I, for one think this is a great idea.
Drug use and State Aid
- Thread starter jimmydean
- Start date
I like it. I foresee problems, but hopefully they'll work them out prior to ratification...
It is one of those things that sounds good but may backfire. Denying assistance to those in need with drug problems may just force them further into criminal activity. Maybe requiring those who test positive to seek counceling as a requirement to obtain assistance.
I also like where this is headed, esp the part about requiring treatment in order to continue receiving aid.
My reading comprehension just isn't working today.
Why do geezers get out of it? I can see if they test positive for Geritol but if grandma is on crank she should have to deal with things just like everyone else.
C
cyberpunk66
Guest
other than the invasion of privacy and denial of basic human rights not bad... Curious? are they going to test the toddler so as to deny them getting food?
Denial of basic human rights?
State-sponsored (i.e. taxpayer-sponsored) financial assistance is a basic human right? The right to spend the money you've been given by the government in order to live, on whatever is your drug of choice, is a basic human right?
State-sponsored (i.e. taxpayer-sponsored) financial assistance is a basic human right? The right to spend the money you've been given by the government in order to live, on whatever is your drug of choice, is a basic human right?
That's what I'm saying!
My wife wrote to some of our state reps about getting a program like that here in Oregon and it sounds like they might be taking it up at the next round (a long way off).
And:
C
cyberpunk66
Guest
I am not saying that it is a basic human right to take drugs or to get aid but aid is just that=AID. It is not right to ask everyone to get a blood test so that they can possibly get some food or get some medical care. Beleive me I get just as pissed about the people that abuse the system as everyone else, but here is the deal not everyone that gets aid is a drug using foreign scumbag. Try getting some aid sometime... it's not easy especially if you are in that growing gap of people that can't put food on the table but ARE working usually 2-3 jobs but can't make enough. This kind of leglislation is frightning because it is another step for the government to invade YOUR daily workings. OOPS you fell off your bike today MR Smith the government deems that Mountain Biking is dangerous, and populated by drug using deadbeats, also those trails you ride on are awfully close to our oil pipelines you must be a terrorist and so you go to jail. Farfetched? Yeah but the clocking by association is wrong.
It's more basic than that. You apply for aid, you piss in a cup. That's all there is to it. If you are on drugs, then you can either get off and get help, or f@ck off.
If you are on state aid, you can't afford drugs. If your on drugs and require aid to make ends meet, then maybe by getting off the drugs, you might also get off aid.
There are a lot of people in Oregon that abuse the system. One of the ways the system is abused is by using the state system to support a habit.
Is the UCI running this system? Guilty until proven innocent?
Also, I don't see the drug testing as any sort of invasion. Almost every job I've taken in my life (sans bike industry) has required a drug test.
Also, I don't see the drug testing as any sort of invasion. Almost every job I've taken in my life (sans bike industry) has required a drug test.
What about prescription drugs, will these be counted in? I mean, there's a whole lot of average people that are using those as narcotics but consider them selves to be better than the "illegal drug using scum".. Ask Dennis Leary, he doesn't need anything illegal when one can find such good isht at the pharmacy.
So your original post was irrelevant?
Ok, then.cyberpunk66 said:
I'm not about giving to addicts just so they can get high. I want tangible results for MY hard-earned cash. Sure, it could be instantaneous, or it could take years. Either way, I expect that people will have the smarts, will, etc. to get to the place where they can stop asking for handouts, pull themselves up, etc. (whatever they need to do to become self-dependent). If they don't, then so be it. Ain't gonna be my money helpin' them gettin' a fix.
L
luelling
Guest
They saw the scene in Little Miss Sunshine where the old guys says about heroin "at your age your nuts to do it, at my age I'm nuts NOT to do it!"
I think it should apply to unemployment as well. If you are using, how are you going to pass a drug screen for employment? At least if you aren't home stoned, you might be off the couch interviewing.
any credits given for rendered fat made into soap for prisoners?
how very clever.
But I'm not talking about liposuction... just helping people lead slightly healthier lifestyles.
As has been said, I want at least a little ROI.
would the same apply for those destitute types who pursue all lifestyles successfully argued as unhealthy? examples include those who contract STDs, subsist upon foods high in transfats, heavy smokers, heavy drinkers...
STDs is questionable, but the others are evil and explains why I'd never be in charge of anything.
High fructose corn syrup, transfats, cigarettes, etc... I'd never get funding to run for office.
First thing I'd do is close public school campuses, allow no junk food and feed them just healthy organic stuff.
Sure but there's a whole buncha Swedes that are on that isht, and doctors have given it to them. Some doctors can be bribed, but I belive most these prescriptions from clean doctors.
In comparison I have also seen that in the US there are loads of dope that can be bought on the net. Like valium, that isn't possible here (from Swedish sites but I don't think there's any problem to order from the US).
Lost a few pounds for us and now he's shaving his chacha?
Ope,
Eliminating all the "ugly" people in the world isnt making it a better place, it's destroying diversity. The human race needs fat, ugly, skinny, hot, std stricken, drug addicted, etc, kinds of people. Trying to turn every human into a 6' supermodel via government regulations is a little 1984 IMO.
Im not a fan of the current welfare system either, but you're talking about some dangerous precedents here. First its drugs, then smoking, transfats, then HF cornsyrup, then what? Lots of these things are generally unhealthy but have been part of the human diet since long before welfare even began. I can see drug tests, but we all have our vices and its wrong to expect that because someone is on welfare that they shouldnt. If I broke my spine in 12 places and had to go on disability/welfare, Id sure as hell still want a beer now and again.
Again, I'm talking about abuse, not use. Big difference.
If you want trans fats, cool, but if you're morbidly obese, you get sent to nutrition education classes if you want govt money.
Let's not slide down the slippery slope just yet. I advocate education, not elimination.
There's a private charity here that focuses on teaching poor families proper nutrition on the same budget that they already have for their crappy McDonalds meals. They teach moms how to buy and prepare better foods for the same money and time already allocated in the individual's life.
If you want trans fats, cool, but if you're morbidly obese, you get sent to nutrition education classes if you want govt money.
Let's not slide down the slippery slope just yet. I advocate education, not elimination.
There's a private charity here that focuses on teaching poor families proper nutrition on the same budget that they already have for their crappy McDonalds meals. They teach moms how to buy and prepare better foods for the same money and time already allocated in the individual's life.
There are plenty of docs that will over-prescribe or wrongly prescribe some pretty powerful narcotics and stimulants. It's pretty f-ing easy for me to "legally" get my hands on Vicadin, Percoset, Ritalin, Adderol, etc.
I agree in theory, but my personal belief about the reality of the situation is that I must just come to accept that if I am to live in a society in which there is a welfare program, that there will be ways to, and people who, abuse the system out of sheer laziness. I think the main emphasis should be aimed at eliminating the sense of entitlement that welfare bound families pass on from one generation to the next. I really have no idea how to do that. Maybe shaming people out of being lazy/poor is the way to go, but that would of course shame those who actually need the system.
Maybe all welfare checks should be those giant ones they give out on gameshows. It would be really embarassing walking to the bank to cash a five foot long welfare check.
Lol!
I agree with Opie. It's not a slippery slope when you can clearly define the point of abuse and it has a direct cost to society, which in this case is morbid obesity.
Besides, what's going to happen if you deny them aid? It's not like they'll starve. They can digest themselves for at least a few months.
The US is the only country in the world where being morbidly obese is a sign of poverty.
i'm eHumping your leg right now.
PM Sent!
no kiding. I'd like some illegal percs or vics. Seriously.
awesome.
