Food Stamp outrage

[Shogun]

Hey genius, these people have been caught and punished. Looks like good work to me. carry on.

sure.. individuals that YOU, apparently, wouldn't waste money filtering out because it might cost money.

So, you are claiming that these people were caught via drug testing ? Or are you changing the premise here, mid stream ?

I must have missed the part about drug testing, eh ?

Im claiming that these people were caught with efforts that cost more than the total dugget of just FS money. Therefor, the cost of further filtration is not only a precedence but financially rationalized given the clarification of the program integrity just like the above cases.


Tell me, how much do you think it cost to investigate these people? To charge them and put them on trial? Similarly, the cost of drug testing should be added to this clarification process.

 

[Peejay]

There is testing equipment available from several manufactures (one being the alcomate from advanced safety devices ) gives immediate results testing for Alcohol,Pot,coke and several other substances, cost $139.95. 100 disposable mouth pieces are $39.95.
end cost is about .33 per test. It has bright led lights and also beeps if over limits..We all love computers ...wonder how ya gonna feel about this one. Already in use at some sporting events and several
employers are going to use them also to as the saying go's thin out the heard..(ya will not get unemployment compensation if fired for substance abuse in several states)

I can only imagine the legal nightmare this would be for a government application like food stamps. False positives, cough medicine poisitives, equipment failure. Some rejected applicant will sue for $50 million and take every penny saved and then some.

Sorry, this whole idea of drug testing, as you demonstrate so well here, has bred an entire industry around a concept that has proven to be worth so many popcorn farts. Meanwhile testing centers , equipment and administrators have raked in more in testing profits than anyone has saved in drug related losses. Spending dollars to save dimes.

Scared ya huh Hi Tech future will be used to thin out the heard. If ya use drugs or over drink watch out reguardless of law suites its coming

Yep. Last time I was asked to give a sample I told them a sack of shit came with it. I don't give incomplete waste samples.

Thing is, you're right. look forward to your insurance company demanding stool samples to check out what unhealthy foods you eat in private so they can take your premiums then deny paying for your heart attack.

Yeah, it's coming for most of you. I opted out of the corporate heard long ago.

 

[Peejay]

sure.. individuals that YOU, apparently, wouldn't waste money filtering out because it might cost money.

So, you are claiming that these people were caught via drug testing ? Or are you changing the premise here, mid stream ?

I must have missed the part about drug testing, eh ?

Im claiming that these people were caught with efforts that cost more than the total dugget of just FS money. Therefor, the cost of further filtration is not only a precedence but financially rationalized given the clarification of the program integrity just like the above cases.


Tell me, how much do you think it cost to investigate these people? To charge them and put them on trial? Similarly, the cost of drug testing should be added to this clarification process.

So now you're on board with me. Law enforcement is an effective way to deal with fraud. Glad we agree.

Want to talk about drug testing now or are you going to keep changing the subject ?

 

[Shogun]

So, you are claiming that these people were caught via drug testing ? Or are you changing the premise here, mid stream ?

I must have missed the part about drug testing, eh ?

Im claiming that these people were caught with efforts that cost more than the total dugget of just FS money. Therefor, the cost of further filtration is not only a precedence but financially rationalized given the clarification of the program integrity just like the above cases.


Tell me, how much do you think it cost to investigate these people? To charge them and put them on trial? Similarly, the cost of drug testing should be added to this clarification process.

So now you're on board with me. Law enforcement is an effective way to deal with fraud. Glad we agree.

Want to talk about drug testing now or are you going to keep changing the subject ?

If that is the sum total of your ability to comprehend what I am saying then I guess it's no wonder why I work with drug tests every day and you, uh, busk in the corner of a bar.

The point is that law enforcement and investigation costs money just like drug tests do. Both are valuable tools in reducing the amount of scam artists hoping that you keep looking the other way while they buttfuck a system that actual poverty stricken people need. I haven't changed the subject at all. what I HAVE done is provide evidence beyond your laughable "derrr, abuse hardly ever happens and isn't worth paying attention to anyway" position on this.

but, I'm finally glad to see that you figured out how to cut and past a URL for your links. And they say singing for dinner isn't technical.

