• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Drug Screening Required for Welfare

Wrangor play nice.

We should do both. If we do rehab for the durggies, they can be propductive.
 
Wrangor said:
What is wrong with doubling down on Wall Street and at the same time trying to prevent people from being addicted to drugs? I am confused on why we can't do both. Bake is pulling a bait and switch. RJ does it all the time as well. Distract and change the subject. Lets not address the fact that drug dependence is bad, that drug dependence increases the likelihood that we will continue to support not only the recipients welfare status, but also the recipients children who grow up in a world surrounded by drugs and government checks.

Instead lets point out another bad thing in our current nation (Wall Street's dishonesty and greed) because that is worse and should be addressed first. Lets address both issues. Both need fixing, both require change from the status quo. We don't have to choose WHICH system we need to reform, just how to reform both systems. Liberals don't want to touch entitlements, psycho conservatives don't want to touch anything regarding tax reform or financial oversight - in reality we need to attack both problems and stop yelling at each other from our own respective corners while claiming some sort of moral superiority.

Both sides are at fault, and both sides are a part of a broken system. Instead of yelling at each other about how the other half caused their half to break, why not try to fix it?
Click to expand...

PFT (posrepped for truth).
 
Wrangor said:
What is wrong with doubling down on Wall Street and at the same time trying to prevent people from being addicted to drugs? I am confused on why we can't do both. Bake is pulling a bait and switch. RJ does it all the time as well. Distract and change the subject. Lets not address the fact that drug dependence is bad, that drug dependence increases the likelihood that we will continue to support not only the recipients welfare status, but also the recipients children who grow up in a world surrounded by drugs and government checks.

Instead lets point out another bad thing in our current nation (Wall Street's dishonesty and greed) because that is worse and should be addressed first. Lets address both issues. Both need fixing, both require change from the status quo. We don't have to choose WHICH system we need to reform, just how to reform both systems. Liberals don't want to touch entitlements, psycho conservatives don't want to touch anything regarding tax reform or financial oversight - in reality we need to attack both problems and stop yelling at each other from our own respective corners while claiming some sort of moral superiority.

Both sides are at fault, and both sides are a part of a broken system. Instead of yelling at each other about how the other half caused their half to break, why not try to fix it?
Click to expand...

ok, fine do both - but this was touted as 'spending reform' or 'budget reform' policy- not as drug prevention policy, unless I misread the story.

With all due respect Wrangor I'm not pulling a bait and switch, you guys are. Wall Street reform and tax reform are spending/budget reform items, as this is.

EDIT: and there is nothing wrong with doubling down on Wall Street - but the party represented by these FLA legislators actively resisted Wall Street reforms, and deregulation and lower taxes are the major planks of its platform.

Come on, don't bullshit me - even with your posrep for truth.....;)
 
Last edited:
I should add that i firmly do not believe that drugs put these people in the position that they needed welfare. Maybe a small percentage, but there are many other factors that play a role in someone becoming destitute. It is lazy and dishonest to just blame it on drugs, but I imagine the real villains of our economy are sitting back having a nice laugh about this.
 
WakeandBake said:
well, I mean, damn - these guys are picking on a few drug users who are on the dole while at the same time resisting reform on Wall Street and tax reform.

It's so fucking blatant.

We don't need to invent villains - the real ones are right in front of us. But hey, it works on you guys. The poor will always be a scapegoat I suppose
Click to expand...


Not so. I think drug tests for welfare recipients is a waste of time. It doesn't address the underlying problem (that crack heads should not procreate). If they want to pass an effective law they should start sterilizing welfare recipients. Problem solved. Planned Parenthood can't carry all the water.

I would not be opposed to sterilizing Wall Street CEOs either... just to be fair.
 
DirkTheDeac said:
Not so. I think drug tests for welfare recipients is a waste of time. It doesn't address the underlying problem (that crack heads should not procreate). If they want to pass an effective law they should start sterilizing welfare recipients. Problem solved. Planned Parenthood can't carry all the water.

I would not be opposed to sterilizing Wall Street CEOs either... just to be fair.
Click to expand...

because everyone on welfare is on it permanently?
 
DirkTheDeac said:
Not so. I think drug tests for welfare recipients is a waste of time. It doesn't address the underlying problem (that crack heads should not procreate). If they want to pass an effective law they should start sterilizing welfare recipients. Problem solved. Planned Parenthood can't carry all the water.

