Congresswoman Who Used To Receive Welfare Wants To Drug Test Rich People (tax breaks)

Your article states 1.5 million. Not billion. So savings of 46.5 million?

 

And 1.5 billion in legal fees BECAUSE of this program is NOT a savings. My argument is valid because you just want to act like the 1.5 billion never happened. It did and is a consequence of this program. hence it cost the state more as a whole.

 

Dear Elected Representative,

Please ask the One Percent to create a Jobs Boom so we can help pay taxes.

Thank you.

 

BWHAHAHAHAHAH Ok, I definitely get the dumbass award today. read that completely wrong.

I withdraw my comments to Windigo and thirty-below zero.

Thanks for the catch there. Now, time to chug some coffee down I obviously need it.

 

Try reading next time.

Bluesguy, Post #2:

 

I'm absolutely right because $1.5 billion never happened.

 

Why is it that you people never seem to think ahead? What the hell do you think will happen if we decriminalize drugs and eliminate drug tests for jobs?

 

There were no drug tests before 1929 when capitalism died, and socialism bailed it out. Why are you for increasing government cost?

 

I wouldn't want to have tests for government jobs, shipping jobs, or flying jobs eliminated but really who gives a f'ck if a software design company hires a graphic designer who likes to smoke reefer sometimes? It's not affecting you, and if they do good work for the company then your way ends up hurting the business. You are effectively stealing from me and others who would buy the company's product in this case. Some champion of "free enterprise" you are.

edit: speaking of government jobs, this is relevant

 

Meh, we all do it... At least you can admit it.

 

Its all good. We all misread things sometimes.

If it makes you feel any better, it only seems to have worked for Florida in this instance. The other states that do this aren't testing a ton of people(one state had 100,000+ applicants, they only sent ~ 40 people for testing, and of that ~40, only 2 or 3 tested positive), and don't have 1600 people flatly refusing to take the test.

I still hate drug testing. My body, my business.

 

There have also been more dangerous drugs created since 1929, and the population has grown by 210,000,000 more people since 1929. We also mature at a much slower pace since 1929.

 

If he values his job, he won't smoke reefer sometimes since it's against company policy and it wouldn't end up effecting the business OR you. If he values drugs over his career then he can be replaced by someone more mature or someone that takes his job more seriously. Personal responsibility doesn't seem to play much into the minds of people these days. You actually accuse me of stealing from you because I favor professionalism over the inability to hold a job just because someone wants to break company policy.

 

See post #29, you'll be amused.

 

Okay fair enough. Then we should listen to this congresswoman and strictly enforce testing for all white collar professional jobs, public and private sector alike. No double standards. For cocaine and other hard drugs it would probably need to be done every Monday since it exits the system in 3 days.

 

So many mistakes... But one point, yes, she should just say everyone lowering their tax payments with special government allowances given to them should be tested, just to make it fair, not just people getting large breaks.

But you say people on welfare are not paying into the treasury. Well, each Walmart supercenter has over $1 million in welfare paid to it's WORKERS. Food stamps, childcare so they can WORK, and so forth are all for people who are paying into the treasury. Sure, sometimes someone is on unemployment, or gets welfare when not working, but that doesn't mean they haven't paid in to the treasury during their lifetime.

The point she is making is that the government assists citizens in many ways, by laws legally passed by congress. By targeting only certain recipients of this government assistance, you are being discriminatory and unfair. If the government gives you a large tax break to buy a vacation home and a boat, then you are asking for government handouts. And the government has legally passed these handouts to influence society for the better.

Now I am all for punishing welfare fraud. Someone who is sucking off the system and not even trying to work is often committing fraud. The laws about who can receive benefits is another topic, and if you think those laws need to be tightened, explain the specifics details of those laws you want changed. But if someone is legally receiving benefits, they should not be tested. If they are committing fraud, then they should be charged. But claiming that because some people may be committing fraud and sucking off the system, everyone who receives certain government assistance should be drug tested does not make sense, anymore than saying that because some people cheat on their tax deductions, all people who take tax deductions should be drug tested, because, you know, they could be cheating on their taxes to fund drug use...

 

I'm all for random testing... I don't know why they don't get tested already. I've never had a job where I didn't get tested before being hired, and at random intervals, or if I got injured on the job. They need to drug test employees and welfare. Go ahead and toss government positions in there as well and let's get this on the move.

 

Your points were well made and well taken.

If there's anything amusing about this ridiculous idea, it's Gwen Moore's breathtakingly defective logic. A handout that comes from someone else is not the same as keeping your own money.

Obviously, Ms. Moore is not a very bright woman, which makes you wonder about the intelligence of the voters who elected her...

 

Take a look-see at who is standing behind her, on HER left... It's Corrine Brown, another ignorant (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) that can't even speak the English language very well. She was laughed at in the sports world for years, here's a closed captioned video of the speech I'm talking about.

[video=youtube;KgbBP9Em00A]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgbBP9Em00A[/video]




I just noticed towards the end that she was discussing the playoffs (which were only talk back then) and said that everything can't be equal. Anyways, what a joke she is, and it's nice to see her standing behind another idiot as ignorant as her. Matter of fact, I believe she had something to do with the failed drug testing in "Flarda."

And the chickenhead on Moore's right is one of the leaders for the Black Caucus that said she didn't need any evidence in the M. Brown case that Wilson was innocent because she just KNEW Wilson killed Brown because he was black. Moore is surrounded by idiots.

 

LOL

I used to live in the city of Richmond, Virginia and the dumbasses in that city were notorious for electing the biggest (*)(*)(*)(*) ups they could find to office. I'm not joking - City Council was a revolving door to federal prison.

There was Chuck Richardson, a convicted heroin addict. Sa'ad al-Amin, who got sent to Club Fed for tax evasion. Gwen Richardson, who got convicted of bribery conspiracy, attempted bribery, taking a bribe, and lying to federal authorities. Last but not least, there was former mayor Reverend Leonidas Young, who was imprisoned for influence peddling, mail fraud and obstruction of justice. If I recall correctly, he also defrauded some little old lady on her deathbed.

That's what you get with the Character Doesn't Count crowd. Now, look what they're running for president...

 

Sadly, the progressive left views tax deductions, or letting people keep more fruits of the labor, the same as welfare payments which is giving people money they didn't earn.

Only in progressive liberal America does that make sense.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

 

So, I go to work every day, and a portion of the fruits of my labor are given to people that you think should he able to do drugs?

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

 

Really? What kind of work do you do?

I've never been drug tested for a job, doing building operations now, and even when i was working Security a decade+ back.

- - - Updated - - -

If it doesn't impede their desire to find work, then I don't care what they do with their free time.

 

And now, your posts turn to snide little rants.

You want me to pay for somebody on welfare, then they ought to be making good decisions and be working to get off the dole. Otherwise, I shouldn't have to pay to support them.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

 

Here is where your argument simply falls short and has no merit.

People on welfare are getting free money from tax payers, the responsibility of government is to prevent the waste of tax payers money!

Secondly, testing the wealthy would be purely communistic in nature, what a person does with there own money is their business, not yours, not mine and certainly not the governments.