 

[Peejay]

Im claiming that these people were caught with efforts that cost more than the total dugget of just FS money. Therefor, the cost of further filtration is not only a precedence but financially rationalized given the clarification of the program integrity just like the above cases.


Tell me, how much do you think it cost to investigate these people? To charge them and put them on trial? Similarly, the cost of drug testing should be added to this clarification process.

So now you're on board with me. Law enforcement is an effective way to deal with fraud. Glad we agree.

Want to talk about drug testing now or are you going to keep changing the subject ?

If that is the sum total of your ability to comprehend what I am saying then I guess it's no wonder why I work with drug tests every day and you, uh, busk in the corner of a bar.

The point is that law enforcement and investigation costs money just like drug tests do. Both are valuable tools in reducing the amount of scam artists hoping that you keep looking the other way while they buttfuck a system that actual poverty stricken people need. I haven't changed the subject at all. what I HAVE done is provide evidence beyond your laughable "derrr, abuse hardly ever happens and isn't worth paying attention to anyway" position on this.

but, I'm finally glad to see that you figured out how to cut and past a URL for your links. And they say singing for dinner isn't technical.

The free liquor is the real attraction in bar busking.

Enforcement is great. Drug test don't work very well. As I quoted before, pre employment drug screens, not unlike a pre food stamp screen, are regarded as an intellignece test by most professionals in the industry. You have to be an idiot to fail. Would it catch some people ? Sure. Would it be worth the resources ? Doubtful. Do drug users kids need food ? Yes.

 

[Shogun]

So now you're on board with me. Law enforcement is an effective way to deal with fraud. Glad we agree.

Want to talk about drug testing now or are you going to keep changing the subject ?

If that is the sum total of your ability to comprehend what I am saying then I guess it's no wonder why I work with drug tests every day and you, uh, busk in the corner of a bar.

The point is that law enforcement and investigation costs money just like drug tests do. Both are valuable tools in reducing the amount of scam artists hoping that you keep looking the other way while they buttfuck a system that actual poverty stricken people need. I haven't changed the subject at all. what I HAVE done is provide evidence beyond your laughable "derrr, abuse hardly ever happens and isn't worth paying attention to anyway" position on this.

but, I'm finally glad to see that you figured out how to cut and past a URL for your links. And they say singing for dinner isn't technical.

The free liquor is the real attraction in bar busking.

Enforcement is great. Drug test don't work very well. As I quoted before, pre employment drug screens, not unlike a pre food stamp screen, are regarded as an intellignece test by most professionals in the industry. You have to be an idiot to fail. Would it catch some people ? Sure. Would it be worth the resources ? Doubtful. Do drug users kids need food ? Yes.

your OPINON that drug tests don't work very well is noted and dismissed. As I quoted before, why do you think they are a mind fuck that repels most drug users from applying at locations where they know they will get a drug test. Acting like a pre-employment drug test is similar to an IQ test is beyond retarded. Companies use them for a reason: to protect their liability. Not just because they enjoy facilitating the piss test industry. Not just because someone in HR is trying to mentally joust applicants. And no, the intellegence of a workforce is not derived from the ability to pass or fail a drug test. The very idea is the kind of thing i'd expect someone who plays guitar for a beer tab to think about the business world.

I'm sure you already know where your opinion of the worthiness or return of drug testing goes.

Perhaps the thing you should ask yourself is if drug users need drugs more than food. When they can afford their own lifestyle without leaching off of the balls of society then, by all means, enjoy the drugs. Otherwise, much like every other tax based program, there are regulatory stipulations that you must follow or take your begging hand down the road.


ask catholic charities and the boy scouts all about it.

 

[Peejay]

If that is the sum total of your ability to comprehend what I am saying then I guess it's no wonder why I work with drug tests every day and you, uh, busk in the corner of a bar.

