Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000 (VI

[jaeger19]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

So a dealer would give a drug addict with no money 10 hits for free, believing the drug addict would return with the money for the extra 8 hits?

I'm thinking something got lost in the translation.

When the consequence is that the dealer will never ever sell to you again.. no matter how much it hurts? Yeah...and that's the lesser of consequences... at one time, when I worked philly, the penalty for not paying up in the situation was being set on fire. You would be doused with gas or lighter fluid and lit on fire.

Treated one lady who didn't pay her drug bill, and she was found because her neighbors complained that someone was "burning pork". She survived, with a 75% body burn.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

It's not "guilty until proven innocent". It's part of the interview process, the same way a business checks to see if you have other requirements to do the job.

Regardless of your view on this, surely you're aware that it's extremely common for businesses to check for drugs and a drug addict is basically making themselves unemployable. Why should the state pay for someone who is choosing to be unemployable?

Exactly my thought.

My take is that random testing should be done for people capable of working. If they don't like the hassle, get a better job, education, or what ever it takes.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

If I'm understand this correctly, Conservatives want to kick drug addicted welfare recipients off of assistance if they test positive.

The problem is, most assistance goes to feeding children. If the person is single and able to work, I'm fine with stringent rules regarding what they can get from our government (don't want to become enablers). But, when children are involved, we hurt them for their parents bad behavior. That's not fair and only hurts America's future (malnutrition has a huge impact of brain development).

This doesn't sound like a reasonable policy that'll improve America.

Why should the tax payer be responsible for other people's mistakes?

Test positive, stay in treatment programs.

Have kids? They better be there are still solutions. Remember, nothing should be zero tolerance, all mitigating circumstances considered. There should never be a one-size-fits-all solution.

It is not solving a problem to allow problems to go on without intervention.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

So a dealer would give a drug addict with no money 10 hits for free, believing the drug addict would return with the money for the extra 8 hits?

I'm thinking something got lost in the translation.

Many get drugs from family or friends, or even sexual favors. As long as someone chooses not to be employable, I say let them rot.

 

[Binary_Digit]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

Alcohol use is legal and there are no prohibitions on use. That would be like testing for nicotine.

They are sending people to rehab if they test positive. That tells me the intent is not to enforce crime with punishment, but to try and help them quit using drugs. I actually think it's a noble idea in a way and I shouldn't have been so harsh in that post.

Here's the issue I have with it: About 1 in 6 people have a problem with alcohol. But they aren't sending people to AA if they pee in a cup and it reveals any amount of alcohol consumption in the last few weeks. And I'm willing to bet they'll send people to rehab for testing positive for marijuana, which is a complete and utter joke. Some other drugs I can sort-of see a case for (e.g. nobody uses meth "just a little"), but the tendency for policy makers to lump marijuana into the same category as crack, and zero in on illegal drug addiction while ignoring alcohol addiction, just annoys the crap out of me.

 

[TheDemSocialist]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

If those 12 people were eligible for just $10k in benefits each I figure it's cost effective. Keep in mind that 12 of 400 is 3% of the group so it's a significant percentage.

Remember i thought it was " billions of dollars of welfare funds ending up in the wrong places or being spent on illegal drugs"....

 

[VanceMack]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

They are sending people to rehab if they test positive. That tells me the intent is not to enforce crime with punishment, but to try and help them quit using drugs. I actually think it's a noble idea in a way and I shouldn't have been so harsh in that post.

Here's the issue I have with it: About 1 in 6 people have a problem with alcohol. But they aren't sending people to AA if they pee in a cup and it reveals any amount of alcohol consumption in the last few weeks. And I'm willing to bet they'll send people to rehab for testing positive for marijuana, which is a complete and utter joke. Some other drugs I can sort-of see a case for (e.g. nobody uses meth "just a little"), but the tendency for policy makers to lump marijuana into the same category as crack, and zero in on illegal drug addiction while ignoring alcohol addiction, just annoys the crap out of me.

Alcohol doesnt stay in your system long enough to test weeks out and again...we are talking about a legal substance. I am not sure but I doubt they send marijuana users to rehab as there really isnt a marijuana rehab program or detox/addiction treatment. they also cant test for things like Spice and bath salts. If the program is true to its stated intent they would only send real 'addicts' to a treatment program in the hopes that doing so would help them get off the drug and have a better shot at improving their lives. It would be interesting though to know the real scope of the testing and see just what is being tested for.

My guess is that people know about the testing program which is why the 12 in 400 number is rather suspect. You can usually stop for 2-3 days if your check depended on it. The NIDA stats show that approx 9 people in 100 will use some form of narcotic or illegal drug in a given 30 day span (8.7%). S to suggest that only 3 in 100 Welfare recipients are using it...well...thats rather silly. They are cleaning up to take the test, or the threat of losing their check is causing people to quit (highly unlikely but still...win win).

 

[radcen]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

It's not "guilty until proven innocent". It's part of the interview process, the same way a business checks to see if you have other requirements to do the job.

Regardless of your view on this, surely you're aware that it's extremely common for businesses to check for drugs and a drug addict is basically making themselves unemployable. Why should the state pay for someone who is choosing to be unemployable?

The human species is amazing in its ability to rationalize.

 

[Fisher]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

Read more: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

Looks like these "fiscal conservative" policies arent working out to well. Their witch hunts have failed yet again. [/I][/FONT][/COLOR]

So the conservatives are evil for trying to get drug addicts help? Socialists have a very peculiar world view, even more so than those kooky Ron Paul libertarians.

 

[radcen]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

So the conservatives are evil for trying to get drug addicts help? Socialists have a very peculiar world view, even more so than those kooky Ron Paul libertarians.

Maybe I'm too cynical, but I question they really give a rat's arse about helping anybody. If anything, they're simply playing to their demographic. Those on welfare are only pawns. At the least, they're perpetuating a government full of programs and bureaucracies. (In spite of the rhetoric, the Reps stopped being the party of small government decades ago.)

 

[Northern Light]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

This drug testing scheme for welfare recipients is worthless. You can't test for alcohol or tobacco use and they are the highest consumed drugs among welfare recipients. Ever see people lining up at the liquor store the day they get their check? There are no drug tests for tobacco or alcohol, so this whole witch hunt is not only unfair but it's ineffectual.

If we really want to control people's lives this much, then it would be better to implement the cash card policy like in the UK. Welfare recipients are given a pre-loaded cash card that can only be used at designated vendors. If they try to use it to buy alcohol or cigarettes, the card will reject the purchase.

Drug testing is intrusive and a violation of civil rights. Just because people are poor does not mean they should be subject to privacy intrusions and increased control. We're in a recession, a lot of those people are genuinely unemployed and have turned to welfare once their EI ran out. Stop demonizing the poor, and stop wasting precious tax dollars on these ridiculous ring-wing social justice causes.

 

[jaeger19]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

So the conservatives are evil for trying to get drug addicts help? Socialists have a very peculiar world view, even more so than those kooky Ron Paul libertarians.

I don't know that "evil" was ever thrown out.. but I think the original poster has a point...

Its quite a contradiction to say you are a conservative (or libertarian) and for small government and then turn around and tell people to go pee in a cup for the state.

Oh yes.. that's right.. its because why should we taxpayers pay for their drugs...

Great.. any and all people that are stockholders of oil companies should get tested too. because why should my money go for their subsidies if they are on drugs.

Same with farmers
College students
All politicians
Any banker whose bank took tarp funds
Any parts company that benefited from the auto industry bailout.
anyone working for a company that does business with the US government..

Gee, that covers just about everyone... gonna get kind of expensive.....

 

[Fisher]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

I don't know that "evil" was ever thrown out.. but I think the original poster has a point...

Its quite a contradiction to say you are a conservative (or libertarian) and for small government and then turn around and tell people to go pee in a cup for the state.

Oh yes.. that's right.. its because why should we taxpayers pay for their drugs...

