Thread: Florida bad at math

Originally Posted by C-B-M

That basically boils down to you being upset about people being punished for using drugs. Or, "why is the government looking for drug use, just let the people use their drugs!"

If you feel that, great. Then just write "hey, guys, this pisses me off ...in Florida, they're trying to find drug users!" Instead, you pretended that you were upset about a cost -- which was poorly calculated -- that is negligible relative to the amount being spent for benefits. Both of which are points that a number of posters, including myself, have made.

So why not drug test for driver's license and registration?
Why not a random drug test team, that randomly stops people, and gets samples.
Would you mind being stopped, and released as soon as you provided government ID and a urine or blood sample.

Or would you be pissed off that they were trying to find drug users?

Originally Posted by goober

So why not drug test for driver's license and registration?
Why not a random drug test team, that randomly stops people, and gets samples.
Would you mind being stopped, and released as soon as you provided government ID and a urine or blood sample.

Or would you be pissed off that they were trying to find drug users?

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt since it's a long thread and I also don't read prior posts in long threads.

The issue was initially raised that this was "authoritarian." And I agreed, it would be if this was the government testing random citizens. But since it is merely testing people receiving money FROM IT, it doesn't constitute an over-reach. If you are for the government providing you money, you must also be accepting of the government placing pretty much any stipulation it wants on that money.

Originally Posted by C-B-M

That basically boils down to you being upset about people being punished for using drugs. Or, "why is the government looking for drug use, just let the people use their drugs!"

Clearly you don't get it. If the government is looking for drug use, let the government look for drug use by following the law as it it exists. Nothing in this program is about finding and punishing drug users it's about building confidence into the system with a facade of cost savings using drug users as a bugaboo.

Originally Posted by C-B-M

But since it is merely testing people receiving money FROM IT, it doesn't constitute an over-reach. If you are for the government providing you money, you must also be accepting of the government placing pretty much any stipulation it wants on that money.

So what stops them from testing people who receive money from tax returns? Those are people receiving money from the government.

What if the law is altered so a family must be one man, one woman and one or more children to receive money from the government as our government is all about supporting families, is that okay?

What if one must past a test demonstrating a certain level of competence or allegiance to political ideology to receive money from the government , after all poorly educated people with mental problems shouldn't be given free reign to finances ?

Where is the line?

Originally Posted by JDJarvis

So what stops them from testing people who receive money from tax returns? Those are people receiving money from the government.

Uh, WHAT?? That's their OWN MONEY.

Seriously, WHAT?

Social Security recipients should clearly be drug tested. Same for Medicare & Medicaid recipients.

Originally Posted by Jefe

Social Security recipients should clearly be drug tested. Same for Medicare & Medicaid recipients.

Oh, that would be fine.

Originally Posted by C-B-M

Oh, that would be fine.

Hey, let's not stop at drug testing, right? We should also restrict them from buying alcohol, tobacco, candy, fancy foods, birthday cards.. basically, people should only be able to buy gruel. Sound good?

Originally Posted by C-B-M

Uh, WHAT?? That's their OWN MONEY.

Seriously, WHAT?

It is? Why do people have to beg for it back from the government with the correct forms?

Benefits are the tax payers money before they are paid out in benefits right?

Originally Posted by JDJarvis

There's a constant stream of folks applying for benefits, some folks that fail the test can reapply, someone not getting the benefits doesn't save the state a penny becasue they weren't receiving the funds before they applied...

It's only possible to actually get savings with this scheme if a finite number of people are permitted to apply over a time period and some of those people are rejected. People apply when they perceive they have a need. They are not costing the system any money for those benefits before they apply and are approved.

I welcome any effort to prevent freeloaders from getting welfare dollars. If it takes a while to work out cost efficiencies, so be. Going over $30 for a test is absurd. $7 is fine. Why not deduct the cost of the test from the first check?

Social Security disability advised my grandpop, who have been rejected twice, to hire an attorney. That would be the applicants cost and was around $1,500.

so no one has data yet to show if applications for welfare have decreased?

Originally Posted by JDJarvis

It is? Why do people have to beg for it back from the government with the correct forms?

Benefits are the tax payers money before they are paid out in benefits right?

Really, you must be joking at this point. You're really saying that tax refunds are government money? I just want to be clear because I don't want you to say that I lied about what you said or misquoted you or took you out of context before I embarrass you.

Originally Posted by Jefe

Hey, let's not stop at drug testing, right? We should also restrict them from buying alcohol, tobacco, candy, fancy foods, birthday cards.. basically, people should only be able to buy gruel. Sound good?

Sure, why not?

See, the problem is you think I'm going to get outraged. Why? If you're not outraged that people are getting money that isn't theirs transferred to them from others, then why should I get outraged that there are restrictions placed on that money? Both are equally ridiculous, but you only get upset at one.