Why should a drug addict's babies die? ("Welfare"

Page 7 of 8 [ 123 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Dantac
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,672
Location: Florida

12 Jun 2011, 10:06 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:

I am suprised there are so many people on this website who have aboslutly no care in the world about what others might be going through. And would just assume anyone with problems dies so the rest of us don't have to be bothered by their existance.

In the final equation what others are going through is not my problem. I am not responsible for their problems nor is it my responsibility to solve that problem for them. It becomes my problem however, when they either commit crime to sustain their addiction or for some screwed up reason end up receiving my money (aka taxes) to help pay for that addiction.

That does not mean i'm against welfare or that I dont give a crap about people. If a family is in financial duress and needs help I've no problem with tax money being spent to provide food and housing or job training for them for a limited time.

Its the difference between symbiotic and parasitic. A person in need being helped back into his feet is money well invested. An addict using welfare to feed the addiction is parasitic. Like any parasite, I fully support its removal.

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,157
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

12 Jun 2011, 11:07 pm

Dantac wrote:

Sweetleaf wrote:

I wonder what people are going to do when the economy collapses and all their precious money is useless....I really do hope that happens. Then people may rethink their values.

Dantac
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,672
Location: Florida

12 Jun 2011, 11:32 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:

I wonder what people are going to do when the economy collapses and all their precious money is useless....I really do hope that happens. Then people may rethink their values.

Oh? And who do you think will be helping others when the economy collapses? I can assure you it wont be those who spent years drugging themselves up with welfare money.

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,157
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

13 Jun 2011, 9:10 am

Dantac wrote:

Sweetleaf wrote:

I wonder what people are going to do when the economy collapses and all their precious money is useless....I really do hope that happens. Then people may rethink their values.

Oh? And who do you think will be helping others when the economy collapses? I can assure you it wont be those who spent years drugging themselves up with welfare money.

My point is regardless of whether its you're problem or not the problem still exists.......and some of the suggestions people have made like forcing the addicts into hard labor rather then helping them with their addiction problem are quite ridiculous and won't solve the problem at all.

Dantac
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,672
Location: Florida

13 Jun 2011, 12:10 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:

My point is regardless of whether its you're problem or not the problem still exists.......

Yes it still exists but again, it is not my problem nor is it my responsibility.

Quote:

and some of the suggestions people have made like forcing the addicts into hard labor

That is rather extreme I agree.

Quote:

rather then helping them with their addiction problem are quite ridiculous and won't solve the problem at all.

I don't agree with having my tax money spent on helping these people the way its done now.I'm very utilitarian when it comes to these things. My tax money should be spent helping orphaned kids or to build infrastructure.. not to babysit adult addicts (underage addiction I do support tax money to be spent on rehab..since the parents are made responsible for that).

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,157
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

13 Jun 2011, 3:01 pm

Dantac wrote:

Sweetleaf wrote:

My point is regardless of whether its you're problem or not the problem still exists.......

Yes it still exists but again, it is not my problem nor is it my responsibility.

Quote:

and some of the suggestions people have made like forcing the addicts into hard labor

That is rather extreme I agree.

Quote:

rather then helping them with their addiction problem are quite ridiculous and won't solve the problem at all.

Yes because infrastructure and orphaned kids are the only issues worth thinking about...and what about the orphaned kids who might grow up to be drug addicts? they better weed out the ones that display addictive behavior so that your tax money will only go to the ones that turn out not to be addicts.

Dantac
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,672
Location: Florida

13 Jun 2011, 3:13 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:

Yes because infrastructure and orphaned kids are the only issues worth thinking about...and what about the orphaned kids who might grow up to be drug addicts?

If they become addicts as adults then they get bunched with the other addicts. Regardless of what situation a person is in he is still responsible for himself and his own actions. When you step in and take over a person's individual responsibility you will only perpetuate the problem.

Quote:

they better weed out the ones that display addictive behavior so that your tax money will only go to the ones that turn out not to be addicts.

how you made the logic leap between not babysitting adult addicts that are responsible for their own problems to a society that would practice pre-emptive eugenics to save tax dollars is hard to understand.

Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

13 Jun 2011, 3:29 pm

Dantac wrote:

Sweetleaf wrote:

Yes because infrastructure and orphaned kids are the only issues worth thinking about...and what about the orphaned kids who might grow up to be drug addicts?

Quote:

they better weed out the ones that display addictive behavior so that your tax money will only go to the ones that turn out not to be addicts.

can you categorically state that no external factors outside a persons control is involved?

_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,157
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

13 Jun 2011, 3:49 pm

Dantac wrote:

Sweetleaf wrote:

Yes because infrastructure and orphaned kids are the only issues worth thinking about...and what about the orphaned kids who might grow up to be drug addicts?

Quote:

they better weed out the ones that display addictive behavior so that your tax money will only go to the ones that turn out not to be addicts.

Well I think that is rather narrow minded....there are lots of reasons one could be come addicted to drugs, and I hardly see how the correct approach is do nothing about other then make sure no ones tax money goes to help them with anything. I mean unless your issue is with paying taxes in general...but that is a different issue.

MollyTroubletail
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Oct 2010
Age: 56
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,185
Location: Canada

13 Jun 2011, 4:20 pm

What about super-super-obese people who are on welfare and are addicted to food. Should they be required to conform to a healthy diet in order to retain their benefits?

What about chain-smokers on welfare, should they be forced to quit in order to keep receiving benefits?

What about the mentally ill people, should their blood be tested for evidence of their regularly taking their meds in order to retain benefits?

What about World of Warcraft addicts? Should they have their internet privileges revoked in order to receive welfare?

What about severe anorexics? Should they be required to stay above a certain weight threshold in order to receive welfare?

What about pregnant women? Should they be incarcerated in "maternity prisons" if blood tests show they've ingested any drugs?

Keep in mind that drug addiction is only one of a large number of similar cases in which a person can use welfare money to make unhealthy purchases and neglect their children. Addicts aren't the only people using tax money for the wrong things.

Dantac
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,672
Location: Florida

13 Jun 2011, 5:41 pm

Im sorry but the only valid excuse to being hooked on drugs is if someone else forced them upon you and you became addicted to them. Otherwise it is a CHOICE. I really make no difference between the rich kid that tries them for fun and keeps on doing them and the poor kid who uses them to switch his brain off for a few hours... both did it out of choice. A bad choice. I dont see why I nor anyone should pay for their bad life decisions.

Now, if an addict can prove he has become clean and needs welfare for a limited time to get on his feet then he is more than welcome to have it as long as he can prove he is OFF the drugs and remain OFF them.

Quote:

What about super-super-obese people who are on welfare and are addicted to food. Should they be required to conform to a healthy diet in order to retain their benefits?

--- Yes. Food stamps should (and in many states do) only be used to buy non-luxury foods. That means no caviar, no triple mocha ice cream and no junk/fast food.

What about chain-smokers on welfare, should they be forced to quit in order to keep receiving benefits?

--- If they're on welfare because of smoking related illness.. YES.

What about the mentally ill people, should their blood be tested for evidence of their regularly taking their meds in order to retain benefits?

---- If its welfare benefits we talking about then yes. That would make sense.

What about World of Warcraft addicts? Should they have their internet privileges revoked in order to receive welfare?

--- welfare money cannot (as far as I know) be used to pay for internet or other such services so this is irrelevant.

What about severe anorexics? Should they be required to stay above a certain weight threshold in order to receive welfare?

--- again, if they on welfare because this issue made them disabled.. YES.

What about pregnant women? Should they be incarcerated in "maternity prisons" if blood tests show they've ingested any drugs?

---- As long as a fetus is not legally considered a person this wont happen. Its not a bad idea though.

Keep in mind that drug addiction is only one of a large number of similar cases in which a person can use welfare money to make unhealthy purchases and neglect their children. Addicts aren't the only people using tax money for the wrong things.

I agree. That is why I mentioned in another such thread that all states should really define and enforce the use of welfare money so that it is used for the purpose for which it is given to people.

However the thread is about drug tests for welfare recipients so this is why i'm only commenting on it.

Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

13 Jun 2011, 5:46 pm

Dantac wrote:

well does this entail all drugs use and when do you deifne it as hooked?

_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.

Benbob
Pileated woodpecker

Joined: 1 Jun 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 178

13 Jun 2011, 5:46 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:

I wonder what people are going to do when the economy collapses and all their precious money is useless....I really do hope that happens. Then people may rethink their values.

Translation: "you f*****s what disagree wit me will pay some day!!"

Look, bud, you're not going to win a nobel prize for a bleeding heart. Some people are beyond reform, that's just the way of it.

_________________
Member of the WP Strident Atheists

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,157
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

13 Jun 2011, 5:52 pm

Dantac wrote:

If an addict has no real way of getting help how are they going to get clean? sure some people have enough will power to overcome addictions on their own but not everyone. Also take into account there are many reasons people use drugs and therefore many different reasons someone may get addicted......not saying drugs are always a good choice or anything but should people be doomed to suffer for making a bad choice in their life regardless of their circumstances?

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,157
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

13 Jun 2011, 5:57 pm

Benbob wrote:

Sweetleaf wrote:

I wonder what people are going to do when the economy collapses and all their precious money is useless....I really do hope that happens. Then people may rethink their values.

Translation: "you f**** what disagree wit me will pay some day!!"

Look, bud, you're not going to win a nobel prize for a bleeding heart. Some people are beyond reform, that's just the way of it.

I have no idea what your translation is supposed to mean, it does not sound like something I would say...and I am not after any sort of prize. I agree some people are beyond reform, society in general is a good example. So this is why I am kind of hoping for a full economic collapse. I mean when life is about getting a job to buy crap to distract you from how meaningless life has become and the quality of someone is based upon how sucessful they are in a society that is all about stepping on as many people as you can to get to the top I think its a problem

marshall
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

13 Jun 2011, 7:08 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:

If an addict has no real way of getting help how are they going to get clean? sure some people have enough will power to overcome addictions on their own but not everyone.

Only arrogance leads people to believe they have "will-power" absent of outside motivating forces. I'm sure if Dentac or Benbob were locked in a room with the temperature fixed at 400 degrees and the only way to release the lock was to pull a switch and kill an innocent person they would do it. Every single person on this planet would. A drowning person will also hold down the person trying to rescue them in order to get air, putting the rescuers life in danger. If a drug addict is a danger to you than you have every right to kick them out as a matter of self-protection, but the moral grandstanding is utter BS.

Page 7 of 8 [ 123 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

Jump to:

Why should a drug addict's babies die? ("Welfare" Post Reply New Topic

Why should a drug addict's babies die? ("Welfare"