- Thread starter
- #61
More importantly, it speaks to the taxpayer subsidizing drug abuse.Those 89 were not a statistical sample of all welfare recipients, doofus.Why is it hard to understand that 21 of 89 is 23.5%. Is there a progressive math system which defies logic? Has simple mathematics joined the world of political correctness?So, I guess you also always mention polls are not statistically representative of the whole, either then, right?An interesting article designed for dumbed down liberals which states that only 0.3% of those screened tested positive. Now, I would like to challenge those with US public education to figure out this paragraph of the article:
From the 7,600 recipients and applicants given an initial screening, social workers referred only 2% for drug testing. That amounted to 89 people. Of those 89, 21 people tested positive for drugs, representing less than 0.3% of the total number of those screened.
North Carolina reveals results of welfare applicant drug tests
Why do our USMB conservative posters repeatedly lie when they post threads? Is it that they are too stupid to know better or they think they can draw conclusions from their links and that everyone will blindly accept their conclusions
No, 23.5% of NC welfare recipients are not on drugs. From your link....
Social workers decide who to test based on drug history. Anyone who has used drugs in the past year or was convicted of a felony drug crime in the past three years gets tested.
Only those with a history of drug use got tested for drugs and only about a quarter of those were found to still be using drugs
Yet another conservative unable to understand basic math
Any more of you out there? Come on conservatives...chime in
They were a statistical sample of those with a prior history of drug abuse or a felony conviction.
At most, this piss test revealed a 23.5% recividism rate of drug abusers. It does not speak at all to welfare recipients.