- Joined
- Mar 11, 2006
- Messages
- 96,099
- Reaction score
- 33,418
- Location
- SE Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
So the "Gents" will go across the street to withdraw cash at a nearby atm.
Why should we make it convenient?
So the "Gents" will go across the street to withdraw cash at a nearby atm.
The same as the amount that would if they couldn't hire illegals and had to pay taxes.
Aw Bull! You don't know what the hell you are talking about.
j-mac
How many small businesses do you suppose would go out of business if a "Living Wage" were enacted as law?
j-mac
I thought this thread was about drug testing.
In theory. While the employer's portion is an overall part of your "salary" package, it would be naive to think you'd see a dollar-for-dollar increase if the employer suddenly didn't have that expense anymore.If you're paying $200/month then your employer is probably paying twice that much for your policy -- which actually reduces your pay by the same amount.
Better yet, why not just pay people a living wage for working full time and reduce the need for welfare altogether?
Now, that would be a great idea for people who have jobs.
We have been discussing drug testing welfare recipients and branched out to other related subjects. What would you like to add to the drug testing discussion?
The same as the amount that would if they couldn't hire illegals and had to pay taxes.
Not necessarily. In this scenario...Remove the laws that criminalize the consumption of various substances. Problem solved.
Remove the laws that criminalize the consumption of various substances. Problem solved.
Sounds like a good idea to me, but it doesn't sound like it would solve the problem that some people have in finding a way to cut funding for the those in need.
Seems to me it would. I mean, they are not proposing we drug test for nicotine of booze.
And what do the pro-drug testing folks say about your suggestion?
They are also likely the pro keep drugs illegal crowd.
Most of the pro-test people on this thread just want to test poor people, they have no interest in testing the greater population at large.
Now, that would be a great idea for people who have jobs.
I would disagree...most of them are all for testing senators, and any other government position. And if rich people want government aid, test them too. That seems to be the stance. You want government money, pee in a cup.
Hogwash, if you ask me. Booze costs just as much as meth, and is ALMOST as destructive to one's ability to procure and hold a job. We ain't testing for that, though, are we? Seems fishy. I think most people won't be happy until they control, literally, every aspect of any welfare recipient's life, right down to when they piss in the morning.
Only folks on the public dole. If they want free cash from the taxpayers, they need to be clean and sober. Why is that a problem with you?Most of the pro-test people on this thread just want to test poor people, they have no interest in testing the greater population at large.
Only folks on the public dole. If they want free cash from the taxpayers, they need to be clean and sober. Why is that a problem with you?
Only folks on the public dole. If they want free cash from the taxpayers, they need to be clean and sober. Why is that a problem with you?
Only folks on the public dole. If they want free cash from the taxpayers, they need to be clean and sober. Why is that a problem with you?