Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
-FAIL - Florida Gov. Rick Scott drug testing welfare applicants -FAIL-
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="brett636" data-source="post: 872544" data-attributes="member: 249"><p>It was bad reporting or bad wording. 3 days ago I posted <a href="http://www2.tbo.com/news/politics/2011/aug/24/3/welfare-drug-testing-yields-2-percent-positive-res-ar-252458/" target="_blank"><span style="color: #ff0000">this link</span></a> in the Welfare thread to a Tampa Bay Online story about this same drug testing program for cash assistance welfare. Here is how they worded the meat and potatoes part.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think this story worded it better so you could understand that the entire cash assistance program costed $178 mil and then what the drug testing savings would be. Having read this previous story and then read the piece Sleeve linked too, I understood the gist but I can see where it would be easy to confuse it as well, especially being half asleep.</p><p><img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/FeltTip/wink.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":wink2:" title="Wink :wink2:" data-shortname=":wink2:" /></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Sleeve,</p><p>Here is what I said in my post on the Welfare thread <a href="http://www.browncafe.com/forum/f13/welfare-338355/#post871346" target="_blank"><span style="color: #ff0000">(#55)</span></a> that you might appreciate in light of the comments above.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think you'd get some real savings there!</p><p><img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/FeltTip/happy-very.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":happy-very:" title="Happy Very :happy-very:" data-shortname=":happy-very:" /></p><p></p><p>Personally I would like to see this taken further. I don't believe people on such assistance should be allowed to vote. I also think random inspections of them and their assets should occur and if they have too many flat screen TVs or ones over a certain size they should get denied assistance. Same goes for their car and or cars, if they own a vehicle newer than 10 years old and or have wheels on the car worth than the car then they don't need government assistance. Government assistance is to help people with meager means to keep their heads above water so they and their dependents don't starve. It's not meant as a means to live a life of luxury.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="brett636, post: 872544, member: 249"] It was bad reporting or bad wording. 3 days ago I posted [URL='http://www2.tbo.com/news/politics/2011/aug/24/3/welfare-drug-testing-yields-2-percent-positive-res-ar-252458/'][COLOR=#ff0000]this link[/COLOR][/URL] in the Welfare thread to a Tampa Bay Online story about this same drug testing program for cash assistance welfare. Here is how they worded the meat and potatoes part. I think this story worded it better so you could understand that the entire cash assistance program costed $178 mil and then what the drug testing savings would be. Having read this previous story and then read the piece Sleeve linked too, I understood the gist but I can see where it would be easy to confuse it as well, especially being half asleep. :wink2: Sleeve, Here is what I said in my post on the Welfare thread [URL='http://www.browncafe.com/forum/f13/welfare-338355/#post871346'][COLOR=#ff0000](#55)[/COLOR][/URL] that you might appreciate in light of the comments above. I think you'd get some real savings there! :happy-very: Personally I would like to see this taken further. I don't believe people on such assistance should be allowed to vote. I also think random inspections of them and their assets should occur and if they have too many flat screen TVs or ones over a certain size they should get denied assistance. Same goes for their car and or cars, if they own a vehicle newer than 10 years old and or have wheels on the car worth than the car then they don't need government assistance. Government assistance is to help people with meager means to keep their heads above water so they and their dependents don't starve. It's not meant as a means to live a life of luxury. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
-FAIL - Florida Gov. Rick Scott drug testing welfare applicants -FAIL-
Top