Hmm ... Thoughts?
A friend of mine posted this on her MySpace bulletins and I think it is an interesting idea. What do you guys think?
Like a lot of folks in this state, I have a job. I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as they see fit. In order to get that paycheck.. I am required to pass a random urine test, which I have no problem with.
What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don't have to pass a urine test. Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check, because I have to pass one to earn it for them?
Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet. I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sit on their ass. Could you imagine how much money the state would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check?
** It reminds me of a gentler version of the ... People should have to be sterilized to get welfare. Which, I think is ridiculous. Would the government spend more money on testing than it does giving money out to those who would test positive? Not to mention the additional money spent on the people who coordinate that aspect of the program. It may be one of those things that sounds like a good idea on the surface, but would be a bit messier in the implementation of the program. Anyway, discuss amongst yourselves.
Like a lot of folks in this state, I have a job. I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as they see fit. In order to get that paycheck.. I am required to pass a random urine test, which I have no problem with.
What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don't have to pass a urine test. Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check, because I have to pass one to earn it for them?
Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet. I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sit on their ass. Could you imagine how much money the state would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check?
** It reminds me of a gentler version of the ... People should have to be sterilized to get welfare. Which, I think is ridiculous. Would the government spend more money on testing than it does giving money out to those who would test positive? Not to mention the additional money spent on the people who coordinate that aspect of the program. It may be one of those things that sounds like a good idea on the surface, but would be a bit messier in the implementation of the program. Anyway, discuss amongst yourselves.