No Drug Tests For Food Stamp Recipients, Feds Tell Georgia

You can't buy drugs with EBT, so it's a moot point.

On the flip side though, how would a person who can afford a meth addiction be able to qualify for EBT - unless they're a drug dealer making money under the table and not reporting income taxes.

So I've got mixed feelings on this one.

 

It's a reality of life - there's actually a lot of safeguards in place (at least in my state) to prevent people from using EBT as their personal welfare plan. I know that a single person is required to work at least 20 hours a week in order to remain on the EBT program after 2 months.

Bottom line is that, if it comes down it, the country is going to aid a person in need (even one who's blatantly lazy) versus letting a person starve, and that's going to remain that way indefinitely because that'd be bad for national morale. Ultra-libertarianism is pure idealism and will never work in any real life scenario.

The real problem are the individuals who have multiple children knowing they have no income or means of supporting them, and the fact that there's no penalty for an unemployed individual to father 6 kids with 6 different mothers and fathers. The real solution to actual welfare abuse would be to legally punish people who do this (ex. enact jail time for people who haven't reported income taxes in the last 1-2 years, but are continuing to have children - possibly offering them sterilization as a means to lessen or remove the jail sentence).

That's a realistic solution right there - crying that "taxation is theft" or whatever mantra's the flavor of the day isn't going to accomplish anything other than mental masturbation.​

 

... I don't think you and I are going to agree on what's "realistic."




​

 

So what's your realistic solution then? Mine's a lot more realistically implementable.

If a person hasn't been employed or filed tax returns in the last 2 years, but continues to have more kids, then they could be charged with child neglect (since they're having a child knowing very well that they can't support the child), and offered voluntary sterilization as an alternative to a jail sentence. I think that would cut down on the problem right there.

 

It's not a moot point. In most if not all states with EBT you can take CASH out of any ATM. Who says they have to be an addict? Do you want your tax dollars going to buy someone who's not working pot/booze?

 

Sounds like just more government programs. Why does the right condone these infringements to Individual Liberty while claiming government is "too big".

 

My solution relies more on Individual Liberty instead of just more government and government programs.

 

How is your eugenics solution more realistically implementable than the one you assume I offered before you stated your problem but that you know nothing about?

My comment was not that I had offered something "more realistic." It was that I disagree with your assertion that sterilizing welfare recipients is "a realistic solution."



​

 

If you don't care what the wealthiest do with their "bailout" money, why should you care what the least wealthy do with their "bailout" money?

- - - Updated - - -

Sometimes, the right gives the impression they really don't care about Indididual Liberty as much as they claim.

 

You have no more respect for the concept of individual liberty, maybe less.

Demanding someone else be responsible for the cost of your life or suggesting government enforce reproductive choices for the poor are both denying people the right and responsibility to own their individual lives. Both are suggesting government assume responsibility for an individuals life, it's suggesting we keep people like pets.

Whether you want the authority to kennel and neuter someone or the entitlement to have someone else feed you and pick up after you — you're arguing for an abandonment of individual liberty. And that's a luxury this nation cannot afford you.



​

 

You are singing to the band. When I contract IDIQ, MATOC, FFP's or what have you it is a automatic %30+ increase compared to the civ. market. Drug policy is just but a fraction of the requirements to do business.

Oh, I am not in the GOP, left it when the Patriot Act was signed....but my private opinion is no welfare recipient should receive funding while doing drugs.

Work or starve for every able body adult. No sympathy, no feelings, no tears.

 

I'm not aware of that, and yes I oppose EBT cash withdrawls. In my state the Food Stamps program doesn't allow cash withdrawls; I think some other welfare programs such as TANF do allow cash benefits.

 

It's not "eugenics" since it's voluntary, and eugenics refers to population control which is attempting to weed out undesirable genetic traits - if the issue is encouraging people who can't financially support children not to have them then that's not an issue of "genetics" - please learn what you speak of.

 

CBS2 Investigates: Millions In LA County Welfare Money Traced To Casinos, Bars, Vacation Spots

Read the story above. it's happening in many, many more states too.

 

In my opinion, the real tragedy is that ebt cards cannot be used with financial planners.

 

Can't keep an obamavoter from getting online. They're too stupid to learn anything, but there they are.

 

What "charity"?

Money taken from honest citizens at gunpoint to give to Rodent voters in direct violation of the Constitution is not "charity", it's theft.​

 

The power to tax is in our social contract so stop complaining about our supreme law of the land.

 

The Constitution guaranties against UNREASONABLE search and seizure not ALL search and seizure.

What is unreasonable about someone living off the taxpayer dole while they are supposed to gaining employment which will require a drug test insuring the taxpayer they are fully prepared to take that drug test in order to accept employment?

 

One has nothing to do with the other.

 

We have laws regarding employment at will in most States.

 

If you have to pass a drug test to earn "Welfarites" (People who do not plan to work and are worthless to society) there grubby cards why don't they have to take one?

That's only logical sense but liberals don't believe in this magic normal people call "Logic" its a scary word watch out.

I'm an independent and honestly both sides look foolish,

Democrats believe anything there Lord All Mighty Mr.Obama says without hesitation.

Republicans need to get a grip with the world today not the world of the 70's.

 

They are not asking for employment in any at-will employment State? Simply seeking recourse to a social safety net is not comparable to employment at will.

 

The majority of those who have jobs and job applicants are subjected to drug testing so there is no logical reason why welfare receipients should not be. In fact, it may be a means of discovering a reason why they are unemployable or don't apply for jobs or educational programs which do require drug testing.

Makes sense to me

 

Only if you like to waste the (other) Peoples' money through nanny-Statism.

We have laws regarding employment at will. Applying for a job is usually a choice. Applying for recourse to a social safety net is not usually a choice, but a necessity.