RE: Glass houses and stones don't mix

RE: Glass houses and stones don't mix (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DarqueMirror -> RE: Glass houses and stones don't mix (1/17/2012 12:59:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic he is batting 1000 tonite on guessing what we mean and want, he hasnt been RIGHT yet on any of his strawmen, except in his opinion LOL My average is better than yours. yours is the straw man that suggests all politicians are drugged up boozers and that it somehow means that they shouldn't be passing these laws (forgetting that the people elected them to do just that). And I don't have to guess what you want, it's written in every post you make. Fact: Drug testing can help prepare the non-working people to enter the workforce in which testing has become the norm, if only for its deterrent effect. Fact: Most of the American work force already gets tested. Fact: You don't want non-working citizens, who are given FREE money to have to deal with the same thing working citizens do. Those are the facts, and they are undisputed.

tazzygirl -> RE: Glass houses and stones don't mix (1/17/2012 1:01:32 AM)
quote: Oh come now. You can't really believe that. If they qualify for welfare, they also qualify to get food stamps and government housing as well. In government housing, most don't pay utilities, so that's out as well. Notice I didnt say food. Government housing, which is Section 8, has a massively long waiting list, or havent you noticed the headlines about that? Waiting List Because there are so many families who need affordable rental housing, the fairest way for housing authorities to select families is through a waiting list. Applicants for Miami-Dade Public Housing and Community Development's subsidized rental housing programs are placed on a ranked waiting list compiled using a lottery-like system. All across the country. They arent getting rent paid, or housing, when on the list. And, to get a good indication of how long that waiting list is... Waiting List 2008 Applicants from the 2008 waiting list are currently being processed If you cannot view PDF files, you can download Acrobat Reader for free from Adobe Systems, Inc. In order to use PDF files, you must have Acrobat installed on your computer. Back to Top Page Last Edited: Thu Nov 10, 2011 4:47:14 PM http://www.miamidade.gov/housing/waitlist.asp So please, admit your lack of knowledge here and move on.

DarqueMirror -> RE: Glass houses and stones don't mix (1/17/2012 1:02:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic but keep making it about MY hate and emotion please Pardon me, who brought up the word hate first? That honor is yours alone.

Lucylastic -> RE: Glass houses and stones don't mix (1/17/2012 1:04:27 AM)
I wonder if this little snippet, quote: the first 40 applicants tested, only two came up positive, and one of those was appealing.The state will also have to spend considerably more to defend the policy in court Will bring up the suggestion by ANOYONE that they shouldnt be allowed to appeal, either. after all its alll about saving money isnt it?

tazzygirl -> RE: Glass houses and stones don't mix (1/17/2012 1:05:45 AM)
quote: Fact: Drug testing can help prepare the non-working people to enter the workforce in which testing has become the norm, if only for its deterrent effect. Fact: Most of the American work force already gets tested. Fact: You don't want non-working citizens, who are given FREE money to have to deal with the same thing working citizens do. Fact : employers bare the burden of those drug tests. Fact : not every employee gets tested.. as we have proven. But all welfare recipients will be. Fact: employees have options other than just one employer Fact : over half of those on welfare have been working. Many states have limits as to how long you can be on the program. 5 years is the longest I have seen.

DarqueMirror -> RE: Glass houses and stones don't mix (1/17/2012 1:07:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Notice I didnt say food. Government housing, which is Section 8, has a massively long waiting list, or havent you noticed the headlines about that? Now you're going to complain about waiting lists? Sheessh. Let's just go ahead and give these people everything they could ever want, for nothing in return. Damn, let me on your "help" list. Sheesh. quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl So please, admit your lack of knowledge here and move on. I have a lot more knowledge than you do, apparently. I work with more than a couple of folks who have vast experience in this area (being that they're some of the only few in their families with jobs). I'm well versed in their tales on how many of their family members are gaming the system.

