• 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!

Deal OKs bill requiring drug testing for welfare recipients

Kal'Stang said:
When I said "ignoring the problem" I am talking about letting people that use drugs get welfare. That is ignoring a problem.
Click to expand...

The problem is with the amount of people on welfare.
 
I feel like we are taking everything that made this country great, balling it up, and throwing it in the trash.

What happened to hard work and personal responsibility.?

People with no job having five kids and then expecting the rest of us to pick up the tab?

I heard on the radio yesterday in 2010 only 81 million people paid taxes.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
Personal responsibility is still around, but when discussing government actions, it's more irrational to focus on what the government can do rather than what it cannot do. It can't force people to be personally responsible so that doesn't even factor into this discussion.
Click to expand...
Meant "rational", not "irrational". haha, oops.
 
Last edited:
Kal'Stang said:
You're right, we can't force personal responsibility. But we also do not have to support personal irresponsibility.
Click to expand...
If "not supporting personal irresponsibility" has great costs with little benefit to society, then "not supporting personal irresponsibility" seems like a bad choice. The costs of people on drugs using welfare will simply be replaced by the cost of drug tests and the costs of dealing with the children of those who fail the tests.
 
Kal'Stang said:
When I said "ignoring the problem" I am talking about letting people that use drugs get welfare. That is ignoring a problem.
Click to expand...

Perchance, but I don't see it as high priority. There are well bigger fish to fry. Once they have been so, we can start looking down the list. But to get sidetracked onto something like this is nothing more than political deflection (not by you or other debaters, but by government). Did we demand that the CEO’s and Board of Directors for all the companies that got bailed out recently take drug tests? How about anyone else getting government money? Scholarships? Student Loans? Does this extend to tax deductions? If you wanna claim child credit, should you have to pass a piss test first? Why should society subsidize the cost of raising your kid if you’re using drugs, yes?
 
To me getting a government backed loan( which must be repayed) is not the same as walking out to your mailbox and collecting a paycheck that you did not earn and will not pay back.
 
Paratrooper said:
To me getting a government backed loan( which must be repayed) is not the same as walking out to your mailbox and collecting a paycheck that you did not earn and will not pay back.
Click to expand...

Student loans are often better interest rates than regular ones, subsidized through government force and taxpayer dollars. You're getting government money, yes? Or is it only those dirty, low down freeloaders who deserve this form of treatment. Your government money shouldn't come with strings, just other peoples.
 
Ikari said:
Student loans are often better interest rates than regular ones, subsidized through government force and taxpayer dollars. You're getting government money, yes? Or is it only those dirty, low down freeloaders who deserve this form of treatment. Your government money shouldn't come with strings, just other peoples.
Click to expand...

One could make the argument that subsidizing student loans is an investment if those students go on to get good jobs and become tax payers. In the long run the government will make their money back, no so much with many welfare recipients.

I'd like to see us help as many as possible reach that upper half of Americans that pay almost all federal income taxes.
 
Last edited:
Paratrooper said:
One could make the argument that subsidizing student loans is an investment if those students go on to get good jobs and become tax payers. In the long run the government will make their money back, no so much with many welfare recipients.

I'd like to see us help as many as possible reach that upper half of Americans that pay almost all federal income taxes.
Click to expand...

One could make the argument that higher education is an investment in oneself and you should be responsible for your own stuff. Right? I hear that argument a lot from "conservatives", funny how all of a sudden it's a collectivized benefit and that's why you should get free money (OMG...socialism!). No one wants to give up their handouts, but some want to point at other groups and condemn them for their handouts. You have kids? You claim the tax credit? You're offloading the cost of your kids onto the rest of society. How many of y'all jump up and down mad as hell when someone says "it takes a village", yet how many will so quickly feed from the government teat if given half the chance?

So what's it going to be. Does government money come with stipulations and piss tests or does it not?
 
I realize we have some programs that are for the common good like police, fire fighters, and military. That doesn't mean we should open the flood gates for full fledged socialism.
 
Paratrooper said:
I realize we have some programs that are for the common good like police, fire fighters, and military. That doesn't mean we should open the flood gates for full fledged socialism.
Click to expand...

And yet here you come arunning with your palm turned toward the sky. "I deserve those loans! I deserve those tax breaks!".

In all seriousness, I have no problem funding higher education on a much larger scale than we do now. An educated populace is a benefit for the Republic. But Welfare has benefits too, Unemployment has benefits too, Medicare has benefits too. This ain't the 1500's anymore. The science, technology, and complexity of society is beyond the scopes of the past. And as we expand, we will need to support large aggregate necessities through the government. I just find it funny that some so vehemently and zealously go after welfare recipients without even thinking about all the government monies they get. How quickly people are willing to throw their fellow man under the bus and how resiliently they will resist the same.

Everyone wants their money and everyone thinks other people aren't entitled to theirs. So we point our fingers at groups and talk down to them and demand extra sacrifice that we'd never accept ourselves for similar handouts. The hypocrisy of it all.
 
Ikari said:
And yet here you come arunning with your palm turned toward the sky. "I deserve those loans! I deserve those tax breaks!".

In all seriousness, I have no problem funding higher education on a much larger scale than we do now. An educated populace is a benefit for the Republic. But Welfare has benefits too, Unemployment has benefits too, Medicare has benefits too. This ain't the 1500's anymore. The science, technology, and complexity of society is beyond the scopes of the past. And as we expand, we will need to support large aggregate necessities through the government. I just find it funny that some so vehemently and zealously go after welfare recipients without even thinking about all the government monies they get. How quickly people are willing to throw their fellow man under the bus and how resiliently they will resist the same.

Everyone wants their money and everyone thinks other people aren't entitled to theirs. So we point our fingers at groups and talk down to them and demand extra sacrifice that we'd never accept ourselves for similar handouts. The hypocrisy of it all.
Click to expand...

Actually I'd be just fine without those benefits too. All that is nice in fantasy land but right now we have accumulated so much debt our grandchildren will be paying on it. Half the country pays the tab while the other half asks for more.

How's that war on poverty working out?
 
Last edited:
Thorgasm said:
th_Arms.gif


I don't see how drug testing is going to make people responsible. That's your fallacy.
Click to expand...

It's called, you want money, you stay clean. Don't stay clean? Starve.
 
Thorgasm said:
Like incarcerating people for marijuana possession, cultivation, and distribution?
Click to expand...

I'm all in favor of not putting people in prison for possession. I'm also in favor of putting every single dealer, without exception, to death.
 
MaggieD said:
Side Two: If you don't let a mom collect welfare, she's going to use drugs anyway, so her kids are going to go hungry (hungrier).
Click to expand...

Then you take the kids away and at least they're not raised to repeat the mom's mistakes. Works for me.
 
Cephus said:
I'm all in favor of not putting people in prison for possession. I'm also in favor of putting every single dealer, without exception, to death.
Click to expand...
Capitol punishment for dealing a product seems a bit extreme dont you think?

Cephus said:
Then you take the kids away and at least they're not raised to repeat the mom's mistakes. Works for me.
Click to expand...
That may work for you since it is not your liberty that is being **** all over. And who is going to pay for that intrusion into parental rights? How exactly will your idea make life any better for the children taken away from their parent(s)?
What impression would these children have of the Government that ripped their life apart. I could see an authoritarian government doing what you are suggesting but it does not fit well with a government that is supposed to be about freedom and liberty.

The fact is that alcohol is no worse than any other drug. Yes any drug. Alcohol is highly addictive and has very bad long term effects. People steal to support their habit of getting drunk. The fact that alcohol is legal while other drugs are illegal is an obvious hypocrisy that cannot be denied. Or better yet explained with any real facts, by those that support it.

Personally I support the legal right to sell drugs for profit. You know after all that is what we call Capitalism. Why should the Government control the sell of drugs? Wouldnt that be closer to Communism?

But seriously killing drug dealers is never going to be a viable solution unless you consider a government that kills business people good. Sure many drug dealers are bad people but not all of them. Just like there are many bad store owners but killing store owners is a bad idea as well.
 
Cephus said:
It's called, you want money, you stay clean. Don't stay clean? Starve.
Click to expand...

And how much money do you get from the government? What have you obtained that was in some way subsidized through taxpayer dollars? It's pretty ridiculous I think to try to hold this to a group; particularly now in middle of an ongoing recession. This is a deflection topic, nothing more. It’s like a dog and a ball. Dog really wants the ball, but you can “throw” the ball while keeping hold of it and the dog will run off after the imaginary ball. Don’t be the dog. There are far greater issues at stake than welfare recipients doing drugs.
 
Ikari said:
And how much money do you get from the government? What have you obtained that was in some way subsidized through taxpayer dollars? It's pretty ridiculous I think to try to hold this to a group; particularly now in middle of an ongoing recession. This is a deflection topic, nothing more. It’s like a dog and a ball. Dog really wants the ball, but you can “throw” the ball while keeping hold of it and the dog will run off after the imaginary ball. Don’t be the dog. There are far greater issues at stake than welfare recipients doing drugs.
Click to expand...

Yeah, like welfare recipients that shouldn't be receiving welfare, gaming and playing the system.
 
Arbo said:
Yeah, like welfare recipients that shouldn't be receiving welfare, gaming and playing the system.
Click to expand...

Lots of that does certainly happen. There is call for reform, no doubt. I wouldn't say keep the system as it is. I see no purpose, however, in piss testing every applicant. It's a waste of time and money while there are far greater things we should be focusing on. Like the ever expanding government against our rights and liberties.
 
Ikari said:
Like the ever expanding government against our rights and liberties.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the problem is the people that make the laws that could stop such a thing, also made the laws would expanded government and their own power.
 
Cephus said:
It's called, you want money, you stay clean. Don't stay clean? Starve.
Click to expand...

As if drug testing would mean that people stay clean. :lol:
 
FreedomFromAll said:
Capitol punishment for dealing a product seems a bit extreme dont you think?
Click to expand...

Obviously I don't think that or I wouldn't have said it in the first place.

That may work for you since it is not your liberty that is being **** all over. And who is going to pay for that intrusion into parental rights? How exactly will your idea make life any better for the children taken away from their parent(s)?
Click to expand...

We have laws for a reason. If you break the laws, you pay the penalty. Why is that so hard for you to comprehend?
 
Thorgasm said:
As if drug testing would mean that people stay clean. :lol:
Click to expand...

If you don't stay clean, and testing would find out if they did, you lose your benefits. Geez, are you that dense?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom