Mayhem
Banned
It doesn't matter that **** are going hungry as long as you have someone to blame. Deep, real deep.
Should Welfare Recipient's Be **** Tested?
- Thread starter jointsmoker612
- Start date
It doesn't matter that **** are going hungry as long as you have someone to blame. Deep, real deep.
Lolita_Borgia
Official Checked Star Member
Yes that would slow down their illicit hypocritical **** trade... corruption is one reason why they don't decriminalise *****
I say yes, but with a few differences from most. One, ********* isn't something that'd get you in trouble (less harmful than cigs). Two, any hard substances (meth, pcp, ****, etc.) gets you taken to rehab and **** remanded to a custodian (preferably able ****** members) via court order. You get clean, and you get your **** back and back on assistance. I know some of you guys won't like this, but if you're going to take government money, the government should have a say in how you can behave (kinda like private businesses). It's not really a perfect solution, but it's the best I can think of for balance between "Whatever, here's some money..." and "Get a job, slime."
JaanaRuutu
Official Checked Star Member
No. It costs more money than it saves, and in Florida they ****** a ton of time and money on this..for nothing. 2% and most of that was pot.
I **** the idea that because someone is poor and in need of assistance, it automatically means they MUST be using *****. Why else would they be poor?! it couldn't possibly be because their job doesn't pay enough, or because they're a single parent and the other parent of their ***** refuses to step up, or that they're a veteran/military ******.
It's easier to just turn the other way and make the excuse of "Oh, they're on *****. We shouldn't help them" than to actually look the poverty facing your country and say "Welp, we've failed". You've been conditioned by the elite to **** your own fucking people. It's sick.
if we're going to **** test for welfare, we've gotta **** test EVERY SINGLE PERSON that receives ANY form of government money - politicians, students, grannies on Social Security, scientists doing research - everyone. It's all or nothing. We can't just target the poor.
And, for the record, the ACTUAL WELFARE PROBLEM in the US isn't poor people selling their food stamps for **** money, it's the billions and billions your government basically gives away to companies like GE every year.
I **** the idea that because someone is poor and in need of assistance, it automatically means they MUST be using *****. Why else would they be poor?! it couldn't possibly be because their job doesn't pay enough, or because they're a single parent and the other parent of their ***** refuses to step up, or that they're a veteran/military ******.
It's easier to just turn the other way and make the excuse of "Oh, they're on *****. We shouldn't help them" than to actually look the poverty facing your country and say "Welp, we've failed". You've been conditioned by the elite to **** your own fucking people. It's sick.
if we're going to **** test for welfare, we've gotta **** test EVERY SINGLE PERSON that receives ANY form of government money - politicians, students, grannies on Social Security, scientists doing research - everyone. It's all or nothing. We can't just target the poor.
And, for the record, the ACTUAL WELFARE PROBLEM in the US isn't poor people selling their food stamps for **** money, it's the billions and billions your government basically gives away to companies like GE every year.
jointsmoker612
Banned
I know, it's sad really. You know who the first person that automatically labels you a **** addict and piece of annelid ****? The case worker themselves. As if you weren't already down on your luck. I drove a friend and his elderly grandmother to Social Services once and even "I" got looked at like a piece of trash just for being there.
But about the OP, I feel that if I have to take a **** test for a job to pay for these people they can reciprocate by doing the same. It's that simple. I don't care how much it cost's the taxpayer.
Lolita_Borgia
Official Checked Star Member
Society is pretty much **** testing lots of employee's now days - outside the usual industries of armed ******, mining etc. If we allow this to continue they will **** test many employees, why? It keeps their insurance premiums down. But while the CEO's & board members have long lunches full of **** (a legal **** if your not in an Islamic country), people can drive cars on ************ medications (valium, morphine, methodone etc) but they must be under 0.05 ******* & have NO illicit substances in their bodies at any level. Who decides this **** really... fucking hypocrites!!!
:glugglug: :joint:
Kingfisher
Here Zombie, Zombie, Zombie...
Yes. totally. No lotto tickets, no *****, no *****, no cigarettes, no junk food. If we're to help you, I want you fucking healthy! And get some exercise you obese pig!
