NC New Welfare Drug Test Law: 1/3rd Tested Positive from Sample.

[koshergrl]

Says you. I disagree with you. You have said nothing that sways me. Practicing an illegal activity then expecting government to help you continue down that path is wrong. The government is not in the business of enabling illegal drug activity and ruining families.

I can only appeal to a genuine respect for liberty. It's all too rare these days.

I agree, we have liberty and we have freedom and with both there are responsibilities and consequences. Is it asking to much that a person asking for government assistance refrain from taking illegal drugs that are ruining families and lives on a daily basis, that is almost certainly causing them to need assistance in the first place. Most drug abusers have other issues and drugs are taken to mask the issue.

Yes, it is asking too much. The responsibility associated with freedom is to respect the freedom of others; to ensure your actions don't bring harm to others and accept accounability for it if they do.

I'm sorry if it seems like I'm picking on you personally, because that's not my goal here. I'm simply trying to expose what I consider an unacceptable hypocrisy in modern conservatism, particular as it's implemented by the Republican party. For several decades now, Republicans have courted libertarians with claims that they favor limited government and protection of individual liberty. But the claims don't hold water, and drug prohibition policies are a good example.

Drug and alcohol addiction does a lot of damage to others, not just the person using. That I think is my issue. Addicts will use every means they have to get the next fix, giving them cash or food stamps enables them to keep going. Addiction is a huge issue, it ruins millions of people's lives each year.

Yes, it is, but refusing them basic benifits isn't going to stop the addiction. They'll just end up dying in the streets.

You aren't picking on me, we are discussing solutions to social issues. I am not a Republican, I am socially conservative, I don't care what either party thinks, I am thinking of those that have been ravaged by addiction and how to help them gain sobriety. I am also for legalizing drugs, taxing them, using the tax dollars for rehab. Less crap dealers can cut the drugs with. Also. We know who is using and who may need help.

How does giving them more money help them break free of their addiction is my question.

It doesn't. But...so what? Not giving them welfare doesn't help either. Addiction is powerful. It's a disease. Sometimes the best thing you can do is impliment harm reduction programs while trying to get them into rehab.

Actually, not giving them welfare does help. Tremendously.

 

[Coyote]

Near every citizen should be drug tested because they most ALL receive something from the federal gvt...

the guy who owns a home and pays a mortgage gets a tax break and money that the guy making the same amount of money as he, who only rents, gets nothing so the guy with the mortgage should be drug tested.

anyone getting their insurance through their employer who gets a tax break for the benefit, and also gets to write off his share on his taxes should all be drug tested, while the guy who has no insurance making the same money as the guy with insurance pays more in taxes to cover the guy's tax break and employer's tax break for health insurance...the guy with insurance should have to be drug tested cuz he is getting 'something' from the gvt the other guy isn't, right?

anyone paying for college for their kids who earns the same money as the single guy pays less in taxes than the guy with no kids and the single guy has to pay MORE in taxes though making the same income to help pay for the guy with kids college....the guy paying for college getting the tax money for it should be drug tested...

I can go on and on and on....most ALL OF YOU should be drug tested.because you are "getting something" from the gvt that others are not...

Which is why people need to stop taking government bribes.

BTW, I don't depend on the government for anything. I can't tell you how nice it is. You wouldn't understand.

Hopefully you'll never be in the position where you have to.

 

[Pogo]

Sanction: "...explicit or official approval, permission, or ratification." Definition of SANCTION

When the federal government pays you not to work, that is SANCTIONING that behavior.

Get it?

No -- you don't get your own definition.
If the gubmint gives you credits for food and shelter, that you turn around and use for something else, that gubmint has in no way "explicitly" OR "officially" sanctioned squat. It means you gamed it.

That's why for instance EBT is specifically only cashable for actual food. You can't buy a hit or a TV with it. If the gubmint were "sanctioning" that restriction would not exist.

Your own post.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Near every citizen should be drug tested because they most ALL receive something from the federal gvt...

the guy who owns a home and pays a mortgage gets a tax break and money that the guy making the same amount of money as he, who only rents, gets nothing so the guy with the mortgage should be drug tested.

anyone getting their insurance through their employer who gets a tax break for the benefit, and also gets to write off his share on his taxes should all be drug tested, while the guy who has no insurance making the same money as the guy with insurance pays more in taxes to cover the guy's tax break and employer's tax break for health insurance...the guy with insurance should have to be drug tested cuz he is getting 'something' from the gvt the other guy isn't, right?

anyone paying for college for their kids who earns the same money as the single guy pays less in taxes than the guy with no kids and the single guy has to pay MORE in taxes though making the same income to help pay for the guy with kids college....the guy paying for college getting the tax money for it should be drug tested...

I can go on and on and on....most ALL OF YOU should be drug tested.because you are "getting something" from the gvt that others are not...

Apple and oranges


Subisidies are the government saying you can keep a little of it but give me the rest

Welfare is the government handing you other people's money.

 

[Coyote]

..

I can only appeal to a genuine respect for liberty. It's all too rare these days.

I agree, we have liberty and we have freedom and with both there are responsibilities and consequences. Is it asking to much that a person asking for government assistance refrain from taking illegal drugs that are ruining families and lives on a daily basis, that is almost certainly causing them to need assistance in the first place. Most drug abusers have other issues and drugs are taken to mask the issue.

Yes, it is asking too much. The responsibility associated with freedom is to respect the freedom of others; to ensure your actions don't bring harm to others and accept accounability for it if they do.

I'm sorry if it seems like I'm picking on you personally, because that's not my goal here. I'm simply trying to expose what I consider an unacceptable hypocrisy in modern conservatism, particular as it's implemented by the Republican party. For several decades now, Republicans have courted libertarians with claims that they favor limited government and protection of individual liberty. But the claims don't hold water, and drug prohibition policies are a good example.

Drug and alcohol addiction does a lot of damage to others, not just the person using. That I think is my issue. Addicts will use every means they have to get the next fix, giving them cash or food stamps enables them to keep going. Addiction is a huge issue, it ruins millions of people's lives each year.

Yes, it is, but refusing them basic benifits isn't going to stop the addiction. They'll just end up dying in the streets.

You aren't picking on me, we are discussing solutions to social issues. I am not a Republican, I am socially conservative, I don't care what either party thinks, I am thinking of those that have been ravaged by addiction and how to help them gain sobriety. I am also for legalizing drugs, taxing them, using the tax dollars for rehab. Less crap dealers can cut the drugs with. Also. We know who is using and who may need help.

How does giving them more money help them break free of their addiction is my question.

It doesn't. But...so what? Not giving them welfare doesn't help either. Addiction is powerful. It's a disease. Sometimes the best thing you can do is impliment harm reduction programs while trying to get them into rehab.

Actually, not giving them welfare does help. Tremendously.

In what way - have anything to support that claim?

 

[Care4all]

Near every citizen should be drug tested because they most ALL receive something from the federal gvt...

the guy who owns a home and pays a mortgage gets a tax break and money that the guy making the same amount of money as he, who only rents, gets nothing so the guy with the mortgage should be drug tested.

anyone getting their insurance through their employer who gets a tax break for the benefit, and also gets to write off his share on his taxes should all be drug tested, while the guy who has no insurance making the same money as the guy with insurance pays more in taxes to cover the guy's tax break and employer's tax break for health insurance...the guy with insurance should have to be drug tested cuz he is getting 'something' from the gvt the other guy isn't, right?

anyone paying for college for their kids who earns the same money as the single guy pays less in taxes than the guy with no kids and the single guy has to pay MORE in taxes though making the same income to help pay for the guy with kids college....the guy paying for college getting the tax money for it should be drug tested...

I can go on and on and on....most ALL OF YOU should be drug tested.because you are "getting something" from the gvt that others are not...

Apple and oranges


Subisidies are the government saying you can keep a little of it but give me the rest

Welfare is the government handing you other people's money.

Giving one person making the same as another person, a tax break IS HANDING the govt more of one person's money than the next person's money who earns the same as you.

the person not getting the tax break is paying for the one who is getting it....there is no way around that.....imo.

