i work in a grocery store, and one time a few months back around 1st of the month i saw a woman and she had her food stamp card in her hand (for those of you that dont know, food stamps are like on pre-paid debit cards now) anyways, she had a lebron jersey on, a nicer cell phone than the one i have, bottle of grey goose in her cart (and yes i know you cant buy alcohol on food stamps, she would've had to pay for that seperate) and her 2 kids were texting.

FatHobbit;384104 wrote:Wouldn't it just be easier to strap a camera and a microphone to your head? Then they can see and hear everything you do.

I could see a very good Reality TV show ..... "Living in the Belly" I like it the possibilities are endless


Note: I have nothing to hide ....the only people that have something to hide are those that don't like testing for drugs......

Belly35;384200 wrote:the only people that have something to hide are those that don't like testing for drugs......

Not true. Not remotely.

Although I am all for drug testing of those that are on assistance it has to encompass all of those that receive assistance. But those that are talking about sterilization, castration and so on are crazy. But isn't it the right that screams for less government? What would stop them from amping this up a little after they see what they can get away with and next thing you know there will be more of the government controlling your life. While the left wants to give money to every able bodied person that won't work or women that have hit the baby lotto to be on welfare.

Not at all.

Belly35;384200 wrote:I could see a very good Reality TV show ..... "Living in the Belly" I like it the possibilities are endless


Note: I have nothing to hide ....the only people that have something to hide are those that don't like testing for drugs......

This is a logical fallacy.

captain_obvious;384077 wrote:Now I am for sterilization for people that would buy Wild Irish Rose...

haha! Agreed! I was just trying to think of cheap and rotgut alcohol

Belly35;384200 wrote:
Note: I have nothing to hide ....the only people that have something to hide are those that don't like testing for drugs......

Then Allow me to come and review your business records and see if you havent cheated on something.

Am I understanding that people will be drug tested for practically everything they apply for or do or want to do from here on? And I thought Conservatives were for small government?? this will make Barack Obama look like Glen Beck. I can only surmise that conservatives are ok with big government as long as the result is the limiting of freedoms for those not on the "approved by conservatives" list. Minorities, the unemployed, who evidently all want to continue on the gravy train known as subsistence welfare survival. I would ask my conservative acquaintances only one question. Would you be willing to turn in your way of life and trade your circumstances with a person currently going wild and living the good life on a minimal welfare payment twice a month? I know that I wouldn't. has anyone actually talked to the people you are planning on doing this to, or are you just going to go ahead and limit basic human rights because in your opinion some folks (and we all know who you are talking about..) do not deserve to be treated like the good working Americans such as yourselves?. For being conservatives who seem to enjoy throwing around terms like socialism and communism and other selected buzz words, you have spent very little time reading the Constitution.

Thread Bomber;384262 wrote:Then Allow me to come and review your business records and see if you havent cheated on something.

Why? What is the benifit to me or my business. In have a nobody look at my records I'm not asking for anything from you nor do you have nothing I want. See Thread Bomber in business the idea is to make money and to do things that will benifit the aspect of making a profit. Show and tell for no reason has no good results...
I have applied to recieve Federal / State / Local SBA Grants and Loans for research and development of our new product.
In doing so a complete personal and business accounting record where provide ....plus my personal investment for a loan to start the process of development of the new product a set of finanical records was also provide ... Clean

..........................So the bottom line is I'm dam good at hiding or they are just stupid accountants...........

You hit the nail on the head Swamp Fox.

Good post Swamp Fox.

Great post Swamp Fox.

Belly35;384301 wrote:Why?

Because you have nothing to hide. Right?!?

Anyone who doesn't want their business records out there has something to hide.

See how insane that logic is?

What are the pitfalls of not having government welfare?

Jason Bourne;384320 wrote:What are the pitfalls of not having government welfare?

There'd be a good number of people who wouldn't be able to scrape by.

rookie_j70;384199 wrote:i work in a grocery store, and one time a few months back around 1st of the month i saw a woman and she had her food stamp card in her hand (for those of you that dont know, food stamps are like on pre-paid debit cards now) anyways, she had a lebron jersey on, a nicer cell phone than the one i have, bottle of grey goose in her cart (and yes i know you cant buy alcohol on food stamps, she would've had to pay for that seperate) and her 2 kids were texting.

I hear all of this. Believe me, I see it every day in Cleveland. My question is, how are they getting the money for those non-necessities and still on Food Stamps. I don't know the answer to that. If it's TANF, well that money should be on a debit card like food stamps. If it's, SSI for disability, well the way you tell the story it doesn't sound like she has a disability.

rookie_j70;384192 wrote:that is exactly what i was going to say. because when you think about it, i have to be drug free in order for the people on welfare to receive their checks

Maybe you shouldn't have to be drug tested to get a job? My family business sold out and became part of a franchise and now we're required to drug test and it's just increased business costs. Personally my dad never minded if his guys smoked some weed as long as they did a good job.

