TN Welfare applicants drug tests: 37 out of 16,017 positive (0.2%)

[Brain357]

Drug testing of welfare applicants yields few positives

Six months after the rollout of a controversial law to drug-test people applying for public benefits, only a small fraction of low-income Tennesseans seeking financial assistance have tested positive for illegal drugs.

Thirty-seven of 16,017 applicants for the Families First cash assistance program between July and December tested positive for illegal substances, according to the Department of Human Services.

Another 81 lost their chance to receive benefits because they discontinued the application process at some point between the time they were required to fill out a three-item drug screening questionnaire and completing their application....

...In the first six months of the program, the state spent $5,295 to administer the program, including $4,215 to pay for the drug tests.

So much for the RW meme that all welfare recepients are on drugs.

On the other side, the cost of the testing program is really not very expensive, so assuming $1,000 per month in welfare, with 37 less people, that means $37,000 saved, minus $9,500 for the drug testing = $27,500 saved. Statistically, the drug tests are worth doing.

So what do the people denied welfare do now? Do they get them help to get off drugs?

In fact, there is information about that within the link in the OP.

Of the 37 who tested positive, 25 were referred to a drug treatment program.

One of the stated intents of the new law was to encourage people with substance abuse problems to enter treatment. Ben Middleton, chief operating office for Centerstone Tennessee, which operates more than 50 facilities offering substance abuse treatment, said he is skeptical that it will achieve that goal.

"The law was written with another purpose, to save money," Middleton said. "I don't think it's going to scratch the surface" in treating addiction.

I'd think you'd provide welfare as long as they can show they are receiving treatment.

 

[Nutz]

Well, let's think about this.

Without EXACT bios of the people who were tested, then there is no way any sane person can answer that question, n'est ce pas?

This is about applicants for welfare in TN. Whether they are illegal immigrants receiving welfare, only the testers in TN can answer that question.

Get it?

Oh yes, I do "get it", loud and clear. It's a shame that they single out those that they think may be buying illegal drugs and collecting welfare at the same time. A lot of prejudice going on in that state. I guess those folks think that only the poor and needy are using illegal drugs. And, my guess is that they are doing it because it involves taxpayers' hard earn dollars. I wonder where they think the money comes from to pay city, county, and state workers. And what money is used to pay those giving the test? It's an injustice to single out the poor, the needy, and the less fortunate that depend on government assistance programs to survive. The state should be ashamed and embarrassed to let the word get out about what they're doing.

If you want the Freebies, you'll have to meet requirements. It's as simple as that. If you're not good with that, simply don't ask for the Freebies.

It may NOT be freebies. Some folks work and still qualify for assistance. And, if they work, they're paying into the system through payroll deductions. Also, each time they make a purchase, they're paying sales tax. In addition, if they've ever worked, they have paid into the system. So, what freebies are you talking about here? Hey, the children aren't old enough to work. What about the elderly, the handicapped, the severely disabled? If the parents do drugs, go ahead and punish their children also? By withholding benefits from the parents, they are also withholding benefits from their children. Do you see anything wrong with this picture? Do you see any prejudice here at all? Lets be fair and give the test to everyone, no exceptions. Fair play across the board. If we punish one, punish all. Punish state employees, lawyers, judges, social workers, all of them. Lets see how many can keep their job.

Actually, all you mentioned are also subject to drug testing to gain employment. But like i said, you're free to not ask for the Freebies. If you don't want the requirements, you'll have to forgo the Freebies. It is what it is.

What "freebies" are you talking about? Do you know that some receiving assistance also work, and pay into the system through payroll deductions? Do you also know that many receiving assistance are little children too young to work? Do you know that some receiving assistance have worked in the past and paid into the system through payroll deductions? Do you know that some receiving assistance are elderly, the handicapped, and the severely disabled? Do you also know that if you punish the parents, that you're also punishing the children of those parents? What "freebies" are you talking about?

In the same respect, there are too many that abuse the system.

