Drug Test to Receive Welfare?

[jennybird]

The point is all in all the betterment of mankind and survival. Why should children suffer for there parents wrongs?

Handing over my tax dollars to support drug related life-styles is not bettering mankind and survival. If the children are in households where parents are doing drugs, they should be removed from the home. The parents cause the children's suffering, not me. I just hand over my money.

Arnt all people CREATED EQUAL? or just the rich and eduicated?....

Yes, all people are CREATED equal. They're all created by the joining of an egg and a sperm. What they do with themselves and their lives from that day on is by no means equal. If your theory is true, then why is it that I have to work and others get to sit at home, collect free money, and shoot up? That is equal? You can't be serious.

 

[ATF Consumer]

why are guys named mike so hard headed? No one here is really right.... You seem way to hyped up. Just like the government we to have just learn that by nit-picking everything to death we miss the point. The point is all in all the betterment of mankind and survival. Why should children suffer for there parents wrongs? Arnt all people CREATED EQUAL? or just the rich and eduicated?.... Why should the working suffer the wrongs of the non-working? Yes, we are created equal, so for me to give money to them is not equal! Richness comes thru education, as we are all offered public education...that's where I went to school, and I am working.

IMO This is about the Idea that we have enough laws. With every new law we dig a bigger hole. We give the government another loop hole to circumnavigate the system , invade our lives and tell us what to do. RIGHT and WRONG no longer mean anything to our government. Its about controlling our lives to the point we are all slaves to the laws and rules that we thought would never hurt us.

See above.

 

[cce1302]

OH yes, please visit the other thread on this topic. It's become quite interesting.

I like this one better.

 

[jennybird]

I like this one better.

Yeah, the other one is getting a bit ridiculous isn't it?

 

[Scutter01]

Threads merged.

 

[cce1302]

Threads merged.

That wasn't nice. I guess I'll stay for the popcorn.

 

[csaws]

Welfare is what churches are for not the gov't.

 

[hoosiertriangle]

I agree there are severe problems with allowing the government more control into our lives such as forcing random drug testing on those who are on welfare. It basically goes against my views of freedom and liberty. But, allowing people to stay on welfare and vote themselves more benefits at my expense also is against my liberty. Once you rely on the government for your own well being, you've already given them more control over your life and given them control of my life because they need some way to finance it.

It almost seems to me like some have bought the behavioral psychologist babble that none of us have any free will, we're all products of our environment. This theory of behavioral development is at the heart of welfare systems. We must engineer a better world through controlling environment. Once everybody is dependent on the government, controlling everyone's environment will be much easier. We're NOT the product of our environment. Environment is but one factor that plays into it and a powerful at that I will grant you.

At the end of the day our equality comes from our ability to make choices that influence our lives and our responsibility for those choices. Behavioral psychology has broken this apart to state that we have no choice and you're not responsible for your actions, its a product of the environment. CRAP, utter CRAP. People have hard times and the government could help them out, but enabling is not helping.

 

[csaws]

Space turtle, if you get the chance ask Ted Nugent what he feels about welfare. I bet the guy you ask "What would Ted Nugent do?" in your sig line DOES NOT agree with you

 

[jennybird]

Sorry to differ, but I do...Unemployement (insurance) is a GOVERNMENT PROGRAM...they are who I am required to pay into.
If it was an insurance as you call it, then as a small business owner, would be an option rather than a requirement. So the real difference between welfare and unemployment (welfare) is tax payers pay welfare, while employers pay unemployment (welfare). Either way, the employee pays nothing into it, yet reaps the benefits of sitting on their lazy ass while I still pay into that system...yea, that's seems quite fair to me

Call it what you want... here is the link.
Unemployment Insurance

 

[USMC_0311]

Call it what you want... here is the link.
Unemployment Insurance

Thats what it is. INSURANCE

 

[ATF Consumer]

Call it what you want... here is the link.
Unemployment Insurance

Jennybird, you appear to be getting caught up in the whole word game the left uses to reduce the impact of what this actually is.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but insurance, until here very recently is a private sector offering...not government.

Since you think it actually is insurance then you must also believe that there is no terrorism as the White House has changed it to "man caused disasters".
Also, the war on terror is now called “Overseas Contingency Operation”

So, ok if that is how you see things...continue to accept how the government controls your thinking.

Again, as a small business owner, I am NOT required to provide insurance for my employees, although I actually cover 95% of their benefit payments.
Just as I am not required to offer 401k, which I do not.
Same should be said of this so called unemployment insurance.

If it actually was insurance, then I as an employer would have the ability to pay as much or as little of the employee's portion as I choose, which would then allow the employee to decide how much coverage they actually want.

 

[ATF Consumer]

What other type of insurance does the government offer on someone else's dime?

 

[Turtle]

LMAO I own his book.....lol I know what Ted would do. BUT im not TED. I understand your side. But I could never watch people go hungry, or homeless. I was raised better. I have a stronger sence of character. I will give the shirt off my back. I dont do drugs, I rarely have a drink. I dont smoke cigs, I work, my wife works even more than me. 50 hrs a week.
But by your opinion... lets see when I was 16 I lived on my own got foodstamps worked part time (per age laws) I should not have gotten food stamps I guess. maybe starved to death. or went to jail for stealing food at work.

WE got (wick) when we had our son and foodstamps. I guess because I couldnt make enough money then my family should have starved to death. they didnt deserve to eat? we have 5 family members total none of wich could help us.

But had we starved to death gee we wouldnt be able to pay all those taxes from our jobs now.... Or on all my damn rental houses. OMG! I pay my share! yall got your money back.

 

[ATF Consumer]

But by your opinion... lets see when I was 16 I lived on my own got foodstamps worked part time (per age laws) I should not have gotten food stamps I guess. maybe starved to death. or went to jail for stealing food at work. I'm not saying that it should not exist, I just don't think there is much oversight into this program, so it is too widely abused and those whom actually need it are demonized along with the moochers.

WE got (wick) when we had our son and food stamps. I guess because I couldn't make enough money then my family should have starved to death. they didnt deserve to eat? we have 5 family members total none of wich could help us. Dave Ramsey along with others would say to get a second or third job.

But had we starved to death gee we wouldnt be able to pay all those taxes from our jobs now.... Or on all my damn rental houses. OMG! I pay my share! yall got your money back.

When I started my company, I wasn't making any money, my wife was making $10.50/hr and we had a $1300 house payment. We could have very easily received benefits, but I decided to get a part time job 3rd shift UPS to help get us by. That is what I did until my company could cover the difference.

It should always be a last resort and not just a simple supplement to help out until things get better.

 

[jennybird]

Jennybird, you appear to be getting caught up in the whole word game the left uses to reduce the impact of what this actually is.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but insurance, until here very recently is a private sector offering...not government.

Since you think it actually is insurance then you must also believe that there is no terrorism as the White House has changed it to "man caused disasters".
Also, the war on terror is now called “Overseas Contingency Operation”

So, ok if that is how you see things...continue to accept how the government controls your thinking.

Again, as a small business owner, I am NOT required to provide insurance for my employees, although I actually cover 95% of their benefit payments.
Just as I am not required to offer 401k, which I do not.
Same should be said of this so called unemployment insurance.

If it actually was insurance, then I as an employer would have the ability to pay as much or as little of the employee's portion as I choose, which would then allow the employee to decide how much coverage they actually want.

I'm just stating facts sir. You're the one who keeps arguing. Unemployment insurance is a premium you must pay as an employer, just like attorneys and realtors are required to pay for E&O insurance and doctors are required to pay for malpractice insurance. If there is a claim against it, your premium goes up. The intent is not to support "lazy asses". The intent is to prevent people from losing their homes due to a job loss. Why should someone lose their home because you decide you don't like their haircut, or their new car, or because you simply decided you want to hire someone cheaper? Just because it's required, doesn't mean it's not for an insurable purpose. Just because it's required, doesn't make it welfare.

And I would appreciate it if you wouldn't speak to me as if I am an idiot. I don't appreciate the condescending tone of your message, however I am willing to turn the other cheek as I understand you are a small business owner who is greatly affected by government decisions. But if you knew anything about me, or read any of my posts, there would be no doubt in your mind that the government does not control my thinking. No one controls MY thinking.

 

[ATF Consumer]

I'm just stating facts sir. You're the one who keeps arguing. Unemployment insurance is a premium you must pay as an employer, just like attorneys and realtors are required to pay for E&O insurance and doctors are required to pay for malpractice insurance. If there is a claim against it, your premium goes up.
Quite different actually...both of those insurances you descibed are if they make a mistake or cause harm...etc.
It is really a punishment for not being able to keep an employee working.

The intent is not to support "lazy asses". The intent is to prevent people from losing their homes due to a job loss. Why should someone lose their home because you decide you don't like their haircut, or their new car, or because you simply decided you want to hire someone cheaper?
Since when was it a requirement for me to keep them employed? They can go get another job. It's part of the FREE MARKET. I don't remember signing up to be responsible for someone else house payment...How is this different than supporting all of this bailout stuff?

Just because it's required, doesn't mean it's not for an insurable purpose. Just because it's required, doesn't make it welfare.
Right, I call it socialism.

And I would appreciate it if you wouldn't speak to me as if I am an idiot. I don't appreciate the condescending tone of your message, however I am willing to turn the other cheek as I understand you are a small business owner who is greatly affected by government decisions. But if you knew anything about me, or read any of my posts, there would be no doubt in your mind that the government does not control my thinking. No one controls MY thinking.

Sorry to sound as if I am talking down to you, that isn't my intent...yes, as a small business owner, this particular issues bothers me to no end.

 

[USMC_0311]

Jennybird, you appear to be getting caught up in the whole word game the left uses to reduce the impact of what this actually is.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but insurance, until here very recently is a private sector offering...not government.

Since you think it actually is insurance then you must also believe that there is no terrorism as the White House has changed it to "man caused disasters".
Also, the war on terror is now called “Overseas Contingency Operation”

So, ok if that is how you see things...continue to accept how the government controls your thinking.

Again, as a small business owner, I am NOT required to provide insurance for my employees, although I actually cover 95% of their benefit payments.
Just as I am not required to offer 401k, which I do not.
Same should be said of this so called unemployment insurance.

If it actually was insurance, then I as an employer would have the ability to pay as much or as little of the employee's portion as I choose, which would then allow the employee to decide how much coverage they actually want.

You really need to get a grasp on this. You are small business owner and you really should know the facts maybe then you would not get so upset about paying unemployment insurance. Unemployment insurance is nothing new it been around at least the 30 years I have been working. Your last paragraph makes no sense, If you were to decide how much then you would all so decide the coverage (coverage is based on premium). That is why it is required, if it was your choice there is no doubt you would not pay anything and if you had to close business your employees would be screwed. I owned a small business for 10 years I know your frustration but unemployment insurance is not an issue you should take so personally. Now if you want to talk about Social Security and the portion you pay for each employee, there is something to get mad about.

 

[hoosiertriangle]

Most all of us aren't saying you or somebody in your situation shouldn't have gotten help from the government. From what you've shared, its looks like the welfare system did exactly what it was supposed to do. Temporarily help until you got back on your feet. What we are saying is that if somebody is continuing to subside on the government's (read my) dime, then there should be strings attached.

I also share in your feelings of helping others. I, however, condition that help on them helping themselves first. I will do my best to not enable another's problems through my help. I commend you for choosing to change your lot in life and succeeding in the change.

LMAO I own his book.....lol I know what Ted would do. BUT im not TED. I understand your side. But I could never watch people go hungry, or homeless. I was raised better. I have a stronger sence of character. I will give the shirt off my back. I dont do drugs, I rarely have a drink. I dont smoke cigs, I work, my wife works even more than me. 50 hrs a week.
But by your opinion... lets see when I was 16 I lived on my own got foodstamps worked part time (per age laws) I should not have gotten food stamps I guess. maybe starved to death. or went to jail for stealing food at work.

WE got (wick) when we had our son and foodstamps. I guess because I couldnt make enough money then my family should have starved to death. they didnt deserve to eat? we have 5 family members total none of wich could help us.

But had we starved to death gee we wouldnt be able to pay all those taxes from our jobs now.... Or on all my damn rental houses. OMG! I pay my share! yall got your money back.

 

[ATF Consumer]

You really need to get a grasp on this. You are small business owner and you really should know the facts maybe then you would not get so upset about paying unemployment insurance. Unemployment insurance is nothing new it been around at least the 30 years I have been working. Many social programs have been around for many years. I think I have a good grasp on what this is. It's clearly a social program. What other facts am I missing? Regardless what the government calls this program, it is nothing more than taking from the working and given to the non-working.

Your last paragraph makes no sense, If you were to decide how much then you would all so decide the coverage (coverage is based on premium). That is why it is required, if it was your choice there is no doubt you would not pay anything and if you had to close business your employees would be screwed.
I beg to differ...health insurance isn't required for my company, yet I pay 95% of the employees contribution. I could simply leave this up to the employees to cover.

I owned a small business for 10 years I know your frustration but unemployment insurance is not an issue you should take so personally. Now if you want to talk about Social Security and the portion you pay for each employee, there is something to get mad about.
Same difference to me...I pay into it, yet I do not receive JACK.

See above