Florida - Want Welfare? Take a Urinalysis

And it seems it's the same nanny staters who want to outlaw smoking and salt.

It saddens me that a 19 year old soldier serving in combat can't drink a beer, but a 19 year old teen mom should be allowed to smoke dope. What's wrong with this country?
 
And it seems it's the same nanny staters who want to outlaw smoking and salt.

It's the same impulse in either case. Unfortunately, both Democrats and Republicans share a passion for telling other people how to live. They might have different list of 'shoulds', but ultimately they agree that the state should make the call. Nannies tag-teaming with Big Brother.
 
And it seems it's the same nanny staters who want to outlaw smoking and salt.

It saddens me that a 19 year old soldier serving in combat can't drink a beer, but a 19 year old teen mom should be allowed to smoke dope. What's wrong with this country?

lieberals izzz what's wrong wit the country. lieberals want to legalize drugs and then they want you to pay for the drug users medical care, feed, clothe and educate their children.. in short they want to rob you blind so they can sit on their fat asses and take dope.
 
In our city Goodwill provides drug screening services and charges the city $50 a pop.

The welfare recipient cannot afford the $50 buck so who pays for it? the city.

So the money the state spends on screening welfare recipients for drugs every month eats away and may possibly become more expensive than just giving them the money in the first place.

do the math. 100 people screened at $50 a head equals $5,000 per month. For a year that comes to $60,000. How long is the wait period for results?

This is just a bad idea all the way around.

I think it's an excellent idea for a good reason.

It puts the emphasis where it belongs. If you are on welfare, you are living by the charity of others.

We forgot this because at some time we started calling them "entitlements", as if you are owed something.

It should be a hand up when you hit a rough patch, not a hand out for life.
 
Actually welfare is a violation of the taxpayers right against INVOLUNTARY SLAVERY and their 5th Amendment right not to have the state take money from them - private individuals to give to the parasites , also private individuals.

So you want the privilege? Then waive your rights.

Right. That's pretty much what this all comes down to. Conservatives are opposed to the welfare state, but they don't have the wherewithal to get rid of it - so they resort to this kind of shit. They know that, while they can't get enough consensus to get rid of welfare, they can get plenty of liberals on board when it comes to micromanaging people's lives and telling them how to live. That seems to be the one thing liberals and conservatives agree on.

Precisely. So many alleged conservatives claim to favor small government, but their solution to what they consider a big government problem is to grow it even bigger.
 
Precisely. So many alleged conservatives claim to favor small government, but their solution to what they consider a big government problem is to grow it even bigger.

Their enthusiasm for limited government is only activated when they're not in charge. When they are, they suddenly get libertarian amnesia.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: kaz
Precisely. So many alleged conservatives claim to favor small government, but their solution to what they consider a big government problem is to grow it even bigger.

Their enthusiasm for limited government is only activated when they're not in charge. When they are, they suddenly get libertarian amnesia.

Yep, which is why I left the Party. Growing up they always said they were compromising because Democrats were the majority party. When they finally were the majority party, they changed nothing. Now that they lost power and are coming back, they don't have any credibility they actually want to cut the size of government. They're going to the wall now to cut $100 billion out of a $1.4 trillion deficit as if that's actually fiscally responsible. Would they even actually remove Obamacare? That would be an actual reason to support them, but even for that they have little credibility.
 
Would they even actually remove Obamacare? That would be an actual reason to support them, but even for that they have little credibility.

I seriously doubt it. As the Dems keep pointing out, it's very 'Republican' legislation. My guess is the thugs will use the individual mandate, and the general discontent with health care reform, as an excuse to strip the law of most of it's constraints on the insurance industry and then leave the mandate and the corporate welfare in place.

Go team!
 
No you are right

Much better to leave Papa Obama in place
so it cripples the market to point where the
the Left will starting demanding single payer
 
Not at

All the waivers issued by state dictate from some bureaucrat
tells us all we need to know
:eusa_angel:

card-i2513.jpg


There is still hope to rectify this faux legacy of Papa Obama
 
Last edited:
And it seems it's the same nanny staters who want to outlaw smoking and salt.

It saddens me that a 19 year old soldier serving in combat can't drink a beer, but a 19 year old teen mom should be allowed to smoke dope. What's wrong with this country?

It's all about convenience for the Nanny Staters in both Political Parties. They fight to ban things they personally dislike. Nanny Staters are usually very confused & dishonest people. Unfortunately there are far too many of them in both Parties.
 
Most American Citizens have to be Drug-Tested to get or stay employed. Whether or not you agree with that isn't the point. It is the current state of things in America. Being required to be Drug Tested to receive Welfare shouldn't be so shocking to anyone in America. It just goes right in line with what the rest of American Citizens have to go through in their lives. Now if you oppose Drug Testing as an Employment requirement,i can see where you might be opposed to this. But if you don't have a problem with Drug Testing as an Employment requirement,you really shouldn't have a problem with this. Some just need to think things through a bit more before typing. Knee-Jerk responses are often a mistake.
 
