• 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!

Florida Welfare Drug Testing Law Gets No Reprieve From Appeals Court

Oh yes they are. They ran their banks into the ground, and got millions in government handouts to keep them from going broke. This IS welfare, and bankers are the biggest welfare queens of them all.

As did the unions at GM, the green weenies at Solyndra and countless other beneficiaries of our very generous public "servants" - yet we the sheeple re-elected 94% of them in last federal elections. Hmm...
 
I have used various methods to pass drug tests. The most effective is using clean urine. If they use a blood test, it then becomes very tricky.


Not in Texas. When I was on probation and taking drug tests, I had to show them my penis, and the pee coming directly out of it.
 
I'd be willing to bet that the average drug or alcohol user can tell you down to the minute how long it takes to leave your system. So unless drug testing is done randomly, and not on a monthly appointment schedule, most would pass the testing... :naughty:

Drug testing is a farce! It does not achieve anything while costing corporations billions of dollars.
 
As did the unions at GM, the green weenies at Solyndra and countless other beneficiaries of our very generous public "servants" - yet we the sheeple re-elected 94% of them in last federal elections. Hmm...

The problem here is actually quite hilarious. Congress as a whole gets a worse rating than venereal disease, but most of the respondents in those polls give their own congressman high marks. LOL.
 
As a military man I was required to pee in the cup all the time. No problem.

Pregnant moms are also asked to provide urine samples, done at the doctor's office, and I haven't heard anyone claiming discrimination. I admit that's a little different than expecting someone who is receiving taxpayer money to provide a urine sample, but the fact that it isn't a problem for most people does tell us that it is not unreasonable to expect same.
 
Innovation at its finest????

While I was on probation, I saw, with my own eyes, 3 people being led out of the building in handcuffs, after attempting to use a whizzinator to pass their piss tests. Probation officers are not stupid people, but there are many stupid people who think they are, and pay the price for it.

The best way to beat a drug test? Don't use drugs. It's very simple.
 
As long as aid recipients are not being singled out, and public officials are being held to the same standard, I have no problem with this. But you won't see public officials held to the same standard. Why? Because, as many scandals have shown, many of them DO abuse drugs and alcohol, and what's OK for the little guy isn't OK for them.

I'm completely fine with that. It's wrong if they were to exempt themselves. A big red flag for me is when congress knowingly and willfully exempts themselves from public provisions.
 
Drug testing is a farce! It does not achieve anything while costing corporations billions of dollars.

Unless it becomes a matter of safety...airline pilots come to mind.
 
I have used various methods to pass drug tests. The most effective is using clean urine. If they use a blood test, it then becomes very tricky.

Clean urine, that's what works, they tell me. It doesn't have to be yours, it just has to be clean, they tell me.
 
The problem here is actually quite hilarious. Congress as a whole gets a worse rating than venereal disease, but most of the respondents in those polls give their own congressman high marks. LOL.

That and, in most elections, we are offered a choice between two lying morons and asked to choose wisely. ;)
 
I already answered this question for Joko. I know that there are plenty of whites on welfare. I simply happen to have personal experience with the "baby momma" culture, so I tend to make reference to it often.

However, even going by the statistics, it is worth pointing out that the African American welfare rate is more than two and a half times the white welfare rate, simply due to the fact that they make up a sigificantly smaller portion of the population than whites, yet still account for almost 40% of total welfare expenditures.

There is also the following to account for:

72% of Black Children Are Raised in Single Parent Homes

Considering that single mothers are the greatest force driving welfare expenditures in today's economy, I would think that these numbers more than speak for themselves.



I never said that it was "the" problem. Military expenditures, medicare, and medicaid play major roles as well. However, the simple fact of the matter is that we're never going to make any progress so long as the Left not only remains reflexively opposed to any kind of domestic spending reform, but actually insists on adding more new and equally useless programs (i.e. Obamacare) to our (nonexistent) budget each year.

Cuts are supposed to hurt. It's time to man up and deal with what we've had coming for the better part of half a century.



Higher wage jobs are unsustainable from an economic standpoint. You don't pay double what a job is actually worth on general principle alone.

There is absolutely no reason why lower income earners cannot get by, and even thrive, on market determined wages.



Poverty should be a painful experience, and that's the whole point. What possible incentive do you have to work your way up if everything's being artificially kept just fine and dandy at the bottom?

Government dependents are living in "lala land" and the whole thing's getting ready to come crashing down around their heads. They had best start learning to fend for themselves sooner rather than later.

The majority of our deficits are due to short run economic factors. Plain and simple. Deficits were bad under Bush due to the Bush tax cuts and two unfunded wars. The economic disaster just piled on and has cost us trillions. This "feel the pain" caucus are the same folks that caused the problem and now supposedly have the solution. Americans are right to reject the notion that cuts now are the fix. The fact is major cuts now will just compound our macro economic woes. There's really not much more to say on the subject. When the economy turns around that's the time to start looking at places we could potentially cut. The idea of deep cuts to the folks that have been hit the hardest just isn't dumb economics it's immoral.
 
That and, in most elections, we are offered a choice between two lying morons and asked to choose wisely. ;)

And it would be better to have 4 lying morons to choose from how? We would still be voting for the lesser of evils!
 
