• 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!

98 Percent of Welfare Applicants Pass Drug Test

Henrin said:
I'm assuming you are talking about opportunity and relating opportunity to amount of work needed to reach a certain class. That doesn't mean the opportunity is not there, it just means one party has farther to go than another party. I do not consider that unequal as both parties in the same situation would have the same road ahead of them.
Click to expand...

Its absolutely unequal...how can you compare a kid born with a gold spoon sticking out of his buttocks to a kid born in the slums in terms of equal opportunity....its not even close in terms of struggle and impediments....Henrin the term BORN EQUAL only applies to birth rights...after that the entire ballgame changes....and your quite smart enough to know that
 
Kali said:
I really wish I could take you on a trip to real hoods to see how people live! Children do sometimes only eat beans and bread and at the end of the month that could be their only meal. You are one of those that have decided just because there is a small few that rip off the system that everyone else on welfare are living high off the hog when that is not the case!

You have been duped and are brainwashed towards those evil poor folks on welfare simply cause you have bought into some twisted untrue view that the majority of folks on welfare are living nice, lazy and eating good. It is simply not true! You have fell for a sterotype!!
Click to expand...

1) I'm not going on a trip to the "hood". Hell with that. Princes don't walk with paupers. Pardon me for not wishing I was a "brutha".

2) Alot of them do live relatively "high on the hog", for lack of better terms. I know women right now on all sorts of government assistance from A to Z that have their own place. They get some high-ticket items at the grocery store. They're afforded lots of things I wouldn't buy because of price tags (part of that is because I'm a cheap mofo, but that's beside the point). This should not be allowed. I know people who work full-time and live with parents or family due to lack of finances. To see these women with multiple kids, not working or working part-time, with their own place is just a giant "Fck you" sign to others who aren't remotely as irresponsible.

3) You need to stop trying to "represent" for your "peoples". This white race apologist mad-at-daddy crap is just annoying. If you want to go hang with the ghetto, drink malt liquor and shoot dice all day, that's fine. Hands off my tax money. You can stay in hovel without your hand in my pocket.
 
lpast said:
Its absolutely unequal...how can you compare a kid born with a gold spoon sticking out of his buttocks to a kid born in the slums in terms of equal opportunity....its not even close in terms of struggle and impediments....Henrin the term BORN EQUAL only applies to birth rights...after that the entire ballgame changes....and your quite smart enough to know that
Click to expand...

I don't accept the premise. You believe that because of where they were born they are not equal. They are equal as you admit by birth rights. Opportunity is a chance game played by us all. We can't pick our part on the field, we can bearly pick the amount of work it will take to get the position on the field we wish. We play to the best of our abilities all of us, and in that respect the world is equal as long as the rights of all individuals are kept sound. There will always be a natural sense of inequality, it is natural. The thing that makes us equal in any society is our rights and liberties.

Sure some will get to higher ground quicker than others through many avenues and sure sometimes luck takes someone higher faster, but again both are all natural orders of the world. You can't find equality with value by fighting the natural world in the economic environment.
 
Last edited:
lpast said:
I think shes frustrated with the rhetoric on this forum from some and coming from the teaparty who seem to want to rip the lungs out of everyone that are not the richest in the country.
Kali like me is for the underdog....its them that need the most support, somehow lately there seems to be an attitude that its the rich that are the downtrodden and need to be coddled with more huge tax cuts....eventually that attitude is going to make alot more Kali's....dont change Kali america needs people with hearts...its what made us America
Click to expand...

Kali is not the one you want to look up to. She wouldn't know economic theory if it pimp-slapped her. She comes on here with these emotional pleas, pretty much asking everyone with money to write a blank check to help people who don't deserve, nor have tried to better their situations. She just acts like the town crier for redistribution, mostly as a push for reparations I'm led to believe. Financially, she speaks in a manner likening her to someone who has never worked, nor paid taxes ever.
 
1. 98% is not a vindication of 'the noble savage', as a few fringe lefties might want people to believe. I'd estimate that ~20% of the US population (at least) would fail a fool-proof drug test, rich, poor, black, white, asian, whatever. 98% is an indictment of the test, nothing else.

2. Kali advocates help for the truly needy and wants them represented. I don't think she believes that everyone on welfare is living tough; however, some people think that everyone on welfare is living easy - and that's what bothers her. It's not reasonable to misinterpet a call for needed and useful welfare as a call for unfettered socialism... when it is a response to a call for the total elimination of welfare. Calling for total elimination is extremist, and such a position calling their opposition extremist seems, well, illegit.

