• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

States consider drug tests for welfare recipients

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
24,380
Reaction score
7,805
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
My Way News - States consider drug tests for welfare recipients

There seems to be no coordinated move around the country to push these bills,

Good.

If they aren't working they should be looking and if they're all doped up... they can handle their matters alone; sans tax payer funding.

Taxpayers should not be subsidizing pot heads or any other druggies.

They want to do it... get a yob.
After that they can do whatever they want.

.
 
Last edited:
Great something else for the government to pay for:lol:
 
Good.

If they aren't working they should be looking and if they're all doped up... they can handle their matters alone; sans tax payer funding.

Taxpayers should not be subsidizing pot heads or any other druggies.

They want to do it... get a yob.
After that they can do whatever they want.

.

We agree. :shock:
 
Bad policy. The costs would be astronomical and there would be almost no benefit whatsoever.
 
Bad policy. The costs would be astronomical and there would be almost no benefit whatsoever.

Would they not lose their welfare if found on drugs? (didn't read the article, just sneaking online for a few minutes).
 
Would they not lose their welfare if found on drugs? (didn't read the article, just sneaking online for a few minutes).

Yes, they would. But how much do think it would cost to run drug tests for everyone? There's no way the testing would catch enough people that the savings would cover it.

And then there's the matter of having useless, jobless people on the street without their Welfare benefits. They can't just turn around and get a job if they're on drugs, so how do you think they're going to make money?
 
Last edited:
Yes, they would. But how much do think it would cost to run drug tests for everyone?

There's no way the testing would catch enough people that the savings would cover it.

And then what do we do when they are homeless?
 
Its about time.

If the govenrment can put all kinds of strings on the money it gives out, there's no reson that "clean" cannot be among them.
 
And then what do we do when they are homeless?

Put them in jail. That's about the least useful and most expensive policy I can think up... which means it's practically guaranteed to be what they have in mind.
 
Put them in jail. That's about the least useful and most expensive policy I can think up... which means it's practically guaranteed to be what they have in mind.

That is what I was kinda what I was thinking too.
 
Yes, they would. But how much do think it would cost to run drug tests for everyone? There's no way the testing would catch enough people that the savings would cover it.

And then there's the matter of having useless, jobless people on the street without their Welfare benefits. They can't just turn around and get a job if they're on drugs, so how do you think they're going to make money?

Why can't they get a job just because they failed a piss test?
 
Bad policy. The costs would be astronomical and there would be almost no benefit whatsoever.

I agree. I'm a firm believer in putting welfare recipients on public works programs/community service.

There's plenty of work needed to be done in every community. That way we're at least getting some sort of return on our investment.
 
I agree. I'm a firm believer in putting welfare recipients on public works programs/community service.

There's plenty of work needed to be done in every community. That way we're at least getting some sort of return on our investment.

Yes, absolutely. This would also increase costs... but it would provide valuable service, both in the form of the work itself, and in the rehabilitational value of performing the work. That would be helping Welfare recipients prepare for jobs in the private sphere.
 
Back
Top Bottom