Judge Blocks Florida Law Requiring Welfare Applicants to Pass Drug Test

[osan]

Osan -do you remember the 102 things to not do if you hate paying taxes thread?
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?295369-102-things-NOT-to-do-if-you-hate-paying-taxes

By your logic - if you accept anything that is supported by tax dollars, then its okay for the government to violate your rights and control you. One of the fundamental flaws with your logic and the logic of the 102 things list is that the government forces people into these situations. Where's my option to buy private unemployment insurance?

The other important thing here is that back door government control must be opposed. How different would it be if the government offered a $1000 drug-free tax credit? If you want the tax credit, you must submit to the drug testing. Are you going to accept the violation of privacy because its voluntary? How long would we expect the violation of privacy to be voluntary?

What are you going to say when a concealed carry permit or a any gun purchasing background check requires a drug test? Are you going to cry about it violating your innate right to bear arms. Sorry, Osan - but you just tossed innate rights aside in your post above. What right to decide what you ingest? Privacy Schmivacy.

Unless we go to extreme austere measure - everybody is forced to suck on a government teat somewhere.

If you negate the rights of the recipients - you negate everybody's rights because we (sadly) get no choice but to be recipients.

You are suggesting super-rights to the providers. Guess who gets the super rights? It's the government officials and the police state who implements it.

See this for what it is - it's class warfare designed only to further government control of its mundanes.

You make the same error of applying incorrect solutions in a given context. It is like giving penicillin for cancer - it simply will not work.

That said, my solution is simple: dissolve the welfare system within 12 months, in toto. Nobody goes on the tit because there is no tit to which one can turn. Life is tough and even fucked at times. I've been on the ragged edge of oblivion for several years now, economically speaking. I've not even thought to turn to welfare. I would, quite honestly, rather die. Not afraid of that, but I am afraid of becoming like the rest of the parasites. Death is ever more attractive.

The nation is in its death throes. The chances we will save it are just this side of zero. Parasitism is a mental disease rampant across the globe and our chances of fighting it off are slim to none. Fight it, but don't hold any high expectations there. My worthless opinion, of course.

 

[angelatc]

Wow. Just wow.

I had to leave for a while ...and when I get back I'm scratching my head wondering what has happened to this forum.

Your state will pass this law or we'll cut your Federal funding.
Your school will teach this curriculum or we'll cut your Federal funding.

Are you unemployed - do you give money to your church - sorry separation of church and state - you lose your unemployment.

The other factor is that drug tests aren't accurate. I am going to quote Marilyn Vos Savant, who has the highest IQ of any known female. (Obviously they haven't tested Amy....its a conspiracy.):

... Charles Feinstein a Ph.D. at Santa Clara University asked “A particularly interesting and important question today is that of testing for drugs. Suppose it is assumed that about 5% of the general population uses drugs. You employ a test that is 95% accurate, which we’ll say means that if individual is a user, the test will be positive 95% of the time, and if the individual is a nonuser, the test will be negative 95% of the time. A person is selected at random and given the test. It’s positive. What does such a result suggest? Would you conclude that the individual is highly likely to be a drug user?

She replied that “Given your conditions, once the person has tested positive, you may as well flip a coin to determine whether he or she is a drug user. The chances are only 50-50. (The assumptions, the makeup of the test group and the true accuracy of the tests themselves are additional considerations.) This is just the sort of common misunderstanding that should give great pause to those who will make the decisions about testing.”

And, as Ms Vos Savant suggests the 95% accuracy postulate may be overly generous. DRUG-TESTING-solutions.net quotes an April 1992 article which appeared in Personnel Journal as saying "Only 85 of the estimated 1,200 laboratories in the United States currently testing urine for drugs meet federal standards for accuracy, qualified lab personnel, and proper documentation and record-keeping procedures. Because private companies are not required to use certified drug testing labs, workers are being asked to put their job security in the hands of a drug test that has insufficient quality controls."

 

[specsaregood]

The other factor is that drug tests aren't accurate. I am going to quote Marilyn Vos Savant, who has the highest IQ of any known female.

And, as Ms Vos Savant suggests the 95% accuracy postulate may be overly generous. DRUG-TESTING-solutions.net quotes an April 1992 article which appeared in Personnel Journal as saying "Only 85 of the estimated 1,200 laboratories in the United States currently testing urine for drugs meet federal standards for accuracy, qualified lab personnel, and proper documentation and record-keeping procedures. Because private companies are not required to use certified drug testing labs, workers are being asked to put their job security in the hands of a drug test that has insufficient quality controls."

She must not be too bright if she thinks only labs with a precious govt certification can do the job well.

 

[2young2vote]

This is a good example of what it will be like under socialized health care.

"Well, you are using government health care so it is okay to regulate the fast food industry even more so you don't get fat!"

 

[AuH20]

Osan -do you remember the 102 things to not do if you hate paying taxes thread?
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?295369-102-things-NOT-to-do-if-you-hate-paying-taxes

By your logic - if you accept anything that is supported by tax dollars, then its okay for the government to violate your rights and control you. One of the fundamental flaws with your logic and the logic of the 102 things list is that the government forces people into these situations. Where's my option to buy private unemployment insurance?

The other important thing here is that back door government control must be opposed. How different would it be if the government offered a $1000 drug-free tax credit? If you want the tax credit, you must submit to the drug testing. Are you going to accept the violation of privacy because its voluntary? How long would we expect the violation of privacy to be voluntary?

What are you going to say when a concealed carry permit or a any gun purchasing background check requires a drug test? Are you going to cry about it violating your innate right to bear arms. Sorry, Osan - but you just tossed innate rights aside in your post above. What right to decide what you ingest? Privacy Schmivacy.

Unless we go to extreme austere measure - everybody is forced to suck on a government teat somewhere.

If you negate the rights of the recipients - you negate everybody's rights because we (sadly) get no choice but to be recipients.

You are suggesting super-rights to the providers. Guess who gets the super rights? It's the government officials and the police state who implements it.

See this for what it is - it's class warfare designed only to further government control of its mundanes.

Further control? That ship sailed from port decades ago. They practically own these folks. They're slaves for government checks. One more layer of compliance isn't going to alter the situation.

 

[pcosmar]

This is a good example of what it will be like under socialized health care.

"Well, you are using government health care so it is okay to regulate the fast food industry even more so you don't get fat!"

Exactly so.
The acceptance by some of the policy of intrusion in personal life is troubling.
as I said i am opposed to both welfare and Drug testing. I am opposed to employee drug testing.
There is and NEVER was anything free market about it. Nothing at all.

It was pushed by insurance Companies. Mandated by insurance companies. The same companies that are in collusion WITH the government and are mandated by the government.
I am opposed to Extortion. And forced insurance is extortion. Forced Drug testing is extortion.

The "Black Boxes" that are going in cars is yet another example of this Extortion.
Pushed by insurance Companies, Mandated by law and just another layer of control.

If you are OK with that I truly feel sorry for you. You still don't get it.

 

[Wolverine302]

the simple solution is to stop taking people's property and giving it to others. problem solved.

 

[ItsTime]

What is next? Drug tests to get a tax return? Drug tests to get a drivers license? Drug test to ride the bus?

 

[Shinerxx]

Given your conditions, once the person has tested positive, you may as well flip a coin to determine whether he or she is a drug user. The chances are only 50-50.

I was very interested in how she came up with this mathematical calculation so I looked it up. She's dead on.

Bayes' Theorum

 

[pcosmar]

the simple solution is to stop taking people's property and giving it to others. problem solved.

That would be good.
So would a respect for both the 4th and 5th Amendments.

Just stop testing pee. And end the War on personal choices.

 

[OrigSEOH]

What is next? Drug tests to get a tax return? Drug tests to get a drivers license? Drug test to ride the bus?

lol, that is what I was thinking. It would work better if applied to public roads. That way everyone is tested that wants to use the taxpayer's roads. This is just a attack on poor people. These poor people, usually are not worth min wage. They were talking about this here in Ohio...but nothing has happened once the public outrage was felt. But hey we got random vehicle safety checkpoints going on all over the place and this seems to be another fantastic Republican State Legislature idea to attack the poor people. Seems all they know to do is attack poor people at home and brown people overseas. This in my mind just goes to show how stupid politicians are when it comes to fixing problems.

 

[specsaregood]

What is next? Drug tests to get a tax return? Drug tests to get a drivers license? Drug test to ride the bus?

I'm not 100% certain; but I think you already have to get drug tested to get a commercial drivers license and for a captain's license.

 

[AuH20]

lol, that is what I was thinking. It would work better if applied to public roads. That way everyone is tested that wants to use the taxpayer's roads. This is just a attack on poor people. These poor people, usually are not worth min wage. They were talking about this here in Ohio...but nothing has happened once the public outrage was felt. But hey we got random vehicle safety checkpoints going on all over the place and this seems to be another fantastic Republican State Legislature idea to attack the poor people. Seems all they know to do is attack poor people at home and brown people overseas. This in my mind just goes to show how stupid politicians are when it comes to fixing problems.

That's why these poor people are defined as dependents. They signed their free will and personal dignity away a long time ago. Maybe this will wake them up but I doubt it. I shed no tears for voluntary slaves. We all have a choice as effed up as this world is.

 

[Krugerrand]

That's why these poor people are defined as dependents. They signed their free will and personal dignity away a long time ago. Maybe this will wake them up but I doubt it. I shed no tears for voluntary slaves. We all have a choice as effed up as this world is.

And once the apparatus is in place for government controlled screenings ... you'll be the next one required to get a screening for whatever. Of course, the screenings should help build a DNA database and whatever ever other future projects that can be thought of.

But, i guess we've never seen the government expand its reach like that.

 

[Pericles]

Drug Testing Companies are going to see huge profits.

This is who benefits from this - corporate welfare recipients.

 

[osan]

I'm with you. Our right to privacy is sacred, and not to be violated, whether by government tyranny or corporate tyranny.

Pre-employment drug screen? Got a warrant with probable cause for that?

And your right to job X is nonexistent. Don't like the conditions of employment? Don't take the job. I'm no fan of such conditions, but look at it from an employer's point of view: imagine you provide a product or service. The last thing you want is exposure to liability for bringing harm or death to your customers... or anyone else for that matter.

You're running an airline, for instance - how willing do you think you will be to risk killing a couple of hundred people at a time by not testing your pilots for drugs and alcohol? It is very easy to sit where you are and say "no way, I believe in liberty". It is not so easy when you are in the board room before your colleagues, the weight of your responsibility for perhaps tens of thousands of lives every day resting on your shoulders. If, for argument's sake, you were to walk that talk and a stoned pilot used one of your aircraft, full of passengers, to bore a black smoking hole in the ground, what exactly do you think your future would look like? Like nothing good? Right. Reality is what it is and you have to play smartly. Drug testing is de-rigeur these days in many companies and industries. It sucks. It should be changed. But until it changes, there is a standard of acceptable procedure that, if ignored exposes you to economic destruction and possibly even criminal liability.

Commercial pilots are assholes WAY too often to ignore the risks their unchecked behaviors pose to a company's ability to stay in business. How about the mechanics? How eager are you to get on a plane with an engine that had leftover parts when a stoned mechanic reassembled it?

If we lived in a libertarian nation, things might be different, but they aren't and I cannot in any way blame some companies from toeing this line. To do otherwise would likely result in their destruction, given the legal environment. Once again, government ruins it for everyone because they define the context and give nobody viable options.

 

[UWDude]

Sure, why not.

It isn't control, because people have a choice of whether or not to receive the benefits. If you are gonna get taken care of by mommy govt, then you have to live by her rules.

that's what Im saying. They should have tests for high cholesterol and obesity. F-it.

 

[bobbyw24]

Rick Scott spokesman: Governor will fight for drug testing of state employees 'all the way to Supreme Court if necessary.' That's expensive!

 

[pcosmar]

And your right to job X is nonexistent. Don't like the conditions of employment?

Who imposed those conditions ? Who enforces those conditions ?
Who Created those conditions ?

They were imposed by the collusion between protection rackets and Government.
Insurance is NOT voluntary. It once was, but that was long ago.

Insurance companies and government working together made it mandatory.
Then they imposed conditions .

True, it is a reality to be in business today.
It is also a reason that businesses have closed or moved elsewhere.

Remove that interference and business would flourish, and workers would be judged on job performance and productivity and not on personal habits.

 

[JK/SEA]

Before we start testing regular peasants, i think all elected and ALL government workers should be tested for EVERYTHING first.