Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Interstates 95 And 75 Will Be Jammed  
User currently offlinegeezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2671 times:

I just heard this, so I haven't had a chance to check it out yet; It sounds like a pretty good plan to me; it will be interesting to hear what others think.

Charley




I-95 and I-75 will be jammed for the next month or so with druggies and
deadbeats heading North out of Florida, because this is the first state in
the union to require drug testing to receive welfare!

In signing the new law, Republican Gov. Rick Scott
said, "If Floridians want welfare, they better make sure they are
drug-free".

Applicants must pay for the drug test, but are reimbursed if they test
drug-free.

Applicants who test positive for illicit substances won't be eligible for
the funds for a year, or until they undergo treatment.

Those who fail a second time will be banned from receiving funds for three
years!

Naturally, a few people are crying this is unconstitutional. How is this
unconstitutional? It's a legal requirement that every person applying for a
JOB has to pass drug tests in order to get the JOB, why not those who
receive welfare?


I might add to that last paragraph, for the last 10 or so years I worked, we were subject to have to go for a random test any time; the terminal would receive orders from the corporate office........send driver so and so for a random test as soon as he comes to work; I've even had to go take the test twice in one month; you'd be surprised at how many drivers gave up smoking "pot".

The union made the company pay us about four hours pay, and our hourly rate was around $20 at the time (late 80's )
and it usually only took an hour and a half or two hours, so I was glad to do it; (I even "volunteered" to go for guys that thought they might not pass) If the public ever knew how many truck drivers were smoking weed back then, there would have been a revolt; one of the few good things I ever remember the feds doing.

Here's my only "beef.........even though I never got "into" the pot thing, I worked with a hell of a lot of guys who did, and I really think most of them were less than 1/10 the risk driving after a weekend smoking a few joints, than someone who showed up for work 10 hours after being plastered on their butts from too much beer. I'm totally convinced that beer has caused far more crashes than pot ever has. Yet you could get drunk, go to work 10 hrs later, and be legal ! See why I have such faith in the " gubmint" ?


Charley


Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
85 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinego3team From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3266 posts, RR: 17
Reply 1, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2659 times:

I can't remember how many Gov't mandated randoms I've had in the past 16 years, but I do remember the 4 I had to take in one month because that is how random it is. I also remember having the owner of the company taking me over to do mine, because he had to do his too. Exactly how hard is it to pee in a cup to get a check?


Yay Pudding!
User currently offlinephotopilot From Canada, joined Jul 2002, 2632 posts, RR: 18
Reply 2, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2608 times:

Here's the only problem with this.

You get smashed on alcohol and within a day all traces of the alcohol are out of your system. However THC, the active ingredient in Marijuana is fat soluable and a person can show residual traces for quite some time after, even though there are no psychotropic effects left.


User currently offlinestarbuk7 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 599 posts, RR: 5
Reply 3, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 2546 times:

Quoting photopilot (Reply 2):
You get smashed on alcohol and within a day all traces of the alcohol are out of your system. However THC, the active ingredient in Marijuana is fat soluable and a person can show residual traces for quite some time after, even though there are no psychotropic effects left.


Drugs are Illegal, alcohol is not, so this is very fair IMHO.


User currently offlinesprout5199 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1833 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2532 times:

Quoting geezer (Thread starter):
It's a legal requirement that every person applying for a
JOB has to pass drug tests in order to get the JOB, why not those who
receive welfare?

Really? Show me that law.

Quoting geezer (Thread starter):
Naturally, a few people are crying this is unconstitutional. How is this
unconstitutional?

A little thing called the fourth amendment, unlawful search and seizure.

Dan in Jupiter


User currently offlineGSPflyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 367 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2520 times:

Good, people don't need to be wasting money they get from the government on drugs.

I actually think this is more reasonable than drug testing someone who works, at least the person who is working is spending their own money on drugs, not money out of the taxpayers pockets. Now, I'm not saying to get rid of drug testing for jobs, because they are called ILLEGAL drugs for a reason, I'm just pointing something out.


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 11919 posts, RR: 25
Reply 6, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 2487 times:

Quoting geezer (Thread starter):
I-95 and I-75 will be jammed for the next month or so with druggies and
deadbeats heading North out of Florida, because this is the first state in
the union to require drug testing to receive welfare!

Either that, or crime rates will go up, along with police, court and prison costs, as "druggies" decide to just steal what they want. There's no easy answer. If it were easy, it would have been solved long ago.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineCASINTEREST From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4157 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 2469 times:

According to articles I have read, they have only caught 2% of the folks using drugs on welfare throught this method. Their is an estimate that 9% of the population of Florida uses illegal drugs, so maybe the theory of who is doing the drugs is a bit off?

