Posted on 05/01/2007 10:19:22 AM PDT by jamesfreedman
Like a lot of folks in this state, I have a job. I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as they see fit.
In order to get that paycheck. I am required to pass a random urine test, which I have no problem with. What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don't have to pass a urine test.
Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check, because I have to pass one to earn it for them?
Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet. I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sit on their butt. Could you imagine how much money the state would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check.
What is your stance?
(Excerpt) Read more at politicalmajority.com ...
Free men do not pee for their government
I agree with the principle in the argument. However, any lazybones who can’t pass a drug screen will be able to collect even more money in the form of an SSI check once they’re diagnosed as a “chronic alcoholic” or a “chronic drug addict.” And I’m not joking.
State of Michigan won’t let it happen here.
Believe it or not, this might be an ADA issue. Go figure.....
“State of Michigan won’t let it happen here.”
***
I doubt it would be allowed anywhere. It would “violate the rights of the poor” or some such.
Years ago, if you were on the dole, you were subject to surprise visits from a state welfare social worker. Now, the worker has to make an appointment...so the recipient can hide the supposedly absent father, the drug money, etc.
Although we don’t like social security as conservatives, for the majority of people on SS, it is not really welfare. And Medicare isn’t a welfare program either. Medicaid is the welfare program.
Medicare is the medical provider for most over 65 today, people with or without private insurance. Even the VA charges Medicare first for all services for vets over 65. You surely wouldn’t classify them as welfare recipients, would you? Private insurers for the workforce today are moving the over 65 medical burden to Medicare.
Why drug test addicts when we subsidize them through Social Security Disability and Congress is almost as likely to be guilty of the same non-drug-free status?
Can anybody imagine Dennis Kucinich is actually NOT smoking something? McDermot? Kennedy? Ron Wyden?
Amen
Free men do not accept government forced charity...
Career welfare recipients over several generations are not free men.
They are "kept pets".
Just saying.
What's my stance?
I think they should get tested for everything. All known illegal drugs, too much fat in their diets, smoking, risky behavior, the works.
Why then, is subjecting taxpayers to the same rules is not "demeaning" to them or violates their rights?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.