 

[koshergrl]

Near every citizen should be drug tested because they most ALL receive something from the federal gvt...

the guy who owns a home and pays a mortgage gets a tax break and money that the guy making the same amount of money as he, who only rents, gets nothing so the guy with the mortgage should be drug tested.

anyone getting their insurance through their employer who gets a tax break for the benefit, and also gets to write off his share on his taxes should all be drug tested, while the guy who has no insurance making the same money as the guy with insurance pays more in taxes to cover the guy's tax break and employer's tax break for health insurance...the guy with insurance should have to be drug tested cuz he is getting 'something' from the gvt the other guy isn't, right?

anyone paying for college for their kids who earns the same money as the single guy pays less in taxes than the guy with no kids and the single guy has to pay MORE in taxes though making the same income to help pay for the guy with kids college....the guy paying for college getting the tax money for it should be drug tested...

I can go on and on and on....most ALL OF YOU should be drug tested.because you are "getting something" from the gvt that others are not...

Which is why people need to stop taking government bribes.

BTW, I don't depend on the government for anything. I can't tell you how nice it is. You wouldn't understand.

Hopefully you'll never be in the position where you have to.

I have a lower standard of living now, and I work FULL time, than the welfare families I work with. A MUCH lower standard of living. We don't eat as well, we don't drive a nice car, our house is a rental and it's not a very nice rental. I don't qualify for a loan, because I have outstanding medical and dental debts. A good half of the snap recipients I see own their own homes, and pay less than 1/2 of what I pay per month for their housing.

Federal subsidies and welfare are BRIBES and nothing more. They have been used as a vehicle for the feds to insert themselves into every aspect of your life, and now that they are established there, the fun will begin.

It's beginning now.

 

[Coyote]

Says you. The entire debate here is whether anyone should have to give up their rights in exchange for utilizing government service. Some of us are less eager to go down that path.

Says you. I disagree with you. You have said nothing that sways me. Practicing an illegal activity then expecting government to help you continue down that path is wrong. The government is not in the business of enabling illegal drug activity and ruining families.

I can only appeal to a genuine respect for liberty. It's all too rare these days.

I agree, we have liberty and we have freedom and with both there are responsibilities and consequences. Is it asking to much that a person asking for government assistance refrain from taking illegal drugs that are ruining families and lives on a daily basis, that is almost certainly causing them to need assistance in the first place. Most drug abusers have other issues and drugs are taken to mask the issue.

Yes. It is. A private charity, can and indeed has every right to make whatever demands it wants of recipients, but the government can not discriminate in that way against a particular class of people because they are poor.

The government certainly can, and does, and will continue to. You don't give a shit when women are killing their babies...you don't care about that particular "class of people". You don't care when the class of people getting mowed over are rural people being mowed under by the feds in huge land grabs. You don't care when working class people get their checks raped every single month in order to support the millions of people you think shouldn't have to work to feed their families.

Unfortunately, as you've been told a million times, the government won't stop after they destroy the people you hate. Once they have that power, it will extend over EVERYBODY, and EVERYBODY will be treated exactly as they have been treating the unborn, the working man, the Christian.

Including you and the people you love.

And that has what to do with the topic

 

[koshergrl]

..

I agree, we have liberty and we have freedom and with both there are responsibilities and consequences. Is it asking to much that a person asking for government assistance refrain from taking illegal drugs that are ruining families and lives on a daily basis, that is almost certainly causing them to need assistance in the first place. Most drug abusers have other issues and drugs are taken to mask the issue.

Yes, it is asking too much. The responsibility associated with freedom is to respect the freedom of others; to ensure your actions don't bring harm to others and accept accounability for it if they do.

I'm sorry if it seems like I'm picking on you personally, because that's not my goal here. I'm simply trying to expose what I consider an unacceptable hypocrisy in modern conservatism, particular as it's implemented by the Republican party. For several decades now, Republicans have courted libertarians with claims that they favor limited government and protection of individual liberty. But the claims don't hold water, and drug prohibition policies are a good example.

Drug and alcohol addiction does a lot of damage to others, not just the person using. That I think is my issue. Addicts will use every means they have to get the next fix, giving them cash or food stamps enables them to keep going. Addiction is a huge issue, it ruins millions of people's lives each year.

Yes, it is, but refusing them basic benifits isn't going to stop the addiction. They'll just end up dying in the streets.

You aren't picking on me, we are discussing solutions to social issues. I am not a Republican, I am socially conservative, I don't care what either party thinks, I am thinking of those that have been ravaged by addiction and how to help them gain sobriety. I am also for legalizing drugs, taxing them, using the tax dollars for rehab. Less crap dealers can cut the drugs with. Also. We know who is using and who may need help.

How does giving them more money help them break free of their addiction is my question.

It doesn't. But...so what? Not giving them welfare doesn't help either. Addiction is powerful. It's a disease. Sometimes the best thing you can do is impliment harm reduction programs while trying to get them into rehab.

Actually, not giving them welfare does help. Tremendously.

In what way - have anything to support that claim?

Remember the program that required tanf recipients look for work, or lose their benefits?

It worked. Of course Obama reversed it.

 

[koshergrl]

Says you. I disagree with you. You have said nothing that sways me. Practicing an illegal activity then expecting government to help you continue down that path is wrong. The government is not in the business of enabling illegal drug activity and ruining families.

I can only appeal to a genuine respect for liberty. It's all too rare these days.

I agree, we have liberty and we have freedom and with both there are responsibilities and consequences. Is it asking to much that a person asking for government assistance refrain from taking illegal drugs that are ruining families and lives on a daily basis, that is almost certainly causing them to need assistance in the first place. Most drug abusers have other issues and drugs are taken to mask the issue.

Yes. It is. A private charity, can and indeed has every right to make whatever demands it wants of recipients, but the government can not discriminate in that way against a particular class of people because they are poor.

The government certainly can, and does, and will continue to. You don't give a shit when women are killing their babies...you don't care about that particular "class of people". You don't care when the class of people getting mowed over are rural people being mowed under by the feds in huge land grabs. You don't care when working class people get their checks raped every single month in order to support the millions of people you think shouldn't have to work to feed their families.

Unfortunately, as you've been told a million times, the government won't stop after they destroy the people you hate. Once they have that power, it will extend over EVERYBODY, and EVERYBODY will be treated exactly as they have been treating the unborn, the working man, the Christian.

Including you and the people you love.

And that has what to do with the topic

It was a long weekend and I forgot how stupid you are.

 

[xband]

Sanction: "...explicit or official approval, permission, or ratification." Definition of SANCTION

When the federal government pays you not to work, that is SANCTIONING that behavior.

Get it?

No -- you don't get your own definition.
If the gubmint gives you credits for food and shelter, that you turn around and use for something else, that gubmint has in no way "explicitly" OR "officially" sanctioned squat. It means you gamed it.

That's why for instance EBT is specifically only cashable for actual food. You can't buy a hit or a TV with it. If the gubmint were "sanctioning" that restriction would not exist.

Your own post.

Ahh, you don't believe that using an EBT card can easily be turned into illegal drugs. Having lived in Atlanta before, it is easy. Use the EBT card and buy lots of expensive steaks in the grocery store which are easily traded for drugs in the projects.

 

[Skylar]

North Carolina begins drug tests for welfare applicants | Myinforms

"State officials presented early results Tuesday of a new law that requires drug tests for welfare applicants. Of several thousand people who were screened, 89 people took the test and 21 of them tested positive.The law requiring testing of any Work First recipient suspected of being a drug user was enacted in 2013 over Gov. Pat McCrory’s veto."

That's 21 out of 7600.

That's a failure rate of about 0.25%

 

[Pogo]

Sanction: "...explicit or official approval, permission, or ratification." Definition of SANCTION

When the federal government pays you not to work, that is SANCTIONING that behavior.

Get it?

No -- you don't get your own definition.
If the gubmint gives you credits for food and shelter, that you turn around and use for something else, that gubmint has in no way "explicitly" OR "officially" sanctioned squat. It means you gamed it.

