Aa
Should Welfare precipitance be drug tested?
Should Welfare precipitance be drug tested?
If I am drug tested and my taxes pay for their welfare, why are not they held to the same standards?
If I am drug tested and my taxes pay for their welfare, why are not they held to the same standards?
I agree there are differences in the two, but only in how an individual first used them. The addiction is the same and can have devestating results either way. Most people have tried some sort of recreational drug at some point (I am including alcohol in this) and for some it results in addiction, for others it does not. But at the end of the day addiction is addiction. I agree that we should not be feeding addicts money to continue their addiction. My question still remains though...if we cut them off of welfare, then what? There needs to be some sort of alternative in place. These are still human beings even if they are very sick. And even if that is not important to you (and I don't mean that rudely, I understand not everyone sees this the same way I do), having all of these folks live on the streets will wind up costing the taxpayer more. From funding shelters and soup kitchens, to increased medical issues to an increase in crime. I think we need reform in the welfare system, but I don't think just cutting people off is the answer.
I see a world of difference between people who abuse drugs for recreation and people who become dependent on the medications used to manage their medical problems.
I salute you guys for enduring peginteron/ribavarin treatment. I did 48 weeks so I know what that can be like. I am one of the fortunate ones who made it through and had a sustained response, although it came with some permanent long-term damage, mainly to my thyroid and some long-lasting brain fog. As R Glass said, some things that once came naturally to me now require a lot of effort.
When I was first treating for cancer I underwent several months of chemotherapy (round the clock continuous infursion 5 days per week) and daily radiation treatments. The combination was excruciatingly painful and I was given dilaudid in large quantities to control pain so I could continue the treatment. After completing the first round of chemo and radiation I had surgery, and experienced post-op complications partly because I had become physically dependent on the dilaudid. I had to get off dilaudid and it was incredibly hard.
To me, that kind of drug dependence is different to addiction arising from recreational drug use, although drug testing would not differentiate between the two.
I salute you guys for enduring peginteron/ribavarin treatment. I did 48 weeks so I know what that can be like. I am one of the fortunate ones who made it through and had a sustained response, although it came with some permanent long-term damage, mainly to my thyroid and some long-lasting brain fog. As R Glass said, some things that once came naturally to me now require a lot of effort.
When I was first treating for cancer I underwent several months of chemotherapy (round the clock continuous infursion 5 days per week) and daily radiation treatments. The combination was excruciatingly painful and I was given dilaudid in large quantities to control pain so I could continue the treatment. After completing the first round of chemo and radiation I had surgery, and experienced post-op complications partly because I had become physically dependent on the dilaudid. I had to get off dilaudid and it was incredibly hard.
To me, that kind of drug dependence is different to addiction arising from recreational drug use, although drug testing would not differentiate between the two.
I have to agree with specialmom, you ARE one tough cookie! I was on tx with Pegintron and Ribavirin for the full 48 weeks, and it almost killed me. They put me on 240mgs of methadone (a medication that I would only have to take once a day to protect my liver) and many of the adverse effects still affect me quite badly.
One of them was the addiction. I self-detoxed down to morphine, then down to oxycodone and took my last oxycodone medication 25 days ago. Right now, even with the aid of a partial withdrawal blocker, I am still a wreck. However, this too shall pass.
The worst part is that the tx failed, made the HCV worse and the adverse affects (some of them) seem to be permanent. I'm just now trying to get back to writing, but it's very hard....very hard. But I HAVE to get back to writing professionally, as the tx left me in such shape I can't physically handle construction, sheetrocking, or painting anymore. I fade after about a 90 minutes, and though SSI has treated me with at least compassion if not respect, all the hoops I have to go through, and all the disrespect I get from DSHS is beginning to make me believe I am how they treat me: like a lazy blood-sucking leech!
I'm not even sure how they managed to get their fingers into the Social ecurity Agency program in the first place, but I actually have had panic attacks over some of their "assessments" (read "interrogations") and in my current state all I know is that I HAVE to get away from this and back to being independent.
Thanks!
One of them was the addiction. I self-detoxed down to morphine, then down to oxycodone and took my last oxycodone medication 25 days ago. Right now, even with the aid of a partial withdrawal blocker, I am still a wreck. However, this too shall pass.