Drug testing of welfare applicants yields few positives

Six months after the rollout of a controversial law to drug-test people applying for public benefits, only a small fraction of low-income Tennesseans seeking financial assistance have tested positive for illegal drugs.

Thirty-seven of 16,017 applicants for the Families First cash assistance program between July and December tested positive for illegal substances, according to the Department of Human Services.

Another 81 lost their chance to receive benefits because they discontinued the application process at some point between the time they were required to fill out a three-item drug screening questionnaire and completing their application....

...In the first six months of the program, the state spent $5,295 to administer the program, including $4,215 to pay for the drug tests.

So much for the RW meme that all welfare recepients are on drugs.

On the other side, the cost of the testing program is really not very expensive, so assuming $1,000 per month in welfare, with 37 less people, that means $37,000 saved, minus $9,500 for the drug testing = $27,500 saved. Statistically, the drug tests are worth doing.

So what do the people denied welfare do now? Do they get them help to get off drugs?

They sell drugs for extra income.

 

[Roadrunner]

Drug testing of welfare applicants yields few positives

Six months after the rollout of a controversial law to drug-test people applying for public benefits, only a small fraction of low-income Tennesseans seeking financial assistance have tested positive for illegal drugs.

Thirty-seven of 16,017 applicants for the Families First cash assistance program between July and December tested positive for illegal substances, according to the Department of Human Services.

Another 81 lost their chance to receive benefits because they discontinued the application process at some point between the time they were required to fill out a three-item drug screening questionnaire and completing their application....

...In the first six months of the program, the state spent $5,295 to administer the program, including $4,215 to pay for the drug tests.

So much for the RW meme that all welfare recepients are on drugs.

On the other side, the cost of the testing program is really not very expensive, so assuming $1,000 per month in welfare, with 37 less people, that means $37,000 saved, minus $9,500 for the drug testing = $27,500 saved. Statistically, the drug tests are worth doing.

Once again the far left drones do not represent all the facts..

279 drug tests were administered

37 drug tests were positive

37 out of 279 is the true number, but this far left drone will once again show their religious dogma rules over reality..

There are also numerous ways to beat a piss test.

Any woman can just fill a condom with clean piss, and secrete it until time to fill the jar.

I understand there are pills readily available for masking pot in the piss too.

 

[rdean]

Drug Testing Welfare Recipients Is a Waste of Taxpayer Money

It's not about the cost. It's Republicans working to humiliate people who have had unfortunate circumstances. Read some of those stories in the times article. I wonder how many of those vote Republican but are getting screwed over by their party. This Republican Party is all about humiliation and class warfare. Like Mitt said, he wouldn't represent 47%, or nearly half, of America. He was referring to the poor and lower middle class. The GOP base wrongly assumed he was talking about blacks and Hispanics, but he was talking about them. It shows how the propaganda has affected their tiny minds.

Ah, quit yer bitchin. You want the Freebies, you'll have to meet the requirements. If you're not good with that, don't ask for the Freebies. It's as simple as that.

What freebies are you talking about? Even welfare isn't free. Remember, welfare reform passed under Clinton. Do you even know what that was? Wow, an ignorant and uninformed right winger. What a surprise.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Drug testing of welfare applicants yields few positives

Six months after the rollout of a controversial law to drug-test people applying for public benefits, only a small fraction of low-income Tennesseans seeking financial assistance have tested positive for illegal drugs.

Thirty-seven of 16,017 applicants for the Families First cash assistance program between July and December tested positive for illegal substances, according to the Department of Human Services.

Another 81 lost their chance to receive benefits because they discontinued the application process at some point between the time they were required to fill out a three-item drug screening questionnaire and completing their application....

...In the first six months of the program, the state spent $5,295 to administer the program, including $4,215 to pay for the drug tests.

So much for the RW meme that all welfare recepients are on drugs.

On the other side, the cost of the testing program is really not very expensive, so assuming $1,000 per month in welfare, with 37 less people, that means $37,000 saved, minus $9,500 for the drug testing = $27,500 saved. Statistically, the drug tests are worth doing.

Remind us how upset you are with firearms murders, 10000 out of 315000000, do the math on that one you retard.

 

[paulitician]

Biggest lesson learned here... Nothing's really 'Free.' Don't count on Big Brother to support you and your family. He's gonna get something out of the deal. You will pay a price. And that price will be your Freedom & Liberty.

 

[martybegan]

Drug testing of welfare applicants yields few positives

Six months after the rollout of a controversial law to drug-test people applying for public benefits, only a small fraction of low-income Tennesseans seeking financial assistance have tested positive for illegal drugs.

Thirty-seven of 16,017 applicants for the Families First cash assistance program between July and December tested positive for illegal substances, according to the Department of Human Services.

Another 81 lost their chance to receive benefits because they discontinued the application process at some point between the time they were required to fill out a three-item drug screening questionnaire and completing their application....

...In the first six months of the program, the state spent $5,295 to administer the program, including $4,215 to pay for the drug tests.

So much for the RW meme that all welfare recepients are on drugs.

On the other side, the cost of the testing program is really not very expensive, so assuming $1,000 per month in welfare, with 37 less people, that means $37,000 saved, minus $9,500 for the drug testing = $27,500 saved. Statistically, the drug tests are worth doing.

Once again the far left drones do not represent all the facts..

279 drug tests were administered

37 drug tests were positive

37 out of 279 is the true number, but this far left drone will once again show their religious dogma rules over reality..

I stand corrected. You are indeed right. I didn't see the end notes. That is then 11%, a higher figure indeed.

However, without having tested all 16,017 applicants, we will never know how many really would have tested positive. We also don't know what kind of profiling they used to decide to only test these 297. So, the figure is probably still quite low.

Thank you for catching my error, it was not intentional.

That being said, the statistic in the headline was still accurate:

16,017 applicants. 37 positive tests. That is 0,2% of the 16,017 applicants. Not my fault that they didn't test them all...

Its still a misleading statement that implies all 16k were tested.

You can't only test 300 or so, get 37 positives, and still reference "only 0.2% of the applicants" as a number of any meaning whatsoever.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Drug testing of welfare applicants yields few positives

Six months after the rollout of a controversial law to drug-test people applying for public benefits, only a small fraction of low-income Tennesseans seeking financial assistance have tested positive for illegal drugs.

Thirty-seven of 16,017 applicants for the Families First cash assistance program between July and December tested positive for illegal substances, according to the Department of Human Services.

Another 81 lost their chance to receive benefits because they discontinued the application process at some point between the time they were required to fill out a three-item drug screening questionnaire and completing their application....

...In the first six months of the program, the state spent $5,295 to administer the program, including $4,215 to pay for the drug tests.

So much for the RW meme that all welfare recepients are on drugs.

On the other side, the cost of the testing program is really not very expensive, so assuming $1,000 per month in welfare, with 37 less people, that means $37,000 saved, minus $9,500 for the drug testing = $27,500 saved. Statistically, the drug tests are worth doing.

Once again the far left drones do not represent all the facts..

279 drug tests were administered

37 drug tests were positive

37 out of 279 is the true number, but this far left drone will once again show their religious dogma rules over reality..

I stand corrected. You are indeed right. I didn't see the end notes. That is then 11%, a higher figure indeed.

However, without having tested all 16,017 applicants, we will never know how many really would have tested positive. We also don't know what kind of profiling they used to decide to only test these 297. So, the figure is probably still quite low.

Thank you for catching my error, it was not intentional.

That being said, the statistic in the headline was still accurate:

16,017 applicants. 37 positive tests. That is 0,2% of the 16,017 applicants. Not my fault that they didn't test them all...

Its still a misleading statement that implies all 16k were tested.

You can't only test 300 or so, get 37 positives, and still reference "only 0.2% of the applicants" as a number of any meaning whatsoever.

