Florida - Want Welfare? Take a Urinalysis

[chanel]

When did I ever say it was a problem (even though any idiot knows it is) ?

You seem to be hearing/reading things that people are not saying.

Come back when you sober up.

You just said it was a problem. Unless you're claiming to be an idiot.

So go ahead and provide one shred of factual evidence to support this notion. Just one.

Or admit that you can't. Either is fine with me.

Is this your offician admission that you can't provide evidenc that drugs are an issue in the welfare system?

After all, you refused to provide the evidence. Which is supremely lazy of you, since I'm sure it exists.

It does and I posted it. But instead of reading the link, he negged me. I'm thinking it's a lack of fiber in his diet. Or drugs.

Drug Deaths
38,371 people died of drug-induced causes in 2007, the latest year for which data are available. The number of drug-induced deaths has grown from 19,128 in 1999, or from 6.8 deaths per 100,000 population to 12.6 in 2007.1 (These include causes directly involving drugs, such as accidental poisoning or overdoses, but do not include accidents, homicides, AIDS, and other causes indirectly related to drugs.) There is a drug-induced death in the U.S. every 15 minutes.2 Compared to other causes of preventable deaths, drug-induced causes exceeded the 31,224 deaths from injuries due to firearms and the 23,199 alcohol-induced deaths recorded in 2007. In the same year, 34,598 deaths were classified as suicides and 18,361 deaths as homicides.3
Drugged Driving
From a national roadside survey in 2007, one in eight (12.4%) of weekend nighttime drivers tested positive for at least one illicit drug.4 Based on a self-report survey in 2009, approximately 10.5 million Americans reported driving under the influence of an illicit drug during the past year.5 In 2009, one in three drivers killed in motor vehicle crashes who were tested for drugs and the results known, tested positive for at least one medication or illicit drug.6 Among high school seniors in 2008, one in 10 (10.4%) reported that in the two weeks prior to their interview, they had driven a vehicle after smoking marijuana.7
Children
Annual averages for 2002 to 2007 indicate that over 8.3 million youth under 18 years of age, or almost one in eight youth (11.9%), lived with at least one parent who was dependent on alcohol or an illicit drug in the past year.8 Of these, About 2.1 million youth lived with a parent who was dependent on or abused illicit drugs, and almost 7.3 million lived with a parent who was dependent on or abused alcohol.9
School Performance
Significantly fewer youth in school who are current marijuana users report an average grade of “A” (12.5%) compared to those who are not current marijuana users (30.5% report an average grade of “A”).10 College students who use prescription stimulant medications nonmedically typically have lower grade point averages, are more likely to be heavy drinkers and users of other illicit drugs, and are more likely to meet diagnostic criteria for dependence on alcohol and marijuana, skip class more frequently, and spend less time studying. 11
Economic Costs

 

[Warrior102]

I have researched it. There is no real data to suggest this a problem so big that more government bureaucracy is needed to fix it. I'm simply asking you to provide what you have learned. I guess I should've known that would be nothing.

When did I ever say it was a problem (even though any idiot knows it is) ?

You seem to be hearing/reading things that people are not saying.

Come back when you sober up.

You just said it was a problem. Unless you're claiming to be an idiot.

So go ahead and provide one shred of factual evidence to support this notion. Just one.

Or admit that you can't. Either is fine with me.

Why don't you post proof drug abuse among welfare recipients is NOT a problem and quit activing like a blithering idiot.

 

[manifold]

Is this your offician admission that you can't provide evidenc that drugs are an issue in the welfare system?

No, it is not.

My official position is that I'm not convinced that the problem is large enough to justify growing the size of government to address it. And in the absence of a justifiable reason, I oppose all expansion of government.

 

[manifold]

Trolling again. What makes a "big problem" "big enough" mani? Please define "big" for us idiots.

For authoritarians like you, no problem is too small that it shouldn't be solved with more government.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

When did I ever say it was a problem (even though any idiot knows it is) ?

You seem to be hearing/reading things that people are not saying.

Come back when you sober up.

You just said it was a problem. Unless you're claiming to be an idiot.

So go ahead and provide one shred of factual evidence to support this notion. Just one.

Or admit that you can't. Either is fine with me.

Why don't you post proof drug abuse among welfare recipients is NOT a problem and quit activing like a blithering idiot.

This is a good point. Where does all that Welfare cash go? Is it really being spent on the children? Drug Abuse is a huge problem with the Entitlement crowd. If they do test Positive,they should probably be arrested and incarcerated for child abuse. Not getting their Freebies should be the least of their problems in my opinion.

 

[candycorn]

Can you imagine how much money would be saved if all 50 states enacted this ?

Florida governor signs welfare drug-screen measure - CNN

So, the testing is free? Wait a second...that costs money too. I'm sure it comes from somewhere else though...no worries.

Yes, rest assured taxpayers, like me will pay for their urinalysis. And if they pass, I will even continue paying for their cable tv, heat, air, apartment, and everything else. Fear not Liberals - all is not lost.