Last edited:
It isn't shocking..the problem is that it is the government doing it, which is more government involvement, and an expansion of already unwieldy programs.

In addition, the snap program exists SPECIFICALLY to provide food to the children of the poorest of the poor, i.e., children of addicts, criminals, people who live on the fringes of society, and if you make it so that addicts are left out of that then you are essentially saying the program is no longer about helping the children who need it the most. It's redefining what the program is about.

If we're going to do that, fine, I don't think it's a good idea...but at least call it what it is. A step towards eliminating that population via starvation.
 
Most American Citizens have to be Drug-Tested to get or stay employed. Whether or not you agree with that isn't the point. It is the current state of things in America. Being required to be Drug Tested to receive Welfare shouldn't be so shocking to anyone in America. It just goes right in line with what the rest of American Citizens have to go through in their lives. Now if you oppose Drug Testing as an Employment requirement,i can see where you might be opposed to this. But if you don't have a problem with Drug Testing as an Employment requirement,you really shouldn't have a problem with this. Some just need to think things through a bit more before typing. Knee-Jerk responses are often a mistake.

I think that depends, the only job I was in where drug tests were a requirement is the Military, I have worked 2 jobs since than one with a private workers compensation company in Virginia and now with the Federal government, none of them require drug tests.
 
Most American Citizens have to be Drug-Tested to get or stay employed. Whether or not you agree with that isn't the point. It is the current state of things in America. Being required to be Drug Tested to receive Welfare shouldn't be so shocking to anyone in America. It just goes right in line with what the rest of American Citizens have to go through in their lives. Now if you oppose Drug Testing as an Employment requirement,i can see where you might be opposed to this. But if you don't have a problem with Drug Testing as an Employment requirement,you really shouldn't have a problem with this. Some just need to think things through a bit more before typing. Knee-Jerk responses are often a mistake.

I think that depends, the only job I was in where drug tests were a requirement is the Military, I have worked 2 jobs since than one with a private workers compensation company in Virginia and now with the Federal government, none of them require drug tests.

Yea i'm just speaking in general. Most Employers are now requiring Drug Tests for gaining or keeping Jobs. And i can see where many would oppose that,but it is the Law of the Land currently. So if you want to receive Welfare,you have to accept that the Government has the right to require Drug Testing. They're basically your Employer at that point. So your rights are limited. So if Drug Testing is a an accepted Employment requirement,this really isn't so shocking or abusive. It's just the price you have to pay for getting that Government Cheese. Most Americans go through the same thing. It is what it is.
 
Last edited:
It isn't shocking..the problem is that it is the government doing it, which is more government involvement, and an expansion of already unwieldy programs.

In addition, the snap program exists SPECIFICALLY to provide food to the children of the poorest of the poor, i.e., children of addicts, criminals, people who live on the fringes of society, and if you make it so that addicts are left out of that then you are essentially saying the program is no longer about helping the children who need it the most. It's redefining what the program is about.

If we're going to do that, fine, I don't think it's a good idea...but at least call it what it is. A step towards eliminating that population via starvation.

I don't think it's a good idea either. Because once there is a significant homeless population due to this policy, then yet another program will be instituted to deal with the homeless drug addicts and their children.
 
Most American Citizens have to be Drug-Tested to get or stay employed. Whether or not you agree with that isn't the point. It is the current state of things in America. Being required to be Drug Tested to receive Welfare shouldn't be so shocking to anyone in America. It just goes right in line with what the rest of American Citizens have to go through in their lives. Now if you oppose Drug Testing as an Employment requirement,i can see where you might be opposed to this. But if you don't have a problem with Drug Testing as an Employment requirement,you really shouldn't have a problem with this. Some just need to think things through a bit more before typing. Knee-Jerk responses are often a mistake.

I think that depends, the only job I was in where drug tests were a requirement is the Military, I have worked 2 jobs since than one with a private workers compensation company in Virginia and now with the Federal government, none of them require drug tests.

Yea i'm just speaking in general. Most Employers are now requiring Drug Tests for gaining or keeping Jobs. And i can see where many would oppose that,but it is the Law of the Land currently. So if you want to receive Welfare,you have to accept that the Government has the right to require Drug Testing. They're basically your Employer at that point. So your rights are limited. So if Drug Testing is a an accepted Employment requirement,this really isn't so shocking or abusive. It's just the price you have to pay for getting that Government Cheese. Most Americans go through the same thing. It is what it is.

I agree with you to an extent, won't drug testing these individuals cost even more money? plus I have heard there are all kinds of way to beat the drug test.
 

Forum List

Back
Top