23.5% of Welfare Rec. in NC Test Positive for Drugs

[Meathead]

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

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?

Those 89 were not a statistical sample of all welfare recipients, doofus.

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.

More importantly, it speaks to the taxpayer subsidizing drug abuse.

 

[LoneLaugher]

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

It would be great to kick all those caught off welfare.

I used to argue its not worth the cost but I think it is. I've seen personally too many taking advantage of welfare. If we could purge 23% off welfare that'd be good

You bought his 23% number? Isn't that special!

What if welfare abuse/fraud were far more rampant than you know?

It isn't. And we already know that people on public assistance are no more likely to be drug addicts than anyone else.

From my perspective, it is rampant. I see or know of a few young white male slackers who instead of sucking it up, instead of spending money on all kinds of stuff they shouldn't be buying, we subsodize their slackiness. And the one dude comes over with beef jerky and starbuck little cold coffees in those little glass bottles. Those things are expensive. I can afford them and I don't even buy them.

The one slacker I'm talking about is a republicans. I ask him how he can take food stamps and be a republican. He admits that without foodstamps he would be forced to make different choices.

Now some might make good choices like don't buy weed and cigarettes or $3 a beer at the bar, but some might resort to stealing/robbery.

Remember I'm a liberal so I see both sides of the coin. I don't completely disagree with you so try to see the other sides points. There is fraud and abuse. Probably a lot.

Oh and my sister in law is a physical therapist. She says all the young arabs that come in to her hospital all have medicaid. They came here, faked an illness, got an arab doctor to approve them, now they will be on ssi forever. And there are probably thousands of them. Now imagine all the whites, blacks and every other slacker in America who's too sick to work.

If you knew how uninterested and unimpressed I am by personal anecdotes like this, you wouldn't have wasted the time and effort that it took to type it.

There is fraud and abuse. The amount is manageable and it has nothing to do with drug use.

Read my signature. There is a question in it. Answer the question and then find a bigger fish to fry.

 

[g5000]

So, I guess you also always mention polls are not statistically representative of the whole, either then, right?

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

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?

Those 89 were not a statistical sample of all welfare recipients, doofus.

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.

More importantly, it speaks to the taxpayer subsidizing drug abuse.

It speaks to propagandists twisting the facts to further an agenda.

Your integrity is destroyed when you build your case on an outright lie. Worst of all, you obliterated your integrity yourself!

 

[rightwinger]

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

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?

Why do conservatives struggle so much with the basic concepts of math? Is it due to their placement on the intellectual bell curve or just inbreeding?

When you look at a subset of a population like "welfare recipients who were former drug users" You can only draw conclusions about that subset

You cannot use that data to make conclusions about the population as a whole

 

[Meathead]

So, I guess you also always mention polls are not statistically representative of the whole, either then, right?

Yet another conservative unable to understand basic math

Any more of you out there? Come on conservatives...chime in

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?

Those 89 were not a statistical sample of all welfare recipients, doofus.

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.

More importantly, it speaks to the taxpayer subsidizing drug abuse.

It speaks to propagandists twisting the facts to further an agenda.

Your integrity is destroyed when you build your case on an outright lie. Worst of all, you obliterated your integrity yourself!

So I have lost your respect because 23.5% of welfare recipients tested for drugs failed. Well, as Scarlett O'Hara said, tomorrow is another day.

 

[Meathead]

You cannot use that data to make conclusions about the population as a whole

The population as a whole?! No, the moochers who got tested in NC are not the population as a whole.

Is there something wrong with you?

 

[rightwinger]

You cannot use that data to make conclusions about the population as a whole

The population as a whole?! No, the moochers who got tested in NC are not the population as a whole.

Is there something wrong with you?

OK...I'm going to have to go with inbreeding on this one

 

[depotoo]

Out of the rest of that 89, how many actually beat the test, I wonder? If 23% failed, did another 15% beat the test? Even 5%?

So, I guess you also always mention polls are not statistically representative of the whole, either then, right?

Yet another conservative unable to understand basic math

Any more of you out there? Come on conservatives...chime in

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?

Those 89 were not a statistical sample of all welfare recipients, doofus.

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.

More importantly, it speaks to the taxpayer subsidizing drug abuse.

It speaks to propagandists twisting the facts to further an agenda.

Your integrity is destroyed when you build your case on an outright lie. Worst of all, you obliterated your integrity yourself!

 

[BluesLegend]

Well, life is hard and sometimes people do drugs to make it a little easier. Maybe if you raised the minimum wage or fought to get more of the profit going to the workers. Well, maybe there'd be a lot less people on it.

Look fool maybe you could live on $15 an hour back in 1980 but its slave wages today, libs and their plans for failure.

 

[Meathead]

OK...I'm going to have to go with inbreeding on this one

Your family history is not relevant here and I apologize for prompting it with my question about something being wrong with you. I knew that public education itself was not accountable itself.

 

[g5000]

Out of the rest of that 89, how many actually beat the test, I wonder? If 23% failed, did another 15% beat the test? Even 5%?

Desperate much?

You can't beat a piss test. They can tell you down to the day when you last used.

 

[rightwinger]

OK...I'm going to have to go with inbreeding on this one

Your family history is not relevant here and I apologize for prompting it with my question about something being wrong with you. I knew that public education itself was not accountable itself.

The conclusions you draw based on your limited understanding of mathematics are amusing

I still go with inbreeding

 

[Meathead]

I still go with inbreeding

Then you should stop doing it! I don't care how liberal or politically correct you are, having children with close genetic relatives is not healthy!

 

[g5000]

Here's the thing.

Bullshit has a lot of flash. ZOMG! 23.5% of darkies on food stamps do drugs!

Flash is for the crowd. It gets oohs and ahs. It's a fireworks show. But after the show is over, nothing has changed.

Truth, on the other hand, is explosive. There's a puff of dust at key weak points, and then the whole edifice comes down. After the truth goes to work, the whole landscape is changed.

Learn the difference rubes. The truth just leveled your bullshit to the ground.

 

[sealybobo]

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

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?

Why do conservatives struggle so much with the basic concepts of math? Is it due to their placement on the intellectual bell curve or just inbreeding?

When you look at a subset of a population like "welfare recipients who were former drug users" You can only draw conclusions about that subset

You cannot use that data to make conclusions about the population as a whole

I'd like to see the percent of welfare takers come from broken homes. I bet 80% or higher. Half the people on welfare shouldn't be. Maybe more than half. And that is not manageable or reasonable.

 

[sealybobo]

Well, life is hard and sometimes people do drugs to make it a little easier. Maybe if you raised the minimum wage or fought to get more of the profit going to the workers. Well, maybe there'd be a lot less people on it.

Look fool maybe you could live on $15 an hour back in 1980 but its slave wages today, libs and their plans for failure.

A kid should be THRILLED to be making $15 hr. and an adult making that much should have made better choices or better be working towards getting the **** out of that job.

No one is a slave. You want to quit, save up and keep looking for another job.

 

[g5000]

This is just another sideways attempt to blame our country's problems on the poor.

It's transparent hackery.

 

[Meathead]

Here's the thing.

Bullshit has a lot of flash. ZOMG! 23.5% of darkies on food stamps do drugs!

Flash is for the crowd. It gets oohs and ahs. It's a fireworks show. But after the show is over, nothing has changed.

Truth, on the other hand, is explosive. There's puff of dust at key weak points, and then the whole edifice comes down. After the truth goes to work, the whole landscape is changed.

Learn the difference rubes. The truth just leveled your bullshit to the ground.

Congratulations! You are the first (as far as I can tell) who's infused racism into this thread.

So, if we're talking about drugs and welfare, we are invariably discussing blacks? Is that right? Why would you think that?

 

[sealybobo]

Here's the thing.

Bullshit has a lot of flash. ZOMG! 23.5% of darkies on food stamps do drugs!

Flash is for the crowd. It gets oohs and ahs. It's a fireworks show. But after the show is over, nothing has changed.

Truth, on the other hand, is explosive. There's puff of dust at key weak points, and then the whole edifice comes down. After the truth goes to work, the whole landscape is changed.

Learn the difference rubes. The truth just leveled your bullshit to the ground.

Congratulations! You are the first (as far as I can tell) who's infused racism into this thread.

So, if we're talking about drugs and welfare, we are invariably discussing blacks? Is that right? Why would you think that?

Who do you think young black men from Detroit sell drugs to? White boys from the hood.

 

[Meathead]

Here's the thing.

Bullshit has a lot of flash. ZOMG! 23.5% of darkies on food stamps do drugs!

Flash is for the crowd. It gets oohs and ahs. It's a fireworks show. But after the show is over, nothing has changed.

Truth, on the other hand, is explosive. There's puff of dust at key weak points, and then the whole edifice comes down. After the truth goes to work, the whole landscape is changed.

Learn the difference rubes. The truth just leveled your bullshit to the ground.

Congratulations! You are the first (as far as I can tell) who's infused racism into this thread.

So, if we're talking about drugs and welfare, we are invariably discussing blacks? Is that right? Why would you think that?

Who do you think young black men from Detroit sell drugs to? White boys from the hood.

No, the vast majority are to other blacks. Few white people live in the "hood". In fact, most white people and Asians who engage in that sort of thing do it on a wholesale aspect. Street sales are for stupid college and high school kids, hard up junkies and blacks.