That's why for instance EBT is specifically only cashable for actual food. You can't buy a hit or a TV with it. If the gubmint were "sanctioning" that restriction would not exist.

Your own post.

Ahh, you don't believe that using an EBT card can easily be turned into illegal drugs. Having lived in Atlanta before, it is easy. Use the EBT card and buy lots of expensive steaks in the grocery store which are easily traded for drugs in the projects.

Then you're bartering steaks, not buying drugs. You can barter anything that would have little or no practical monetary value. One of your CDs. A ride home. Simple conversation/friendship. In none of these cases does money change hands. If we actually want to veer off to a "follow the food" mentality where you trace exactly how the food was used, we get farther and farther away from the point.

 

[Meathead]

North Carolina begins drug tests for welfare applicants | Myinforms

"State officials presented early results Tuesday of a new law that requires drug tests for welfare applicants. Of several thousand people who were screened, 89 people took the test and 21 of them tested positive.The law requiring testing of any Work First recipient suspected of being a drug user was enacted in 2013 over Gov. Pat McCrory’s veto."

That's 21 out of 7600.

That's a failure rate of about 0.25%

21/89 = 24%

 

[Skylar]

North Carolina begins drug tests for welfare applicants | Myinforms

"State officials presented early results Tuesday of a new law that requires drug tests for welfare applicants. Of several thousand people who were screened, 89 people took the test and 21 of them tested positive.The law requiring testing of any Work First recipient suspected of being a drug user was enacted in 2013 over Gov. Pat McCrory’s veto."

That's 21 out of 7600.

That's a failure rate of about 0.25%

21/89 = 24%

From the source article:

7,600 people screened from August through December21 of 89 people who were ordered to take tests came back positive

North Carolina begins drug tests for welfare applicants | Myinforms

That's a failure rate of 0.25% or so.

 

[Pogo]

North Carolina begins drug tests for welfare applicants | Myinforms

"State officials presented early results Tuesday of a new law that requires drug tests for welfare applicants. Of several thousand people who were screened, 89 people took the test and 21 of them tested positive.The law requiring testing of any Work First recipient suspected of being a drug user was enacted in 2013 over Gov. Pat McCrory’s veto."

That's 21 out of 7600.

That's a failure rate of about 0.25%

Gonkulator sez that works out to 0.27631578947368 percent. Quite a number to hang one's stereotype hat on.

 

[xband]

Sanction: "...explicit or official approval, permission, or ratification." Definition of SANCTION

When the federal government pays you not to work, that is SANCTIONING that behavior.

Get it?

No -- you don't get your own definition.
If the gubmint gives you credits for food and shelter, that you turn around and use for something else, that gubmint has in no way "explicitly" OR "officially" sanctioned squat. It means you gamed it.

That's why for instance EBT is specifically only cashable for actual food. You can't buy a hit or a TV with it. If the gubmint were "sanctioning" that restriction would not exist.

Your own post.

Ahh, you don't believe that using an EBT card can easily be turned into illegal drugs. Having lived in Atlanta before, it is easy. Use the EBT card and buy lots of expensive steaks in the grocery store which are easily traded for drugs in the projects.

Then you're bartering steaks, not buying drugs. You can barter anything that would have little or no practical monetary value. One of your CDs. A ride home. Simple conversation/friendship. In none of these cases does money change hands. If we actually want to veer off to a "follow the food" mentality where you trace exactly how the food was used, we get farther and farther away from the point.

I have had friends from all spectrums. One friend was a successful drug dealer until his brother got shot and killed. He had a safe in his house slap full of old and musty drug money that the bank would not accept and then he got robbed of his old and musty drug money..

 

[Coyote]

I can only appeal to a genuine respect for liberty. It's all too rare these days.

I agree, we have liberty and we have freedom and with both there are responsibilities and consequences. Is it asking to much that a person asking for government assistance refrain from taking illegal drugs that are ruining families and lives on a daily basis, that is almost certainly causing them to need assistance in the first place. Most drug abusers have other issues and drugs are taken to mask the issue.

Yes. It is. A private charity, can and indeed has every right to make whatever demands it wants of recipients, but the government can not discriminate in that way against a particular class of people because they are poor.

The government certainly can, and does, and will continue to. You don't give a shit when women are killing their babies...you don't care about that particular "class of people". You don't care when the class of people getting mowed over are rural people being mowed under by the feds in huge land grabs. You don't care when working class people get their checks raped every single month in order to support the millions of people you think shouldn't have to work to feed their families.

Unfortunately, as you've been told a million times, the government won't stop after they destroy the people you hate. Once they have that power, it will extend over EVERYBODY, and EVERYBODY will be treated exactly as they have been treating the unborn, the working man, the Christian.

Including you and the people you love.

And that has what to do with the topic

It was a long weekend and I forgot how stupid you are.

Let's hope you are never in a position to need assistance - the fecal explosion alone would require costly damage control measures.

The government isn't raping you, you're just whining because you want to enjoy benefits but you don't want to pay for it.

You don't give a fuck about poor people (presumably they're all welfare queens scamming the system because they're lazy) and you really don't give a fuck about the unborn because you're concern starts at and ends with limiting an individual women's right to have an abortion, and has certainly never extended to the thousands of embryos destroyed in the name of improving fertility.

Oh, and Christians are the most persecuted religion in America.

In the meantime, I'm sure you'll make a good start on criminalizing poverty - have any plans for instituting Poor Farms and Debtors Prisons again?

 

[Meathead]

North Carolina begins drug tests for welfare applicants | Myinforms

"State officials presented early results Tuesday of a new law that requires drug tests for welfare applicants. Of several thousand people who were screened, 89 people took the test and 21 of them tested positive.The law requiring testing of any Work First recipient suspected of being a drug user was enacted in 2013 over Gov. Pat McCrory’s veto."

That's 21 out of 7600.

That's a failure rate of about 0.25%

21/89 = 24%

From the source article:

7,600 people screened from August through December21 of 89 people who were ordered to take tests came back positive

North Carolina begins drug tests for welfare applicants | Myinforms

That's a failure rate of 0.25% or so.

Not everyone is a moron. If you don't take a test you can't pass or fail it.

 

[Meathead]

I agree, we have liberty and we have freedom and with both there are responsibilities and consequences. Is it asking to much that a person asking for government assistance refrain from taking illegal drugs that are ruining families and lives on a daily basis, that is almost certainly causing them to need assistance in the first place. Most drug abusers have other issues and drugs are taken to mask the issue.

Yes. It is. A private charity, can and indeed has every right to make whatever demands it wants of recipients, but the government can not discriminate in that way against a particular class of people because they are poor.

The government certainly can, and does, and will continue to. You don't give a shit when women are killing their babies...you don't care about that particular "class of people". You don't care when the class of people getting mowed over are rural people being mowed under by the feds in huge land grabs. You don't care when working class people get their checks raped every single month in order to support the millions of people you think shouldn't have to work to feed their families.

Unfortunately, as you've been told a million times, the government won't stop after they destroy the people you hate. Once they have that power, it will extend over EVERYBODY, and EVERYBODY will be treated exactly as they have been treating the unborn, the working man, the Christian.

Including you and the people you love.

And that has what to do with the topic

It was a long weekend and I forgot how stupid you are.

Let's hope you are never in a position to need assistance - the fecal explosion alone would require costly damage control measures.

The government isn't raping you, you're just whining because you want to enjoy benefits but you don't want to pay for it.

You don't give a fuck about poor people (presumably they're all welfare queens scamming the system because they're lazy) and you really don't give a fuck about the unborn because you're concern starts at and ends with limiting an individual women's right to have an abortion, and has certainly never extended to the thousands of embryos destroyed in the name of improving fertility.

Oh, and Christians are the most persecuted religion in America.

In the meantime, I'm sure you'll make a good start on criminalizing poverty - have any plans for instituting Poor Farms and Debtors Prisons again?

You should be more concerned with the imprisonment of imbeciles.