Just requires people to actually dig. Also, the statistic is bunk anyway, because without having tested all 16,017 applicants, we have no idea if this statistic of perhaps 11% would have held, risen, or dropped. So, at the end of the day, it's a he-said-she-said kind of thing.

The main point I was making, the point that most Cons should have been happy to have read, is that the cost of the testing itself is not cost prohibitive and therefore it does actually save money to test to week out druggies from getting welfare. Assuming just the 300 who were actually tested, and $9,500 to test them, that is just a little over $300 per testee. But assuming that were he to have gotten through without the test and taken home at least $12,000 per year in unemployment, for instance, then the state still saves $11,700. It's amazing how many Cons actually missed the larger point I was making.

LOL.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Drug testing of welfare applicants yields few positives

Six months after the rollout of a controversial law to drug-test people applying for public benefits, only a small fraction of low-income Tennesseans seeking financial assistance have tested positive for illegal drugs.

Thirty-seven of 16,017 applicants for the Families First cash assistance program between July and December tested positive for illegal substances, according to the Department of Human Services.

Another 81 lost their chance to receive benefits because they discontinued the application process at some point between the time they were required to fill out a three-item drug screening questionnaire and completing their application....

...In the first six months of the program, the state spent $5,295 to administer the program, including $4,215 to pay for the drug tests.

So much for the RW meme that all welfare recepients are on drugs.

On the other side, the cost of the testing program is really not very expensive, so assuming $1,000 per month in welfare, with 37 less people, that means $37,000 saved, minus $9,500 for the drug testing = $27,500 saved. Statistically, the drug tests are worth doing.

Remind us how upset you are with firearms murders, 10000 out of 315000000, do the math on that one you retard.

Why? Have I ever indicated that I am anti-2nd-Amendment?

Now, think really sloooowly about that one...

 

[martybegan]

Drug testing of welfare applicants yields few positives

Six months after the rollout of a controversial law to drug-test people applying for public benefits, only a small fraction of low-income Tennesseans seeking financial assistance have tested positive for illegal drugs.

Thirty-seven of 16,017 applicants for the Families First cash assistance program between July and December tested positive for illegal substances, according to the Department of Human Services.

Another 81 lost their chance to receive benefits because they discontinued the application process at some point between the time they were required to fill out a three-item drug screening questionnaire and completing their application....

...In the first six months of the program, the state spent $5,295 to administer the program, including $4,215 to pay for the drug tests.

So much for the RW meme that all welfare recepients are on drugs.

On the other side, the cost of the testing program is really not very expensive, so assuming $1,000 per month in welfare, with 37 less people, that means $37,000 saved, minus $9,500 for the drug testing = $27,500 saved. Statistically, the drug tests are worth doing.

Once again the far left drones do not represent all the facts..

279 drug tests were administered

37 drug tests were positive

37 out of 279 is the true number, but this far left drone will once again show their religious dogma rules over reality..

I stand corrected. You are indeed right. I didn't see the end notes. That is then 11%, a higher figure indeed.

However, without having tested all 16,017 applicants, we will never know how many really would have tested positive. We also don't know what kind of profiling they used to decide to only test these 297. So, the figure is probably still quite low.

Thank you for catching my error, it was not intentional.

That being said, the statistic in the headline was still accurate:

16,017 applicants. 37 positive tests. That is 0,2% of the 16,017 applicants. Not my fault that they didn't test them all...

Its still a misleading statement that implies all 16k were tested.

You can't only test 300 or so, get 37 positives, and still reference "only 0.2% of the applicants" as a number of any meaning whatsoever.

Just requires people to actually dig. Also, the statistic is bunk anyway, because without having tested all 16,017 applicants, we have no idea if this statistic of perhaps 11% would have held, risen, or dropped. So, at the end of the day, it's a he-said-she-said kind of thing.

The main point I was making, the point that most Cons should have been happy to have read, is that the cost of the testing itself is not cost prohibitive and therefore it does actually save money to test to week out druggies from getting welfare. Assuming just the 300 who were actually tested, and $9,500 to test them, that is just a little over $300 per testee. But assuming that were he to have gotten through without the test and taken home at least $12,000 per year in unemployment, for instance, then the state still saves $11,700. It's amazing how many Cons actually missed the larger point I was making.

LOL.

I've seen plenty of people treat as gospel poll results with a far lower representation than this survey. 300 of 16000 is 1.9% or so of the overall population. What is the usual sample size by percentage for your average opinion poll?

The hard # is 11% of those sampled failed. Even if one cuts it in half, its still an order of magnitude greater than the 0.2% implied in the original article.

 

[paulitician]

People sell their souls to the Devil when they want Big Brother to support them and their families. You want the Freebies, you're gonna do it his way. If he wants to drug test, oh well. And guess what? He'll probably be coming up with even more intrusive requirements in the future. He is broke after all.

So my advice to all would be, don't sell your soul to the Devil. Do it the old fashioned way instead... Work harder.

 

[koshergrl]

Drug testing of welfare applicants yields few positives

Six months after the rollout of a controversial law to drug-test people applying for public benefits, only a small fraction of low-income Tennesseans seeking financial assistance have tested positive for illegal drugs.

Thirty-seven of 16,017 applicants for the Families First cash assistance program between July and December tested positive for illegal substances, according to the Department of Human Services.

Another 81 lost their chance to receive benefits because they discontinued the application process at some point between the time they were required to fill out a three-item drug screening questionnaire and completing their application....

...In the first six months of the program, the state spent $5,295 to administer the program, including $4,215 to pay for the drug tests.

So much for the RW meme that all welfare recepients are on drugs.

On the other side, the cost of the testing program is really not very expensive, so assuming $1,000 per month in welfare, with 37 less people, that means $37,000 saved, minus $9,500 for the drug testing = $27,500 saved. Statistically, the drug tests are worth doing.

Once again the far left drones do not represent all the facts..

279 drug tests were administered

37 drug tests were positive

37 out of 279 is the true number, but this far left drone will once again show their religious dogma rules over reality..

There are also numerous ways to beat a piss test.

Any woman can just fill a condom with clean piss, and secrete it until time to fill the jar.

I understand there are pills readily available for masking pot in the piss too.

Anybody can beat a piss test, and do regularly.

The test is rigged. I sat at a desk across from applicants for services for YEARS, and I can tell you right now..more than 13 percent are loaded up on illegal drugs. You can smell it on them, and it's obvious when you talk to them.

 

[TooTall]

Drug testing of welfare applicants yields few positives

Six months after the rollout of a controversial law to drug-test people applying for public benefits, only a small fraction of low-income Tennesseans seeking financial assistance have tested positive for illegal drugs.

Thirty-seven of 16,017 applicants for the Families First cash assistance program between July and December tested positive for illegal substances, according to the Department of Human Services.

Another 81 lost their chance to receive benefits because they discontinued the application process at some point between the time they were required to fill out a three-item drug screening questionnaire and completing their application....

...In the first six months of the program, the state spent $5,295 to administer the program, including $4,215 to pay for the drug tests.

So much for the RW meme that all welfare recepients are on drugs.

On the other side, the cost of the testing program is really not very expensive, so assuming $1,000 per month in welfare, with 37 less people, that means $37,000 saved, minus $9,500 for the drug testing = $27,500 saved. Statistically, the drug tests are worth doing.

Once again the far left drones do not represent all the facts..

279 drug tests were administered

37 drug tests were positive

37 out of 279 is the true number, but this far left drone will once again show their religious dogma rules over reality..

I stand corrected. You are indeed right. I didn't see the end notes. That is then 11%, a higher figure indeed.

However, without having tested all 16,017 applicants, we will never know how many really would have tested positive. We also don't know what kind of profiling they used to decide to only test these 297. So, the figure is probably still quite low.

Thank you for catching my error, it was not intentional.

That being said, the statistic in the headline was still accurate:

16,017 applicants. 37 positive tests. That is 0,2% of the 16,017 applicants. Not my fault that they didn't test them all...

I am in also in favor of drug testing welfare recipients, but hope that there is a follow on program to get them help breaking the addiction to drugs. That would run the cost of drug testing up substantially, but might benefit some of the offenders.

As an aside, I once worked for a company that had mandatory drug testing for some of us that had a Secret or above security clearance that the company paid the DOD to maintain. I ran an offsite office, but got to know the manager that directed the drug tests. At one of my visits to the plant in California he and I had a few beers and he told me why I was always picked at the supposedly random selection of people to be tested every quarter. He stated that there were so many people in house that were known to use, he had to pick people he was quite sure were non-users for testing. He had to keep the percentage of drug abusers down to keep several government contract from being cancelled. I lost a bit of confidence in the mandatory drug testing program, but if everyone had been tested, it would have shut the plant down.

 

[koshergrl]

Anybody who works in human services knows that the reason people NEED them is running in their veins. A combination of really stupid lifestyle choices sold to them by weirdos on the left.....and addiction.


I'm pretty ambivalent about drug testing. All the druggies are up on how to fake out piss tests....the ones who are so stupid they'll flunk are mostly young women with lots of kids...we already can't house kids whose parents are criminally abusive...where the hell do you think those kids are going to go when they start starving because mom can't get her foodstamps?

 

[koshergrl]

It's the dawn of institutionalized child management for the masses. I sense Charles Dickens is about to make a comeback.

 

[TooTall]

Well, let's think about this.

Without EXACT bios of the people who were tested, then there is no way any sane person can answer that question, n'est ce pas?

This is about applicants for welfare in TN. Whether they are illegal immigrants receiving welfare, only the testers in TN can answer that question.

Get it?

Oh yes, I do "get it", loud and clear. It's a shame that they single out those that they think may be buying illegal drugs and collecting welfare at the same time. A lot of prejudice going on in that state. I guess those folks think that only the poor and needy are using illegal drugs. And, my guess is that they are doing it because it involves taxpayers' hard earn dollars. I wonder where they think the money comes from to pay city, county, and state workers. And what money is used to pay those giving the test? It's an injustice to single out the poor, the needy, and the less fortunate that depend on government assistance programs to survive. The state should be ashamed and embarrassed to let the word get out about what they're doing.

If you want the Freebies, you'll have to meet requirements. It's as simple as that. If you're not good with that, simply don't ask for the Freebies.

It may NOT be freebies. Some folks work and still qualify for assistance. And, if they work, they're paying into the system through payroll deductions. Also, each time they make a purchase, they're paying sales tax. In addition, if they've ever worked, they have paid into the system. So, what freebies are you talking about here? Hey, the children aren't old enough to work. What about the elderly, the handicapped, the severely disabled? If the parents do drugs, go ahead and punish their children also? By withholding benefits from the parents, they are also withholding benefits from their children. Do you see anything wrong with this picture? Do you see any prejudice here at all? Lets be fair and give the test to everyone, no exceptions. Fair play across the board. If we punish one, punish all. Punish state employees, lawyers, judges, social workers, all of them. Lets see how many can keep their job.

Actually, all you mentioned are also subject to drug testing to gain employment. But like i said, you're free to not ask for the Freebies. If you don't want the requirements, you'll have to forgo the Freebies. It is what it is.

It may NOT be "freebies". Do you believe that everyone getting some form of government assistance, has never ever worked and paid into the system through payroll deductions? Do you call it "freebies" when little children are helped through assistance programs? Are they old enough to work? If the state punished the parents, are they not also punishing the children of the parents? Do you know that some getting government assistance also work, and contribute through payroll deductions? Who exactly gets "freebies"?

Payroll taxes consist of Social Security and Medicare, neither of which contribute to Welfare. You are being misleading implying they pay for "freebies' because they don't.