2a. It's too bad Kali doesn't love bombs, like me; but oh well, I guess she doesn't care about oppression. ;)
 
Last edited:
ecofarm said:
1. 98% is not a vindication of 'the noble savage', as a few fringe lefties might want people to believe. I'd estimate that ~20% of the US population (at least) would fail a fool-proof drug test, rich, poor, black, white, asian, whatever. 98% is an indictment of the test, nothing else.

2. Kali advocates help for the truly needy and wants them represented. I don't think she believes that everyone on welfare is living tough; however, some people think that everyone on welfare is living easy - and that's what bothers her. It's not reasonable to misinterpet a call for needed and useful welfare as a call for unfettered socialism... when it is a response to a call for the total elimination of welfare. Calling for total elimination is extremist, and such a position calling their opposition extremist seems, well, illegit.

2a. It's too bad Kali doesn't love bombs, like me; but oh well, I guess she doesn't care about oppression. ;)
Click to expand...

Not sure about 2a, ;) But otherwise, well stated.
 
VanceMack said:
Then why are people losing their mind about the cost of the program vs the benefit? And why do they continue to cite the cost of Welfare in the state as the cost of the drug testing program? It cant POSSIBLY have anything to do with posters bias and agenda...
Click to expand...

Perhaps for the same reason people began to complain about the cost of employee benefits packages for state employees - it became a rallying cry for "big government" and "big government spending". As such, enough people in positions of political power raised enough noise to convince people that welfare recipients are this "dredge on society". Kinda goes with that old saying, "if you say it often enough and loud enough eventually the lie becomes the truth".

So, what do the preliminary numbers tell us?

1. That there are tens of thousands of Floridians who are on state welfare who still need it.

2. That the vast majority of applicants who have applied for TANF since the mandatory drug testing program has come into effect very likely are not habitual drug users as some have suggested.

3. That those potential applicants who may be drug users may have refrained from applying for state benefits out of fear of being caught and subsequently losing said benefits.

Other than the above, there's very little one can take away from the preliminary numbers. However, as I said in my last post the fact that over 90,000 Floridians still applied for TANF and the numbers from July-August are only 8.3% off the yearly average tells me that there are still more applicants out there who don't mind being tested likely because they don't have anything to hide.

Give the process time...another year or two of testing should illustrate just how right or wrong the orchestrators of Florida's drug testing law are.
 
Kali said:
Also do not forget that with Gippers bright idea they may even have to split families up and all kids in these "homes/shelters/TENTS!!" and adults in the other. It is a bad idea. We are not living in a 3rd world country for **** sake! :(
Click to expand...

....We were not a 3rd world country, but then Reaganomics came along. We are not Mexico north, with 400 families running the country.

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
 

Attachments

  • Wealth disparity in US.jpg
    Wealth disparity in US.jpg
    36.5 KB · Views: 48
Last edited:
Gipper said:
Yeah Lord, you got me...something like 18th century Great Britain. Guilty.



No, I hope welfare wasn't designed to "support the nuclear family", because that's entirely too much cost. It's supposed to ensure the bare minimum of survival for all parties involved. If I was to see a "welfare family" in an average-sized house, multiple kids, sitting around a finely crafted dinner table with a steak in front of them, I would vomit with rage. You would completely disincentivize working. They can do jack, and enjoy standard benefits rendered to hard-working middle-class citizens? Hell, I wouldn't try to get a job either.

Know what welfare should mean? It should mean squalor. It should mean beans and bread for dinner. It should mean thrift shop clothing runs. Give them barely enough to survive, and let them know firsthand that this is the life that is destined for them should they choose to continue this behavior. They can look around at the gainfully employed, driving Cadillacs out to Red Lobster for dinner, and know that with the right effort, they could hope for that someday too.

In the meantime, I'm all about cost minimalization for people that are currently living off the dole.
Click to expand...


Lord Tammerlain said:
It was not forced, if they wanted assistance they went to the workhouse, or they could stay outside and die.

No slavery involved
Click to expand...

Thanks. I thought I would save a link to these posts. It will make an excellent rebuttal to the assertion that America is a Christian nation.
 
We're a Christian nation, but I still believe in that pesky "First Amendment" thing. I sure as hell don't want evangelicals mandating Biblical law.
 
Gipper said:
We're a Christian nation, but I still believe in that pesky "First Amendment" thing. I sure as hell don't want evangelicals mandating Biblical law.
Click to expand...

I realize it's a minor and argumentative point, but what makes us Christian? I would say if you look at our overall behavior and actions, you'd be hard pressed to prove this nation was Christain. just saying . . . :coffeepap
 
Well while it was founded on religious freedom, one could just see the statistics of people who identify themselves as Christian. It's overwhelming.

And what is "Christian" and what people believe is "Christian" vary immensely. Some people think eating a burger on Friday earns you a spot in hell. Some people think to be a good "follower of God" means you forsake pretty much any technological advance. Even some people [in Kansas] think that we should boycott military funerals because they died based on the fact that God hates homosexuals.

Any wonder why I'm not religious?
 
Gipper said:
Well while it was founded on religious freedom, one could just see the statistics of people who identify themselves as Christian. It's overwhelming.

And what is "Christian" and what people believe is "Christian" vary immensely. Some people think eating a burger on Friday earns you a spot in hell. Some people think to be a good "follower of God" means you forsake pretty much any technological advance. Even some people [in Kansas] think that we should boycott military funerals because they died based on the fact that God hates homosexuals.

Any wonder why I'm not religious?
Click to expand...

What people think really doesn't have much to do with what is actually Christain. But I think we agree on the problem. Many affliate with a religion without fully understanding what that religion actually believes. For example, I was talking to a Christian the other day (not the first time) who didn't believe in the trinity, thought it was a silly belief.

Just saying . . . :coffeepap
 
Some denominations don't. Everyone has their own interpretation, they all think theirs is right and others are wrong. Personally, I tend to save most of my religious slams on the Catholics. Sorry, but they just set themselves up way too easily.

It's a broad spectrum. Some are pro-life, some are pro-choice. Some are pro-capital punishment, some are anti. They all choose to align themselves as Christians though.

Whether it makes sense or not doesn't qualify as a basis for assigning this nation as "Christian". If sense played a larger role, religion wouldn't be as pervasive as it is.
 
Gipper said:
Some denominations don't. Everyone has their own interpretation, they all think theirs is right and others are wrong. Personally, I tend to save most of my religious slams on the Catholics. Sorry, but they just set themselves up way too easily.

It's a broad spectrum. Some are pro-life, some are pro-choice. Some are pro-capital punishment, some are anti. They all choose to align themselves as Christians though.

Whether it makes sense or not doesn't qualify as a basis for assigning this nation as "Christian". If sense played a larger role, religion wouldn't be as pervasive as it is.
Click to expand...

As a Catholic, I appreciate that. Somethings I think are less uniform than others, but the trinity is fundamental to the faith. The line between vengence from the old testement and compassion in the new testement is open to some discussion. Less so with fundamental tentants like Jesus was God in as man.
 
Got that right!!!.....Everyone is told when their going to be tested ahead of time. What a joke.
 
Objective Voice said:
Perhaps for the same reason people began to complain about the cost of employee benefits packages for state employees - it became a rallying cry for "big government" and "big government spending". As such, enough people in positions of political power raised enough noise to convince people that welfare recipients are this "dredge on society". Kinda goes with that old saying, "if you say it often enough and loud enough eventually the lie becomes the truth".

So, what do the preliminary numbers tell us?

1. That there are tens of thousands of Floridians who are on state welfare who still need it.

2. That the vast majority of applicants who have applied for TANF since the mandatory drug testing program has come into effect very likely are not habitual drug users as some have suggested.

3. That those potential applicants who may be drug users may have refrained from applying for state benefits out of fear of being caught and subsequently losing said benefits.

Other than the above, there's very little one can take away from the preliminary numbers. However, as I said in my last post the fact that over 90,000 Floridians still applied for TANF and the numbers from July-August are only 8.3% off the yearly average tells me that there are still more applicants out there who don't mind being tested likely because they don't have anything to hide.

Give the process time...another year or two of testing should illustrate just how right or wrong the orchestrators of Florida's drug testing law are.
Click to expand...
Except for the reality that states have decades worth of debt to prove their rallying cry vs the first few months of this program, i dont necessarily disagree with your post. there ARE thousands that need the services...MOST are legit. Many that are not legit require greater motivation for change. Those that are illegaly or imporperly accessing those resources prohibit those that need them from recieving them.

people really should read the links and the associated articles. the $178 million dollar price tag is the total cost of welfare in the state...not the cost of drug testing.
 
VanceMack said:
Except for the reality that states have decades worth of debt to prove their rallying cry vs the first few months of this program, i dont necessarily disagree with your post. there ARE thousands that need the services...MOST are legit. Many that are not legit require greater motivation for change. Those that are illegaly or imporperly accessing those resources prohibit those that need them from recieving them.

people really should read the links and the associated articles. the $178 million dollar price tag is the total cost of welfare in the state...not the cost of drug testing.
Click to expand...