Not a matter of blame its a matter of right. We are no where near the people we like to believe we are if we let a ***** go hungry because of a parents **** test. Use your brain for just one second and flesh it out, anyone who would allow a ***** to go hungry under this criteria should be beaten within a inch of their lives. Again unacceptable.
Yes that would slow down their illicit hypocritical **** trade... corruption is one reason why they don't decriminalise *****
Never understood putting people in jail for ***** WTF!?! We waste so much money policing something that people get anyway???
Learn the lesson of prohibition, if people want it it does not matter if its legal or not someone will make a **** load of money getting it.
The Soviets had a **** problem and that was a police state??? Facts are facts its pure insanity going the way we have been treating **** use in this country **** up and evolve.
meesterperfect
Hiliary 2020
well, a good buddy of mine right here on freeones told me I can't form my opinions based on personal experience.
He tells me that a lot.
in my extensive experience around welfare folks I have found -
Most don't take proper care of their ******** and expose them to unsavory things.
Most smoke cigs.
most are overweight.
Most *****.
most do *****.
They love their scratch offs.
most are involved with ***** protection repeatedly, but nothing ever comes of it.
many sell their foodstamp card for 50 cents on the dollar.
many sell their free ************ medication for money to buy their ***** of choice.
All get fat from their "earned income credit" each winter to the tune of many thousand of dollars that some poor slob worked for, then go on a gluttonous spending spree on stuff for themselves, then are broke a week later.
Most vote democrat.
but none of that forms my opinion because I haven't read it in a book.
Oh, most have nice sneakers too
He tells me that a lot.
in my extensive experience around welfare folks I have found -
Most don't take proper care of their ******** and expose them to unsavory things.
Most smoke cigs.
most are overweight.
Most *****.
most do *****.
They love their scratch offs.
most are involved with ***** protection repeatedly, but nothing ever comes of it.
many sell their foodstamp card for 50 cents on the dollar.
many sell their free ************ medication for money to buy their ***** of choice.
All get fat from their "earned income credit" each winter to the tune of many thousand of dollars that some poor slob worked for, then go on a gluttonous spending spree on stuff for themselves, then are broke a week later.
Most vote democrat.
but none of that forms my opinion because I haven't read it in a book.
Oh, most have nice sneakers too
Mr. Daystar
In a bell tower, watching you through cross hairs.
It wouldn't break my heart, but I would rather see politicians and judges tested first. Most ***************, at least on the local level ARE randomly tested...not sure about the feds. I think it would be very expensive to implement a random program, but a reasonable suspicion system would test fewer. To be honest, I would rather see them hand every welfare recipient a broom or a shovel, and send them out to clean the streets and dig the ditches, that need to be dug.
meesterperfect
Hiliary 2020
I guess you mean random. If so I can agree.
But most people on welfare are eligible because they have ****. So if there is any cause to believe a parent is on ***** or ***** they must be tested.
Mr. Daystar
In a bell tower, watching you through cross hairs.
So in all reality, what does that mean? Hey, Jag...I wonder about your sense of humor...you on dope boy...go take a test. That would get ****** like anything else. Trust me, as someone that has peed in more cups then toilets, they will ALWAYS find a way. Now suggest that a politician be tested, and suddenly civil rights are being ********...even though most bills that effect EVERY citizen, are conjured over 4 martini lunches. Personally, I am subject to 5 kinds of testing. Pre employment, random, post accident, return to service, and follow up. The first thing imma gonna do when I retire, is spark up a fatty so big, I'll need to use Channel Locks for the roach clip.
If you want them to eat healthy, okay. Remember though that to eat healthy actually cost more than to buy all those bulk processed foods that the poor buy more as a percentage. You would be willing to pay more so people could actually eat healthy?
There is also a problem of what to do with things that are healthy and part of a balanced diet, but become the opposite of that in sufficient quantity, like say butter for example. It's becomes almost impossible to draw the line at where to stop giving something to somebody without becoming draconian to a ridiculous degree. Not to mention that even with electronic scanning and tracking stores, even today, will probably not want to go through the extra effort it would take to implement a system were things are tracked like that.
Why has no one pointed out that there is an unnecessary apostrophe in the title? That's the level of discourse the OP deserves.
I think I called him out on his consistently-infantile spelling once. He probably called me a mick back.
Similar threads