Is this a money loser for the State of Florida? especially now that State Employees....but not legislaters are going to be reguired to undergo the drug testing?



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21088 posts, RR: 56
Reply 8, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 2461 times:

Quoting geezer (Thread starter):
It sounds like a pretty good plan to me

It's a great plan if you don't mind spending money on it. Because it's not saving Florida anything. Quite the reverse, in fact:

http://www.wftv.com/news/news/9-inve...igates-welfare-drug-testing/nFPB3/

This should be a good lesson to everyone who wants government to make laws just on principle. Laws have a cost of enforcement, and if you're not careful, you'll end up paying more to enforce them than you save. If Florida is smart, they'll be repealing this one pretty soon.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8711 posts, RR: 24
Reply 9, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 2450 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 8):
This should be a good lesson to everyone who wants government to make laws just on principle. Laws have a cost of enforcement, and if you're not careful, you'll end up paying more to enforce them than you save. If Florida is smart, they'll be repealing this one pretty soon.

Saving money is not the point. The point is to stop rewarding and enabling bad behavior. There is no question that a meth-head or pot-head is going to have a tougher time finding someone willing to hire them.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21088 posts, RR: 56
Reply 10, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2416 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 9):
Saving money is not the point. The point is to stop rewarding and enabling bad behavior.

If you're willing to spend taxpayer money to do that, fine. But then call it what it is: a social engineering plan, not a cost-saving measure.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinemt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6545 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2415 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Wanst there a counter proposal taht would require Florida Legislators to submit to drug testing as well for them to collect their salary?


Step into my office, baby
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 11919 posts, RR: 25
Reply 12, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2409 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 9):
Saving money is not the point.

Maybe in your mind, but the link in #8 says:

Quote:

Governor Rick Scott said the program would save money.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11123 posts, RR: 15
Reply 13, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2399 times:

First you say:

Quoting geezer (Thread starter):
It sounds like a pretty good plan to me;

Then you say:

Quoting geezer (Thread starter):
Yet you could get drunk, go to work 10 hrs later, and be legal ! See why I have such faith in the " gubmint" ?

So, you want the "gub'mint" out of everyone's lives, but you want the "gub'mint" to be in everyone's lives???

Quoting GSPflyer (Reply 5):
people don't need to be wasting money they get from the government on drugs.

I don't know about Florida, but OR, WA, and CA have cards for people to purchase food. They have to take the card to the supermarket to purchase actual food. They can not simply tear those coupons out and give them to other people. How does that work, exactly?



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlinemmedford From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 561 posts, RR: 9
Reply 14, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2367 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 8):
It's a great plan if you don't mind spending money on it. Because it's not saving Florida anything. Quite the reverse, in fact:
Quoting geezer (Thread starter):
Applicants must pay for the drug test, but are reimbursed if they test
drug-free.

Applicants who test positive for illicit substances won't be eligible for
the funds for a year, or until they undergo treatment.

Hell How much could a drug test costs these days; i'm sure Qwest would love to make a killing on this contract.


Look I'm a Fed Employee...my salary comes out of the same fund that welfare does. I get randomly drug tested, why shouldn't those who get paid out of the same fund get the same treatment?



ILS = It'll Land Somewhere
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21088 posts, RR: 56
Reply 15, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2355 times:

Quoting mmedford (Reply 14):
Look I'm a Fed Employee...my salary comes out of the same fund that welfare does. I get randomly drug tested

Because you're in a safety critical job. So are truck drivers, pilots, air traffic controllers, etc. So drug testing makes sense. But your average welfare recipient is not in a safety critical job, and thus the only point of drug testing is to try and make sure that they're not spending public money on drugs (which is a very different reason from the reason you're on a drug testing program).

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinemmedford From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 561 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2348 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 15):
which is a very different reason from the reason you're on a drug testing program).

How do they know I'm not using public money on drugs?... You know the deal, don't smoke the profits...lol



ILS = It'll Land Somewhere
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21088 posts, RR: 56
Reply 17, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2334 times:

Quoting mmedford (Reply 16):
How do they know I'm not using public money on drugs?.

If it's coming out of your salary, then it's your money, not public money. You perform a service for the government, the government compensates you for that service, and then you're free to spend that money however you want to. The only thing that the government should really care about is that you're not under the influence of drugs while maintaining critical navigation equipment.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinesprout5199 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1833 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2327 times:

This is about Gov. Voldemort pandering to the the tea baggers. far and away the WORST governor Florida has ever had. Doesnt matter that most of the things he has changed are against the law(see the prision and pension screw ups) he keeps doing them, costing us Floridians more money taking it to court. He is a crook.

Dan in Jupiter


User currently offlinelewis From Greece, joined Jul 1999, 3592 posts, RR: 5
Reply 19, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2317 times:

Wouldn't it be cheaper to just give them named cards that they can use in supermarkets for food only instead of doing drug tests?

User currently onlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16691 posts, RR: 51
Reply 20, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2307 times:

Quoting geezer (Thread starter):
It's a legal requirement that every person applying for a
JOB has to pass drug tests in order to get the JOB, why not those who
receive welfare?

Where, in fact public school teachers don't have to take drug tests. Neither do Principals, Vice Principals, Guidance Counselors, janitors, Mayors, School board members etc...

Question, do the Florida lawmakers who wrote the bill, have to take drug tests. I doubt it.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 11919 posts, RR: 25
Reply 21, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2301 times:

Quote:
This is about Gov. Voldemort pandering to the [tea party]

I thought they were the ones who were fanatical about the Constitution?

Quoting sprout5199 (Reply 4):
A little thing called the fourth amendment, unlawful search and seizure.

Hmmm...



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 18684 posts, RR: 58
Reply 22, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2286 times:

Quoting geezer (Thread starter):
Here's my only "beef.........even though I never got "into" the pot thing, I worked with a hell of a lot of guys who did, and I really think most of them were less than 1/10 the risk driving after a weekend smoking a few joints, than someone who showed up for work 10 hours after being plastered on their butts from too much beer. I'm totally convinced that beer has caused far more crashes than pot ever has. Yet you could get drunk, go to work 10 hrs later, and be legal ! See why I have such faith in the " gubmint" ?

Truer words were never spoken.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 9):
Saving money is not the point.

Did YOU of all people really just say that?         

You rail about some money going to Planned Parenthood or to pay for contraception, but you're quite happy to waste money when it suits your purposes. "Fiscally conservative" my left gonad.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 13):
So, you want the "gub'mint" out of everyone's lives, but you want the "gub'mint" to be in everyone's lives???

Where did he say that?

Quoting sprout5199 (Reply 4):

A little thing called the fourth amendment, unlawful search and seizure.

Interesting question. How is this different from requiring a nude-o-scope when flying? Why is that Constitutional and this isn't? It's one thing when you don't have a choice at all, but in this case, you can avoid the drug tests by choosing not to use welfare. Of course, it's your problem how you're going to eat and pay rent, then. But that's no different from having a job that requires drug tests. If you don't want to work, it's your problem of how you are going to pay for food and rent.

I'm actually fine with cracking down on welfare abuse and I don't have any philosophical opposition to drug testing welfare recipients. But I think that a random program that pulls, say, one out of every twenty people coming into the welfare line at random and drug tests them makes more sense than a universal testing program. The problem is that in typical GOP fashion, they went for the "hit 'em hard" approach and used a cannon to kill a mosquito when a fly swatter would have done the job just as well.

As for...

Quoting geezer (Thread starter):
I-95 and I-75 will be jammed for the next month or so with druggies and
deadbeats heading North out of Florida, because this is the first state in
the union to require drug testing to receive welfare!

Approximately 3% of recipients have been testing positive so far (if I read the reports correctly), so the above statement is ridiculous.


User currently offlinezckls04 From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 1169 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2279 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 9):
Saving money is not the point. The point is to stop rewarding and enabling bad behavior. There is no question that a meth-head or pot-head is going to have a tougher time finding someone willing to hire them.

I'm quite surprised this has never been done before (or at least trialled). However I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that it will have the desired effect. The real scumbags will find other, more destructive ways of getting their drug money.

I think I'd like to see a clear goal stated here- if it's to reduce drug use there needs to be a way of measuring its effects so we can establish if the trial has been a success. I think the idealogical position taken by supporters of this bill is weak, so the pragmatic position must be strong for it to have merit.

But I think it would be a mistake to reject it out of hand.



If you're not sure whether to use a piece of punctuation, it's best not to.
User currently offlineGSPflyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 367 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2275 times:

Quoting lewis (Reply 19):
Wouldn't it be cheaper to just give them named cards that they can use in supermarkets for food only instead of doing drug tests?

South Carolina, my home state, uses these cards, but I'm pretty sure people find a way around it. Possibly by selling the food that they purchase with the card.