The worst part is that the tx failed, made the HCV worse and the adverse affects (some of them) seem to be permanent. I'm just now trying to get back to writing, but it's very hard....very hard. But I HAVE to get back to writing professionally, as the tx left me in such shape I can't physically handle construction, sheetrocking, or painting anymore. I fade after about a 90 minutes, and though SSI has treated me with at least compassion if not respect, all the hoops I have to go through, and all the disrespect I get from DSHS is beginning to make me believe I am how they treat me: like a lazy blood-sucking leech!
I'm not even sure how they managed to get their fingers into the Social ecurity Agency program in the first place, but I actually have had panic attacks over some of their "assessments" (read "interrogations") and in my current state all I know is that I HAVE to get away from this and back to being independent.
Thanks!
R Glass, you are one tough cookie. I hate to think of people in such difficult circumstances but admire those that do what they've got to do. May your struggles get easier.
I can totally relate to your situation. I went through the same tx that you went through. It also left me with permanent damage. I was G2b and did reach SVR.
Prior to tx I tried to make preparations incase I was not able to work. Even with insurance my co-pays were averaging about $1000 a month. Without working there was no way I would have been able to pay my bills and the co-pay for 6 months. All I was looking for was some kind of temporary assistance. I was turned down and was forced to work through the entire duration.
One person told me, if I could put off tx for one year and quit my job, I could get all my meds and labs paid for 100% and get financial assistance. You would think, I would be an investment since I have paid taxes my entire life and they would want me to get healthy. Instead the answer was for me to become dysfunctional and they would reward me. I still do not know how I pulled it off. Around week 16 I was forced to make the decision of quitting work or tx. I told my Gastro, I could not quit work. He gave me Xanax, Lortab, ambian, and some kind of anti-psychotic. Even though I was a Zombie, I was able to make the final 8 weeks. I am fortunate that with the permanent damage I am able to continue to work but what used to come natural to me is a struggle. I often wander if I would have gotten temporary assistance that would have allowed me to stay at home and take care of myself, would it have caused the damage that it did.
Prior to tx I tried to make preparations incase I was not able to work. Even with insurance my co-pays were averaging about $1000 a month. Without working there was no way I would have been able to pay my bills and the co-pay for 6 months. All I was looking for was some kind of temporary assistance. I was turned down and was forced to work through the entire duration.
One person told me, if I could put off tx for one year and quit my job, I could get all my meds and labs paid for 100% and get financial assistance. You would think, I would be an investment since I have paid taxes my entire life and they would want me to get healthy. Instead the answer was for me to become dysfunctional and they would reward me. I still do not know how I pulled it off. Around week 16 I was forced to make the decision of quitting work or tx. I told my Gastro, I could not quit work. He gave me Xanax, Lortab, ambian, and some kind of anti-psychotic. Even though I was a Zombie, I was able to make the final 8 weeks. I am fortunate that with the permanent damage I am able to continue to work but what used to come natural to me is a struggle. I often wander if I would have gotten temporary assistance that would have allowed me to stay at home and take care of myself, would it have caused the damage that it did.
Some people do need a reason to get and stay clean. The government can provide financial assistance and the reason to stay clean at the same time. Efficiency.
Now for an Irish view to the original question. As some of those posts were far too long to read. Let us say people on drugs ( junkies ) were stopped welfare. Do you not think they would find another way to get their money to buy their drugs? Be it mugging. Or even shooting people. I think they would do whatever it takes for their next fix. So I don't think stopping their welfare would help a situation. It would create another one. Bit like passing the buck along. It is no longer welfares problem. Let the police deal with it.
It is a hard one to call. Because my money would be on the vast majority of them coming back positive from any tests done. Not just medication either. So what are you suggesting is the sollution? Say no more welfare to anybody who comes back positive? That would be a lot of people. A lot of angry people at that. No money at all. The worst effected areas would probably be the, we class them as working class areas, over there I think you call them projects? It would be a certain type of person mainly. Probably end up with major riots.
Not going to pretend I have the answer to the question. But I think your government would rather have these people happy and calm. They would be well aware who would be effected most of all and they wouldn't want any unrest as result.
Passes the soap box over.
It is a hard one to call. Because my money would be on the vast majority of them coming back positive from any tests done. Not just medication either. So what are you suggesting is the sollution? Say no more welfare to anybody who comes back positive? That would be a lot of people. A lot of angry people at that. No money at all. The worst effected areas would probably be the, we class them as working class areas, over there I think you call them projects? It would be a certain type of person mainly. Probably end up with major riots.
Not going to pretend I have the answer to the question. But I think your government would rather have these people happy and calm. They would be well aware who would be effected most of all and they wouldn't want any unrest as result.
Passes the soap box over.
The Department of Social and Health Services already has grown from a tiny little agency dealing specifically and directly with those who need a "temporary hand up" to a gigantic entity that even the legislature has become afraid of with their fingers in just about every pie in the state.
I had no choice but to go on welfare when seven months of chemotherapy they "wouldn't" pay for ate up my entire life savings. When the chemo failed, and I was stuck with gigantic medical bills, a horrible addiction to painkillers (that I finally self-detoxed off of 25 days ago that took me almost eight years to do) and was worsened physically, emotionally and mentally from adverse effects that apparently are permanent, I had to go on SSI.
I have had political battles with DSHS over a number of issues in which they had absolutely no business sticking their noses in in the first place, (won most, lost a few) I think they should focus finding those who are committing fraud. Allowing DSHS to arbitrarily pick and choose who to drug test, is opening the doors to HUGE taxpayer costs and only add to the largest single entity of tax-payer burden in the state, with no benefit whatsoever.
I went from a "rising star" in the journalism field, who was met with respect and dignity even in the highest offices in the state, to an SSI bum, who has to deal with DSHS to this day because of their having their noses into everything, even Federal Programs, and whenever I have to go in to their Community Services Office, I am now treated like some kind of blood-sucking leech, and met with continual roadblocks, unnecessary obstacles, a complete lack of respect and ZERO compassion, simply because they can't comprehend an incurable, terminal illness.
Then they hide behind the law their insurance companies lobbied for where "Intimidating a public servant is a 5-year felony" with no reciprocal law when they intimidate others. Drug testing? Why not focus on fraud rather than if they were to save up their change in a jar to buy a couple bong hits worth of weed or whatever.
It's fraud that's breaking the system, and we don't have the money to do all that individual drug screening in the first place. I can tell you from personal experience that dealing with their total lack of respect, foolish and expensive committees and offices with inexperienced to the point of stupidity managers, case workers intake workers etc etc etc ad nauseum, that we have far more problems with that system to deal with than drug-screening them at tax-payer expense.
Not to mention that a great many of those who have to go through that treatment don't drive heavy equipment or other dangerous machinery. And anybody who has ever been in a position to be screened for drugs on even a semi-regular basis (both in the working community and the DSHS sector) already know how to "beat the tests."
I personally think we should focus on fixing the problems rather than pointing the fingers. Either that or simply take whoever we think is causing a problem and shooting them in the streets. Which will happen under the Martial law many states and the federal government is already threatening to use.
We simply CAN'T afford to keep turning to "the law" to help us, we have to get back to our roots and have our OWN communities find non-violent ways to protect ourselves.
I had no choice but to go on welfare when seven months of chemotherapy they "wouldn't" pay for ate up my entire life savings. When the chemo failed, and I was stuck with gigantic medical bills, a horrible addiction to painkillers (that I finally self-detoxed off of 25 days ago that took me almost eight years to do) and was worsened physically, emotionally and mentally from adverse effects that apparently are permanent, I had to go on SSI.
I have had political battles with DSHS over a number of issues in which they had absolutely no business sticking their noses in in the first place, (won most, lost a few) I think they should focus finding those who are committing fraud. Allowing DSHS to arbitrarily pick and choose who to drug test, is opening the doors to HUGE taxpayer costs and only add to the largest single entity of tax-payer burden in the state, with no benefit whatsoever.
I went from a "rising star" in the journalism field, who was met with respect and dignity even in the highest offices in the state, to an SSI bum, who has to deal with DSHS to this day because of their having their noses into everything, even Federal Programs, and whenever I have to go in to their Community Services Office, I am now treated like some kind of blood-sucking leech, and met with continual roadblocks, unnecessary obstacles, a complete lack of respect and ZERO compassion, simply because they can't comprehend an incurable, terminal illness.
Then they hide behind the law their insurance companies lobbied for where "Intimidating a public servant is a 5-year felony" with no reciprocal law when they intimidate others. Drug testing? Why not focus on fraud rather than if they were to save up their change in a jar to buy a couple bong hits worth of weed or whatever.
It's fraud that's breaking the system, and we don't have the money to do all that individual drug screening in the first place. I can tell you from personal experience that dealing with their total lack of respect, foolish and expensive committees and offices with inexperienced to the point of stupidity managers, case workers intake workers etc etc etc ad nauseum, that we have far more problems with that system to deal with than drug-screening them at tax-payer expense.
Not to mention that a great many of those who have to go through that treatment don't drive heavy equipment or other dangerous machinery. And anybody who has ever been in a position to be screened for drugs on even a semi-regular basis (both in the working community and the DSHS sector) already know how to "beat the tests."
I personally think we should focus on fixing the problems rather than pointing the fingers. Either that or simply take whoever we think is causing a problem and shooting them in the streets. Which will happen under the Martial law many states and the federal government is already threatening to use.
We simply CAN'T afford to keep turning to "the law" to help us, we have to get back to our roots and have our OWN communities find non-violent ways to protect ourselves.
Most addicts don't take their medication as the doctor prescribed.....so it's hard to blame the doctors. One of the first things an addict needs to do, is take responsibility for their addiction. However, there are some doctors out there that over prescribe and don't educate enough. I think the first time a patient asks for a refill they should be made to sit and watch a video educating them on addiction.
My pain pill addiction started after an auto accident. There is no doubt I needed the pain meds initially. I questioned my doctor about getting addicted and his response was......it's better that your not in pain right now. (not a very good answer for someone concerned). After the auto policy paid him he refused to treat me any longer because I didn't have health insurance. Like with everything there are good ones and bad ones. I didn't have a very good one. lol
My pain pill addiction started after an auto accident. There is no doubt I needed the pain meds initially. I questioned my doctor about getting addicted and his response was......it's better that your not in pain right now. (not a very good answer for someone concerned). After the auto policy paid him he refused to treat me any longer because I didn't have health insurance. Like with everything there are good ones and bad ones. I didn't have a very good one. lol
Neither would I ever discredit anyone who is trying their best and still having a hard time. At least they are trying.
The problem with many doctors though is that the patients lie to them. Most physicians I know will turn away a known drug seeker or eventually lose their license. True chronic pain is an issue though and difficult.
I had surgery once and was given pain medication post op. I took it a couple of days after the surgery and then no more. I didn't have a chronic pain condition and had I taken the meds after the initial post surgical pain, that would have been my responsibility not the doctors, in my opinion. One of the key factors in addiction recovery is ownership of it.
In all honesty, I don't like to think of anyone struggling. I won't discredit people that are trying and still need help.
I had surgery once and was given pain medication post op. I took it a couple of days after the surgery and then no more. I didn't have a chronic pain condition and had I taken the meds after the initial post surgical pain, that would have been my responsibility not the doctors, in my opinion. One of the key factors in addiction recovery is ownership of it.
In all honesty, I don't like to think of anyone struggling. I won't discredit people that are trying and still need help.
I have known people that got addicted to drugs because of chronic pain and doctors that seem to freely write scripts for those pain meds, so to me the doctors are responsible as well. With that said, we gotta draw the line somewhere because what is currently going on is simply unacceptable and can not continue. And ya know a normal family trying to hold down a job and pay their bills cannot get help. If a man and a woman are married for instance and cannot make it are stuck. Now if the man leaves and the woman gets divorced on the other hand, they can have it all. Another thorn in my side.
It's great that so many of us do agree on a point.
I'm not cold blooded either; but I'd like to point out that we *do* have low income housing; we do have free/subsidized education; we do have subsidized day care; we do have free job placement. There are even places one can go to, to acquire proper clothing, etc for job interviews; to draft a resume, learn how to answer questions in job interviews -- there's no end to the help that's available if one is willing to take the time/effort to find it, apply for it and make use of it.
And even with all the help available, look at our crime rate; there are still those who would rather be on drugs than be productive members of society.
R Glass, I was very happy to know that you don't think addiction is a disease; I think these people make voluntary choices and if they chose to get on drugs, they can also choose to get off and I'm all for helping those who are willing to help themselves.
People using illegal drugs are breaking the law -- why should they get rewarded (benefits) for doing so?
I'm not cold blooded either; but I'd like to point out that we *do* have low income housing; we do have free/subsidized education; we do have subsidized day care; we do have free job placement. There are even places one can go to, to acquire proper clothing, etc for job interviews; to draft a resume, learn how to answer questions in job interviews -- there's no end to the help that's available if one is willing to take the time/effort to find it, apply for it and make use of it.
And even with all the help available, look at our crime rate; there are still those who would rather be on drugs than be productive members of society.
R Glass, I was very happy to know that you don't think addiction is a disease; I think these people make voluntary choices and if they chose to get on drugs, they can also choose to get off and I'm all for helping those who are willing to help themselves.
People using illegal drugs are breaking the law -- why should they get rewarded (benefits) for doing so?
It looks like we all agree here...... :0)
But I do just want to say that I think wallstreet/investments are a bit different...To me investing money is sort of like going to vegas and gambling....If you lose in poker you cant sue the casino....Investments are not guaranteed there is always a risk that you will lose money...My husband was financial consultant for many years....
But I do just want to say that I think wallstreet/investments are a bit different...To me investing money is sort of like going to vegas and gambling....If you lose in poker you cant sue the casino....Investments are not guaranteed there is always a risk that you will lose money...My husband was financial consultant for many years....
There is a difference in being drug dependant and drug addiction. Like you said you were only physically dependant not mentally. Any drug addict will tell you that the physical withdrawal is pretty bad but the truly hard part comes after, in trying to stay clean.
Adgal, You make very good points. Throwing people to the curb really isn't the answer. Like you said .....these people then end up on the streets, the streets where our children should be playing. We would then need to hire more police (more tax dollars). Our emergency rooms would fill with these people (more tax dollars). The list goes on..... I think drug testing probably is a good idea, but then we need to get these people the help they need. If we do that, we can help them lead productive (tax paying) lives.
I think everyone on this forum is in agreement that..........they don't want to pay taxes for just lazy free-loaders and some Welfare reform is needed. There will always be some people that learn to work the system. Welfare, big insurance, Wall Street.....someone will always find a loop-hole to screw others. Actually I find it even more repulsive when a large insurance company screws you as apposed to a drug addict living on Welfare........or how about Wall Street screwing with our hard earned money. I would like to hear as much outrage to these abuses.
Adgal, You make very good points. Throwing people to the curb really isn't the answer. Like you said .....these people then end up on the streets, the streets where our children should be playing. We would then need to hire more police (more tax dollars). Our emergency rooms would fill with these people (more tax dollars). The list goes on..... I think drug testing probably is a good idea, but then we need to get these people the help they need. If we do that, we can help them lead productive (tax paying) lives.
I think everyone on this forum is in agreement that..........they don't want to pay taxes for just lazy free-loaders and some Welfare reform is needed. There will always be some people that learn to work the system. Welfare, big insurance, Wall Street.....someone will always find a loop-hole to screw others. Actually I find it even more repulsive when a large insurance company screws you as apposed to a drug addict living on Welfare........or how about Wall Street screwing with our hard earned money. I would like to hear as much outrage to these abuses.
I just can't think of human beings in that way. I know that many think I am wasting my time of some of these people, but there are success stories. Many success stories. I really believe that when you get that down and out you give up hope. When you lose hope and feel you have nothing to live for, there is no motivation to change. If you don't care if you live or die there is no reason to give up the drugs or alcohol. We just have to find that which motivates them and help give hope back. I have seen it happen. I have also been disappointed and I know we can't save everyone, but I just don't believe in throwing away humans like so much trash. And I do firmly believe it is a disease and some are more predisposed then others. For many years mental health issues such as depression and schizophrenia were not recognized for the diseases we now know they are. People need help and treatment and they can become productive members of society.
No matter what your stance on this issue, I think we can all agree the welfare system needs a major overhaul, so we're not at complete odds...its' just how to do it. I am off to bed myself. Keep your fingers crossed for me that my little guy sleeps a few hours for me! He has been waking up every hour the last few nights...arrghh!!!
No matter what your stance on this issue, I think we can all agree the welfare system needs a major overhaul, so we're not at complete odds...its' just how to do it. I am off to bed myself. Keep your fingers crossed for me that my little guy sleeps a few hours for me! He has been waking up every hour the last few nights...arrghh!!!
This is a first. How many years has it been now? Good Night
Are you sitting down? Because I had to sit down myself when I realized that we agree on this one. I don't believe drug addicts have a disease. I believe they engage in volitional behavior.
I hate to make this answer so short but I am extremely exhausted and ready to go to bed. I am not cold blooded. I am all for helping people that wants help. The rest are just human parasites and I really couldn’t care less about them.
I may see it differently then you do, but way to go on beating the addiction. Watching my father deal with it, I have a bit of an idea how difficult it is, although not having experienced it personally, I don't claim for a second to have your level of insight. Your family must be very proud of you. I know I am of my dad.
I still have to ask though...so we cut them off...then what? They live on the streets? It will still cost more, there really isn't any way around it. What do we do with them? As an ex addict, do you not think that we should make access to rehabilitation and treatment easier? I do not know how you did it in your case, but surely you agree that whether you see it as a disease or not, for most they cannot do it alone.
I still have to ask though...so we cut them off...then what? They live on the streets? It will still cost more, there really isn't any way around it. What do we do with them? As an ex addict, do you not think that we should make access to rehabilitation and treatment easier? I do not know how you did it in your case, but surely you agree that whether you see it as a disease or not, for most they cannot do it alone.
First I want you to know I find your compassion and commitment both Nobel and Admirable. However, we do have conflicting opinions on this issue. I am sure there will be some that will ridicule, and want to burn me at the stake for my opinions (I’m used to it), but I am entitled to them. As an ex- addict (physically not mentally) there is very little you can tell me that I don’t already know. Also notice, I said ex and not recovering. I used to be an addict, I am not any longer. I realized I had to change and I did it. It was tough but did it. It is a good thing I didn’t use the excuse of it being a disease because I probably wouldn’t have stopped. I look at like this, if it were a disease being drug screened, arrested for behavior under the influence (symptoms of the disease), losing a job for being under the influence, would be considered discrimination. I do not feel that it is fair to take my tax dollars and give them to someone that is not held to the same standards I am held to. By telling them they have a disease and they will not loose their benefits, we are removing incentive for them to change and rewarding them. As far as “where do you draw the line”, that is simple if it is illegal your cut off.
Yes that's a complex one. Wherever I've worked I had to specifically help people with disabilities so that was different. There were of course people (this was rare) who did not have a substantial disability and were malingerers (who we would not help of course) but the main goal of where I have worked was to promote independence so benefits representation was only one of many aspects. Much of the goals included helping people with disabilities find jobs so that they would not have to be on benefits and could be independent. I would tell you that supported housing for people with psychiatric disabilities includes mandatory drug testing and if that is found a person is required to go to rehabilitation and they can only be approved for any form of service if they have been free of substance abuse (which includes regular testing) for 6 months. I would agree that for people who do not have a disability or other reason to require long term benefits that they should not receive long term payments.
I would however say just as much of the sentencing for low level drug users (which is entirely separate from drug dealers and the like who should still do time) is being replaced by mandatory rehabilitation it would be the same in this case. There is a rehabilitation facility in my neighborhood and the people do not leave until they are free from drug abuse. However unlike prison they are more able to be free from substance abuse rather than leaving a hardened criminal. I wouldn't disagree with drug testing just like for anything else but I would help the people obtain rehabilitation which is what they need and one way they could be able to get a job and not be dependent to begin with.
I would however say just as much of the sentencing for low level drug users (which is entirely separate from drug dealers and the like who should still do time) is being replaced by mandatory rehabilitation it would be the same in this case. There is a rehabilitation facility in my neighborhood and the people do not leave until they are free from drug abuse. However unlike prison they are more able to be free from substance abuse rather than leaving a hardened criminal. I wouldn't disagree with drug testing just like for anything else but I would help the people obtain rehabilitation which is what they need and one way they could be able to get a job and not be dependent to begin with.
I know this subject invokes passion in everyone. No one likes to feel their tax dollars are being used inappropriately and I am not hear to change your mind about your feelings on that. We are all a product of our own personal experiences and I fully acknowlege that I am very very liberal. We see it differently and I can respect your feelings and agree to disagree.