 

[Ravi]

Oh yes, I do "get it", loud and clear. It's a shame that they single out those that they think may be buying illegal drugs and collecting welfare at the same time. A lot of prejudice going on in that state. I guess those folks think that only the poor and needy are using illegal drugs. And, my guess is that they are doing it because it involves taxpayers' hard earn dollars. I wonder where they think the money comes from to pay city, county, and state workers. And what money is used to pay those giving the test? It's an injustice to single out the poor, the needy, and the less fortunate that depend on government assistance programs to survive. The state should be ashamed and embarrassed to let the word get out about what they're doing.

If you want the Freebies, you'll have to meet requirements. It's as simple as that. If you're not good with that, simply don't ask for the Freebies.

It may NOT be freebies. Some folks work and still qualify for assistance. And, if they work, they're paying into the system through payroll deductions. Also, each time they make a purchase, they're paying sales tax. In addition, if they've ever worked, they have paid into the system. So, what freebies are you talking about here? Hey, the children aren't old enough to work. What about the elderly, the handicapped, the severely disabled? If the parents do drugs, go ahead and punish their children also? By withholding benefits from the parents, they are also withholding benefits from their children. Do you see anything wrong with this picture? Do you see any prejudice here at all? Lets be fair and give the test to everyone, no exceptions. Fair play across the board. If we punish one, punish all. Punish state employees, lawyers, judges, social workers, all of them. Lets see how many can keep their job.

Actually, all you mentioned are also subject to drug testing to gain employment. But like i said, you're free to not ask for the Freebies. If you don't want the requirements, you'll have to forgo the Freebies. It is what it is.

It may NOT be "freebies". Do you believe that everyone getting some form of government assistance, has never ever worked and paid into the system through payroll deductions? Do you call it "freebies" when little children are helped through assistance programs? Are they old enough to work? If the state punished the parents, are they not also punishing the children of the parents? Do you know that some getting government assistance also work, and contribute through payroll deductions? Who exactly gets "freebies"?

Payroll taxes consist of Social Security and Medicare, neither of which contribute to Welfare. You are being misleading implying they pay for "freebies' because they don't.

Payroll taxes also consist of state and federal income tax.

And lol at the two dim bulbs that agreed with your false statement.

 

[TooTall]

If you want the Freebies, you'll have to meet requirements. It's as simple as that. If you're not good with that, simply don't ask for the Freebies.

It may NOT be freebies. Some folks work and still qualify for assistance. And, if they work, they're paying into the system through payroll deductions. Also, each time they make a purchase, they're paying sales tax. In addition, if they've ever worked, they have paid into the system. So, what freebies are you talking about here? Hey, the children aren't old enough to work. What about the elderly, the handicapped, the severely disabled? If the parents do drugs, go ahead and punish their children also? By withholding benefits from the parents, they are also withholding benefits from their children. Do you see anything wrong with this picture? Do you see any prejudice here at all? Lets be fair and give the test to everyone, no exceptions. Fair play across the board. If we punish one, punish all. Punish state employees, lawyers, judges, social workers, all of them. Lets see how many can keep their job.

Actually, all you mentioned are also subject to drug testing to gain employment. But like i said, you're free to not ask for the Freebies. If you don't want the requirements, you'll have to forgo the Freebies. It is what it is.

It may NOT be "freebies". Do you believe that everyone getting some form of government assistance, has never ever worked and paid into the system through payroll deductions? Do you call it "freebies" when little children are helped through assistance programs? Are they old enough to work? If the state punished the parents, are they not also punishing the children of the parents? Do you know that some getting government assistance also work, and contribute through payroll deductions? Who exactly gets "freebies"?

Payroll taxes consist of Social Security and Medicare, neither of which contribute to Welfare. You are being misleading implying they pay for "freebies' because they don't.

Payroll taxes also consist of state and federal income tax.

And lol at the two dim bulbs that agreed with your false statement.

How much state and federal income tax do you think someone pays that is employed and still eligible for Welfare?

