iamwithstupid:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

and then what, they end up in jail? what's more expensive, welfare or prison?

The drug problem is another subject. My solution would be to bring it in in 18 wheelers and give it away free. The problem would then go away pretty quick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The drug problem is another subject. My solution would be to bring it in in 18 wheelers and give it away free. The problem would then go away pretty quick.

it's not as though people who are cut off of welfare suddenly go to college and become independently wealthy...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Once we make it legal to have drugs, but illegal to do them while on welfare, this will be an awesome idea - rich people can do all the drugs they want, and poor people can't! Yay!

that's pretty much the reality already.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites