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

[thegoat121886]

Originally Posted by tkthafm

 

[witnesskb24]

Originally Posted by Rexanglorum

Originally Posted by WITNESSkb24

Originally Posted by Rexanglorum

You guys do realize the perverse incentive created by such a law? It should be called the "trade in marijuana for crack, meth and heroin act." THC stays in a person's system for weeks while cocaine and opiates and methamphetamine will usually be out of an addict's system within days. This encourages someone who might have only smoked marijuana to take up stronger, more dagerous and more addictive drugs.

Will the CEO's of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, GM, AIG and Goldman Sachs and every other bailed out firm be willing to piss in a cup on demand. They are all welfare recipients after all.

Will tobacco, caffeine and alcohol be on that list of banned substances? (does anyone else find it ironic that the OP and the person who is so gung ho about this law counts "beer" among his trinity of good things in life. Beer is, despite all of the history, mystique and marketing surrounding it, a mind altering substance).

The definition of "recipient of government benefits" is very elastic. I understand the underlying logic of drug testing people who receive tax payer to beneficiary payments. However, as Senator Orrin Hatch proposed, everyone who gets  Unemployment benefits should be drugs tested. In theory at least, those benefits are a form of insurance and not welfare payments as is social security and medicare and workers' compensation. Should we test anyone in those programs. What about anyone whose mortgage was bundled and sold to a GSE? What about any who every drives on government funded roads.

Finally, I hope that you younger people here take a lesson from this. Big government means less privacy for you. The more benefits that you get from the public treasury, the more they attach strings to those benefits and one day a "free" man might be treated about the same as an inmate in a penitentiary today.

I don't drink nor do I view beer like that, but thanks.....You know what they say about how you shouldn't ASSUme, right? 

This was from, another thread about Missouri doing the same thing and everything but that point is the same. I will edit this pro forma response because, it seems like this drug testing for benefits in various states is catching on all over the country.

No worries, I just didn't wanna be put in the same category as the clowns who actually DO view beer as that.

 

[witnesskb24]

Originally Posted by Rexanglorum

Originally Posted by WITNESSkb24

Originally Posted by Rexanglorum

You guys do realize the perverse incentive created by such a law? It should be called the "trade in marijuana for crack, meth and heroin act." THC stays in a person's system for weeks while cocaine and opiates and methamphetamine will usually be out of an addict's system within days. This encourages someone who might have only smoked marijuana to take up stronger, more dagerous and more addictive drugs.

Will the CEO's of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, GM, AIG and Goldman Sachs and every other bailed out firm be willing to piss in a cup on demand. They are all welfare recipients after all.

Will tobacco, caffeine and alcohol be on that list of banned substances? (does anyone else find it ironic that the OP and the person who is so gung ho about this law counts "beer" among his trinity of good things in life. Beer is, despite all of the history, mystique and marketing surrounding it, a mind altering substance).

The definition of "recipient of government benefits" is very elastic. I understand the underlying logic of drug testing people who receive tax payer to beneficiary payments. However, as Senator Orrin Hatch proposed, everyone who gets  Unemployment benefits should be drugs tested. In theory at least, those benefits are a form of insurance and not welfare payments as is social security and medicare and workers' compensation. Should we test anyone in those programs. What about anyone whose mortgage was bundled and sold to a GSE? What about any who every drives on government funded roads.

Finally, I hope that you younger people here take a lesson from this. Big government means less privacy for you. The more benefits that you get from the public treasury, the more they attach strings to those benefits and one day a "free" man might be treated about the same as an inmate in a penitentiary today.

I don't drink nor do I view beer like that, but thanks.....You know what they say about how you shouldn't ASSUme, right? 

This was from, another thread about Missouri doing the same thing and everything but that point is the same. I will edit this pro forma response because, it seems like this drug testing for benefits in various states is catching on all over the country.

No worries, I just didn't wanna be put in the same category as the clowns who actually DO view beer as that.

 

[rashi]

Originally Posted by LieutenantDan93

Just going to make more money for the companies who provide the drug tests..

GOV. RICK SCOTT'S WIFE OWNS THE COMPANY THAT WILL BE TESTING THESE PEOPLE.


I live in the dumbest State, no wonder our public education is ranked 49th.

 

[rashi]

Originally Posted by LieutenantDan93

Just going to make more money for the companies who provide the drug tests..

GOV. RICK SCOTT'S WIFE OWNS THE COMPANY THAT WILL BE TESTING THESE PEOPLE.


I live in the dumbest State, no wonder our public education is ranked 49th.

 

[dathbgboy]

I have no issues with this. Whether they are approved or not, the money still aint goin to feed their children, it's going to support their habit by selling there stamps.

 

[dathbgboy]

I have no issues with this. Whether they are approved or not, the money still aint goin to feed their children, it's going to support their habit by selling there stamps.

 

[chokeonsmoke]

^ or rims for the whips

 

[grizzlyboy]

Originally Posted by TruthGetsBusy

I can't rock with this.  Of course people shouldn't be on drugs but its more to it than that. 

Well what else is there?

 

[grizzlyboy]

Originally Posted by TruthGetsBusy

I can't rock with this.  Of course people shouldn't be on drugs but its more to it than that. 

Well what else is there?

 

[chokeonsmoke]

^ or rims for the whips

 

[bb4 86]

How can this not be considered good? I'm all for helping someone who isn't as fortunate as myself, but I'm not gonna pay for your habit. Maybe of they didn't use drugs then they could be more responsible, keep a job, support themselves and have no need for welfare. Now if someone is clean and needs welfare, then that's fine. But don't be bringing your scab-having, itchy blood, crackhead %** up to the welfare office expecting a handout.

 

[bb4 86]

How can this not be considered good? I'm all for helping someone who isn't as fortunate as myself, but I'm not gonna pay for your habit. Maybe of they didn't use drugs then they could be more responsible, keep a job, support themselves and have no need for welfare. Now if someone is clean and needs welfare, then that's fine. But don't be bringing your scab-having, itchy blood, crackhead %** up to the welfare office expecting a handout.

 

[-Red-]

Originally Posted by Rexanglorum

You guys do realize the perverse incentive created by such a law? It should be called the "trade in marijuana for crack, meth and heroin act." THC stays in a person's system for weeks while cocaine and opiates and methamphetamine will usually be out of an addict's system within days. This encourages someone who might have only smoked marijuana to take up stronger, more dagerous and more addictive drugs.

Will the CEO's of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, GM, AIG and Goldman Sachs and every other bailed out firm be willing to piss in a cup on demand. They are all welfare recipients after all.

Will tobacco, caffeine and alcohol be on that list of banned substances?

The definition of "recipient of government benefits" is very elastic. I understand the underlying logic of drug testing people who receive tax payer to beneficiary payments. However, as Senator Orrin Hatch proposed, everyone who gets  Unemployment benefits should be drugs tested. In theory at least, those benefits are a form of insurance and not welfare payments as is social security and medicare and workers' compensation. Should we test anyone in those programs. What about anyone whose mortgage was bundled and sold to a GSE? What about any who every drives on government funded roads.

Finally, I hope that you younger people here take a lesson from this. Big government means less privacy for you. The more benefits that you get from the public treasury, the more they attach strings to those benefits and one day a "free" man might be treated about the same as an inmate in a penitentiary today.

One of the very few times I agree with this dude.

Great post

 

[-Red-]

Originally Posted by Rexanglorum

You guys do realize the perverse incentive created by such a law? It should be called the "trade in marijuana for crack, meth and heroin act." THC stays in a person's system for weeks while cocaine and opiates and methamphetamine will usually be out of an addict's system within days. This encourages someone who might have only smoked marijuana to take up stronger, more dagerous and more addictive drugs.

Will the CEO's of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, GM, AIG and Goldman Sachs and every other bailed out firm be willing to piss in a cup on demand. They are all welfare recipients after all.

Will tobacco, caffeine and alcohol be on that list of banned substances?

The definition of "recipient of government benefits" is very elastic. I understand the underlying logic of drug testing people who receive tax payer to beneficiary payments. However, as Senator Orrin Hatch proposed, everyone who gets  Unemployment benefits should be drugs tested. In theory at least, those benefits are a form of insurance and not welfare payments as is social security and medicare and workers' compensation. Should we test anyone in those programs. What about anyone whose mortgage was bundled and sold to a GSE? What about any who every drives on government funded roads.

Finally, I hope that you younger people here take a lesson from this. Big government means less privacy for you. The more benefits that you get from the public treasury, the more they attach strings to those benefits and one day a "free" man might be treated about the same as an inmate in a penitentiary today.

One of the very few times I agree with this dude.

Great post

 

[prymone]

i support this
if you got money to do drugs, you got money to buy food, pay rent, etc..
i use drug(s) heavily, my bills are all up to date, my kitchen is full, and im LOUD 24/7
no excuse

every crack head in chicago has a link card smh

 

[prymone]

i support this
if you got money to do drugs, you got money to buy food, pay rent, etc..
i use drug(s) heavily, my bills are all up to date, my kitchen is full, and im LOUD 24/7
no excuse

every crack head in chicago has a link card smh

 

[rashi]

For the people who are cool with this...



What if the government started drug testing students who file for FAFSA? Or drug testing checkpoints on the road? Would you also be cool with that? Ya'll have to understand the precedence these laws like this will have.


You think these Congressman, Senate, thousands of bureaucrats will make a law that has themselves drug tested? Hell naw. They take tax payer money too, but its you cattle that are chained to the pens that have to obey these immoral laws.

 

[rashi]

For the people who are cool with this...



What if the government started drug testing students who file for FAFSA? Or drug testing checkpoints on the road? Would you also be cool with that? Ya'll have to understand the precedence these laws like this will have.


You think these Congressman, Senate, thousands of bureaucrats will make a law that has themselves drug tested? Hell naw. They take tax payer money too, but its you cattle that are chained to the pens that have to obey these immoral laws.

 

[prymone]

well for one college kids are not wasting my tax money, and 2 the government is not paying/helping me pay for my car so no that is a horrible equation

 

[prymone]

well for one college kids are not wasting my tax money, and 2 the government is not paying/helping me pay for my car so no that is a horrible equation

 

[strawberry milkshakes]

well for one college kids are not wasting my tax money

@ you thinking financial aid isn't going to Jordans, louis purses, video games...

 

[strawberry milkshakes]

well for one college kids are not wasting my tax money

@ you thinking financial aid isn't going to Jordans, louis purses, video games...

 

[weekz]

bad. i saw this story a while back. the governors own company (owned by is wife as of now) is doing testing. its just a scam to line his pockets and the sad part is he can get away with it.

 

[weekz]

bad. i saw this story a while back. the governors own company (owned by is wife as of now) is doing testing. its just a scam to line his pockets and the sad part is he can get away with it.