Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Swampfox10mm]

Do you see a trend in this sort of thing?

Could get interesting:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110531/us_nm/us_florida_welfare_drugs

[Kuros]

This is fair.

Once bestowed, welfare becomes a property right that can only be taken away by some sort of evidentiary hearing.

[NYC_Gal 2.0]

As long as rehab is offered for free, I think it's fair.

[Sergio Stefanuto]

It's a situation that should never have arisen. They should never have banned drugs to begin with, and neither should we permit people to become idle scroungers.

There could be nothing more pernicious than state paternalism.

[young_clinton]

Some people will take the risk and be kicked off of welfare to the detriment of the children. Drug rehab is definately a necessity, along with second chances. Overall a very good idea. In education I think Texas and some other states have had good success improving education by tying ample money given for education with demands for results from the money, the same should be done for any money given out by the government to anybody for anything. Otherwise I think the money goes down the drain.

[jaykimf]

[sirius black]

I am totally against this new law. First, I have a problem with its violation of civil liberties. Its no ones business what anyone, even those who receive state aid, do with their own bodies.

This law wrongly assumes that if a person on aid has taken illegal drugs that person has done so with monies received from the state. Its an assumption that is not based on fact. Are there any studies or such information that even shows that people on state aid are using the funds to purchase illicit funds? If a person from state aid is given a marijuana cigerate at a party or whatever, what business is it of the state to test someone to find out if they have? This bill includes all state workers as well. If you are doing your job its no business of the government to force you to reveal if you're doing illicit drugs in your spare time.

The measure says that those who want aid must pay for their drug tests and be reimubursed if they are clean. Hmm...I lost my job and am financially strapped and now I have to come up with money to pay for my own drug test? Money I presumably don't have which is why I am asking for aid in the first place. Also, this adds to the cost of an already financially strapped Florida. Is the cost justified? Its possibly presumed that the amount of people who are on aid who are tested positive will have a net plus result. Any proof it would be?

Its hypocritical as welll. That same governor was against the illegal use of prescription meds like Oxycotin, Vicadin, etc. until recently. Its well known that those drugs have been abused by the middle and upper classes. Floridian Rush Limbaugh being one of the most famous abusers. Michael Jackson another and its an abuse that his doctor is being taken to court over.

The govervor has changed his mind about investigating this only when the hypocracy has been pointed out.

http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/the-buzz-florida-politics/category/buzz-tags/prescription-drug-monitoring-database
Gov. Rick Scott's decision to drop his opposition to a prescription drug monitoring database drew plaudits Thursday from Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear, who had personally urged Scott to change his mind.

The hypocracy becomes even more evident when its now revealed that the governor owned a company that does drug screening and transferred ownership to his wife prior to authorizing this act.

http://www.examiner.com/hernando-county-political-buzz-in-tampa-bay/gov-rick-scott-forces-drug-testing-for-public-aid-hernando-co-florida
Among the companies that may do Scott�s drug testing is Solantic. Scott co-founded the urgent care chain, then in January, transferred his ownership share to his wife.
�Given Solantic's role in that marketplace, critics are again asking whether Scott's policy initiatives - this time, requiring drug testing of state employees and welfare recipients - are designed to benefit Scott's bottom line

In theory, if its okay for the state to test welfare recipients, then it would be okay to test ANYONE receiving monies from the state. Why not test EVERY student who receives state monies to pay for college? I would assume the bill also includes their professors if it doesn't already but if not, they are susceptible as well. Why shouldn't the state test the recipients of anyone receiving a state loan or grant for their company or small business? Why not test all retirees on state pension?

Finally, here is a great MSNBC piece on the hypocracy of Republicans touting 'small government' that includes Rick Scott's bill.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hH9eBnpmEhA

[Kuros]

[Fox]

[sirius black]