Great.. any and all people that are stockholders of oil companies should get tested too. because why should my money go for their subsidies if they are on drugs.

Same with farmers
College students
All politicians
Any banker whose bank took tarp funds
Any parts company that benefited from the auto industry bailout.
anyone working for a company that does business with the US government..

Gee, that covers just about everyone... gonna get kind of expensive.....

Or we can just target people who are most at risk. Either way is fine with me.

 

[iacardsfan]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

Testing positive for drugs is equivalent to shooting up? :lamo

You obviously spent too much time on simple arithmetic and little on understanding the science behind drug testing.

I understand that not every drug user in the US physically shoots up, it was simply an expression.

 

[ReformCollege]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

So why don't you lose it when you benefit from public money? There is no one who doesn't. The roads you drive on, the medicine you take when you're sick, the law enforcement that protects you, the farm subsidies that pay for growing your food, the research that has gone into most of the technology you enjoy. Why doesn't that strip you of privacy, but it does for poor people?

No one wrote me a check to pay for a road I drive on :roll:. Actually, they take money from me instead, they are called toll roads. Same thing with medication I buy, there is something called a copay. And yes, the insurance company does have a say on what I'm buying there.

 

[Paschendale]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

No one wrote me a check to pay for a road I drive on :roll:. Actually, they take money from me instead, they are called toll roads. Same thing with medication I buy, there is something called a copay. And yes, the insurance company does have a say on what I'm buying there.

I get it, you don't understand how we are all beneficiaries of public spending. You only understand the notion of directly handing you money as receiving benefit from the government. You're not as different from the people you're looking down on as you think you are.

 

[VanceMack]

Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,0

I don't know that "evil" was ever thrown out.. but I think the original poster has a point...

Its quite a contradiction to say you are a conservative (or libertarian) and for small government and then turn around and tell people to go pee in a cup for the state.

Oh yes.. that's right.. its because why should we taxpayers pay for their drugs...

Great.. any and all people that are stockholders of oil companies should get tested too. because why should my money go for their subsidies if they are on drugs.

Same with farmers
College students
All politicians
Any banker whose bank took tarp funds
Any parts company that benefited from the auto industry bailout.
anyone working for a company that does business with the US government..

Gee, that covers just about everyone... gonna get kind of expensive.....

Every one of those categories of people you listed are either gainfully employed or as in the case of students, already preparing for a future. Drug addicts as welfare recipients are looking at a lifetime of more of the same unless their circumstance changes.

 

[ReformCollege]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

I get it, you don't understand how we are all beneficiaries of public spending. You only understand the notion of directly handing you money as receiving benefit from the government. You're not as different from the people you're looking down on as you think you are.

Please, PLEASE explain to me how I'm benefiting from welfare paying for people's drugs, tattoos, or booze? Your last example was a total flop, so I'm just waiting to see what your explanation behind this one is?

 

[CanadaJohn]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

No illegal income.... she was not being paid for the selling drugs. just free stuff... and yes.. she had been and was on welfare and social security. Point being, taking her money away from her would do nothing to change her drug habits..so there is no "rewarding her for illegal activity.

The reason that she is getting money is because of her disability and her inability to find a job she is capable of doing and to support her two children. Whether she takes drugs or not... is really immaterial... UNLESS you are concerned about legislating morality. Otherwise , there is so many other factors involved... there are folks that smoke pot, and work two jobs and still get welfare because they don't make enough.. even though they hump everyday...

then there are others that could work, choose not to, have more kids they cannot support so they can get more aid..

If you give money to the one that's lazy and doesn't try
and not give money to the worker because they smoke pot... you are most certainly legislating morality;.

I, personally, wouldn't give money to either one. Charity is wasted on those who have no interest in helping themselves.

Secondly, no person should want to "reward" such personal negligence by continuing to waste government resources on them - in a free society there is also personal responsibility. It's not legislating morality - that's just liberal tripe - it is, in fact, just not being a sap and letting people take advantage of your kind heart.

 

[opendebate]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

I'd like to know the "400+" number. That could be 401, and honestly that's not a large enough sampling size for me to feel comfortable with the results. I tend to lean liberal when it comes to the economy and I don't see any problem with making sure taxpayers aren't paying straight into anothers needles.

Furthermore, assuming the study is accurate and implemented nationwide, that would be about 129,000 Americans on welfare that shoot up. That number seems a little more significant. (Feel free to check my math on that )

That "shoot up", I didn't see anything in the article about what kind of drug was tested for or that received positive results. Another thing to consider would be, how long were these people on welfare, how much were they receiving, what happens to them when they can no longer receive welfare. Does it make it more likely that they will resort to crime? Then you have a whole other issue with costs. Just questions.

 

[Binary_Digit]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

Please, PLEASE explain to me how I'm benefiting from welfare paying for people's drugs, tattoos, or booze? Your last example was a total flop, so I'm just waiting to see what your explanation behind this one is?

I think the point was, everyone "takes" each other's money but only some of that "taking" (welfare) means giving up their right to privacy. Why the inconsistency?

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

This drug testing scheme for welfare recipients is worthless. You can't test for alcohol or tobacco use and they are the highest consumed drugs among welfare recipients. Ever see people lining up at the liquor store the day they get their check? There are no drug tests for tobacco or alcohol, so this whole witch hunt is not only unfair but it's ineffectual.

If we really want to control people's lives this much, then it would be better to implement the cash card policy like in the UK. Welfare recipients are given a pre-loaded cash card that can only be used at designated vendors. If they try to use it to buy alcohol or cigarettes, the card will reject the purchase.

Drug testing is intrusive and a violation of civil rights. Just because people are poor does not mean they should be subject to privacy intrusions and increased control. We're in a recession, a lot of those people are genuinely unemployed and have turned to welfare once their EI ran out. Stop demonizing the poor, and stop wasting precious tax dollars on these ridiculous ring-wing social justice causes.

You make some points I agree with. What I get all pissed about are those who are chronically on the system. The ones that turned the safety nets into hammocks. Ever notice how many women have babies spaced 3 years apart to stay on these systems?

Collecting benefits should not be an easy things for able bodied people. It should be a distasteful process so people want to be self reliant. The only ones who it should be easy for are the elderly and handicapped.

 

[winston53660]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

You make some points I agree with. What I get all pissed about are those who are chronically on the system. The ones that turned the safety nets into hammocks. Ever notice how many women have babies spaced 3 years apart to stay on these systems?

Collecting benefits should not be an easy things for able bodied people. It should be a distasteful process so people want to be self reliant. The only ones who it should be easy for are the elderly and handicapped.

No. how many did that?

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

No. how many did that?

Just watch the public at large.

I come from a humble background, and I know several people who have it hard financially. Among them and the people they know as well, several women purposely find a sperm donor to knock them up to stay on the system, section 8 housing, etc. They play the system. You see, once your youngest child is so old, you no longer qualify for certain types of benefits. many women, in fear, find it easier to have another child to continue these benefits that are ready to expire.

Again, pay attention to single mothers in the public with 3 or more children. Often, the children will be 3 years apart in age.

Something needs to be done to stop making people want to stay on the social systems.

 

[ReformCollege]

Re: Utah Welfare Drug Testing Results Find Only 12 Drug Users at Cost of Over $30,000

I think the point was, everyone "takes" each other's money but only some of that "taking" (welfare) means giving up their right to privacy. Why the inconsistency?

No, that is incorrect. When I drive on the road I'm not "taking" anyone money. There is a huge difference between using a road that is available for anyone, and a single person cashing a check from the government on a program that is not available to everyone. One is a service, the other is redistribution.
NOT TO MENTION, I do give up my right to "just do whatever I want" when I am using the road. I can't go over the speed limit for example. Or drink while I'm in the car. Or even text for that matter. I know what the "point" was, and the "point" was an absolutely horrendous argument.