If you are serious about thinning the welfare ranks there are less obtrusive and more effective ways to go about it. I just think that many resent being forced to take drug tests for jobs while people on life support do not have to fulfill any expectations.
When I said logic before, I meant the mentality of "if I have to get drug tested to earn money, they should have to get tested for free money." It doesn't mean it's good logic. I was trying to show that I understood his argument while arguing against it.
I've been saying for months to my redneck extreme republican family the only person who might make me not vote Libertarian is if Cory Booker was Clinton's VP. Presently, I hate everyone now (except Johnson. Seriously, I know he sounds like he has a cock in his nose but he's our only hope).
This is easy. The DNC haven't given the mainstream media their talking points yet to explain it all away. Once the DNC sets the narrative relating to their problem and the press has been informed, then they will react. The useful idiots will then swear to the lie and life will go on as before.
What the hell does this have to do with drug testing welfare recipients? I'm against drug testing them, mainly for the reason Nett stated. It would have nothing to do with improving a social program, and everything to do with the company doing the testing making bank and then overcharging on top of it because the government is stupid and easy to take advantage of. As far as the welfare recipients feeling it's an infringement of their rights, or whatever the fuck, I don't think I could care. If you're so poor you need people to shell out cash for you, you shouldn't be spending it on things like weed or harder drugs until you can improve your circumstances and stop asking other people for money.
My question is whether or not people who are too poor to afford their own food should take what little money they do have, or receive, and spend it on drugs. So you're saying this is a question about class, gender, race, and sexual orientation? Or just Class? Is that a racist sort of classism or what exactly? So, it's an identity question? Like this? \ On a more serious note; based on the way you've talked about the right in this country throughout the entire thread you seem far more guilty of lazily cramming people into 'good' and 'bad' categories than the conservatives you're accusing.
This is a Mormon thing. I follow the news from the cult closely. They won't vote for Clinton because she is a democrat (the party of Satan) and a woman (can't get the priesthood). They won't vote for Trump because he is the furthest thing from a Christian plus Mit doesn't like him. This leaves them with libratarians.
We already have a stressed healthcare system, could you imagine the logistical nightmare of trying to drug test ~100m people? How many times a year do you test them? Is it a randomized test or do they get advanced notice? What database is set up to track all of this? What does this extend out to once it's in place? Do you start drug testing high school students before they are able to apply for student loans? Do you drug test people before they can get a driver's license? Do you drug test before you can receive medicare or social security? Do you give people a wellness test before you give them SNAP benefits? There are so many reasons this "sounds good" in a cut and dry manner, don't give money to people who are going to misappropriate the funds towards something harmful, but the practicality of it is off the charts bonkers.
Drug testing welfare recipients is a terrible idea for a number of reasons, chief of which is that it just gives the government another excuse to get involved in people's lives.
Am I the only one who thinks it's ironic that most of the people pushing for drug testing of ANYONE (Politicians, cops, parole/probation officers, etc.) don't have to take drug tests themselves? My parole officer didn't have to take a drug test to get hired. Cops I've talked to said that they didn't get tested (although I'm sure that some departments do), and we all know damn-well that politicians don't.
The government is already involved when it's cutting a check every week. The welfare issue is fairly simple. Does the cost of doing thorough due-diligence on each recipients spending habits and drug tests outweigh the savings obtained from doing so? If the answer is yes, then it doesn't make sense to test them. If the answer is no, then it does. As far as their dignity is concerned, that's tough shit. No one is forcing them to recieve benefits. The government is providing a social service to keep them afloat. They can swallow their pride.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/22/politics/dnc-wikileaks-emails/index.html?adkey=bn Sweet, sweet satisfaction. Wasserman-Schultz will resign her position with the DNC. I'm glad her shananigans are being checked. Interesting thing is that the Clinton campaign is blaming the Russians somehow.
