that's the basic gist of it. people are saying this is unconstitutional and a violation of privacy. The governor said that it was not the tax payer's position to foot the bill for other people's addictions. ...if you're not doing anything wrong then you have nothing to hide and people will only know that you're not on drugs. ...but some say that forcing that is still wrong. wat say you?
Why should we also pay for their medical problems when they are old and infirm?
Its because the baby boomers are still in charge and they are getting old.
The governor said that it was not the tax payer's position to foot the bill for other people's addictions.
If its something dangerous they should get welfare in the form of help, if its something like marijuana they should get welfare like they normally would.
If its something dangerous they should get welfare in the form of help, if its something like marijuana they should get welfare like they normally would.
No its their choice to do the drugs, not the tax payers job to pay for them later.
No its their choice to do the drugs, not the tax payers job to pay for them later.
If they are already getting welfare it shouldn't matter. If they are already getting welfare and are doing a dangerous drug they should get help instead of a check. If they are doing something harmless like marijuana they should still get the check.
If they are already getting welfare it shouldn't matter. If they are already getting welfare and are doing a dangerous drug they should get help instead of a check. If they are doing something harmless like marijuana they should still get the check.
I think it should matter. Sending everyone to rehab is a pain in the pocketbook and just blowing welfare checks on weed is stupid. If I ran welfare you get enough for the basics food, water, clothes, a roof over you and thats it.
Not if you spend the amount they would have been getting in welfare
It will be costing more than there welfare checks for rehab. Even if they are simply getting outpatient treatment it can cost from $1400 to $7500. This method is not as successful as inpatient treatment which runs in the tens of thousands. Source Compare that cost to the average welfare check for a single person is around $600 dollars a month and the cost doesnt add up.
Thats all they do get, if they choose to spend it elsewhere why does it matter?
They wouldn't ever actually receive the checks in my way though. They would merely get the items directly.
But being a state-funded operation, it is expected that the waiting list will be long. If this is the case, you can always go for private but low cost rehab facilities, which tend to discount their already low cost programs for the benefit of those in dire need. There are even facilities which offer entirely free programs for those who cannot pay. Contacting local churches and state social services offices can help you find out if such facilities operate in your area.
The last paragraph in your source, quite an interesting one.
They wouldn't ever actually receive the checks in my way though. They would merely get the items directly.
You complain about the cost of rehab(when it could be free), then want to spend extra money stockpiling and handing out actual goods? And what do you do about housing? You can't give it too them without it costing a fortune, and if you don't give them money they can't live anywhere.
i understand the idea that the governor is trying to get across. its not only that drugs are bad... but isn't it also that people should live within their means? some people will chain smoke pack after pack and drink a six pack a night (or more) every day but they can't afford much in the way of a decent living for themselves let alone their children if they have them.
its a wonder that they aren't going to test these people for alcohol and nicotine and take their funding b/c of those too. technically, if you have money to use and abuse those regularly then you should have money to sustain life. (even if that money is what you're spending... you prob shouldn't be spending it on that)
just b/c of the foreseeable crime rate increase should we allow drug users to continue getting welfare? or should we continue the program and hold our ground w/ maybe adding the extra money to the police budget for more patrols and better equipment?
if they're using drugs and on welfare then its almost certain that they're not trying to better their life or move forward... to warrant welfare you're not making millions to begin with and adding welfare to what you're making still isn't going to make you a millionaire either. should it be like how the gov't views brain dead individuals? ...and by that should the gov't view these individuals as a permanent dead weight on society and no longer fund them? (it parallels in that gov't allows the plug be pulled... b/c they're not gonna pay for it to continue running)
We can, of course, say the same for legal drugs like tobacco, alcohol and coffee. I have no doubt you realise this by your other statement below;
its a wonder that they aren't going to test these people for alcohol and nicotine and take their funding b/c of those too.
which is a valid point. But we know they wont right? And what about me, I spend perhaps 20 pounds a month on some weed, if at all (If they let me, I would farkin well grow my own and not spend ANYTHING). would they take my benefits (welfare) away? Probably! Even tho most adults that frequent the pub spend this every time they go, which can easily be 4-5 times a month (Im being generous with the figures and rounding down, not up)
if you have money to use and abuse those regularly then you should have money to sustain life.
I would have to say that once again its a case of government deciding how we should live our lives, how much is "abusing"?
It wouldnt be so bad if they allowed us to make money on the side. In the UK you cant have someone live with you without declaring it, you cant work extra jobs without declaring it, heck you cant even receive money or have savings without them asking you to declare it (they cant force you, yet)
If they stopped telling me how to live, I might back them up on this.
And for the real junkies, they need help, noone becomes a junkie by choice.
You complain about the cost of rehab(when it could be free), then want to spend extra money stockpiling and handing out actual goods? And what do you do about housing? You can't give it too them without it costing a fortune, and if you don't give them money they can't live anywhere.
Hmmm warehouses are so expensive arent they? As for housing they get the materials and learn to build with it or not. They either live in a poorly made shack or they gain a valuable skill that would help get off welfare. As to last paragraph cheap rehab will still be costing at least half a welfare check, and free rehab is not as common as you seem to think.
