I've recently re-posted on Facebook a picture of the following text:
Thank you Florida, Kentucky, and Missouri, which are the first States that will require drug test when applying for welfare. Some people are crying and calling this unconstitutional. How is this unconstitutional??? It's OK to drug test people who work for their money, but not for those who don't?... Re-post this if you'd like to see this done in all 50 states. If you can afford to buy drugs and extra illegal things then you can afford your own groceries.
The above was then re-posted by a friend and what follows is an exchange between one of his liberal friends and me.
lib: The stats on welfare recipients who test positive show it is very, very few. In FL, 7% of the general public uses (http://oas.samhsa.gov/
me: Where do you see that 2% of welfare recipients tested positive?
lib: The state lost tens of thousands of dollars testing. Ironic that the force behind wanting these tests are people who claim they want less govt waste. I'm not a fan of drug use. I'm a fan of pragmatism. http://
me: 108 of the 4,086 people who took a drug test failed.
Florida had 87,632 welfare recipients in 2008 and 74,994 in 2007.
http://www.nytimes.com/
lib: I don't care of 100% of
those who took a drug test failed. Everyone benefits from taxes spent
and if there's moralizing to be done, apply the test to everyone and
then take away their access to roads, libraries, clean water, plumbing,
education, swingsets, etc. Sounds like a farce to me but people need
their scapegoats, I guess. Personally, I think there are far more
pressing issues and waste to tackle.
The pathetic thing is that if you google welfare and Florida, google is flooded with news posts about these 4,086. Now anyone with a brain would find that number to be extremely strange considering Florida's population and the recent collapse of Florida's real estate and construction industry. Unless you're a liberal that is, then only the percent matters, not the sample size. A few sources did indicate that several thousand people chose to drop out rather than be tested. Now the real question is what would happen if all the 90+ thousand people were tested instead of a small sample and without allowing people to refuse.
The real entertaining part was her last comment. Now while I'm for legalizing marijuana, I'm for having it taxed same as alcohol and cigarettes and having it raise money for the government. What I'm not for is higher taxes due to fraud and unchecked spending. Everyone benefits from taxes spent? How about not burning hard working people's money and instead lowering taxes? Apply the test to everyone? It already is applied to a lot of government employees. Take away access to roads? Already being done. Though the point liberals/communists/socialist don't seem to get is the difference between using your own money to buy drugs and using someone else's money. And it's not only the tax payers' money they're misusing. They're taking money away from people who are on welfare because of need and they're taking money away from other government programs.
Lol. Where have I seen this info before? Issues like these would not happen here in Mexico, because there is no such thing as welfare here. It's only the case of "If you don't work, you don't eat." I wonder how European countries handle their unemployed.
ReplyDeleteIn Europe it's even worse. Whole countries are falling into poverty because of the Euro and people expecting the Germans to do all the work. And there's an even shorter working week than US.
ReplyDeleteIt's absolutely amazing to me the number of people who don't think. Like posted in my Face Book comments. If we're going to spend our hard earned tax dollars, we may as well let people living on welfare spend them on drugs and booze. I was very liberal ... once .... until I started working with public welfare in job retraining. There were so many jobs to be filled (prior to Obama days) and not enough people to fill them. Part of the problem was we couldn't get clean urine tests out of the participants in order to place them in decent positions. Tsk, tsk. I like the insanity/serenity heading. From Seinfeld?
ReplyDeleteWell, even if you do place them, how many actually stayed?
ReplyDeleteWhy work when you don't have to.
I do IT for an employment agency. One time, walked out and like 15 feet away a young guy comes over and ask me for money.
Really dude? Have you no shame?
Yep. Though instead of "Serenity now, serenity now, insanity later", I believe in insanity now, insanity forever :)
Sane people are boring.