[shooz]

A sea capt. taking charters should be drug free.

I guess they forgot to test that guy on the Exxon Valdes.

Wallstreet says..............................

Let's get drunk, do some lines and crash the worlds economy...........
We'll make a fortune on the hedges.
Then we can rape the hotel housekeeper.
Voters won't care, because we are BIG people and welfare moms are just little people.

[magkelly]

Not every one who is on welfare and/or food stamps that takes hard core medications is a drug addict. I've previously been in the position a couple of times of being tested for work and being told that unless I refrain from taking prescribed medications completely, not just refraining from use in working hours something which I tend to do anyway, but not taking them at all, that I can't stay employed with a certain company. Not possible unfortunately, not for me. Tylenol, Advil, they can't take me too far in terms of real pain relief. I'm someone who suffers from chronic pain and who must take a major pain medication just to be able to walk, literally.

I was born with a slight congenital hip thing. Like one of my brothers does also I tend to walk a bit crooked sometimes when I am tired. (Only he's much worse. He's had hip surgery at least a dozen times since he was 5, but it's the same thing, funny gait, constant pain, because the hip socket isn't quite normal.) On top of that I've been in several accidents and have had surgery a few times on my spine. I've also suffered from serious sinus migraines since I was a small child and they have never been able to completely make them go away even with sinus surgery. Pain is something I've just been living with ever since I can remember and OTC medication it just isn't strong enough to work on me anymore.

I don't have medical insurance. Most jobs I've held that simply wasn't a benefit. I used to see a GP and get my pills directly, pay the $150 to see a doctor, several hundred more for labs, and the $$$ to get my 90 days worth of meds, but now I just can't go there. No money, so I get my pain pills now actually from my father who's insurance always covers them and who is basically given them all the time by his old school doctor who tends to way over medicate. (Fortunately for me, but still, he does...)

Dad's a stoic type who likes to suffer. (Okay actually he's not that stoic, but his preferred choice of pain killer is usually whiskey or gin, as in he likes his hot toddy before bed, not pain pills, smile.) I don't much like alcohol myself and since he doesn't even use 1/3 of them otherwise before his script runs out he gives the rest to me.

FYI, it's the same dose, the exact same medication my doctor was prescribing for me for chronic pain for years when I could still afford to go see him. I take 2-3 a day exactly the same way I have for years. No drug abuse here. Just sensible low level pain management when necessary. (I don't actually take them every single day. If I don't hurt enough, I just don't. I don't waste medication or take it regardless.)

Now, I'm not on welfare per se, even though with my income being as lousy as it's been lately I probably should be. (Not a lot of temp work so far this year and I haven't been able to get permanent work. It just doesn't exist here. Not for me apparently, cough.) But I do get food stamps and it's those food stamps that make it possible for me to both eat and pay my rent some months.

Let's say just for the sake of argument I have to get tested now every months just for my food stamps. (I don't yet. Not so far, but let's just be hypothetical here.) So now, I have a choice of not taking my not quite so legally gotten 3 pain pills a day or losing my food stamps.

I lose a couple hundred in food stamps a month, which are pretty vital for me at this point, or I can't walk and can't work even when they do call me to. Oh, and that also means I can't study for too long, or go out shooting with my teacher, or probably do photo shoots professionally when I am done with my internship either.

There are actually a lot of people who are on welfare because they are waiting to get approved for SSI. There are also a lot of retired people who get welfare and food stamps because their income is so low that they can't eat and pay their bills otherwise. Many of these same people have to rely on getting whatever medications they take in a way that's not always legal. People near the borders go to Canada or Mexico to buy their medications there because it's a whole lot cheaper and because it's the only way they can afford to get them.

Under this kind of program everyone who takes anything that they are not legally prescribed, even if they need to, could get their benefits yanked. Yeah, a lot of deadbeat, druggie, parents might get snagged, but so will a lot of elderly people and disabled people who simply can't afford to get their medications on the up and up all the time.

One of the first things to go when you lose a job or get disabled is the health care. Most public insurance programs, clinics, they won't give you anything but Tylenol or Advil, even if the doctor thinks you need it. They're too afraid they'll get in trouble with the state for doing it.

I used to spend $150 per office visit, get $750 worth of labs every six months, plus pay the entire cost of all medications when I was working full time. Now that I am not 75% of the time the LAST thing I can afford is those bills. I'm so grateful that my folks still have insurance and that they can get me at least the pain pills it's not even funny! As it is? I'm doing without several very necessary daily medications because I can't even afford the local sliding scale clinic, the labs they want to do et all. Sliding scale doesn't mean "free" actually and 1/4 of $750-1200 every six months just isn't in my budget.

No, I don't support what they are doing. It's invasive, could be potentially humiliating, and it could affect far too many people who aren't just taking drugs for recreational use and/or who can't afford them legally.

I'm already in the position of having to justify every item in my cart it seems to people who seemingly have no other business to tend to except for apparently critiquing my food choices. I also get looks because I get food stamps and I am single a lot. I'm not there shopping with 3 kids so apparently that's an issue for some. If I buy so much as a bag of pretzels, any kind of "junk" food it's an invitation for comments. Goodness forbid I should actually eat something besides fresh veggies, rice, beans, ramen, ground chicken, and hamburger once in a while.

I'm actually not much of a junk food queen. Less than %5 of my food budget goes for that kind of thing. I do like some Doritos or a coke now and again, or a bit of chocolate, like almost anyone. I actually eat fairly healthy, but my folks, like most older people they do eat junk food. They nibble a lot actually, and if I buy their pretzels, I can trade them for toilet paper, or Tampax, or more importantly a few cans of Friskies cat food, quite necessary items that sometimes I just can't find the extra change for that month.

Quid pro quo...

It's not the nicest thing being in the position of having to get food stamps et all. Too many people would like to take away any measure of privacy or dignity you have just so you can get and use them. I already sacrifice a lot just to make my bills. I have to eat, but even so, sometimes, just going to the grocery store can be a painful experience. Adding random drug tests to that? It would just be awful. Yet one more person I have to answer to? One more person who has the chance to make snarky comments or look down on me because I do need some help sometimes to be able to eat and pay my bills? Oh great, just great...

[shooz]

Don't forget, the governors wife owns a drug testing corporation.
He will get richer, by enacting this law.
Keep it in the family?
Conflict of interest.
As they say on faux news.
You decide.

BTW, who double checks these testing corporations for accuracy?

[seacapt]

A sea capt. taking charters should be drug free. A couch potato, really who cares...

Jeff I'l try to answer that from personal experience in my small world.
-The kid who's Dad had the munchies and fell alseep while cooking and burned the house down.
-The teenage girl who's become a Good Will store fashionista because Momma had a midlife crisis and developed a taste for scrip drugs and coke. BTW Momma don't wear no second hand clothes , she's gotta be a "hottie" cause she's looking for a sponsor.
-The highschool freshman who got no credits for his first semester based on unexcused absences because his Mom stays so sedated she couldn't write him notes when he was sick .
-The kid I bought a bat and mit for and payed team dues for who can't get a ride to practices because Mom and her boyfriend deserve to have a good time on Saturday night instead of putting gas in the car.
Just for the record when it comes down to someone getting high at the expense of thier kids I care too!

---

Last edited by seacapt; 06-03-2011 at 05:28 AM.

[shooz]

According to that, I guess you'd be all for random drug and alcohol testing for all gun owners, as similar accidents happen there too.

Or we could just test everybody, most of us do something stupid every once in a while.
Want to start up a drug testing corporation?

[Parallax]

It isn't about using the drugs. It's about you, me, and everybody else who works and makes a contribution to society, not having to buy the drugs for them.
Here's a thought, I know this is crazy, but how about the people who are on assistance that want to use drugs getting a job to pay for them themselves? Can't get a job? Hrm, maybe there's a connection there. Even if there isn't, what is fundamentally wrong with having to go without an illegal* luxury item that you can't afford?