The point is that law enforcement and investigation costs money just like drug tests do. Both are valuable tools in reducing the amount of scam artists hoping that you keep looking the other way while they buttfuck a system that actual poverty stricken people need. I haven't changed the subject at all. what I HAVE done is provide evidence beyond your laughable "derrr, abuse hardly ever happens and isn't worth paying attention to anyway" position on this.

but, I'm finally glad to see that you figured out how to cut and past a URL for your links. And they say singing for dinner isn't technical.

The free liquor is the real attraction in bar busking.

Enforcement is great. Drug test don't work very well. As I quoted before, pre employment drug screens, not unlike a pre food stamp screen, are regarded as an intellignece test by most professionals in the industry. You have to be an idiot to fail. Would it catch some people ? Sure. Would it be worth the resources ? Doubtful. Do drug users kids need food ? Yes.

your OPINON that drug tests don't work very well is noted and dismissed. As I quoted before, why do you think they are a mind fuck that repels most drug users from applying at locations where they know they will get a drug test. Acting like a pre-employment drug test is similar to an IQ test is beyond retarded. Companies use them for a reason: to protect their liability. Not just because they enjoy facilitating the piss test industry. Not just because someone in HR is trying to mentally joust applicants. And no, the intellegence of a workforce is not derived from the ability to pass or fail a drug test. The very idea is the kind of thing i'd expect someone who plays guitar for a beer tab to think about the business world.

I'm sure you already know where your opinion of the worthiness or return of drug testing goes.

Perhaps the thing you should ask yourself is if drug users need drugs more than food. When they can afford their own lifestyle without leaching off of the balls of society then, by all means, enjoy the drugs. Otherwise, much like every other tax based program, there are regulatory stipulations that you must follow or take your begging hand down the road.


ask catholic charities and the boy scouts all about it.

Don't drink much beer. I like Maker's Mark.

And you'e right, it's a liability issue in the work place. Absolutely. The insurance industry created the whole damned thing. The psuedo medical companies it spawned were just a side effect.

So, considering that you understand the liability issues that created work place testing, where is the liability issue here ? Where is the great loss of insurance premiums that neccesitates drug testing for food stamps ? If you wreck a car on food stamp drugs does someone sue the government ? Where's the liability ? There is none. There is no giant pay off or denialabilty in adjustments that offsets this spending. Seems you could draw that from your knowledge of the issue.

 

[AllieBaba]

Im claiming that these people were caught with efforts that cost more than the total dugget of just FS money. Therefor, the cost of further filtration is not only a precedence but financially rationalized given the clarification of the program integrity just like the above cases.


Tell me, how much do you think it cost to investigate these people? To charge them and put them on trial? Similarly, the cost of drug testing should be added to this clarification process.

So now you're on board with me. Law enforcement is an effective way to deal with fraud. Glad we agree.

Want to talk about drug testing now or are you going to keep changing the subject ?

If that is the sum total of your ability to comprehend what I am saying then I guess it's no wonder why I work with drug tests every day and you, uh, busk in the corner of a bar.

The point is that law enforcement and investigation costs money just like drug tests do. Both are valuable tools in reducing the amount of scam artists hoping that you keep looking the other way while they buttfuck a system that actual poverty stricken people need. I haven't changed the subject at all. what I HAVE done is provide evidence beyond your laughable "derrr, abuse hardly ever happens and isn't worth paying attention to anyway" position on this.

but, I'm finally glad to see that you figured out how to cut and past a URL for your links. And they say singing for dinner isn't technical.

Idiot. They are the poverty stricken people. Nobody is better at scamming than someone who has been poor, mentally ill, dysfunctional all their lives. It's the only thing they do well.

 

[Peejay]

So now you're on board with me. Law enforcement is an effective way to deal with fraud. Glad we agree.

Want to talk about drug testing now or are you going to keep changing the subject ?

If that is the sum total of your ability to comprehend what I am saying then I guess it's no wonder why I work with drug tests every day and you, uh, busk in the corner of a bar.

The point is that law enforcement and investigation costs money just like drug tests do. Both are valuable tools in reducing the amount of scam artists hoping that you keep looking the other way while they buttfuck a system that actual poverty stricken people need. I haven't changed the subject at all. what I HAVE done is provide evidence beyond your laughable "derrr, abuse hardly ever happens and isn't worth paying attention to anyway" position on this.

but, I'm finally glad to see that you figured out how to cut and past a URL for your links. And they say singing for dinner isn't technical.

Idiot. They are the poverty stricken people. Nobody is better at scamming than someone who has been poor, mentally ill, dysfunctional all their lives. It's the only thing they do well.

Yep.....you're talking about testing the people who would be most likely to beat the test. Anyone using that is expecting a test will try to beat it. You end up getting positives for some poor schmuck that had a poppy seed roll for dinner.

Shogun, I can get you in at a couple bars if you want to try making a living with a direct, immediate correlation to your job performance. Since it's so easy and all, I'm sure you'd do just fine. Doesn't take much sense at all.

 

[AllieBaba]

Lol. I know. They drug test at Fleetwood travel trailers (now defunct), and I can tell you straight up I've never met a single man who didn't cheat on that test in the 10 years I've known men who have worked at Fleetwood.

My employees piss tested when I worked as program manager of group homes...and I know very well that probably 2/3 of them cheated.

It's a waste of fucking money.

 

[Peejay]

Lol. I know. They drug test at Fleetwood travel trailers (now defunct), and I can tell you straight up I've never met a single man who didn't cheat on that test in the 10 years I've known men who have worked at Fleetwood.

My employees piss tested when I worked as program manager of group homes...and I know very well that probably 2/3 of them cheated.

It's a waste of fucking money.

Well, I try not to use personal experience for purpose of debate. I despise the food stamp arguments that always start out with "I saw this woman in the grocery store......"

But yes, I have known ONE user that ever got caught and the guy got caught for pot and he didn't even smoke. He was a coke head. Everyone smoked around him at poker games and the second hand smoke got him.

Aside from that one guy, I can't count the dozens and dozens of test that I have seen beaten. I have a whole bunch of pot smoking friends that routinely beat test, year after year. From personal experience, the effectiveness looks like about 1 out of 100. A near complete waste.

 

[Luissa]

And it was in the 70s.

actually it began about 1955, it became more popular in the 60's and 70's.

Since its beginnings in 1955, deinstitutionalization has been more about political correctness than scientific knowledge. When deinstitutionalization began there had been no scientifically sound studies conducted on how to best reintroduce individuals with the severest brain diseases back in to the community. In addition, there have been very few services available to these individuals when they are released into the community

Fact Sheet: Historical View of Mental Illness Crisis and Debacle of Deinstitutionalization

 

[Cecilie1200]

Shows the difference around the country.

No stigma here. Hell, people go shopping with a "card-holding" friend. The friend pays for the groceries, the "non-card-holding" person pays the "card-holding" friend cash (less than what was on the card), and off they go.

The "card-holder" didn't care about groceries; he/she just wanted cash.

It's impossible to come up with a system that cannot be defrauded. That's the point where they just have to depend on people who see it to report it.

Except that's not "defrauding". Once you give something to someone, it's THEIRS TO USE AS THEY SEE FIT.

If they want to split costs with someone who is perhaps working, and they pay the food while the other person pays for non-food items, who the hell are you to say that's "defrauding the system"?

Actually, Allie, that's incorrect. Trading food stamps for cash is considered fraud, and you can be turned in and arrested for it. The position of welfare is that those food stamps are to be used for the sake of the people they are issued for. That's why they go to so much trouble to ascertain EXACTLY who is living in the home, and whether or not they share food costs.

I get so sick of people complaining when they see poor families using their ebt cards to purchase "luxury" items like birthday cakes or chips. Fuck you. You created a system for poor people to use so they could feel more normal, and treat their kids to food like other people have. They have the right to use their fucking food stamps for a birthday cake and chips, or lobster and pate if they want to. You gave it to them, it's fucking theirs. When every day of your life is depression and poverty, I'll tell you what, it feels good to give your kids a pizza, junk food and dvd night, or throw a party with all the edible fixings, or have a couple of friends over for wildly extravagant ribeyes once a month..particularly if those friends have been taking you to dr. appointments, providing child care for your children while you look for work, have given you money to buy fucking toilet paper, or provided any sort of support whatsoever. Or none at all. So long as your kids aren't hungry at the end of the month (and anyone who gets the full allotment of fs shouldn't have hungry kids at the end of the month, unless they eat like that every single day) it's nobody's business what they buy or why they're buying it. They don't belong to the next person in the check out line just because they get foodstamps.

Nope, you're right about that. Leaving aside whether or not I approve of the federal government buying people food, if they ARE going to do it, then I think it's ridiculous to try to micromanage it even further, and I SURE as hell have no use for people who know nothing about the situation trying to micromanage it from their place in the checkout lane. When I was cashiering, I flatly refused to let the customers in my line even discuss it.

 

[Shogun]

The free liquor is the real attraction in bar busking.

Enforcement is great. Drug test don't work very well. As I quoted before, pre employment drug screens, not unlike a pre food stamp screen, are regarded as an intellignece test by most professionals in the industry. You have to be an idiot to fail. Would it catch some people ? Sure. Would it be worth the resources ? Doubtful. Do drug users kids need food ? Yes.

your OPINON that drug tests don't work very well is noted and dismissed. As I quoted before, why do you think they are a mind fuck that repels most drug users from applying at locations where they know they will get a drug test. Acting like a pre-employment drug test is similar to an IQ test is beyond retarded. Companies use them for a reason: to protect their liability. Not just because they enjoy facilitating the piss test industry. Not just because someone in HR is trying to mentally joust applicants. And no, the intellegence of a workforce is not derived from the ability to pass or fail a drug test. The very idea is the kind of thing i'd expect someone who plays guitar for a beer tab to think about the business world.

I'm sure you already know where your opinion of the worthiness or return of drug testing goes.

Perhaps the thing you should ask yourself is if drug users need drugs more than food. When they can afford their own lifestyle without leaching off of the balls of society then, by all means, enjoy the drugs. Otherwise, much like every other tax based program, there are regulatory stipulations that you must follow or take your begging hand down the road.


ask catholic charities and the boy scouts all about it.

Don't drink much beer. I like Maker's Mark.

And you'e right, it's a liability issue in the work place. Absolutely. The insurance industry created the whole damned thing. The psuedo medical companies it spawned were just a side effect.

So, considering that you understand the liability issues that created work place testing, where is the liability issue here ? Where is the great loss of insurance premiums that neccesitates drug testing for food stamps ? If you wreck a car on food stamp drugs does someone sue the government ? Where's the liability ? There is none. There is no giant pay off or denialabilty in adjustments that offsets this spending. Seems you could draw that from your knowledge of the issue.

The liability involved is to the tax payers who can elect to close the system altogether if it's not getting their moneys worth. And, clearly, doling out money to people who have cash to buy sacks of weed is not a sound investment. The LOSS is in tax supported funding for a program that becomes nothing more than a conduit for abusers to have their weed money guaranteed. The Pell Grant of Chronic buying, if you will. Do you think tax payers are eternally OBLIGATED to pay into a system that allows abuse? Believe it or not, the integrity of the FS program is the only thing that keeps it around. The tax payer knows that one doesn't scoop out much water from a well in a bucket full of holes. And, we have the prerogative to elect those who can scrap the entire system. FS are not a guarantee from the Bill of Rights. THIS liability requires those who run the FS program to do so without making bullshit excuses for Caviar dining poor or pothead poverty. Drug tests are THE only way to filter out drug using miscreants from the tit of the public tax payer and save as much tax based (current) obligation as much as possible. Your opinion about how much abuse is acceptable doesn't impress me.

 

[Shogun]

So now you're on board with me. Law enforcement is an effective way to deal with fraud. Glad we agree.

Want to talk about drug testing now or are you going to keep changing the subject ?

If that is the sum total of your ability to comprehend what I am saying then I guess it's no wonder why I work with drug tests every day and you, uh, busk in the corner of a bar.

The point is that law enforcement and investigation costs money just like drug tests do. Both are valuable tools in reducing the amount of scam artists hoping that you keep looking the other way while they buttfuck a system that actual poverty stricken people need. I haven't changed the subject at all. what I HAVE done is provide evidence beyond your laughable "derrr, abuse hardly ever happens and isn't worth paying attention to anyway" position on this.

but, I'm finally glad to see that you figured out how to cut and past a URL for your links. And they say singing for dinner isn't technical.

Idiot. They are the poverty stricken people. Nobody is better at scamming than someone who has been poor, mentally ill, dysfunctional all their lives. It's the only thing they do well.

that is a pretty stupid statement, baba. Poor people are not wholly out to scam the system. Hence the particular bad apples must be rooted out before they spoil the entire opportunity for everyone else.

 

[Shogun]

If that is the sum total of your ability to comprehend what I am saying then I guess it's no wonder why I work with drug tests every day and you, uh, busk in the corner of a bar.

The point is that law enforcement and investigation costs money just like drug tests do. Both are valuable tools in reducing the amount of scam artists hoping that you keep looking the other way while they buttfuck a system that actual poverty stricken people need. I haven't changed the subject at all. what I HAVE done is provide evidence beyond your laughable "derrr, abuse hardly ever happens and isn't worth paying attention to anyway" position on this.

but, I'm finally glad to see that you figured out how to cut and past a URL for your links. And they say singing for dinner isn't technical.

Idiot. They are the poverty stricken people. Nobody is better at scamming than someone who has been poor, mentally ill, dysfunctional all their lives. It's the only thing they do well.

Yep.....you're talking about testing the people who would be most likely to beat the test. Anyone using that is expecting a test will try to beat it. You end up getting positives for some poor schmuck that had a poppy seed roll for dinner.

Shogun, I can get you in at a couple bars if you want to try making a living with a direct, immediate correlation to your job performance. Since it's so easy and all, I'm sure you'd do just fine. Doesn't take much sense at all.

meh, i'll pass, dude. I'm a bigger fan of something a lot more dependable than tip jar payouts and a few bags of chips from behind the bar.


and dude.. if you REALLY think that poppy seeds are out crashing the entire drug test industry then you probably need to take your head out of Larry David's ass because Seinfeld ended LONG ago.

 

[Shogun]

Lol. I know. They drug test at Fleetwood travel trailers (now defunct), and I can tell you straight up I've never met a single man who didn't cheat on that test in the 10 years I've known men who have worked at Fleetwood.

My employees piss tested when I worked as program manager of group homes...and I know very well that probably 2/3 of them cheated.

It's a waste of fucking money.

uh, if you test people and KNEW they were cheating then that doesn't make you much of a tester, now does it? I realize it takes a fucking neurologist to catch that 32 degree piss just might not have come from the person acting like they are pissing into a cup but jeez... It's not the test that is incompetent, baba. That would be you.

 

[AllieBaba]

The labs tested them, idiot. Just like the labs will test fs recipients in your perfect world. At about $100 or more per pop.

 

[AllieBaba]

But when I worked at TREATMENT...there was no faking those tests because the door was open and we had to stand right there.

They were usually dirty when they came in, which was expected. But the unannounced random tests of people in treatment....that was a little different. Test dirty then and you are outta there.

But like I said, we did those ourselves, and sent them off. Much less expensive, and no room for error, at least not when I was doing them.

But your plan wouldn't have that going on.

 

[Luissa]

But when I worked at TREATMENT...there was no faking those tests because the door was open and we had to stand right there.

They were usually dirty when they came in, which was expected. But the unannounced random tests of people in treatment....that was a little different. Test dirty then and you are outta there.

But like I said, we did those ourselves, and sent them off. Much less expensive, and no room for error, at least not when I was doing them.

But your plan wouldn't have that going on.

I had a friend use fake urine right in front of a tester. Clean out kits if done right will only take a few hours.