Oct 22 2009

What’s Good For The Goose …

Published by at 1:02 pm under All General Discussions

This interesting idea came through my email today:

Dr. Mr. Obama,

Like most folks in this country, I have a job. I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit.

In order to get that paycheck in my case, I am required to pass a random urine test ( with which I have no problem ).

What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don’t have to pass a urine test.

So, here is my Question: Shouldn’t one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check because I have to pass one to earn it for them?

Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet. I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sitting on their butts – doing drugs, while I work. . . .

Can you imagine how much money each state would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check?

I guess we could title that program, ‘Urine or You’re Out’.

Pretty provocative idea there. Also, how about people with multiple felon counts – why should we pay for them? How about alcoholics? I am beginning to like this. If only certain life styles can access the rationed government health care system, why not do the same to all government assistance?

13 responses so far

13 Responses to “What’s Good For The Goose …”

  1. crosspatch says:

    I like that idea. But placing any obligation on people receiving welfare would likely cost the Democrats votes. Welfare is basically a bribe for votes. If they actually had an obligation to do something for it or in any way had to show some personal responsibility, it would crush the Dems.

  2. Mike M. says:

    I LOVE it! Being one of the hardworking stiffs subject to random drug tests.

    But I want one change – MANDATORY monthly drug tests for elected officials. Leadership by example.

  3. Frogg1 says:

    Urine or ‘you’re’ out. LOL

  4. sbd says:

    It isn’t just street drugs, but liquor and viagra should also be included. Here is a prime example of welfare dollars at work.

    Officials: Food stamps swapped for booze, Viagra

    (AP) – Oct 9, 2009

    DETROIT — Viagra and pornography are not staples on the government’s food stamp list. But authorities say a Detroit liquor store supplied them during a series of illegal deals.

    Federal prosecutors filed fraud charges this week against three people who worked at Jefferson’s Liquor Palace.

    The alleged scheme worked this way: Food stamp recipients would get cash from the store in exchange for swiping larger amounts off their electronic cards. The store would then be reimbursed by the U.S. Agriculture Department.

    And in some transactions, the government says the store provided informants Viagra, liquor and porn in exchange for swiping about $2,000 off food stamp cards.

    The government says fraud at the store topped $130,000 over 2 1/2 years. The store is closed.

  5. pst314 says:

    Should I have to take a urine test in order to get that tax rebate for my new high-efficiency furnace? How about that homeowner’s deduction on my property taxes?

  6. ivehadit says:

    pst, Assuming you pay taxes, why would you need to take a urine test to get YOUR OWN MONEY BACK?

  7. kathie says:

    It will never happen, and it has already been suggested by some in congress. It was deemed as discriminatory of the poor and needy, those unable to help themselves. Look the government already has your money, do they care how hard you worked to earn it? No they care about the feelings of those they give it too.

  8. KauaiBoy says:

    I’d rather see an IQ test to vote or serve in government.

  9. BarbaraS says:

    I’ll tell you a little story about workmen’s compensation not welfare but to do with urine tests. I worked for a nursing home for years as accountant controller and handled all thing financial including workmen’s comp. A black girl hurt herself on the job. Somehow the incident report never reached my office. When the girl complained to me after three weeks, I asked for and received it and was told “it fell through the crack”.

    In my view it was the department head’s fault that this girl was not collecting workmens comp and had no income so with my boss’ ok I advanced her four hundred dollars that she should have gotten. Well, it turns out she failed the urine test and workmen’s comp doesn’t pay the employee if that happens. There was no way to get that money back so my company had to eat it. Lesson learned. Don’t let your heart rule your head.

    I later found out that the department head knew the girl had been on drugs and due to that fact did not turn in the incident report. This is on par with these people not sending me any credits they received, only invoices. They didn’t think I needed the credits.

  10. stevevvs says:

    But I want one change – MANDATORY monthly drug tests for elected officials. Leadership by example. Mike, you stole my thunder!

    I was going to say the same thing. Surprised AJ did not think of it!

  11. joe six-pack says:

    I like the idea, although I really doubt it will stand a chance at implementation. Lots of excuses not to do it. Expense will probably be at the front of the line. You know how the government works, shortages and rationing of just about everything.