* added text.

[GeneV]

It isn't about using the drugs. It's about you, me, and everybody else who works and makes a contribution to society, not having to buy the drugs for them.
Here's a thought, I know this is crazy, but how about the people who are on assistance that want to use drugs getting a job to pay for them themselves? Can't get a job? Hrm, maybe there's a connection there. Even if there isn't, what is fundamentally wrong with having to go without a luxury item that you can't afford?

The issue isn't whether welfare recipients, any more than any other citizen, should use drugs, but what extent we allow the government to intrude on the privacy and the dignity of a human being who is a citizen of this democracy. If they could just go out and get a job that allowed them and their children to live, then they would/should not be receiving assistance payments to begin with.

Under your theory, we should test them for cigarettes, alcohol, and just about any other non-essential consumable. You've got the urine, so why not check? Perhaps you would like them to be weighed, and they will receive no payments if the parents or children are overweight. Or, even better, test the women to be sure they have been taking birth control. Put TV cameras in their homes.

Why just do this to welfare recipients? Shouldn't anyone who receives money from the government lose their right to privacy? Why not require a drug test before you get a federally-insured mortgage or deposit into a federally-insured bank? Shouldn't you keep testing to keep these subsidies? How about farmers? Do they need subsidies if they have the money to buy drugs? Perhaps all of us who receive any service from the government (police, fire, flood control, etc.) should submit blood or urine to the government for testing.

If you really examine what you are saying, it is that you do want to punish the recipients of this particular government program for not being more successful.

---

Last edited by GeneV; 06-03-2011 at 05:51 AM.

[shooz]

Besides, his wife will make a fortune.
Americans don't need no privacy anyway.
Just rich people..............
And farmers.......
Since JohninIndy gets paid with tax payer dollars we should test him too.

What a slippery slope we slide on when we decide who gets constitutional support and who doesn't.

[Parallax]

Under your theory, we should test them for cigarettes, alcohol, and just about any other non-essential consumable.

Okay, I'll concede that point, Gene. I've amended my statement to say "illegal" luxuries.

If you really examine what you are saying, it is that you do want to punish the recipients of this particular government program for not being more successful.

No, what I'm saying is that measures to insure that public funds are not used for illegal activities aren't unreasonable.

[shooz]

But Wallstreet still gets a free pass?

[Parallax]

But Wallstreet still gets a free pass?

That's different. Just like the owner of a company has privileges that his employees don't have, the owners of Governments have special privileges.

[shooz]

So it just depends on who we give free money to.
Corporate welfare recipients are BIG people who can do what they want and welfare moms are small people who must be controlled and have constitutional rights rescinded.

[mikemike]

While I strongly disagree with drug users having their lifestyle propped up by my tax dollars; I don't think drug testing them is an effective policy simply from a cost-benefit standpoint. In order to be through enough to weed out abuse the government would probably end up spending as much on the drug tests and whatever appeals process is needed to be fair to people who test positively than you do on benefits.

[shooz]

the government would probably end up spending as much on the drug test

What part about the governors wife getting this money is so acceptable, and not a conflict of interest.

Since she would be getting tax payer dollars shouldn't she be randomly tested too?

Who's individual rights should we violate next?

Hint: See the thread about felony photography.

[JohnInIndy]

Besides, his wife will make a fortune.
Americans don't need no privacy anyway.
Just rich people..............
And farmers.......
Since JohninIndy gets paid with tax payer dollars we should test him too.

What a slippery slope we slide on when we decide who gets constitutional support and who doesn't.

Since I won't make an employee do anything I won't do it's not a problem. We are tested randomly. Including me.
BTW I don't get paid with taxpayer dollars. I get paid (company anyway) gets paid for a product that the US government (among others) wants to buy from me. They can go anywhere else to buy my product. They don't have to buy it from me. But then I will sue the hell out of whoever they're getting it from since I still hold the patent on it.