I would not be opposed to sterilizing Wall Street CEOs either... just to be fair.
Click to expand...


I'd be willing to offer folks $5,000 to get a vasectomy or tubal. Long term it makes great fiscal sense when you consider all the welfare spending that would never occur. Plus the instant guarantee of cash would assure a large number of takers.

I think India has something similar in place as part of their population control plan.

Just think...down and out loser gets snipped...no future generation of losers. Plus it's their choice...so the pro-choice crowd should be on board.
 
SCDeac said:
I'd be willing to offer folks $5,000 to get a vasectomy or tubal. Long term it makes great fiscal sense when you consider all the welfare spending that would never occur. Plus the instant guarantee of cash would assure a large number of takers.

I think India has something similar in place as part of their population control plan.

Just think...down and out loser gets snipped...no future generation of losers. Plus it's their choice...so the pro-choice crowd should be on board.
Click to expand...

case in point
 
Hmmmm. Perhaps we can apply this division between the "contributing" members of society and the "non-contributing" members to more than just drug testing.

I mean, you have to figure a non-contributing person is far more likely to be guilty of a crime they're accused of than a contributing person, right? Separate judicial systems would be a good start.

In fact, we may just want to identify them and send them to an island somewhere.
 
WakeandBake said:
He thinks loserdom is hereditary. His petulance about the poor or folks who are down and out , and your defense of him, illustrates my point.
Click to expand...

It wasn't hereditary until our entitlement systems created a way of life: intergeneral dependence on the government at the subsistence level.

Your point that there is any animosity towards the poor is off base, and almost perfectly wrong since the opposite is true. The animosity is towards the a) the system that keeps them poor and b) the denial by some of the undeniable reality that our entitlement systems is broken.

As usual, the divide on this board can be illustrated by reference to the BACK TO THE FUTURE series, in this case episode III. Some of us are the Doc Brown's and Marty McFly's of this Board: We can see that the entitlement train is headed off the ravine and are trying to apply the break, in order to save the train from certain and forseeable disaster. Some of you decry these efforts, by pointing out that we're "against" the train's progress. Sure, in the strictest sense of the words we're applying the breaks, but only in an effort to save the train from the forces of gravity (and also stupidity).

Meanwhile, RJ is the Biff: the oafish, perpetual arch villan who, unbeknownst to him, has another face-date with a pile of manure incoming. This will be the comic relief that saves (in this case) the board.

You can thank me later.
 
jhmd2000 said:
It wasn't hereditary until our entitlement systems created a way of life: intergeneral dependence on the government at the subsistence level.

Your point that there is any animosity towards the poor is off base, and almost perfectly wrong since the opposite is true. The animosity is towards the a) the system that keeps them poor and b) the denial by some of the undeniable reality that our entitlement systems is broken.

As usual, the divide on this board can be illustrated by reference to the BACK TO THE FUTURE series, in this case episode III. Some of us are the Doc Brown's and Marty McFly's of this Board: We can see that the entitlement train is headed off the ravine and are trying to apply the break, in order to save the train from certain and forseeable disaster. Some of you decry these efforts, by pointing out that we're "against" the train's progress. Sure, in the strictest sense of the words we're applying the breaks, but only in an effort to save the train from the forces of gravity (and also stupidity).

Meanwhile, RJ is the Biff: the oafish, perpetual arch villan who, unbeknownst to him, has another face-date with a pile of manure incoming. This will be the comic relief that saves (in this case) the board.

You can thank me later.
Click to expand...

In the following, Theo is playing the role of jh/dirk, while Bill Cosby is pretty much anybody blessed with the gift of logic.



Start at about the 4:00 mark and ride it all the way through.
 
DeaconSig said:
In the following, Theo is playing the role of jh/dirk, while Bill Cosby is pretty much anybody blessed with the gift of logic.



Start at about the 4:00 mark and ride it all the way through.
Click to expand...

That's low, Sig. You know I'm the Cosby Show King of these Boards. Dislike.
 
Sorry, man. But after the earnest Back to the Future III analogy, that is the first thing that popped to mind.

OTOH, at least you aren't describing Sarah Palin as the future of the republican party. So chalk one up for the (sort-of) young folks (we aren't middle-aged, yet, are we?).
 
jhmd believes that poverty is a way of life created by entitlement programs

end of thread
 
DeaconSig, you are blessed. Blessed with no sense of sarcasm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top