25 sprout5199 : Well, one is for the safety of the flight the other is just to say "look what we are doing to reduce welfare". You can avoid the "nude-o-scope" by no
26 DocLightning : And again, you can avoid a drug test by not being on welfare. Some people have to fly or they don't eat and pay the rent. Similarly, some people need
27 sprout5199 : I agree. But that is for another thread. I have never been on unemployment, but have used WIC with my first child. That is a great program, keeps the
28 Dreadnought : Oh god, do we want to bring in the 'sluts' argument here? Shame on you. I'm glad we agree on something. Welfare is a favor - a charitable act on the
29 757luver : They do just like before but instead of giving them the "coupons" like in the old days they go to the store and buy the food for the person. I for on
30 DocLightning : It's a great idea with some serious execution problems. 1) WIC offices insist on handing out unhealthy beverages like whole milk and fruit juice. 2)
31 BMI727 : If you're going to live on government funds, absolutely. If you don't want to get drug tested, you don't have to. You just can't collect welfare. It'
32 Mir : Even if that means handing out more money? -Mir
33 BMI727 : That's why I'd just get rid of the whole thing and build better schools. I'd rather spend money on drug tests than drugs though since, if nothing els
34 Revelation : Let me ask what treatment conservatives would give to members of society who pump out babies or drink or do drugs or otherwise are not committed to b
35 Post contains images StarAC17 : Going to be hard now if the GOP gets their way in the contraception debate .
36 Dreadnought : No, that was the original solution of Progressives, before they realized that they could instead be harvested for the acquisition of power. The conse
37 Revelation : In my experience, hatred of welfare is a strong unifying force for the Conservatives. And have no answer for those who can't/won't/don't. They just p
38 Dreadnought : Negative. We recognize that some people need help. Hatred of the ABUSE of welfare is what gives us heartburn. For instance, the fact that over 40% of
39 Post contains images stasisLAX : Oh my, yet ANOTHER Rethuglican "wedge issue". More of the same old "rich people telling middle class people why they should hate poor people" diversio
40 Ken777 : Let the courts work it out over time. Especially in cases where people are taking prescriptions for medical conditions they have. Trial lawyer paradi
41 Pyrex : Yes, I am sure it all those people not on welfare that are contributing to the alleged 9% drug users in Florida. You know how old snow-birds love a g
42 ltbewr : To me there should be probable cause to require those that want to collect welfare be tested for drugs. To test everyone is a waste, it may cost taxpa
43 Post contains images BMI727 : Yep. The welfare-as-extortion model is ridiculous. It's not like there are any charities or anything trying to help poor people either. The bottom li
44 Mir : Because he and I have talked a couple of times, and the subject of what we do for a living has come up. Nothing more complicated than that. Without k
45 seb146 : Like "you have to have kids" kinda thing? Oh, wait... That's what I don't get: These people have kids and they are being charged for drug tests. That
46 DocLightning : OMG, a conspiracy! I love conspiracy theories! *Sits forward, eyes bright* What's this one? Wait wait wait... the liberals have bred a race of brainl
47 Pellegrine : There's nothing wrong with smoking marijuana. Laws in Florida are made by dumb conservatives.
48 starbuk7 : Sure, and when you go to get your drug test, you show them the prescriptions from your doctors and they screen for those as well and they will not co
49 lewis : Most people I saw smoking pot last time I was in Florida did not look like the welfare types. How is that working out? I guess that the only problem,
50 Post contains images Ken777 : Considering that, be definition, half the people have an IQ below 100 there will be a lot of good decent people who will not be successful in school
51 PC12Fan : Hell, just make them work for the state to collect the welfare.
52 BMI727 : You don't need to be a genius to pass high school. You don't even need to be a genius to succeed in college. We don't need everybody to be particle p
53 DocLightning : No, but we could get rid of a lot of unnecessary expenses. There are entire models of aircraft and ship that have never once even been near a war zon
54 L-188 : The former TSA head is now working for the mfg......things that make you go hmmmm. BRAVO, and drugs tests are a way to verify some of that isn't happ
55 Mir : It's not the fact that they're getting screened. It's the fact that the program is actually costing the state money rather than saving it, at a time
56 DocLightning : Yes, but UNIVERSAL drug tests are a waste of money, as has been unequivocably proven. Random drug tests are far more effective.
57 Ken777 : How about an IQ of 90? How about an IQ of 80? How about an IQ of 70? How about an IQ of 60? How about an IQ of 50? You sound like a bright guy. Obvio
