January 11, 2012
-
This Frustrates Me
"Thank you Florida, Kentucky, and Missouri, which are the first states that will require drug testing when applying for welfare. Some people are crying and calling this unconstitutional. How is this unconstitutional? It's OK to drug test people who work for their money but not those who don't?… Re-post this if you'd like to see this done in all 50 states."
This was on a friends facebook status. Hey, whatever. Drug test people who get welfare, I don't care. I don't think it's unconstitutional to do that.
I do have one problem with this statement.
"It's OK to drug test people who work for their money but not those who don't?"
Not EVERYONE on welfare, DOESN'T WORK. HELLO! A lot of people STILL have jobs and DO WORK, they just don't get paid jack sh**, so shut up.
Seriously.
Sorry for cussing, I just get tired of that. I realize there's a stigma to welfare and that the abusers definitely give it a bad name (I still can't quite figure out how people abuse the system. When I was on welfare, we had to provide like everything under the freaking sun, so how can these people actually abuse the system? They must be slick or something. I don't get it. But I know it exists. I just wish EVERYONE, who is on welfare, wasn't stereotyped like that. It just frustrates me.
Comments (4)
You know, I've seen this on FB before. I've even been tempted to re-post it (and I don't re-post often because I feel it's too robotic & insincere). Perhaps I did & just forgot.
Either way, I never thought about that portion of the post. I fully support exactly what it is saying (those on welfare who do not work - as THEY are the ones likely doing drugs, not those on welfare who are working since workplaces can drug test at will) but I never thought of the OTHER way one could take it.
It sucks because sometimes a few rotten apples spoils the bunch for everyone. I can see where you're coming from on this.
@MyTwoCentss - Hmm, yeah... I never saw it that way, but that makes sense, too. And that would be something I would fully support. If one has no desire to work and just wants to get benefits, then yeah... totally.
I can understand completely! There was a time when my husband and I needed a little help. We drew food stamps and unemployment after he got out of the military and was looking for a job. That didn't mean we were lazy drug addicted bums, it just meant that we were in transition and needed a little help. When we were back on our feet, we stopped collecting. And you're right, I'm not really sure how people manage to abuse the system because there's a tremendous amount of paperwork and checking in.
Although I do know a woman who has been in and out of rehab several times; she's single and has had her children removed from her custody. She was still able to draw food stamps and unemployment even though she wasn't even looking for work. So yeah, I'm all for drug testing for welfare. I don't think it's right for those kind of people to be able to draw government money so they can use what cash they have to buy drugs. But I'm also of a mind that they need to be able to regulate what food stamps can buy. I think it should be able to include other necessities like toilet paper and hygiene. And I think it should be regulated so that unhealthy food can't be purchased. I watched that same woman use her food stamps to buy nothing but junk food and soda. But that's REALLY pushing the envelope on regulations and restrictions and I know the majority of people would probably be against the government telling you what kinds of food you can buy. But part of me says that if you're using their money (tax payer money), you should according to their regulations. I don't particularly enjoy the thought of part of my husband's paycheck going to help folks kill themselves with unhealthy food.
@greene_lily - I worked as a cashier for a couple of years at Walmart in the past. I'd say half or more of those on assistance bought more junk food than customers not on assistance.
I'm not saying this prejudicely either. My husband and I were on assistance for less than a year - during pregnancy & the first few months of our son's life. Then we moved so that we could get out on our own feet as it was never going to happen in the high cost of living area we were at. Since we moved, we've never gone on assistance since. Except for loans here & there when things were bad, but that's not gov't assistance.
Comments are closed.