On the original question though...so let's say we do cut people off of welfare if they test positive. Then what. I am not making up the stat that it costs the tax payers almost 3 times as much for someone to be homeless then to keep them housed (welfare). So in order to save that money we would have to not only kick them off of welfare but close shelters, deny medical attention at emergency rooms and so on and so forth. Crime rates would rise as people will do what they have to do to survive...it's human nature. They aren't just going to crawl away and die. The list goes on. So although I completely understand many people's feelings about addiction and welfare, there has to be a better solution then just cutting people off. We need to replace it with something.
And one last thought...on the topic of jobs. If you have children to feed and your only capable of earning minimum wage (and that then cuts you off from much of the other help available), you too might choose welfare. That is what I mean by it can be hard to get off of the system once your on it. While my father was at the worst of his addiction, my mother took welfare in order to feed and shelter us. Trust me, she wanted to work. However, with a small child and no other help available, there wasn't much choice. She would have loved to get a job, but you couldn't get susidized daycare. A 4 year old was a bit small to stay home alone. She is neither lazy nor stupid nor an addict. Sometimes "getting a job" isn't as simple as it seems.
On the original question though...so let's say we do cut people off of welfare if they test positive. Then what. I am not making up the stat that it costs the tax payers almost 3 times as much for someone to be homeless then to keep them housed (welfare). So in order to save that money we would have to not only kick them off of welfare but close shelters, deny medical attention at emergency rooms and so on and so forth. Crime rates would rise as people will do what they have to do to survive...it's human nature. They aren't just going to crawl away and die. The list goes on. So although I completely understand many people's feelings about addiction and welfare, there has to be a better solution then just cutting people off. We need to replace it with something.
And one last thought...on the topic of jobs. If you have children to feed and your only capable of earning minimum wage (and that then cuts you off from much of the other help available), you too might choose welfare. That is what I mean by it can be hard to get off of the system once your on it. While my father was at the worst of his addiction, my mother took welfare in order to feed and shelter us. Trust me, she wanted to work. However, with a small child and no other help available, there wasn't much choice. She would have loved to get a job, but you couldn't get susidized daycare. A 4 year old was a bit small to stay home alone. She is neither lazy nor stupid nor an addict. Sometimes "getting a job" isn't as simple as it seems.
You said: "First thing is that very few people aspire to get on or stay on welfare. Unfortunately the system is very very difficult to get off once you are on it"
.There are people who do not want to work/think the world owes them a living and have learned to work the system so well, that they can stay on welfare for years and even teach their kids how to do it right, so it goes down from generation to generation........if they wanted to get off it, all they have to do is go to work!! Can't get a job? They can get help to go to school -- the resources are there, they just don't want to use them.
I had to take a drug test before I got my job and any time any tiny thing happens I have to take another just to make sure I wasn't "under the influence"......these tests are for illegal drugs and alcohol.......I am also subject to random testing; I don't get a paycheck if I test positive or refuse to test at all......why should anyone get a welfare check without having to do the same?
Oh by the way --- there was recently a person who got let go for the use of "legal" (prescription) drugs......just so happened they were "dealing", high, had accident......no longer have job.........
Dang right, they should have to take a drug test in order to get the welfare check.
That is my opinion, based on my life experience............
.There are people who do not want to work/think the world owes them a living and have learned to work the system so well, that they can stay on welfare for years and even teach their kids how to do it right, so it goes down from generation to generation........if they wanted to get off it, all they have to do is go to work!! Can't get a job? They can get help to go to school -- the resources are there, they just don't want to use them.
I had to take a drug test before I got my job and any time any tiny thing happens I have to take another just to make sure I wasn't "under the influence"......these tests are for illegal drugs and alcohol.......I am also subject to random testing; I don't get a paycheck if I test positive or refuse to test at all......why should anyone get a welfare check without having to do the same?
Oh by the way --- there was recently a person who got let go for the use of "legal" (prescription) drugs......just so happened they were "dealing", high, had accident......no longer have job.........
Dang right, they should have to take a drug test in order to get the welfare check.
That is my opinion, based on my life experience............
You must join this user group in order to participate in this discussion.
You are reading content posted in the Current Events . . . Group
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