Also why stop at AFDC which is by far the smallest percentage of Government Assistance. Why not drug test for Unemployment Benefits, Medicare, Financial Aid and so many more that are the majority of Government assistance programs. I believe that this thread was pretty much not thought out.

I would like to know (no offense Swamp) what, exactly, is so right/good about Swamps post?
Is it the fact that Swamp has the other side of the opinion? Or is it the fact that there are just as many assumptions played out in the post?

[INDENT]

Am I understanding that people will be drug tested for practically everything they apply for or do or want to do from here on? And I thought Conservatives were for small government??

I would suspect that some are, some aren't, and some don't know (?)

this will make Barack Obama look like Glen Beck. I can only surmise that conservatives are ok with big government as long as the result is the limiting of freedoms for those not on the "approved by conservatives" list.

I am not quite sure how you can surmise that conclusion based on the fact that some conservatives on this board, myself included, do not subscribed totally to that point of view.
Maybe if we blanket ruled everything, your standard would be correct?

Minorities, the unemployed, who evidently all want to continue on the gravy train known as subsistence welfare survival.

I believe that geography has alot to do with such things as listed above. I also believe that the gravy train riders are more substantial than the "very few" people like to alot. Unemployment is all over, so that is fair IMO.

I would ask my conservative acquaintances only one question. Would you be willing to turn in your way of life and trade your circumstances with a person currently going wild and living the good life on a minimal welfare payment twice a month? I know that I wouldn't.

I absolutely would NOT do this. And why would anyone think that I should? I don't necessarily have to trade places with anybody in order to know what I've worked for and what I have as far as what brings pleasure in my life. I also don't have to trade places with anybody to know what they don't have as far as comparisons.
I know what it's like to be very poor. Incidently, I worked my ass off to get out of that financial state and to stay out of it. There was no luck about it. Besides part of my taxes taken out to support those who are living on any sort of public assistance, I supplement what empathy and moral obligations I have with donations to various charities.

has anyone actually talked to the people you are planning on doing this to, or are you just going to go ahead and limit basic human rights because in your opinion some folks

Might be a reasonable question if it was a fact that nobody conservative has ever interacted with any sort of society.

(and we all know who you are talking about..)

Oh no, we don't. Please explain this. I sincerely would like to know.

do not deserve to be treated like the good working Americans such as yourselves?

Some do, some do not. Again, blanket ruling.

For being conservatives who seem to enjoy throwing around terms like socialism and communism and other selected buzz words, you have spent very little time reading the Constitution.

Could you be anymore condescending, pompous or demeaning? Sir, if that is your intent, you have widely missed your mark. If it wasn't, then my apologies for completely misreading those words.
In that remark, you have cast yourself into the very same category of those who fall under your derision. Congrats!



[/INDENT]

For the record, I guess it's pretty obvious that I don't like to be lumped into any one particular group. I happen to support a little bit of liberalism and a whole lot of conservatism.

And, quite frankly, blanket ruling just drives me nuts, it is really unfair and mostly off the mark.

Can we all just quit with all that?

BoatShoes;384334 wrote:Maybe you shouldn't have to be drug tested to get a job? My family business sold out and became part of a franchise and now we're required to drug test and it's just increased business costs. Personally my dad never minded if his guys smoked some weed as long as they did a good job.

If it weren't for the potential liability issues (employees driving to clients, etc.), I would be hard pressed to come up with a reason to do so. That said, as a business owner, I should have the right.

This thread is very entertaining. So how about we just test everyone for everything since we all get government benefits for something. Toll booths can have drug testing units built in. Have a fire, no problem deposit your sample and we will send a truck to your house. Need a tax abatement to build your new company in town? Not a problem send in your shareholder's samples and your good to go.

You hard line conservatives sure have some funny ideas.

Center, you missed the whole point of his post.

Those of us in the Private sector of this population have to adhere to laws and requirement place on our business and personal lives …….
When legal and law bidding citizen are subject to testing for employment and regulation and others that receive government benefits from our hard work and labor and are required only to take …. Them lets do away with all regulation and program that benefit the “taker of this society” Test for drug is not creating big government it will decrease the fraud, cheating and corrupt that leads to big government.

On-site testing kits can do the trick: "On-site" drug testing actually can refer to two (2) entirely different processes. One, is associated with what is called an "immediate-results onsite testing device (or 'kit')"- that is, using a device ("kit") that tests (or "screens") for one or more drugs. Ours screens for the Industry standard "NIDA-5" drugs, plus, we have others that test for those and as many as five additional drugs. Most kits provide results within 3-10 minutes, which is why they are described as "immediate results" devices.

The minute the testing program goes into effect the cost of government welfare participation will drop.

Few years ago I placed a sign on the door “new hires will be drug tested” …. 55% less application. Note: I don’t test yet………..I trust my worker and expect that same respect and dedication of they get fired.
Now if I would have said : New hires Tattoos limit to two per year ..application would have dropped to 70%