Wondered how long it would take before I was called a name. We should really stop criticizing Congress for being so childish.

So will I

 

[Mr Natural]

And while they're at it, why not test them for alchohol, tobacco, and junk food because these are also things they should not be spending our hard-earned money on.

 

[manifold]

When did I ever say it was a problem (even though any idiot knows it is) ?

You seem to be hearing/reading things that people are not saying.

Come back when you sober up.

You just said it was a problem. Unless you're claiming to be an idiot.

So go ahead and provide one shred of factual evidence to support this notion. Just one.

Or admit that you can't. Either is fine with me.

Why don't you post proof drug abuse among welfare recipients is NOT a problem and quit activing like a blithering idiot.

So still no proof. Got it.

 

[chanel]

If it reduces welfare checks even by 10%, it will be shrinking government expenses - not expanding them. And that will have a synergistic effect on their offspring.

What's your definition of "a problem" mani?

 

[WillowTree]

It sure isn't.

Feel free to provide some actual evidence that druggies on welfare is indeed a problem so big it needs to be fixed. That is, if you can.

Or you can continue to solidify my point by repeatedly replying to my posts without providing any real evidence. It's up to you.

No, it's actually up to you. Look it up yourself. I'm not you're freaking secretary. Typical Lib, always expecting someone to take care of you.

Get lost fool.

I have researched it. There is no real data to suggest this a problem so big that more government bureaucracy is needed to fix it. I'm simply asking you to provide what you have learned. I guess I should've known that would be nothing.

Evidently the State of Florida disagree with you. But! whatcha gonna do?

 

[Warrior102]

If it reduces welfare checks even by 10%, it will be shrinking government expenses - not expanding them. And that will have a synergistic effect on their offspring.

What's your definition of "a problem" mani?

He can't even provide proof that drug abuse IS NOT a problem....

 

[Warrior102]

No, it's actually up to you. Look it up yourself. I'm not you're freaking secretary. Typical Lib, always expecting someone to take care of you.

Get lost fool.

I have researched it. There is no real data to suggest this a problem so big that more government bureaucracy is needed to fix it. I'm simply asking you to provide what you have learned. I guess I should've known that would be nothing.

Evidently the State of Florida disagree with you. But! whatcha gonna do?

I bet the governor is really kicking himself in the ass when he realized he didn't ask for Mani's opinion on the matter before making a decision.

 

[Sallow]

Can you imagine how much money would be saved if all 50 states enacted this ?

Florida governor signs welfare drug-screen measure - CNN

Could you imagine the real money we'd save if it was required that Corporate executives do this when applying for government grants or contracts? Or even bailouts?

Gosh.

Billions.

 

[chanel]

He has to define "problem" and "big" for us morons.

 

[manifold]

You just said it was a problem. Unless you're claiming to be an idiot.

So go ahead and provide one shred of factual evidence to support this notion. Just one.

Or admit that you can't. Either is fine with me.

Why don't you post proof drug abuse among welfare recipients is NOT a problem and quit activing like a blithering idiot.

This is a good point.

It is? Really?

So anything you might think is a problem is justification for growing the size of government to address it? So I guess you're a big supporter of Obamacare then.

 

[Warrior102]

Can you imagine how much money would be saved if all 50 states enacted this ?

Florida governor signs welfare drug-screen measure - CNN

Could you imagine the real money we'd save if it was required that Corporate executives do this when applying for government grants or contracts? Or even bailouts?

Gosh.

Billions.

What does that have to do with Florida. If you want to start a policy like this, pick up the phone, dial 911 and pass your suggestion to Obama. Tell him to give GM a piss test

 

[manifold]

If it reduces welfare checks even by 10%, it will be shrinking government expenses - not expanding them. And that will have a synergistic effect on their offspring.

What's your definition of "a problem" mani?

He can't even provide proof that drug abuse IS NOT a problem....

I'm not the one advocating growing the size and reach of government. YOU ARE DIPSHIT.

Therefore the onus is on you to justify said expansion.

So far all you have provided is ignorance and hatred, in both of which you apparently take great pride.

But whatcha gonna do:

 

[shintao]

And while they're at it, why not test them for alchohol, tobacco, and junk food because these are also things they should not be spending our hard-earned money on.

Hmmm, why not just have a commodity store they go to and get rations. Why are we supporting all the grocery stores on welfare? And shouldn't we also drug test the grocery store people?

 

[AllieBaba]

Is this your offician admission that you can't provide evidenc that drugs are an issue in the welfare system?

No, it is not.

My official position is that I'm not convinced that the problem is large enough to justify growing the size of government to address it. And in the absence of a justifiable reason, I oppose all expansion of government.

Oh, my bad. Then you're just an idiot.

 

[AllieBaba]

Though of course I don't think drug testing welfare recipients is going to do a lick of good at ALL....