 

[Sonny Clark]

Oh yes, I do "get it", loud and clear. It's a shame that they single out those that they think may be buying illegal drugs and collecting welfare at the same time. A lot of prejudice going on in that state. I guess those folks think that only the poor and needy are using illegal drugs. And, my guess is that they are doing it because it involves taxpayers' hard earn dollars. I wonder where they think the money comes from to pay city, county, and state workers. And what money is used to pay those giving the test? It's an injustice to single out the poor, the needy, and the less fortunate that depend on government assistance programs to survive. The state should be ashamed and embarrassed to let the word get out about what they're doing.

If you want the Freebies, you'll have to meet requirements. It's as simple as that. If you're not good with that, simply don't ask for the Freebies.

It may NOT be freebies. Some folks work and still qualify for assistance. And, if they work, they're paying into the system through payroll deductions. Also, each time they make a purchase, they're paying sales tax. In addition, if they've ever worked, they have paid into the system. So, what freebies are you talking about here? Hey, the children aren't old enough to work. What about the elderly, the handicapped, the severely disabled? If the parents do drugs, go ahead and punish their children also? By withholding benefits from the parents, they are also withholding benefits from their children. Do you see anything wrong with this picture? Do you see any prejudice here at all? Lets be fair and give the test to everyone, no exceptions. Fair play across the board. If we punish one, punish all. Punish state employees, lawyers, judges, social workers, all of them. Lets see how many can keep their job.

Actually, all you mentioned are also subject to drug testing to gain employment. But like i said, you're free to not ask for the Freebies. If you don't want the requirements, you'll have to forgo the Freebies. It is what it is.

It may NOT be "freebies". Do you believe that everyone getting some form of government assistance, has never ever worked and paid into the system through payroll deductions? Do you call it "freebies" when little children are helped through assistance programs? Are they old enough to work? If the state punished the parents, are they not also punishing the children of the parents? Do you know that some getting government assistance also work, and contribute through payroll deductions? Who exactly gets "freebies"?

Payroll taxes consist of Social Security and Medicare, neither of which contribute to Welfare. You are being misleading implying they pay for "freebies' because they don't.

Where does the money come from to pay for welfare? Where does the money come from to pay for food stamps, housing, aid for dependent children, disability, etc.? Does the government have money other than tax dollars to pay for all of those things? If so, where does the government get the money?

 

[Ravi]

It may NOT be freebies. Some folks work and still qualify for assistance. And, if they work, they're paying into the system through payroll deductions. Also, each time they make a purchase, they're paying sales tax. In addition, if they've ever worked, they have paid into the system. So, what freebies are you talking about here? Hey, the children aren't old enough to work. What about the elderly, the handicapped, the severely disabled? If the parents do drugs, go ahead and punish their children also? By withholding benefits from the parents, they are also withholding benefits from their children. Do you see anything wrong with this picture? Do you see any prejudice here at all? Lets be fair and give the test to everyone, no exceptions. Fair play across the board. If we punish one, punish all. Punish state employees, lawyers, judges, social workers, all of them. Lets see how many can keep their job.

Actually, all you mentioned are also subject to drug testing to gain employment. But like i said, you're free to not ask for the Freebies. If you don't want the requirements, you'll have to forgo the Freebies. It is what it is.

It may NOT be "freebies". Do you believe that everyone getting some form of government assistance, has never ever worked and paid into the system through payroll deductions? Do you call it "freebies" when little children are helped through assistance programs? Are they old enough to work? If the state punished the parents, are they not also punishing the children of the parents? Do you know that some getting government assistance also work, and contribute through payroll deductions? Who exactly gets "freebies"?

Payroll taxes consist of Social Security and Medicare, neither of which contribute to Welfare. You are being misleading implying they pay for "freebies' because they don't.

Payroll taxes also consist of state and federal income tax.

And lol at the two dim bulbs that agreed with your false statement.

How much state and federal income tax do you think someone pays that is employed and still eligible for Welfare?

Can't admit you were wrong, eh? He wasn't talking about that, anyway. He was talking about paying into the system over their work life period. Many, many welfare recipients are elderly people that worked all their lives.