G
Guest 18340
edit
Last edited:
Florida to drug test Welfare recipiients.
- Thread starter trichrider
- Start date
G
Guest 88950
...My concern is for real med patients...
TY
i qualify for walefare but i do not receive any but if i was forced to ask the state for help i would be denied b/c im a medical user and i would test + for cannabis.
because of the length of time cannabis is in your system i dont have the opportunity to quit for a few days so i would test clean.
who are they going to catch? those not smart enough to circumvent the test by quitting or taking a system flush and legit mmj users as well as some recreational users.
when an applicant passes the drug test then the state will reimburse them. how much is this going to amount to?
i doubt that money saved from catching dumb drug users will offset the the cost of reimbursing applicants for drug tests b/c people who live off and abuse the system WILL adapt and there will always be people scamming the govt.
here is the sad part....what could the % of wale fare recipients that are suspected drug users? 20%.....30%.......lets say 40% are suspected drug users ok. that leaves 60% are non drug users that under Gov Scott "get richer quick scheme" will be tested for drugs?
so....you have a base reimbursment cost for 60% of wale fare receipients and then you have to account for those who circumvent the test and pass. what will be the % of drug users still getten over on all those tax payers? 10%....if so then you are up to 70% of the tests being covered by the state, where is the savings and who is getting richer.
RollmeoneKenobi
Member
Gov. Scott's family owns stock in the same drug testing companies that he has now every state employee, and welfare recipient being tested.
medicalgreen
Member
Personally, I'm very happy about this.
I don't want some crackhead who gets cut from welfare trying to break into my home to steal my plants. That's all that goes on in Oakland. I've had them try to break in almost 10 times now. Had to move eventually.
Welfare recipients are dangerous people.
Nobody should be on welfare. Period!
You take that government handout and you must give something back. You give them YOUR FREEDOM.
Now they control you, and THEY SHOULD!!!
The government is there to control all animals and keep the people safe from them.
Take welfare away from folks and you will see a cage full of animals let loose from the zoo.
Then what will you do?
Hope you got guns!
As Gerald Celente says "When the people have nothing to lose, they lose it".
As far as Florida goes, I hope it sinks into the ocean or the swampland. Never to be seen again. The US would be better off without Florida anyways.
I don't want some crackhead who gets cut from welfare trying to break into my home to steal my plants. That's all that goes on in Oakland. I've had them try to break in almost 10 times now. Had to move eventually.
Welfare recipients are dangerous people.
Nobody should be on welfare. Period!
You take that government handout and you must give something back. You give them YOUR FREEDOM.
Now they control you, and THEY SHOULD!!!
The government is there to control all animals and keep the people safe from them.
Take welfare away from folks and you will see a cage full of animals let loose from the zoo.
Then what will you do?
Hope you got guns!
As Gerald Celente says "When the people have nothing to lose, they lose it".
As far as Florida goes, I hope it sinks into the ocean or the swampland. Never to be seen again. The US would be better off without Florida anyways.
G
Guest 88950
i understand but im in fl, this is concerning the residents of fl and other states laws are irrelevant.
as you know there are no laws allowing cannabis to be used as medicine in the state of florida so residents like me who happen to need govt assistance are going to be fucked.
i dont receive any assistance so this law isnt affecting me but that doesnt make it right.
anyway, how does testing everyone to catch 20% of those using drugs save money. 80% of applicants will be tested at the tax payers expense.
According to legislative analysts,113,346 people are receiving temporary cash assistance. However, only people 18 and older will be tested, and officials from the Department of Children and Families estimate that will total about 4,400 adults who apply for aid each month.
Officials estimate the initial screenings would cost about $10 per person – refundable if the individual passes – and first-time failures will be disqualified for one year from receiving benefits under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. A second failure disqualifies the individual for three years.
The numbers are a bit different than the 80/20 you have been led to believe
also it's a lot closer to revenue neutrality...
Officials estimate the initial screenings would cost about $10 per person – refundable if the individual passes – and first-time failures will be disqualified for one year from receiving benefits under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. A second failure disqualifies the individual for three years.
The numbers are a bit different than the 80/20 you have been led to believe
also it's a lot closer to revenue neutrality...
Obviously those residents aren't like you, then are they?
Some people are fine with letting people suck off the teet of Gov't, doing nothing for it.
Easy answer is to just get rid of Welfare.
Fat bitches (unmarried) with three kids will all a sudden become 'Fit Honnies' with a penchant for threesomes and taking it in the rear.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SK-qqyiVe64
Lazy fuckers will either get a job, or starve, or live back home with mom, thus lowering the price of rentals for others, and allowing more people who work the cities (read immigrant labor, to not have to commute so far to clean our toilets and cook our food).
With reasoning like that, smoking pot disqualifies you from unemployment insurance (that you payed for) should you get fired.
nice member name
negative 37000?
Glad to see you'd apply that liberally, dag.
A 47" Hitachi, PlayStation and homemade, wireless can antenna.
Maybe your revolving door got wind of your unemployment insurance appeal strategy.
With obfuscating lawmakers. It won't take long. WI governor Walker slashed budgets. A further look at the numbers showed the combined expenditures and tax cuts = more spending. Trickle up economics.
trickle up - as much as 1.32 mil every year
Other side? Your crystal ball sees right through it... positive test, across-the-board assumption that tax money supports it. Nice little envelope.
Last edited:
G
Guest 18340
"Parents who fail drug tests can get benefits for their children by naming a state-approved designee to collect the money. That designee must also pass a drug test."
Such an easy way around this law...
Again, where is the savings in all this? No one has explained how this new law will save millions, as Rick Scot would have you believe.
And in case some missed this; all of us on these boards are drug users under the law. So WE ALL have something to lose, not just welfare recipients. If you think this will stop with only welfare recipients then we need only look to how the Patriot act turned into spying on American citizens.
Give our government an inch and they will take a mile. Open the door for our government to infringe on personal rights/freedom and you will never be able to close the flood gates.
Such an easy way around this law...
Again, where is the savings in all this? No one has explained how this new law will save millions, as Rick Scot would have you believe.
And in case some missed this; all of us on these boards are drug users under the law. So WE ALL have something to lose, not just welfare recipients. If you think this will stop with only welfare recipients then we need only look to how the Patriot act turned into spying on American citizens.
Give our government an inch and they will take a mile. Open the door for our government to infringe on personal rights/freedom and you will never be able to close the flood gates.
upside the majic eight ball says try again later...negative test, nailed to the board with hypodermic increased thresholds.
perfect circular box.
Who wins with either scenario? Right pocket.
Trickle up is taking money that would have gone back into the economy and stashes it in a personal greed investment. $1.68 going back into the economy for every assistance dollar spent.
Not even Rick Walker floated that.
As I understand it Gov Scott is mandating drug testing for ALL state employees regardless of cause,as well as welfare and other government receipiants. Scott signed over his 62 million dollar interest in the drug testing companies to a third person so there is no conflict for him. The person that he signed the interest to is his WIFE, so we all know and can rest assured that another republicant will take care of ALL the people who elected him and not line his own pockets. We know that will never happen, hell he was or rather the first company he ran, paid the largest fine in the countries history for medicare fraud. Its not about the drug testing rather about him making more money.
G
Guest 88950
According to legislative analysts,113,346 people are receiving temporary cash assistance. However, only people 18 and older will be tested, and officials from the Department of Children and Families estimate that will total about 4,400 adults who apply for aid each month.
Officials estimate the initial screenings would cost about $10 per person – refundable if the individual passes – and first-time failures will be disqualified for one year from receiving benefits under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. A second failure disqualifies the individual for three years.
The numbers are a bit different than the 80/20 you have been led to believe
also it's a lot closer to revenue neutrality...
i admit, all my numbers were crap. just wanted to make the point that no one knows who is using drugs so everyone is tested.
@ the 44,000 adult applicants per month @ $10 per test totaling $440,000 per month before you deduct those who failed the test and wasnt reimbursed. if 30% fail then the state saved $132,000 and therefore the total monthly reimbursement of $308,000 per month.
i wont dispute that there will be some savings as a result of denying benefits based on a + test but i dont think that the savings will offset the cost of reimbursing for the drug test.
i also dont believe the test will be retailed for $10. who here has herd of a complete test for $10. a test that covers every illicit drug, and for $10. hah.....let me sell you some oceanfront property in arizona Sir.
TANF POLICY BRIEF
http://www.clasp.org/admin/site/publications/files/0520.pdf
DAG, i pulled the numbers out of my ass, 80% / 20%, but was close according to the above 5 pg PDF.
EDIT:
for those bent out of shape b/c tax $$$ are spent on dole checks......move on to bigger fish.
forget the dole check cheats and get the real crooks defrauding Medicaid/Medicare to the tune of Billions. the wall street mega millionaires who got bailed out of their clusterfuck while retirement fund and pensions were decimated.
G
Guest 18340
Yeah, cause we all know only leaches like to get high...About time!!!!!!!
Good for them. Keep the leaches out of the system.
IMO, it's economic contraction at the expense of ideology. We might even have some good ol' trickle up greed going on. For every dollar Fl withholds in just food stamps, 68 cents is never generated.
IMO, it's not unlike voter fraud. We have zilch evidence that voters themselves are fraudulent. But we do have concrete examples of election fraud.
What's the solution? Require low income folks to get photo IDs when there's no evidence they're falsifying identification.
I went to the wrong poling place last election. Same county, hell it was the same street. I almost was allowed to vote at the wrong place. Fraud is nonexistent if I didn't cast another vote elsewhere. And that's part of what's being flouted as reality.
fukndenny
Member
I guess I was referring to hard drug addicts who leach the system. Not responsible cannabis users.
G
Guest 88950
from Pg 2 of the above pdf
It is Costly to Administer Accurate Results
"Administrative costs associated with drug testing are significant, and the tests themselves each cost anywhere from $35‐76.11 These costs are increased by the need to repeat tests to confirm results and avoid false positives. Therefore, in order to provide due process protections against false positives, many states such as Idaho and Utah would have to require confirmation of results, meaning human service agencies may have to conduct repeat tests of split samples before imposing sanctions.12 It is not cost effective to test all applicants or participants, regardless of whether they show any indications of drug use. Since few substance abusers are identified in tests, but many are tested, the cost of catching a drug abuser may run between $20,000 and $77,000 per person, as businesses and government employers have found when they have done testing.13"
looks like it might be costly to find 1 drug user.
