Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Not seeing a problem you say.
I have a homework assignment for you. Go buy a urine drug test and pay for the lab fees, bet you money were talking 200$ when its all said and done.
is that really worth it, all the while coming scary close to violating constitutional rights as Americans.
Its not morally or fiscally worth it.
I'm sorry, where is there a constitutional right to collect welfare?
Yes, those tests are a bit pricy, but it costs society a lot more to subsidize that lifestyle, doesn't it?
What does it cost to fix a crack baby?
If you've ever been taxed by the government then the government owes you a service for that tax.
You seem to have no trouble with society filling the pockets of rich scumbags like Scott.
I like the idea of make sure our citizens..American Citizens..have access to treatment if they become sick.
And it's money that is better spent. I like the idea of saving lives. Oh and you don't know me. I made my own way..with my own money.
So has anyone admitted that the $178 million dollars "spent" by the GOP on the tests is a bogus figure yet?
Still waiting for rdean to edit his OP to correct it.
So by your mind, it's money well spent to pay drug abusers to stay home and get high?
Seriously?
Or..
Maybe Scott is using a time honored conservative method of getting rich. Fleecing the public for his own benefit.
Duly noted that you didn't answer my question-
Let's try again. Do you think the government should be paying people to stay home, not work, and get as high as kites?
Do you really think this is a good investment?
How about "Tampa Bay Online"? Oops.
Welfare drug-testing yields 2% positive results | TBO.com
A 2008 study by the Office of National Drug Control Policy also showed that 8.13 percent of Floridians age 12 and up use illegal drugs.
Newton said that's proof the drug-testing program is based on a stereotype, not hard facts.
"This is just punishing people for being poor, which is one of our main points," he said. "We're not testing the population at-large that receives government money; we're not testing people on scholarships, or state contractors. So why these people? It's obvious-- because they're poor."
Scott's office did not respond to a request for comment.
from your link:
The initiative may save the state a few dollars anyway, bearing out one of Gov. Rick Scott's arguments for implementing it.
So the real question in this thread is: Can rdean read?
We drug test employees, the DOT demands our truck drivers be tested. So the state requires drug testing for private companies, yet we shouldn't test people we are giving freebies to?? We send them to a center that does the testing at a cost of $80.00. Where the heck are you getting $200.00+ for this test?? Oh that's right those that live in the Northeast, Illinois and the West Coast are used to paying 3 times the cost for everything.
We all know that republicans are for personal liberty.
"Personal liberty" Where do you groucho heads get these cliches? You throw this crap out and then slink back to your hovels and watch what happens? Don't you have a rational thought that ain't connected to an inane one liner? The number is meaningless. Obama spent that much to get to Martha's Vinyard to play golf. I imagine George Soros's little army of (tax exempt) investigators is tallying up every expense of every red state as we speak. Why not tally up Wisconsin's books since the municipal unions were sent packing?
I click on one of the links...and went to a website called "SLOG news & art"
Only 6% of liberals understand the difference between opinion and fact.
A fact is a fact.
If it's a "fact", then it doesn't matter who said it. Even if it's said by only 6% of scientists.
Try "Tampa Bay Online".
So by your mind, it's money well spent to pay drug abusers to stay home and get high?
Seriously?
Or..
Maybe Scott is using a time honored conservative method of getting rich. Fleecing the public for his own benefit.
Duly noted that you didn't answer my question-
Let's try again. Do you think the government should be paying people to stay home, not work, and get as high as kites?
Do you really think this is a good investment?
We all know that republicans are for personal liberty.
"Personal liberty" Where do you groucho heads get these cliches? You throw this crap out and then slink back to your hovels and watch what happens? Don't you have a rational thought that ain't connected to an inane one liner? The number is meaningless. Obama spent that much to get to Martha's Vinyard to play golf. I imagine George Soros's little army of (tax exempt) investigators is tallying up every expense of every red state as we speak. Why not tally up Wisconsin's books since the municipal unions were sent packing?
We drug test employees, the DOT demands our truck drivers be tested. So the state requires drug testing for private companies, yet we shouldn't test people we are giving freebies to?? We send them to a center that does the testing at a cost of $80.00. Where the heck are you getting $200.00+ for this test?? Oh that's right those that live in the Northeast, Illinois and the West Coast are used to paying 3 times the cost for everything.
You don't see the difference in testing someone who is going to be driving on our public highways and testing someone who just can't find a job and needs to feed and clothe their families?
from your link:
So the real question in this thread is: Can rdean read?
With a rate of 2%, it won't save shit and will cost a, pardon my expression, a "boatload" of money. Drug tests are expensive. You have to buy all those little bottles and gloves for people handling those little bottles. Then you need labs and technicians and secretaries and accountants and buildings and.......well, you get the picture.