It won't. The news is saying that she's getting an honorary chair in the Clinton Foundation, so the wheels keep turning. Failing upward to that role was probably what she wanted anyway. Between the DNC, CNN, and the corruption of the Clinton Foundation, Sanders never stood a fighting chance. It will be interesting to see what the next batch of leaks will bring, if they exist. Here's some of the more interesting parts of the current one: -DNC member killing horses for insurance money. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/578 -DNC making fun of black womans name. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/17942 -DNC telling each other, "I love you too. no homo." https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/425 -DNC requesting a pull an MSNBC commentary segment. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/6107 -DNC controlling the narrative with time released stories. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/12450 -DNC conspiring to create false Trump information and release with Reuters. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/7102 -DNC Hillary supporters infiltrated Sanders campaign. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/4776 -DNC members going to complain to Morning Joe producers about his mentioning of a "rigged system." https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/8806 -DNC discussing their relationship with NBC/MSNBC/CNN and how to get better treatment. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/13762 -Super PAC paying young voters to push back online Sanders supporters. Paid shills. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/8351 -DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz having an off the record meeting in MSNBC President Phil Griffin's office. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/8867 -DNC being messed with by the Washington Examiner. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/5304 -DNC discussing Hillary's policies as unfeasible. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/519 -$200k for a private dinner with Hillary. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/17287 -Offering to send interns out to fake a protest against the RNC. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/13366 -Faking outrage and pasting in a video later. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/7102 -A mole working inside of the Sanders campaign. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/7793 -Bringing up Sanders religion to scare the southern voters. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/11508 -Possible money laundering by moving money back and forth to bypass legal limits. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/6230 -Politico writer sending his stories to the DNC before he sends them to his editor. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/10808 -DNC feeding CNN the questions they want to be asked in interviews. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/4077 -Creating a fake job ad for a Trump business to paint him as a sexist. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/12803 -Hillary funding 2 million dollars in a coordinated campaign in battleground states to win back the Senate. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/7784 -DNC is upset that their "allies" didn't send in protestors so they sent out interns. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/13366 -"Clinton Foundation quid-pro-quo worries are lingering, will be exploited in general." https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/8351 -$50,000 - Lawrence Benenson. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/14700 -Re: BuzzFeed and DNC connection. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/10933 -Draft linking news articles about trump to use as negative press. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/7586 -Fwd: State Dinner Countdown. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/1901 Some woman is angry she hasn't been given more stuff from the Obama administration...might be interesting to follow up. -Re: State Dinner Countdown. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/2946 -Tim O'Brien: Trump's Fixation on Inflating his Net Worth is a Cause for Concern. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/4496 -RE: May Fundraising Numbers. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/5615 -Hillary for America Raised $26.4 Million in April, Began May with More than $30 Million Cash on Hand. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/13986 -Re: For approval: Trump supporter graphics. https://www.wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/788 -Press talking points, states Hillary is their candidate, dated May 5, 2016. More of a smoking gun than the ambiguous talk in the emails themselves. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/fileid/5254/2728 -DNC trying to get away with violating the Hatch Act. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/20148 -Democrats using interns to organize fake "protests." https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/13830 -RE: Action on DNC tomorrow (Immigration Raids). https://www.wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/9736
Seeing as a class action law suit was filed against her and the DNC, it'll be really interesting how it plays out.
Interesting cheat sheet: http://www.cheatsheet.com/personal-...stats-about-public-assistance.html/?a=viewall So almost 40% of welfare recipients are children and the average benefit across the board is $400/month. Do we seriously think the BILLIONS it would cost to run a drug testing program would be worth it? And if the majority of the people using the system are children, single parents and full time workers who aren't paid a living wage is it worth it to vilify them or make them jump through more hoops for $400 fucking dollars? Personally, I think the "lazy drunk welfare" person who is livin' large on the taxpayer dollar and not working is a small enough minority that it's unfair to use them as the poster child for the system.
Honestly I have no idea, that's why I posited the question. I haven't done much research into it. If it's a negative cost/benefit then no. But if it yields savings and cuts down on abuse, then yes. But again, I don't know many of the facts regarding the programs. Poverty =/= nobility, and I never give anyone the benefit of the doubt and abuse is a very real thing. Hell my father-in-laws girlfriend readily brags about gaming social programs and so do all her low life friends. I'm fine accepting a sunk cost over of it, but only if it makes sense to.