tazzygirl -> RE: Glass houses and stones don't mix (1/17/2012 1:08:59 AM)
quote: Now you're going to complain about waiting lists? Sheessh. Let's just go ahead and give these people everything they could ever want, for nothing in return. Damn, let me on your "help" list. Sheesh. Ah, you mistake facts for complaining, Interesting. Quit derailing. quote: I have a lot more knowledge than you do, apparently. I work with more than a couple of folks who have vast experience in this area (being that they're some of the only few in their families with jobs). I'm well versed in their tales on how many of their family members are gaming the system. Ever been on it? Let me tell you. The gaming days are over.

tazzygirl -> RE: Glass houses and stones don't mix (1/17/2012 1:11:59 AM)
Now, lets go back to the discussion, and the question you refuse to answer. Why is it illegal search when it applies to the politicians, but not when it applies to welfare recipients, even though the SC has ruled that it was in breach of the 4th Amendment?

DarqueMirror -> RE: Glass houses and stones don't mix (1/17/2012 1:14:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Fact : employers bare the burden of those drug tests. And? So does the government (since in most cases outside Georgia the state reimburses the cost). quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Fact : not every employee gets tested.. as we have proven. But all welfare recipients will be. Yet I have been tested for every job, as has nearly everyone I know. I have yet so see an employer not require a test. This includes but is not limited to: Grocery checker, Blockbuster manager, Military, Temp Office work, the medical field, security, IT, police, fire department, EMT (technically counts as medical as well), construction, A/C-heating tech, etc. etc. Pretty much all blue collar jobs require the test. So why not prep those on welfare to expect to be tested for a job? What possible harm can preparation do? quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Fact: employees have options other than just one employer Yeah, options that all like to test employees. quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Fact : over half of those on welfare have been working. Many states have limits as to how long you can be on the program. 5 years is the longest I have seen. So they double dip, hmmm? Yet another way to game the system. Nice. [8\|]

DarqueMirror -> RE: Glass houses and stones don't mix (1/17/2012 1:17:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Ah, you mistake facts for complaining, Interesting. Quit derailing. I'm derailing? You brought up rent and housing. You quit derailing. quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Ever been on it? Let me tell you. The gaming days are over. I know you like to think so, but considering the conversation I'm privy to nearly every night, the reality seems to disagree with you.

DarqueMirror -> RE: Glass houses and stones don't mix (1/17/2012 1:23:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Now, lets go back to the discussion, and the question you refuse to answer. Why is it illegal search when it applies to the politicians, but not when it applies to welfare recipients, even though the SC has ruled that it was in breach of the 4th Amendment? I refused to answer? I've already answered. I said MONTHS ago when topics like this first started that I thought everyone should be tested. Everyone. Leaving no one out. But acknowledging that hurts your debate because you like to think I'm only for testing the poor, I'm not. I'm for testing everyone across the board. Even more than that, I'm for cameras everywhere watching everything. But that's a whole different topic for debate. None of which helps your incorrect assumption that I was ever for testing only the poor. Let me say it again: I've been tested for every job I've ever held. Yet I've never even touched drugs. As such, I want everyone tested. How about this: Instead Of whining about not testing the poor because the politicians get to skate it, why not write letters to your congressman demanding tests for politicians as well?

tazzygirl -> RE: Glass houses and stones don't mix (1/17/2012 1:29:14 AM)
quote: Yet I have been tested for every job, as has nearly everyone I know. I have yet so see an employer not require a test. This includes but is not limited to: Grocery checker, Blockbuster manager, Military, Temp Office work, the medical field, security, IT, police, fire department, EMT (technically counts as medical as well), construction, A/C-heating tech, etc. etc. Pretty much all blue collar jobs require the test. So why not prep those on welfare to expect to be tested for a job? What possible harm can preparation do? I havent been tested in years except at one job. Funny how there are employers who are just not willing to pay for that test.

