The best way to cure poverty is make it illegal, says Minnesota Republicans. - Polidicks

[QUOTE=ExplodingGuy;28715893]What the hell are you on about? First of all, it's not even their money, it's the government's money, and the government says they have to spend all but twenty dollars on what is approved. No one is taking away the money of the people on welfare, just making sure they spend it wisely. And FYI almost every state has a law such as this. It cuts down on bureaucratic issues, and makes sure the people get what they need, without excess expenditures.[/QUOTE] How can you guarantee they will spend it on necessities? What if they need to pay rent in cash? The people who need welfare are often in very difficult situations wherein simply forcing them to spend a certain amount isn't the right thing to do. We should be focusing on making them actively seek jobs. They would actually have a chance of getting out of their situation instead of just only letting them have a certain amount of money.

[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;28701777]When will Republicans realize that making something illegal =/= the problem going away?[/QUOTE] They only realize it when you talk about guns, but drugs prostitution and abortion go away for some reason when they're illegal. :downs:

We lived in the ghetto shit projects when I was five, now my family is upper middle class... And then I moved out and went back to the projects because I'm poor... :smith:

[QUOTE=BagMinge104;28702400]Rather than making it so people on welfare can't get their benefits which they need in any spendable form, why can't we step up the investigative process to make sure people don't abuse it?[/QUOTE] I actually think people on welfare should get drug tests. It shows that not only are they not looking for a job, but they're spending money on things that are from from necessary. I'm pro marijuana, but that doesn't change the reality that it will almost absolutely damage your chances at finding one. Yes, there is an issue with corruption with welfare, but helping the ones who need help is more important that hurting the ones who are misusing it. Both are very important though. I think this bill is ridiculous and is only going to damage low income households, not "motivate" them. I'm sure if you threatened to shoot 100 people if they didn't do backflips, a few would be able to train enough to do it in time, but a good number of them, including ones who tried, would have their brains all over the ground, depending on how much time you gave them.

[QUOTE=Lord_Ragnarok;28723467]I actually think people on welfare should get drug tests.[/QUOTE] Massive privacy violation

[QUOTE=Zeke129;28723649]Massive privacy violation[/QUOTE] Pissing into a cup or something like that isn't really a breach of privacy.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;28723756]Pissing into a cup or something like that isn't really a breach of privacy.[/QUOTE] right wait what

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;28723756]Pissing into a cup or something like that isn't really a breach of privacy.[/QUOTE] Sure it is. Drug testing is a medical examination.

"Hey, Guys, how do you think we should fix the whole "everyone is fucking poor" problem?" "Make them poorer, that'll show those fcking pigs to mess up our society!" "Great Idea!"

this is so funny. I live and work here in St Paul MN and god damn you have no idea how many furious black people will rape the capitol if this passes. Haha. [editline]21st March 2011[/editline] yes, there are black people here more than you'd think

They give tax breaks to their friends, while cutting on those who cannot afford to be cut down on.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;28724342]Sure it is. Drug testing is a medical examination.[/QUOTE] Alright. How about we require them to, in order to get welfare each month, which notably isn't a right or anything and is a service provided by the government, have a drug test.

[QUOTE=Earthen;28723167]How can you guarantee they will spend it on necessities? What if they need to pay rent in cash? The people who need welfare are often in very difficult situations wherein simply forcing them to spend a certain amount isn't the right thing to do. We should be focusing on making them actively seek jobs. They would actually have a chance of getting out of their situation instead of just only letting them have a certain amount of money.[/QUOTE] If you read, the card will only authorize purchases at certain places, such as grocery stores, etc. And there are huge incentives to get a job when on welfare. [QUOTE=Zeke129;28724342]Sure it is. Drug testing is a medical examination.[/QUOTE] Not really, well depends. Either way, it's still far from a privacy violation. You want someone's money, you obey their rules.

forcing people who are addicted to drugs (newsflash, it's hard to quit) into homelessness by taking their only source of income isn't going to solve any problems i mean you seem to think that getting a job is as simple as going out and looking for one. that, to be employed, someone just needs to be incentivized to look harder. if that were true then there would be no such thing as a recession seeing as how people who lost their jobs could just go and find another one just like that. [editline]21st March 2011[/editline] the problem isn't 'lazy drug addicted poors', the problem is not enough jobs

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;28729500]forcing people who are addicted to drugs (newsflash, it's hard to quit) into homelessness isn't going to solve any problems[/QUOTE] What? Who ever said anything about forcing people into homelessness? If anything, the drug tests would be used to force people into rehab, in order to get said individuals off drugs, so they can become productive. If I remember correctly, there are some systems in place that do such a thing, except it's optional.

[QUOTE=Treybuchet;28729280]Alright. How about we require them to, in order to get welfare each month, which notably isn't a right or anything and is a service provided by the government, have a drug test.[/QUOTE] because, like i said, taking away welfare from people who are addicted to drugs won't do anything but push them out on the streets. It's already hard enough to quit, say, opiates if you've got a nice home and people who can support you. Now imagine trying to do that while, at the same time, you've got no money to pay the rent or utilities and are trying to scrape by on a dwindling supply of money that you can't refill because you've got no welfare and there are no jobs

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;28729629]because, like i said, taking away welfare from people who are addicted to drugs won't do anything but push them out on the streets. It's already hard enough to quit, say, opiates if you've got a nice home and people who can support you. Now imagine trying to do that while, at the same time, you've got no money to pay the rent or utilities and are trying to scrape by on a dwindling supply of money that you can't refill because you've got no welfare and there are no jobs[/QUOTE] But the addicts will have welfare...

Should have thought about that before you became poor and/or physically/mentally disabled :cop:

[QUOTE=ExplodingGuy;28729579]What? Who ever said anything about forcing people into homelessness? If anything, the drug tests would be used to force people into rehab,[/QUOTE] uhh rehab costs money in america dude. like lots of it. by taking away their only source of income (since they can't get a job [not because they're lazy but because there aren't any jobs for them]) you are going to make them homeless on top of being a drug addict

...

[QUOTE=ExplodingGuy;28729641]But the addicts will have welfare...[/QUOTE] then what's the point of the drug test? and you can't afford rehab on welfare. even the cheapest facilities are still very expensive

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;28723756]Pissing into a cup or something like that isn't really a breach of privacy.[/QUOTE] Doing so would only really be fair if there were good state-run rehab clinics.

[QUOTE=hypno-toad;28729696]Doing so would only really be fair if there were good state-run rehab clinics.[/QUOTE] which i wholly support (but what i don't support is treating all poor people like criminals)

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;28729682]uhh rehab costs money in america dude. like lots of it. by taking away their only source of income (since they can't get a job [not because they're lazy but because there aren't any jobs for them]) you are going to make them homeless on top of being a drug addict[/QUOTE] But they'll be attending rehab as they're on welfare, for the last fucking time, no one said welfare would be taken away from the addicts. And yes, I know rehab takes a lot of money, unlike other budgets, the social social welfare budget can be increased, we just need to redact money from more wasteful expenditures....

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;28729723]which i wholly support (but what i don't support is treating all poor people like criminals)[/QUOTE] Yeah. I mean drug tests would be a bit degrading, but it sort of makes sense. If you give somebody a $200 welfare check and $120 of it goes to buying drugs, then it really defeats the purpose of the system. But making somebody piss in a cup, and then just outright denying them welfare would be a pretty shitty thing to do. If there were state-run rehab clinics like the ones in Portugal, they could "postpone" the welfare check until the person is clean, or hand it off to next of kin until said person has become clean and can be trusted with the money.

[QUOTE=Nannak;28729686]The best way to cure poverty is to abolish the system that [B]allows[/B] it in the first place: Capitalism.[/QUOTE] The only way to cure cancer is to abolish the system that allows it in the first place: Cells.

[QUOTE=RichardCQ;28731604]The only way to cure cancer is to abolish the system that allows it in the first place: Cells.[/QUOTE] It's two different things. One is needed to sustain a human body, the other is not.

I'm pretty lost as to where this whole drug testing argument came into the conversation.

hey guys i was just notified of something that i haven't noted previously in my arguments. It seems that welfare programs in most states(as well as other benefits) are done through debit cards. This isn't a new, untested thing. What the hell are we debating, that Minnesota becoming like other states is bad?