The majority of our deficits are due to short run economic factors. Plain and simple. Deficits were bad under Bush due to the Bush tax cuts and two unfunded wars. The economic disaster just piled on and has cost us trillions. This "feel the pain" caucus are the same folks that caused the problem and now supposedly have the solution. Americans are right to reject the notion that cuts now are the fix. The fact is major cuts now will just compound our macro economic woes. There's really not much more to say on the subject. When the economy turns around that's the time to start looking at places we could potentially cut. The idea of deep cuts to the folks that have been hit the hardest just isn't dumb economics it's immoral.

The government should get the hell out of the way and let people go to work. Stop stifling the private sector.
 
OK using YOUR criteria, alone, yet us examine the "welfare" (in all of its many forms) situation. What, other than economic failure, is used as a qualification for "welfare" benefits? Are not all of us offered a free K-12 public education? I propose denying all public assistance to those lacking a HS education, just as we willfully deny that public assistance to those that do not have dependent children. Simply because I do not make an income over the federal poverty line, I am not "entitled" to welfare (or even Medicaid) unless I have dependent children. We now have a system that encourages having children to "qualify" for welfare, yet do not require taking advantage of the free public education offered; currently 42% of those on welfare lack a HS education, while 90% are single mothers.


A person no longer receives a high school diploma merely for attending. Many states now require passing a final exam and its not a cake walk. Statistically (and obviously) at least 49% of all people are below average intelligence. A fairly large percentage are "slow learners" intellectually and have no capability of passing such final high school exam. Therefore, I oppose a high school diploma as a condition of government assistance.
 
A person no longer receives a high school diploma merely for attending. Many states now require passing a final exam and its not a cake walk. Statistically (and obviously) at least 49% of all people are below average intelligence. A fairly large percentage are "slow learners" intellectually and have no capability of passing such final high school exam. Therefore, I oppose a high school diploma as a condition of government assistance.

I oppose encouraging breeding simply to qualify, so (using your no exclusion for education and my no exclusion for not having dependents) that would mean everyone could simply get a gov't assistance check simply for not earning enough to live "comfortably" on their own income. ;)
 
...................

True that! This is one example of where "the more the merrier" doesn't apply! And note that most of them are attornies.... :2mad:
 
The government should get the hell out of the way and let people go to work. Stop stifling the private sector.

The government did that once. The result was workhouses for the poor, 16 hour work days and still not enough money to feed the kids, child labor, the company stores that charged double what regular stores charged, unsafe working conditions (remember the Shirtwaist Fire, in which hundreds died because they were locked inside the factory?), and many, many more abuses of workers by robber barons. That government should get out of the way is total BS. Human nature and past history have proven that.
 
The government did that once. The result was workhouses for the poor, 16 hour work days and still not enough money to feed the kids, child labor, the company stores that charged double what regular stores charged, unsafe working conditions (remember the Shirtwaist Fire, in which hundreds died because they were locked inside the factory?), and many, many more abuses of workers by robber barons. That government should get out of the way is total BS. Human nature and past history have proven that.

One extreme, or the other? No in between?

How's the economy doing with the government making things better?

Personal income drops in January by largest monthly amount in 20 years « Hot Air
 
It is a preposturous idea in the first place. Actually, if I remember correctly some Congressman's relation owned the company who was going to get the contract (or got it , whatever the case may be). So this whole infringement on the individual was probably nothing but a political patronage scam in the first place.
 
Congressmen are on the public role. In fact, not only are these politicians living off the taxpayer, they are in a position to create laws that affect all of us. Surely these people, of all people, should take a drug test to show their employer, us, that they are of sound mind.

If that's what the voting public wants, then yes.
 
The Federal money they get from the gubmint. If bankers get handouts, they should be subject to the same rules as welfare recipients who get handouts. In the case of Congressmen, they aren't earning their pay, so that's a handout too.

Bankers don't get handouts. You could, however, make a case that banks get handouts.

On that, I agree... handouts to banks should not come with no strings attached.
 
The majority of our deficits are due to short run economic factors. Plain and simple. Deficits were bad under Bush due to the Bush tax cuts and two unfunded wars. The economic disaster just piled on and has cost us trillions. This "feel the pain" caucus are the same folks that caused the problem and now supposedly have the solution. Americans are right to reject the notion that cuts now are the fix. The fact is major cuts now will just compound our macro economic woes. There's really not much more to say on the subject. When the economy turns around that's the time to start looking at places we could potentially cut. The idea of deep cuts to the folks that have been hit the hardest just isn't dumb economics it's immoral.

The self-interested bankers at the Fed and politicians in Washington (the very same people who are directly responsible for all of this mess in the first place, I might add) have been selling us that load of hogwash for almost five years now. I hate to break it to everyone, but the Keynesian approach has more or less indisputably failed.

Even radical Liberal publications like Rolling Stone are being forced to admit just how badly we've all been conned by Bernake and the Obama Administration. We are basically headed down the exact same road that Japan was forced to endure in the early 1990s. As a matter of fact, they STILL have not really recovered from their "Great Recession," and an entire generation of young Japanese workers and students have had their chances of ever living a normal and productive Middle Class life destroyed by it.

Austerity may cause a great deal of short term pain - in fact, it is guaranteed to - but it also tends to guarantee genuine economic and political restructuring which often allows economies to be legitimately prosperous in the longrun.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom