YOU DECIDE: (comment Yes or No)
Should welfare recipients be randomly drug tested to continue to receive benefit checks?
Should welfare recipients be randomly drug tested to continue to receive benefit checks?
Jeff Thomas When I help my neighbor, I don't presume to register him
as my pet. Being jobless doesn't confirm a person's surrender of self-dignity.
It is disgraceful to suggest that all recipients are presumed degenerate by
association.
I propose that if we are debased enough to consider this program, we at least provide some mollifying sense of dignity, perhaps a pageant where trophies might go home for "Best in Show", "Cleanest Urine or "Most Improved".
We need to start distinguishing the welfare population into its legitimate orderings. The climate of our Country's recent tendency toward "Libertarian-absolutionism" has made much hay of the trespasses of the Category's vilest excesses; extrapolations of this order fail the criteria of ethical politics and basic, responsible economics.
Why can't we, as a Nation-community, visualize a day when poverty is acknowledged as the disease it is, where treatments are prescribed in response to specific symptoms? Imagine medicine in twelfth century Genoa, Paris or Edinburgh . . this is the Libertarian concept of poverty in 21st century America. We must stop amputations for the general ailing population on the basis of its successful intervention in a limited class of isolated circumstances.
Let's get American tax dollars into the homes of our neighbors who legitimately struggle against the physics of oppressive hunger, housing and clothing and stop promoting the caricature of the Fraud which absolves our worst collective, selfish tendencies.
Jennifer Lesson Thomas Or we should do the same for Congress. We pay their salaries.
I propose that if we are debased enough to consider this program, we at least provide some mollifying sense of dignity, perhaps a pageant where trophies might go home for "Best in Show", "Cleanest Urine or "Most Improved".
We need to start distinguishing the welfare population into its legitimate orderings. The climate of our Country's recent tendency toward "Libertarian-absolutionism" has made much hay of the trespasses of the Category's vilest excesses; extrapolations of this order fail the criteria of ethical politics and basic, responsible economics.
Why can't we, as a Nation-community, visualize a day when poverty is acknowledged as the disease it is, where treatments are prescribed in response to specific symptoms? Imagine medicine in twelfth century Genoa, Paris or Edinburgh . . this is the Libertarian concept of poverty in 21st century America. We must stop amputations for the general ailing population on the basis of its successful intervention in a limited class of isolated circumstances.
Let's get American tax dollars into the homes of our neighbors who legitimately struggle against the physics of oppressive hunger, housing and clothing and stop promoting the caricature of the Fraud which absolves our worst collective, selfish tendencies.
Jennifer Lesson Thomas Or we should do the same for Congress. We pay their salaries.
Callie Amity I couldn't have
said it better.
Kevin Blank So you and I compromise our
self-dignity and are perceived degenerate when we surrender a urine sample to
prospective employer?
Callie Amity Yes
Jeff Thomas How about searching their
homes for evidence of subversive literature on the nightstand or porn in the
bathrooms? Books and magazines are not cheap these days either.
Sure, you and I haves jobs that require drug tests. You and I also chose to interview for these jobs. If you don't like drug tests, why not quit your job and live out your life fantasies on Welfare? If you get tired of the endless party here however, you're stuck. To the best of my knowledge, you can't resign from Welfare. Guess you'll have to get a job. Now you can experience the real joy suck-hole that is Un-employment".
I would no sooner support a bill suggesting that every State/Municipal employee or every Organization receiving Federal bailout money be required to drug tests than I would choose to further exercise my resentment toward those who need my help. Stop hating and start caring a little more.
Kevin Blank Sorry, there is a point where caring can cross into enabling and I won't have any part of it. I'm getting profiled to receive a check, so can everyone else. I won't hand a rope over to someone looking to hang themselves
Sure, you and I haves jobs that require drug tests. You and I also chose to interview for these jobs. If you don't like drug tests, why not quit your job and live out your life fantasies on Welfare? If you get tired of the endless party here however, you're stuck. To the best of my knowledge, you can't resign from Welfare. Guess you'll have to get a job. Now you can experience the real joy suck-hole that is Un-employment".
I would no sooner support a bill suggesting that every State/Municipal employee or every Organization receiving Federal bailout money be required to drug tests than I would choose to further exercise my resentment toward those who need my help. Stop hating and start caring a little more.
Kevin Blank Sorry, there is a point where caring can cross into enabling and I won't have any part of it. I'm getting profiled to receive a check, so can everyone else. I won't hand a rope over to someone looking to hang themselves
Jeff Thomas When did your sense of civic
integrity cross into paternal condescension? . . . Cashing her last
unemployment check is still not a crime any mother on welfare assistance need
apologize to you or anyone for. If it hurts you so much to see your taxes go to
our neediest neighbors, then at least admit it stems from your sense of
mistrust in the system and stop posturing behind some false gesture of saving
these wretches from themselves. Don't think for a minute that a welfare
recipient is not profiled to qualify for services. These people are the
reflections of our own worst anxieties; they are not yours to parade before
some imagined altar of your own highest sense of principle.
Callie Amity I would much
rather see my tax dollars helping the needy instead of the millions of dollars
we pay out here in Phoenix to settle wrongful death lawsuits for folks killed
in Sheriff Joe's custody.
Kevin Blank And when the guy buying drugs
with his Welfare check gets a job offer, what then? If he’s required to drug
test as a condition of employment and does indeed have a drug problem he would
be denied the job, remaining on a system that isn't supposed to be permanent.
If admission that the system sucks will get you to fold in your finger and down
from the pulpit then you have it. The system sucks. How about a system that
entitles assistance without the distribution of cash? How about the guy on the
corner looking for a dollar for the bus, the guy with scabs unmistakable of
those from an individual stuck in the abyss of methamphetamine use. Do you pony
up the money knowing you've done nothing more than enabled his habit? I refuse
to. Do I profile? No more than you. I mentioned this discussion to a guy that
was in the “business”, if you get my drift, and before I finished my question
he said, "Welfare recipients were our best customers". He certainly
didn't mean all welfare recipients but I understood his message. It isn't hate
that generates my position on the matter and I'm surprised you would believe
so. Call me cynical if you wish. You have your reasons for supporting all
applicants and I've grown suspicious to some over the years. I miss smoking
grass but abstain so I can collect a paycheck. My blood needs to be clean,
theirs should as well. Now, is this really about asking for proof of being drug
free or it this another one of your Constitution rants
Jeff Thomas Hey . . . News Flash!!
America has a drug problem! . . . So that's where we have been losing $500 per
second or a total of $15 billion in 2010 alone! . . How is it conceivable that
the "business", if you get my drift, is so well funded by these
Welfare Kings and Queens that the Federal Drug Czars haven't yet lobbied
congress to serve prison sentences on Unemployment beneficiaries in the act of
cashing their last UE check?
You remind me of the guy who raises his voice and slowly repeats himself upon learning his audience speaks a foreign language. I hear you loud and clear my friend. I simply disagree with your notion that We Tax Payers own any part of a Welfare beneficiary’s "inalienable" right to personal dignity, or that an individual is automatically obliged to defend themselves from unfounded criminal suspicions on the basis of some obscure association alone.
P.S.: I feel sorry for you having to tailor the last line of your most recent post. Obscuring my intentions by questioning my sincerity is the last refuge of an angry man stuck inside an echo chamber of small ideas. Take my hand brother and I'll help you out of the pit.
You remind me of the guy who raises his voice and slowly repeats himself upon learning his audience speaks a foreign language. I hear you loud and clear my friend. I simply disagree with your notion that We Tax Payers own any part of a Welfare beneficiary’s "inalienable" right to personal dignity, or that an individual is automatically obliged to defend themselves from unfounded criminal suspicions on the basis of some obscure association alone.
P.S.: I feel sorry for you having to tailor the last line of your most recent post. Obscuring my intentions by questioning my sincerity is the last refuge of an angry man stuck inside an echo chamber of small ideas. Take my hand brother and I'll help you out of the pit.
Kevin Blank pee in this jar if you want a
hand up . . . it's the only way I see it
Jeff Thomas The view from a hole that
deep is very limited; not entirely your fault. C'mon . . take my hand, no one's
looking.
Callie Amity Take Jeff's hand. My typing finger is too weary to respond
to you
Kevin Blank no . . .
but I will ask . . what do you think needs to be done to prevent abuse to the system, if you even fathom the possibility, or is this like your stance on illegal immigration . . . sit back and do nothing while a shitty policy remains in effect. If a petition in favor of drug testing came my way I would sign it without reserve and I would encourage everyone I know to do the same. I, and I think you're aware of this, encourage the full legalization of marinara. I don't take issue with anyone that wants to smoke it but I'm not buying it for them, directly or through a system that I help fund. (especially since I can't . . . condition of employment) That person is not ready to work. That person has not made a commitment that the majority of the work force has demanded for employment. He would remain on a system of support simply for denying the rules that our society has deemed necessary for safety in the work place. I would without issue watch that person lose everything and not look back at my decision with any regret whatsoever. So the answer is no. You can shovel as much of your shit this way as you wish and I will not come out of this hole regardless of how heartless you feel I'm being. There's too much of the "feel" thing is going on anyway. Is my conservative side showing?
but I will ask . . what do you think needs to be done to prevent abuse to the system, if you even fathom the possibility, or is this like your stance on illegal immigration . . . sit back and do nothing while a shitty policy remains in effect. If a petition in favor of drug testing came my way I would sign it without reserve and I would encourage everyone I know to do the same. I, and I think you're aware of this, encourage the full legalization of marinara. I don't take issue with anyone that wants to smoke it but I'm not buying it for them, directly or through a system that I help fund. (especially since I can't . . . condition of employment) That person is not ready to work. That person has not made a commitment that the majority of the work force has demanded for employment. He would remain on a system of support simply for denying the rules that our society has deemed necessary for safety in the work place. I would without issue watch that person lose everything and not look back at my decision with any regret whatsoever. So the answer is no. You can shovel as much of your shit this way as you wish and I will not come out of this hole regardless of how heartless you feel I'm being. There's too much of the "feel" thing is going on anyway. Is my conservative side showing?
Kevin Blank you sure this isn't just
another one of your constitution rants?
Jeff Thomas Too funny . . .
"legalize marinara" . . . and to think I've been mopping contraband
with heavily buttered semolina all these years.
You've taken a hard stance on this. I am simply too tired of letting you lead the discussion in ever tightening, repetitive spirals of angry accusations for which my rebuttals are ignored (i.e.: "just another one of your constitution rants?" or "is this like your stance on illegal immigration . . . sit back and do nothing while a shitty policy remains in effect.") The fact that you felt the need to repeat, verbatim, the offending remark regarding my sincerity is validation of a suspicion that I have pushed you into such a corner from which you have only the most diminished variety of stale options from which to respond. You are my oldest and dearest friend Hoop, so it is with the sincerest compassion that I accept you and the hole you have drawn around your reason. We have suffered worse in the past . . and as the sage once said: There but for the grace of God go I.
My answer to the Immigration was outlined in an essay, a thorough discussion between you and me in fact, way back in February, 2010:
http://jeffreygiov.blogspot.com/2010_02_01_archive.html
I expect someone with your advanced investment and integrity on the issues shouldn't need to be reminded of our prior conversation. One might mistake you for simply forgetting something which had only a vague, personal polemic significance; a hypothetical rant so to speak. Fascinating, absolutely fascinating.
I bow now, to your sanctimonious view of the noble work place and the agents of purity who have earned their rightful stations within it. There's no room for hypocrisy in this discussion, so I will hide our skeletons in the closet where you require them. Very nice oratory though, (facts aside.)
You've taken a hard stance on this. I am simply too tired of letting you lead the discussion in ever tightening, repetitive spirals of angry accusations for which my rebuttals are ignored (i.e.: "just another one of your constitution rants?" or "is this like your stance on illegal immigration . . . sit back and do nothing while a shitty policy remains in effect.") The fact that you felt the need to repeat, verbatim, the offending remark regarding my sincerity is validation of a suspicion that I have pushed you into such a corner from which you have only the most diminished variety of stale options from which to respond. You are my oldest and dearest friend Hoop, so it is with the sincerest compassion that I accept you and the hole you have drawn around your reason. We have suffered worse in the past . . and as the sage once said: There but for the grace of God go I.
My answer to the Immigration was outlined in an essay, a thorough discussion between you and me in fact, way back in February, 2010:
http://jeffreygiov.blogspot.com/2010_02_01_archive.html
I expect someone with your advanced investment and integrity on the issues shouldn't need to be reminded of our prior conversation. One might mistake you for simply forgetting something which had only a vague, personal polemic significance; a hypothetical rant so to speak. Fascinating, absolutely fascinating.
I bow now, to your sanctimonious view of the noble work place and the agents of purity who have earned their rightful stations within it. There's no room for hypocrisy in this discussion, so I will hide our skeletons in the closet where you require them. Very nice oratory though, (facts aside.)
Jeff Thomas So allow me to suggest a
solution, based on a trajectory of your logic toward its inevitable conclusion.
1] It would be an extraordinary statement to suggest that anyone in the jaws of poverty could sustain their sense of dignity without the help of peripheral influences, such as tremendous religious faith, an extraordinary, self-affirming propensity toward creative distraction, a remarkable social support system, or failing these rare advantages, self-medication, (alcohol, prescription drugs, street drugs or “marinara”.)
2] The loss of personal dignity manifests as depression.
3] It would be naïve to propose that every Welfare recipient is lucky enough to have a strong faith, talented aptitude or strong, supporting community; some indeed will self-medicate. Drugs and alcohol are not free and yes, these individuals will use tax payer money to score.
4] Doing drugs is illegal, punishable by jail time.
5] So why not nip the rose in the bud and divert all the money we spend enabling these Welfare junkies to walk freely among us, to cop drugs with tax payer money, send them all directly to the prisons where we know they belong; just arrest every welfare applicant from the day they apply? Let them sort out the druggies from the faithful where we don't have to watch. I know it sound harsh, but these losers came begging on their hands and knees to us, didn’t they? Let them lick a few boots to remind them how great a resentment we have for any lazy slob who decided to thumb their nose at our virtuous superiority. (Don’t worry hoop, I’ve locked the closet with all our skeletons inside.)
6] "it's nice to be nice to the nice" - Frank Burns
1] It would be an extraordinary statement to suggest that anyone in the jaws of poverty could sustain their sense of dignity without the help of peripheral influences, such as tremendous religious faith, an extraordinary, self-affirming propensity toward creative distraction, a remarkable social support system, or failing these rare advantages, self-medication, (alcohol, prescription drugs, street drugs or “marinara”.)
2] The loss of personal dignity manifests as depression.
3] It would be naïve to propose that every Welfare recipient is lucky enough to have a strong faith, talented aptitude or strong, supporting community; some indeed will self-medicate. Drugs and alcohol are not free and yes, these individuals will use tax payer money to score.
4] Doing drugs is illegal, punishable by jail time.
5] So why not nip the rose in the bud and divert all the money we spend enabling these Welfare junkies to walk freely among us, to cop drugs with tax payer money, send them all directly to the prisons where we know they belong; just arrest every welfare applicant from the day they apply? Let them sort out the druggies from the faithful where we don't have to watch. I know it sound harsh, but these losers came begging on their hands and knees to us, didn’t they? Let them lick a few boots to remind them how great a resentment we have for any lazy slob who decided to thumb their nose at our virtuous superiority. (Don’t worry hoop, I’ve locked the closet with all our skeletons inside.)
6] "it's nice to be nice to the nice" - Frank Burns
Kevin Blank 1] Oh pooh, just a little
urine, that’s all I ask. Would it be so difficult to squeeze out a drop or two
for the benefit of getting some assistance?
2] Oh . . . very nice. Thank you for the mini seminar on one possible pitfall of how the loss of personal dignity might affect one’s mood.
3] A perfect example of how everyone “feels” about something. Tell me, is a group hug in order? My employer didn’t care how I felt about drug testing any more than your employer did. Who cares? Establish the rules and end it. You will be clean thus ready for work if you ask the government for assistance when the money supporting the program is tax generated. I’m surprised you can’t agree with this. It’s just like the schools here in Vegas. The district is more concerned about how the kids feel about things then knuckling down on them with respect to their accomplishments. The world won’t give a shit . . . start accepting it.
4] Right . . . just like entering the country illegally but our prisons aren’t suffering a shortage of cells for that offense, are they?
5] I guess this is you explaining one possible way we can rid the system of the few that abuse it. Thank you for coming up with a suggestion. But really, all this tongue in check crap is the best you can do? We both know the system is flawed and all I asked for was one suggestion that you feel might benefit the system. You came up with nothing. Well, nothing more than to mock the suggestion of another. Beggars and lazy slobs? Perhaps your true thoughts, your real feelings have escaped your subconscious.
6] . . . you know it’s rumored he eats worms.
2] Oh . . . very nice. Thank you for the mini seminar on one possible pitfall of how the loss of personal dignity might affect one’s mood.
3] A perfect example of how everyone “feels” about something. Tell me, is a group hug in order? My employer didn’t care how I felt about drug testing any more than your employer did. Who cares? Establish the rules and end it. You will be clean thus ready for work if you ask the government for assistance when the money supporting the program is tax generated. I’m surprised you can’t agree with this. It’s just like the schools here in Vegas. The district is more concerned about how the kids feel about things then knuckling down on them with respect to their accomplishments. The world won’t give a shit . . . start accepting it.
4] Right . . . just like entering the country illegally but our prisons aren’t suffering a shortage of cells for that offense, are they?
5] I guess this is you explaining one possible way we can rid the system of the few that abuse it. Thank you for coming up with a suggestion. But really, all this tongue in check crap is the best you can do? We both know the system is flawed and all I asked for was one suggestion that you feel might benefit the system. You came up with nothing. Well, nothing more than to mock the suggestion of another. Beggars and lazy slobs? Perhaps your true thoughts, your real feelings have escaped your subconscious.
6] . . . you know it’s rumored he eats worms.
Jennifer Lesson Thomas I would rather
100 public assistance recipients get high than see one child in need go hungry.
If you've ever been in the position to request assistance from the government,
you know that by its very nature the process is degrading. If you haven't had
to, then congratulations, you are the very model of a perfect US citizen. Be
glad you never had to beg for what your ancestors promised and paid for, a
little help in times of need. Besides, the welfare budget pales in comparison
to the corporate welfare huge corporations receive, maybe your employer, Kevin,
is one of them. Does the urine sample go all the way to the ivory tower? I
don't have to take a drug test and I work for the government. The fight
shouldn't be we have to so you have to, it should be no one has to unless there
is compelling evidence that a crime is being committed
Jeff Thomas Hoop, . . . I love the written
word because it doesn't evaporate with time like your memory. Although I
commend the economy of your technique, specifically, employing the same
dismissive attention to my opinion time and time again, while offering nothing
new but the sharp bitterness of fresh plucked adjectives, I do object to this
latest, transparent strategy:
Impersonating the victim of my failure to treat your passion with suitable sensitivity, ("But really, all this tongue in check crap is the best you can do? We both know the system is flawed and all I asked for was one suggestion that you feel might benefit the system. You came up with nothing. Well, nothing more than to mock the suggestion of another.")
I'm simply returning the serve you delivered and it's downright suspicious to hear you even claim it otherwise.
It's getting more compelling, as this conversation slogs on, to just cut and paste my previous responses as I have almost no reason to believe you'd notice anyway.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let me say it one last time. Drug abuse is a tax payer burden. I get it. However, isolating all Welfare applicants/recipients to answer for some collective sense of impotence on behalf of our Nation's failing "War on Drugs" is a conspicuous abuse of their freedom to endure the torments of financial insecurity with dignity. The greater majority of these people (yes, most of them are people, just like you and me) are ashamed to apply and use the money for food, clothing and housing. These are the majority which are apparently invisible to you.
I am appalled by your suggestion that your personal tax contributions to the Social Service System entitles you to clip a leash onto the collars of these people. Where were you when the Banks were bailed out? Your typewriter was silent on the call to drug test these worms. Where were you when Congress went home before solving the National Debt Ceiling crisis last December? Not a peep about drug testing these free-loading jack-offs from you!! What about teachers, soldiers or cops? . . a drug test might be required to land the job, but what about continued, random drug screenings like you support for our welfare neighbors? Must have missed your rant.
Welfare recipients are simply easy prey. You hold them in contempt for the weakness they represent. I just wish you understood how transparent your position is. You want to make them dance for you? Keep trying. Just don't hide behind some altruistic smoke screen of "saving them from themselves."
Impersonating the victim of my failure to treat your passion with suitable sensitivity, ("But really, all this tongue in check crap is the best you can do? We both know the system is flawed and all I asked for was one suggestion that you feel might benefit the system. You came up with nothing. Well, nothing more than to mock the suggestion of another.")
I'm simply returning the serve you delivered and it's downright suspicious to hear you even claim it otherwise.
It's getting more compelling, as this conversation slogs on, to just cut and paste my previous responses as I have almost no reason to believe you'd notice anyway.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let me say it one last time. Drug abuse is a tax payer burden. I get it. However, isolating all Welfare applicants/recipients to answer for some collective sense of impotence on behalf of our Nation's failing "War on Drugs" is a conspicuous abuse of their freedom to endure the torments of financial insecurity with dignity. The greater majority of these people (yes, most of them are people, just like you and me) are ashamed to apply and use the money for food, clothing and housing. These are the majority which are apparently invisible to you.
I am appalled by your suggestion that your personal tax contributions to the Social Service System entitles you to clip a leash onto the collars of these people. Where were you when the Banks were bailed out? Your typewriter was silent on the call to drug test these worms. Where were you when Congress went home before solving the National Debt Ceiling crisis last December? Not a peep about drug testing these free-loading jack-offs from you!! What about teachers, soldiers or cops? . . a drug test might be required to land the job, but what about continued, random drug screenings like you support for our welfare neighbors? Must have missed your rant.
Welfare recipients are simply easy prey. You hold them in contempt for the weakness they represent. I just wish you understood how transparent your position is. You want to make them dance for you? Keep trying. Just don't hide behind some altruistic smoke screen of "saving them from themselves."
Jeff Thomas Hey man . . . I'm done.
You're my oldest, dearest friend and I don't like where the tone of our conversation
is going. Half of my stuff is tongue-in-cheek, but when I re-read it I'm
disturbed by the apparent abuse we dish out to each other. I will never change
your mind. Your attempts on me have failed. Lets disagree and vote our
conscience on this matter. Truce
Kevin Blank white flags are way better
than jolly rogers
love you man . .
love you man . .
