Members RoboPimp Posted July 29, 2011 Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 How bout it? should getting public assistance require mandatory drug screening? and if so, should drug users be denied? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members goodhonk Posted July 29, 2011 Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 you thinking about applying? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members melx Posted July 29, 2011 Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 How bout it? should getting public assistance require mandatory drug screening?and if so, should drug users be denied? all drugs? or just some?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TravvyBear Posted July 29, 2011 Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 If you're going to get government assistance. Why shouldn't you have to abide by their laws? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members conky Posted July 29, 2011 Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 How bout it? should getting public assistance require mandatory drug screening?and if so, should drug users be denied? Yes.Yes.{censored} YES. If you can afford to buy weed and pills, you don't need assistance buying food. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members big_cat Posted July 29, 2011 Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 But what if you grow it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoboPimp Posted July 29, 2011 Author Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 you thinking about applying? I built my pavilion out of govt cheese Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members conky Posted July 29, 2011 Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 Then you can sell it and afford to buy your own food. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members conky Posted July 29, 2011 Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 I built my pavilion out of govt cheese Welfare cheese makes the best grilled cheese sandwiches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Parah Salin Posted July 29, 2011 Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 Depends on how much it would cost the rest of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sleewell Posted July 29, 2011 Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 someone please explain one rational & logical reason why they should not be tested. i am fully in favor of drug testing everyone collecting any type of govt assistance, the idea of my hard earned tax dollars going to fund someone to buy drugs is pretty frusterating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoboPimp Posted July 29, 2011 Author Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 someone please explain one rational & logical reason why they should not be tested.i am fully in favor of drug testing everyone collecting any type of govt assistance, the idea of my hard earned tax dollars going to fund someone to buy drugs is pretty frusterating. maybe because they are poor they are just really thrifty and can get enough sustenance to survive and still afford a nice bag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members onyxrhino Posted July 29, 2011 Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 {censored} yes. they should also be kept under constant surveillance and have to take weekly lie detector tests. maybe mix in an exploding collar like in that running man movie in case they get out of line. this is america. only the wealthy should be allowed to have any fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Zappa74 Posted July 29, 2011 Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 Good question for a guitar effects forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members conky Posted July 29, 2011 Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 someone please explain one rational & logical reason why they should not be tested.i am fully in favor of drug testing everyone collecting any type of govt assistance, the idea of my hard earned tax dollars going to fund someone to buy drugs is pretty frusterating. I see this {censored} every day. Sorry mother{censored}ers calling the ambulance when there is nothing wrong with them. They get their free ride. They get govt assistance and when they are sitting in the E.R. answering their brand new Droid phone with it's custom ring tone, have their nails did, wearing the newest popular shoes and then turn around and say they don't have their $3 copay. Medicaid looks at the bill, says it wasn't a medical emergency and deny payment. It makes all of our health care go up and they get {censored} for free all day long when they can go get a job like the rest of us. It seems like a minor inconvience for those who really need the assistance and something that will help reduce our nations debt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoboPimp Posted July 29, 2011 Author Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 Good question for a guitar effects forum. well, a lot of musicians are poor so maybe it is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoboPimp Posted July 29, 2011 Author Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 I see this {censored} every day. Sorry mother{censored}ers calling the ambulance when there is nothing wrong with them. They get their free ride. They get govt assistance and when they are sitting in the E.R. answering their brand new Droid phone with it's custom ring tone, have their nails did, wearing the newest popular shoes and then turn around and say they don't have their $3 copay. Medicaid looks at the bill, says it wasn't a medical emergency and deny payment. It makes all of our health care go up and they get {censored} for free all day long when they can go get a job like the rest of us. It seems like a minor inconvience for those who really need the assistance and something that will help reduce our nations debt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members conky Posted July 29, 2011 Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 Prime example of ambulance abuse. He wouldn't have gotten any treatment, just a free taxi ride. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members stratedge09 Posted July 29, 2011 Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 Yes.Yes.{censored} YES.If you can afford to buy weed and pills, you don't need assistance buying food. This. Took the words right out of my mouth sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members misterstomach Posted July 29, 2011 Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Operator Posted July 29, 2011 Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 They should also be audited for all purchases. If you can afford cable TV you don't need assistance. If you can afford new shoes you don't need assistance. If you afford a blender you don't need assistance. I guess they can't test for alcohol and tobacco use, so that gets a free pass. How about spending all that money drug testing on facilities to rehabilitate drug addicts? Do you know how small the welfare expense is compared to other luxury programs, like needless war, tax breaks that just don't seem to trickle down, and bailouts for criminal financiers? There are bigger fish to fry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members can't remember Posted July 29, 2011 Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 Sure why not, but I'd rather see welfare recipients doing some kind of public service, be it picking up trash or cleaning up grafiddy, at least one day a week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 I built my pavilion out of govt cheese A friend's band was called Government Cheese. This is awfully political in nature, and I've already been pretty tolerant of one or two other "political" threads that are running at the moment (yes, I see things - even when I'm asleep ) but I'll toss out my two cents, with the caveat that this - and the other poli threads remain open under grace, and can / will be closed without further notice - and that's especially likely to happen if they go off the rails and become uncivil... Drug testing for government assistance recipients? You mean the people who the government pays money to, right? Does that include everyone? I mean EVERYONE? Government workers, contractors, politicians (especially the politicians), medicare and social security recipients, military personnel (they already wizz-quiz the military - as you were ) AND welfare recipients - everyone? Because IMO you can't do it unless you do everyone and don't single anyone / any group out - or exempt anyone. Should they be denied government funds? Well, here's how they'll probably get around that. Claim addiction. If that is diagnosed, and they're below the poverty line or whatever, then under the new health care laws, wouldn't they expect to be covered (in a few years) in terms of health insurance? Addiction is a recognized disease, with recommended courses of treatment. You're going to deny a poor sick person, medically covered by Federal law, not only their Federal poverty assistance, but also treatment for their disease? Or do you treat the disease, then put them back on poverty assistance once they test clean? How are you going to keep track of the difference between the 70 year old man who just got out of the hospital and has a script for narcotics vs the granny who is using illegally? How many people / members of Congress do you think will be onboard with getting into that can of worms right now? It's a big enough political hot-potato that neither side probably wants to get into it at the moment. Not when there's bigger issues (like the debt ceiling / national debt) to worry about right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tashiattack Posted July 29, 2011 Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 Good question for a guitar effects forum. This is exactly what I was thinking. Also, it seems like many here are scholars in the field of social assistance/programs, and or social workers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Moustache_Bash Posted July 29, 2011 Members Share Posted July 29, 2011 I don't mean to come off like a sheltered dick, but I'd think if one were on welfare the person would have bigger problems than to be inebriated whilst putting food on the table. Like, one would be more worried about surviving/living than getting trashed/high/whatever. Although, I imagine there may be some who use that money just for drugs. In that case they're scum, but like Operator said there are much more critical issues that I would want to be addressed before a notion like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.