It's a false assumption to attriute blame for the cost of any one state's deficit woes on social programs alone. There are lots of reasons many states are in financial disarray. Yes, the cost of social programs are part of it, but there's also the poor structure of their budgets, poor investments, not funding infrastructure repairs in a timely manner, not collecting sufficient tax revenues from retail merchants who may not be headquartered in the state but do business within the state, poor property tax laws, no sales tax at all, etc., etc.

There are tons of revenue and expense issues to look at; social programs are just one slice of the economic pie. Unfortunately, too often they are demonized as the sole cause of economic programs and not as one factor among many.
 
The fact that those 2% still submitted to the test even though they had done drugs shows how stupid - or most likely HIGH - they were.
 
ThinktownUSA said:
The fact that those 2% still submitted to the test even though they had done drugs shows how stupid - or most likely HIGH - they were.
Click to expand...

Could mean lots of things. Drug tests have false positives sometimes. My understanding is that somebody who ate poppy seed muffins, was prescribed painkillers, or even some couch syrups might potentially test positive for opiates for example. Also, you have situations where somebody was sitting in a room where somebody was smoking pot and inhaled some of the smoke even though they didn't smoke themselves. Or people who got high like a month ago and assumed it was out of their system. Or people who are just desperate enough to give it a try even if they thought it was more likely that they would fail the test.
 
Gipper said:
1) I'm not going on a trip to the "hood". Hell with that. Princes don't walk with paupers. Pardon me for not wishing I was a "brutha".

2) Alot of them do live relatively "high on the hog", for lack of better terms. I know women right now on all sorts of government assistance from A to Z that have their own place. They get some high-ticket items at the grocery store. They're afforded lots of things I wouldn't buy because of price tags (part of that is because I'm a cheap mofo, but that's beside the point). This should not be allowed. I know people who work full-time and live with parents or family due to lack of finances. To see these women with multiple kids, not working or working part-time, with their own place is just a giant "Fck you" sign to others who aren't remotely as irresponsible.

3) You need to stop trying to "represent" for your "peoples". This white race apologist mad-at-daddy crap is just annoying. If you want to go hang with the ghetto, drink malt liquor and shoot dice all day, that's fine. Hands off my tax money. You can stay in hovel without your hand in my pocket.
Click to expand...

You sound rather jealous of folks living off the system and I telling you there is no need to be mad or jealous. You have bought into a sterotype and your white rage is rather disgusting.

BTW, you have never explained to me why the think I am mad at my Daddy. I love him and am a Daddys Girl. Get the hell off that mess.
 
Gipper said:
Kali is not the one you want to look up to. She wouldn't know economic theory if it pimp-slapped her. She comes on here with these emotional pleas, pretty much asking everyone with money to write a blank check to help people who don't deserve, nor have tried to better their situations. She just acts like the town crier for redistribution, mostly as a push for reparations I'm led to believe. Financially, she speaks in a manner likening her to someone who has never worked, nor paid taxes ever.
Click to expand...

I have worked since I was 16 years old so shut your damn mouth talking as if you "know" me.. You know Nothing about me and I bust my ass daily so you best check your white cheap ass boy!

Don't try to act as if you know anything about me based on a few posts I make on a messgare board. I am a modern day person that will scream for civil rights, fair treatment and help for those in need.

You? Come off as a loser than only cares about yourself.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Kali said:
I really wish I could take you on a trip to real hoods to see how people live! Children do sometimes only eat beans and bread and at the end of the month that could be their only meal. You are one of those that have decided just because there is a small few that rip off the system that everyone else on welfare are living high off the hog when that is not the case!

You have been duped and are brainwashed towards those evil poor folks on welfare simply cause you have bought into some twisted untrue view that the majority of folks on welfare are living nice, lazy and eating good. It is simply not true! You have fell for a sterotype!!
Click to expand...

I lived in the "hood". I don't remember it. It was somewhere around 79th and Euclid avenue in Cleveland Ohio. This was well before the Cleveland Clinic built in that area. My dad worked on Hough Avenue. They had squat but they knew that they wanted something better than 79th and Euclid. We moved to a dinky trailer in the suburbs. My dad constantly looked for a better job and was able to get on with Cleveland Crane. Luckily he continued to try and better his situation as they went under in the early 80's but he had already been gone from there.

People can find rare circumstances where things absolutely out of your control happen but your life is what you make it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom