Welfare Drug Testing Bill in Florida (Page 2)

Ya, because only people that live a crappy life use drugs. Paleease! We all know rich people do not use drugs. I'm so saddened by Sheens crappy life that he has to use all those drugs.

Addiction is a disease, one that should be treated as such IF... IF the user wants to change, and needs help doing it. Until then it is all wasted money...... not to mention..... as hard as it is to belive..... you can actually stop using drugs without spending one penny. I know right!!! Who knew??? Been going on for decades.

Right, because it is not possible for one's living environment to be heavily influenced by the drugs they use and the decisions they make?????

What really bothers me that this done under the umbrella of fiscal responsibility and holding people accountable when in reality is a drive to get rid of social programs. Yes, some assistance recipients use drugs.  Some of them buy it with that money that they obtain, but that is a very small minority.  So in order to combat that very small percentage we create a system that will cost more money to implement than the saving that it will bring by cutting that assistance to ineligible users, so no real benefit to the taxpayers.

The only ones that will benefit from all this are the clinics where these tests are administered, and guess who is a big player in that business, yeap the Governor who signed this bill into law.

Isn't anyone else bothered by the hypocrisy?  I’m only basing my statement on the financial side, I have an even bigger problem with the human and moral side but I won’t even go there again.

Thanks, but I was asking who benefits from making sure the "poor stay poor?"

How about we legalize drugs, thereby making the tests unnecessary and, as a secondary benefit, end the war on drugs?  (Certainly this has been discussed mulitple times in previous threads but it would apply here.)  This would end the need for this bill, save billions, and increase revenues through new taxation opportunities.

While we're at it, why not make welfare recipients work?  Give them 3 (or 4) opportunities for jobs that are equal to or better than their previous employment.  If they turn down all 3 (or 4) opportunities or fail to maintain employment for a specific period of time, perhaps 12-18 months, they are removed from the welfare roles.  (If they don't have a job history, any job will do.)  Didn't mean to hijack...

I like all those ideas. 

Unfortunately for the sake of your argument you don't have any proof that it will end up costing the tax payer money. According to the article you posted the tests cost $10 - $25. Taking that much out of their handout check to pay for tests is not going to make anyone starve to death. So there, problem solved, didn't cost us anything we weren't already paying and we get to deny handouts to people who are buying drugs.

You need a lot more hard facts to argue the fiscal side of this. You need to know exactly how much the testing will cost. You need to know how many people will be off the because of this. And you need to know how many people aren't going to bother applying for a handout because they know they can't stay clean enough to get one. Oh and then you need to know how many people stop using drugs so they can get the handout thus relieving costs to the judicial, penal, and rehab facilities. Perhaps one of those who gets off drugs because of this goes on to open a center to keep kids of drugs and saves us all a bundle of money in the process.

It is easy to say this is going to cost a fortune and make a bundle of money for the drug testers. But it is a whole nother thing to prove.

The only problem I have is why should you make money off me doing what I am free to do??? Why? Cars need roads... and as such cars are taxed to pay for roads. SS pays out money, and as such we are taxed to pay for that. We all use federal highways, so we pay for that with gas tax.

But just because sombody wants to smoke, or drink, or gamble or possible use drugs, why do you all of a sudden see this huge revenue stream???

If alcohol puts a financial burden on society, then tax it. If drug use puts a burden on society due to regulation, rehab, and health care for it's users, then tax it's users.

You pay user fees to run races... but I tell you what.. I need some new roads.... I say we should tax triathletes for new roads. Let's tax running shoes and bike sales 25%... that should bring in huge revenues. How would you like that..... it would even be better if we could use that money to pay for the poor unfortunate souls addicted to drugs and send them to rehab so they can get healthy too. Win Win!

Hand outs, really?  I certainly hope that you never fall in hard times and have someone with those opinions on the giving end.  I will leave at that.

Those hard facts already exist, a pilot program was run during the previous administration and it wasn’t implemented because of the cost to benefit ratio.

I don't necessarily condone a tax on drugs, should they be legalized, but I'm a realist and they will be taxed just as other consumables are.  The billions of $ would come from ending the war on drugs, not from new tax revenues. 

ETA: (That is to say that there will be increased tax revenues from the tax on drugs but the real "increase" would be in $ saved by ending WoD.)

While we're at it, why not release all non-violent drug offenders that are in our prison system, saving even more $?

Really?!?! There's a number of Wall Street insiders who absolutely raped this country.  I'd like to see all of them in prison with a very violent sex offender as a cell mate.  But that's just me...

What does this have to do with non-violent drug offenders?  I'd prefer not to have my tax $ spent on the guy who is serving life in prison for being busted 3x for buying bags of marijuana for personal consumption.  There are better things to do with this money, like let me keep it.

As for the Wall Street insiders, look to the politicians that passed the laws.  They are the ones that are truly to blame for the financial crisis that "raped this country."  (Google Fannie Mae/Freddy Mac for starters.  From there, go to Barney Frank.  The list is endless.)

\hijack

Sales tax is sales tax.... what you are talking about, and every other state out there with a budget short fall is a Sin Tax. And that is exactly why most places now are looking at leagalizing it... revenue off taxing it to tax it. Not sales tax. Here in Colorado the State has made Millions in one year off fees alone. I have a real hard time with sin tax..... or rather I'm going to make money off your recreation because I don't approve of it because some book says so "tax". If it's legal, and I'm an adult, and I'm free to do with my body as I please, why should I get taxed for that reason alone?

Actually... you need to back up. The difference is that alcohol is the only legal DRUG. The financial burden alcohol places on society from health,lost time, unproductivity, and crime..... is more than all other illegal drugs COMBINED. So you can go on about the evils of legalizing drugs, but the legal one about every politicial in this country and a large part of the citizenry partakes in causes much more harm. There is a hipocrisy to this argument that is ridiculous... either legalize it all, or criminalize it all... for the same reasons.

I for one am all for legalizing all drugs... not because it is a great idea, not because there will be less addicts or because it will cost less.... simply because it will never be stopped... and the only people making money off of criminalization is criminals. The addicts will always be there. But current legislation of hipocritical laws funnels 100s of billions of dollars to criminal enterprizes every year. That is what is ridiculous.

And just so you know.... I do not use any drugs, even the legal one.

Just because it is legal doesn't mean you are going to be able to collect a tax from it.  think it through. Will you be able to collect some from the legit places,  Yes..   But do you think the person selling everything except MJ is going to be collecting a tax and filing paperwork on it? Of course not,  You first have to set up a system of distribution, Just like in Colorado, they can collect a tax on the permits for the building, the sales tax on the purchase and the extra Sin tax,  but that is only for the actual places willing to be legit.   You can still easily buy MJ without any tax being collected.   To legalize all drugs so you can collect a tax on one is pretty short sighted

You forgot tobacco.