58 steeler83 : Spot on! You know, drugs are illegal for a very good reason. ANY amount can do some serious damage to your body. Alcohol actually does not if it is u
59 L-188 : Yeah, but if you don't do it random, you get accused of profiling. And to quote Ron White, "And Profiling is wrong."
60 DocLightning : Yeah because 1) The cotton growers didn't want hemp competing with them 2) Mexican migrant laborers in the '30's tended to smoke pot and there were r
61 BMI727 : Sure. I'm not saying everyone needs to get a doctorate or even attend college at all. Just learn enough at school and gain enough skills to do someth
62 zippyjet : Oh happy happy joy joy, these druggie scudders will take to the skies on us beseiged LCC's. Can hardly wait. Are they going to try and pull out the O
63 Pellegrine : $50 for an eighth is way too expensive. That's a hydro or chronic price. You can get regular bud for way cheaper, like $20/eighth. All that My My My.
64 seb146 : No. At grocery stores in California, liquor (rum, vodka, tequila, etc.) is sold along with eggs, butter, milk. If a person purchases eggs and vodka a
65 Pellegrine : Same thing in DC. You can buy food with a food stamp card, but you cannot buy alcohol. Even though some grocery stores carry beer and wine along with
66 DocLightning : I am not stereotyping. I'm saying that welfare should come with conditions.
67 Revelation : Go visit any large city in a third world country without a welfare system and see for yourself. Go visit your local soup kitchen / shelter and see ho
68 seb146 : I still have not had this question answered: If a person is recieveing food stamps and has a job, what is wrong with the odd joint or a couple of beer
69 DocLightning : What's wrong is that you can't afford it. If you could afford it, you shouldn't be on food stamps.
70 BMI727 : High crime isn't because of a lack of welfare, it's because of a lack of police. That money should be going towards buying yourself food so you don't
71 SmittyOne : Excellent choice of words, Doc, and I bet you didn't even do it on purpose!
72 seb146 : Woah.... People who have a brain prioritize. Shelter, food, transportation, health care. Problem is: once that money is gone, there are still mouths
73 BMI727 : Part of the reason the money is gone is spending money on frivolous things. If you're slipping a bottle or two of Jack in with your welfare groceries
74 Type-Rated : And only eligible food at that. In Texas we have something called the LoneStar card which is handed out in place of food stamps. You use it like any
75 DocLightning : Trouble is that the food companies have their fingers all into that business. KFC and Pizza Hut have all been buying hookers for high-ranking officia
76 bestwestern : Really?
77 Post contains links and images DocLightning : http://www.usatoday.com/money/indust...ers-who-use-food-stamps/50267864/1
78 seb146 : Have you ever been that far down? I am guessing no. I have. When I was growing up, my parents took food stamps a few times. They both had jobs, too.
79 DocLightning : One wonders if they thought about that before having three kids. Every decision has a consequence. Also, at what point is smoking a joint part of kee
80 BMI727 : In anybody's eyes. For God's sake, this isn't rocket science. Welfare, if we absolutely must have it, is feed-yourself-so-you-don't-die-on-the-sidewa
81 seb146 : What amazes me is: people honestly and truly believe with all ther heart and mind that every last person who is on welfare and food stamps is defraud
82 DocLightning : I, for one, view those things as necessities. I do not view a joint as a necessity. Or cigs. Or booze.
83 BMI727 : Not all of them, but a lot. The program is a waste and that money would be better spent on education. Show me where I said that. Or just throw that o
84 DocLightning : Not even a lot. But even 5% is too much. And there are some inexpensive steps that could be taken to reduce waste.
85 Pellegrine : No you sort of were. What were your words? Conjures up an image of a "welfare queen" to me. A stereotype of a poor, often black person, in need of pu
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Dubai World: The QE2 Will Be Sold In Restructuring posted Wed Jan 20 2010 23:29:08 by MadameConcorde
Tiger And Elin Will Divorce posted Sun Dec 13 2009 07:20:21 by ThegreatRDU
Who Will Be The QE2's New Owner? posted Tue Dec 8 2009 06:23:48 by MadameConcorde
Who Will Be EU Foreign Minister? posted Mon Nov 9 2009 09:36:12 by Janmnastami
Holden Commodore Will Be Sold As Police Car In US posted Thu Sep 17 2009 17:52:05 by StasisLAX
So, Tomorrow Will Be 09-09-09 posted Tue Sep 8 2009 11:21:28 by Varigb707
Cap And Trade. Will It Pass In The Night? posted Thu Jun 25 2009 09:59:23 by AGM100
Hybrid Cars Will Be 20% Of New Auto Market By 2020 posted Thu May 28 2009 15:48:59 by StasisLAX
Obama Budget Deficit Will Be Larger Than Projected posted Sat May 9 2009 00:24:03 by FreequentFlier
Who Will Be The Next Secretary-General Of Nato? posted Thu Mar 12 2009 06:55:01 by SKYSERVICE_330