tazzygirl -> RE: Glass houses and stones don't mix (1/17/2012 1:35:32 AM)
quote: I refused to answer? I've already answered. I said MONTHS ago when topics like this first started that I thought everyone should be tested. Everyone. Leaving no one out. But acknowledging that hurts your debate because you like to think I'm only for testing the poor, I'm not. I'm for testing everyone across the board. What part of illegal search arent you getting? TANF already allows drug testing for cause. Most employers also have that clause. This isnt for cause, this is for bullshit because people like you believe everyone is using if they are on public assistance. Jobs where you are dealing with safety of the public, jobs where you are handling money, jobs where you could endanger the public, or property... those jobs should be drug tested.. and are. Welfare recipients do not do any of those things. What they are having happen is being penalized for being poor. The law makers thought they would make a killing from denying assistance to druggies... and got caught with their pants down when less than 0.5% tested positive in Florida at the end. You can cloud it up with your wanting everyone to be tested. Its a fallacy. Everyone isnt. Nor should they without cause.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Glass houses and stones don't mix (1/17/2012 1:38:40 AM)
quote: the first 40 applicants tested, only two came up positive, and one of those was appealing.The state will also have to spend considerably more to defend the policy in court I'm no mathemetician (by any stretch of anyone's imagination) but, since when is two people out of 40, 2%? Unless I miss my guess; it's 5%. Is it not? Now, is there a huge difference between 2% and 5%? Not when stated that way but, if there are 10,000 people on assistance and they each get $400 per month, isn't that $4,000,000 per month? Okay. 2% of $4,000,000 is $80,000. 5% of $4,000,000 is $200,000. I could live on that difference (at today's prices) for 4-5 years! I'll take a damned test, every week! Peace and comfort, Michael

Lucylastic -> RE: Glass houses and stones don't mix (1/17/2012 1:43:40 AM)
Tazzys number are real numbers. Mine stating those numbers were specifically out of the first 40 cases tested ONLY not all of the ones that were. Mine was an anecdote NOT all the figures included I should have made that clearer My link, is not the same as Tazzys just to clarify[:)]

DaddySatyr -> RE: Glass houses and stones don't mix (1/17/2012 1:45:03 AM)
Gotcha. Okay. I was just very confused because while I am not in favor of drug testing (as I stated, earlier), That, right there, makes a huge difference (if it were the case)

Lucylastic -> RE: Glass houses and stones don't mix (1/17/2012 1:47:30 AM)
well the links are there .. Its not even five yet so Im not up to getting in deeper yet, I need at least another cofffeee before my research fu works properly Have a good one:)[;)]

DaddySatyr -> RE: Glass houses and stones don't mix (1/17/2012 1:50:50 AM)
Yeah, I couldn't see the links. It's all good. I've read almost every post on this thread so I'm reasonably up to snuff. I jumped to a conclusion and I apologize. My math was right, though! LOL I would even hasten to suggest that there are more than 10,000 people receiving assistance so, you can probably multiply all of my figures by a factor of at least 10. Peace and comfort, Michael

Lucylastic -> RE: Glass houses and stones don't mix (1/17/2012 1:55:57 AM)
its all good:) yeah math is fine:)

tazzygirl -> RE: Glass houses and stones don't mix (1/17/2012 1:59:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr Yeah, I couldn't see the links. It's all good. I've read almost every post on this thread so I'm reasonably up to snuff. I jumped to a conclusion and I apologize. My math was right, though! LOL I would even hasten to suggest that there are more than 10,000 people receiving assistance so, you can probably multiply all of my figures by a factor of at least 10. Peace and comfort, Michael Your math is correct. At the end, before the court called a halt to the testing, 32 people out of 7000 were found testing positive. I think that belies the fact that drug testing will rake in the millions they believed it would. Allow me to add that one of those two are contesting the results. The results therefore drop to 2.5%?

Page: << < prev 4 5 6 [7] 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875