• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

Example of What's Wrong with America

Edit* then according to the guide they follow to approve you, there is no way you could afford to go on a cruise ship or a trip to Hawaii. ( added the extra not in the original)
 
Well when I was on public assistance, it was me and my two children, there was no way I had extra money to save for vacation. All the money I received went to rent, utilities, gas and the kids and was still short on month expenses from time to time. So I can not see where those that are on public assistance could be able to use it as extra on vacations.
 
beautifullywild77 said:
Well when I was on public assistance, it was me and my two children, there was no way I had extra money to save for vacation. All the money I received went to rent, utilities, gas and the kids and was still short on month expenses from time to time. So I can not see where those that are on public assistance could be able to use it as extra on vacations.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure either, but I don't think it's fair to use our personal experiences as the gold standard of behaviour for other people. Like I said, I'd need to know the circumstances of those expenditures.

Basically, we have two different points of view based on incomplete information: You and tsst seem to assume with the limited amount of information that the people who spent that money are wrong for having done so and that should be curtailed. I assume they were in the right for having done so and are not the problem.

Really, either point of view is equally possible at this point, however, my belief that drives my reactions is that the assumption that these people are wrong is based on a form of classism that is creeping across the first world and is something I vehemently disagree with as a matter of principle.

Put simply, I think your assumptions about these people are rooted in a very subtle form of prejudice.
 
I have and always will support random drug tests for anyone on any type of Government Assistance... I had to submit to drug tests while in the military. Most jobs in the US require drug tests to even get the job, and then you sign a waver for many that allows the employer to randomly drug test you... Heck, now that I am collecting VA disability they can randomly test me. If I pop positive, there will be an investigation... Which is what I suggest for those on welfare as well.

I believe that anyone receiving any kind of Government assistance should have to submit to random drug tests. I also believe that those who's accounts are found to being used in Casino's, on alcohol, tobacco, etc, should be under investigation for fraud and theft. Honestly, it is not the responsibility of tax payers to pay for your addictions.
 
It is fraud and the California government is trying to do something about it! Has nothing to do with how I personally feel. There are investigations into the fraud and reforms being put in effect.
 
beautifullywild77 said:
Where did PETA come into the picture or the thread?

This is an example of those changing the subject just for the sake of an argument.
Click to expand...
On a site that is typical of having anti-Peta message, mostly because of it's anthropomorphism and over-statements of animals and people, I think that it's ironic that under a different political perspective it's acceptable to compare humans to animals. That's all, hope I spelled it out... thanks!
 
Michael823 said:
On a site that is typical of having anti-Peta message, mostly because of it's anthropomorphism and over-statements of animals and people, I think that it's ironic that under a different political perspective it's acceptable to compare humans to animals. That's all, hope I spelled it out... thanks!
Click to expand...

Michael, just admit it. You just want to start a fight about something. If it isn't calling someone PETA, it is calling someone racist or prejudice. It is very tiring... I do have one question for you though... Why do I never see you posting about snakes? You only seem to talk in threads that are politically charged.. I am sure that there are many Political forums out there that you can go play on.
 
Outcast said:
I believe that anyone receiving any kind of Government assistance should have to submit to random drug tests. I also believe that those who's accounts are found to being used in Casino's, on alcohol, tobacco, etc, should be under investigation for fraud and theft. Honestly, it is not the responsibility of tax payers to pay for your addictions.
Click to expand...
See, this is something that only a lack of experience with a specific disease or condition, I would say. And I will say that I agree with much of the premise of getting people on assistance away from drugs and alcohol, but there are many forms of assistance. Some of which are cases that are just extreme, and it's quite unfair to think that those people need to be drug tested. And while I hear your example of being tested in the military, that was your choice. And you were asked to carry out missions of extreme life or death. It was for your best interest, without question, to test you for those things.

I can also understand that you feel it's in our country's best interest to do this also for those on any type of assistance, but I think there needs to really be a sensitive attempt to at least try to understand the rights of people in special circumstances that are not on drugs, and still quite uncomfortable with this idea. Some people could not survive without some form of assistance, and to them it's basically a way of intruding on their lives, for something outside of that person's control, only to send the message of fear that assistance that means the difference between a roof and no roof, it just almost seems like terrorism. Especially where many of these people have conditions that make it ridiculous to think that they would even get into drugs, cigarettes or alcohol.

And I'll be specific, just to hope to explain further. But I have a very rare muscular disease, and I struggle to even reach the 90lb mark, and I have limited physical ability. I have been prodded my entire life by people who have 'opinions' about why someone is that thin, and why I should feel guilty about it. People have literally approached me at my vehicle in a parking lot because of my condition (mostly because human beings are natural skeptical, and naturally have negative reactions to things outside of their experience). I am thankful for everyday that I'm alive, and for the life that I have. But I make sacrifices just like everyone else. I give all that I have just like everyone else. And I just want to have a fair presumption of who I am, without all of the demoralization that happens to people with disabilities when they have to live a life of constant scrutiny.

People want to talk about not wanting the Gov't in your lives. Try living with a condition that makes you stand out like a soar thumb. That's all I'm saying. I make the most of my time and resources, because who knows what my future is with my disability. That's not to ask for sympathy, but people should try to understand that not all people are the same. I just expect that I can be given the benefit of the doubt, when my reason for needing assistance is literally outside of my control, and complete nonsense to be compared to predispositions that would lead to drug/alcohol abuse.
 
Outcast said:
Michael, just admit it. You just want to start a fight about something. If it isn't calling someone PETA, it is calling someone racist or prejudice. It is very tiring... I do have one question for you though... Why do I never see you posting about snakes? You only seem to talk in threads that are politically charged.. I am sure that there are many Political forums out there that you can go play on.
Click to expand...
Honestly, I've really never had a problem with you. I'm just going to respond by saying that I think this is a bit much. I very much post about snakes, and I think that's pretty irrelevant to begin with. If you're upset about previous threads, don't bring it up here. It's as petty as what you'd be accusing me of right now.
 
Honestly, I feel that if someone is taking Government money, and therefore Taxpayer money, they should submit to Government drug tests. The government is already involved in their lives. The tests would eventually help those who do not abuse drugs, by removing those who do from the system. More money would be able to go to those who need it, not those who are abusing the system. There may not be nearly as many who abuse the system as I feel there are.

But, I grew up in an area where healthy people were abusing the system because they were lazy, good for nothing, won't keep a job for more than a week, has 3 baby daddy's, or 4 baby momma's, and keeps having babies, because they get a bigger check to go down to the gas station to buy more lottery tickets.

I saw it nearly on a daily basis, and those people were not even trying to hide that they were screwing the system, they were bragging about it, loud enough that I thought the IRS could hear...
 
As someone that has been on assistance, they questions that are asked and the rules and things you have to do to get assistance is very intrusive and being drug tested would just be part of the process. I wouldn't object to being drug tested to receive benefits, especially if it helps weed out those that are abusing it. Those that are on assistance have to go through the welfare job program and apply for jobs which require drug testing anyways.
 
And to add, there is a limited number of years now that ones can be on cash assistance in their whole lifetime and you just can't move to another state and start it over.
 
Michael823 said:
Honestly, I've really never had a problem with you. I'm just going to respond by saying that I think this is a bit much. I very much post about snakes, and I think that's pretty irrelevant to begin with. If you're upset about previous threads, don't bring it up here. It's as petty as what you'd be accusing me of right now.
Click to expand...

Your attitude towards other members here is what has caused my outburst. Yes, it was not relevant to the conversation, but I have seen you call people racist because they did not agree with yours or Ricky's ideals. And, seeing you practically calling someone PETA, because of a statement that they made, sent me over the edge. You call others names in a very subtle way, but it really grates my nerves, sort of how nails on a chalkboard does the same to others.
 
Why should someone who, if were addicted to drugs and/or alcohol would be at serious risk of fatal complications due to their condition, not have the benefit of the doubt over their own decision making. That's all I'm saying. We're not animals, as compared to by some. We're not handouts, as compared to by some. And we really don't ask for much (if nothing at all). Sometimes we get breaks, and all appreciation for that, but I can't value the opinion of someone with no knowledge or understanding of my situation, that tells me there is no circumstance that should allow you the decency for someone to say "hey, for some people, especially those with pre-existing conditions, it's not necessary to have them go through those types of procedures, as logic says that it is not worth the expense of testing people with special needs that would only prove to have been useless to test.".

I mean, would you be fine being the guy to escort someone with a life-altering condition to get drug tested. Could you look at that person and say, "there's a possibility that you're still a huge risk to be addicted to drugs and alcohol"... I think some might say that they'd be comfortable with that "in order to weed out the bad ones". But I think reasonable people would prioritize.
 
Outcast said:
Your attitude towards other members here is what has caused my outburst. Yes, it was not relevant to the conversation, but I have seen you call people racist because they did not agree with yours or Ricky's ideals. And, seeing you practically calling someone PETA, because of a statement that they made, sent me over the edge. You call others names in a very subtle way, but it really grates my nerves, sort of how nails on a chalkboard does the same to others.
Click to expand...
First of all, this is very out of context. I think the comparison of people and animals was quite clear to both Peta and the bears/people analogy, but personally, I am not going to be upset by how you took it. I don't believe that the OP of what I commented on with that quote was all that insightful, or worth enough energy to even clarify.

Second of all, like I said, it's irrelevant to compare my posts in this thread with other posts of mine (or anyone else'). It's clear that you are upset by me, and it's not worth my energy to feel the same. I explain myself (or try to) and that's it. But I don't appreciate the over-sensitivity, when I think you're basically accusing me of something that you're doing right now.

Either way, it's really not worth me even starting to sweat over. I post my opinions. I do make an effort not to deeply offend anyone, and I try to defend beliefs that 'I' find worth it to defend. And if this is the direction of the thread from here on out, it's really in no one's best interest.
 
Lets take this from the top Michael....

I am a recovering/recovered Alcoholic. Like many Veterans out there, after my first deployment to a war zone, I turned to alcohol. Just talking about it makes me very thirsty still, and I have been sober since roughly October of 2008. Not a day goes by that I don't wish that I had a beer, or a shot.

I also suffer from PTSD, a mental condition that many veterans and civilians suffer from. This is one reason that I do not drink. If I were to have a flashback while drunk, someone would get hurt.

I also have a genetic problem that I was born with in my back. It was not caught until after I got out of the military, but it started bothering me while I was in the military. Now the VA is trying to fix it with physical Therapy, though that doesn't seem to be working, so one day I may be looking at some pretty rough surgery.

To tell me that I do not understand where you are coming from, or that my opinion is useless because I do not have your experiences is very shortsighted. You neither know what I have been through, or what ailments I face.

So please understand me when I say. I am prioritizing when I state that everyone, EVERYONE! should have to take a drug test while on government assistance. If the drugs are prescribed, then that should be accounted for, if they are abusing drugs, whether prescription or controlled substances, then well, that should be investigated.

Do not mistake me for some kid who has never experienced anything in my short 25 (almost 26) years on this earth. I have had to do things that I would never wish on anyone, some of which drove me to drinking, and still makes my flesh crawl when I think about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top