Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It depends. Normally I would say smoking anything for that matter would be worse.. In my state, we have an 'education lottery' so all revenue from lotto tickets goes to paying for someone's college..
I like the idea of having people on SSI or welfare submitting to random drug tests. Employers do the same thing, so there is virtually no chance of them getting a job if they test positive for drugs.
And I know, the next argument will be, why should anyone care about drug tests before taking a job, and my only response is:
Poor people should neither be playing the lottery nor be smoking pot. If I were running things, we would have 2 laws like this:
LAW 1: Any person who recieves and soley relies upon welfare, SSI or other government programs to live shall forfiet any winnings in any public or private lottery or other game of chance and be prohibited from playing in such game.
LAW 2: Any persons fitting the description in Law 1 shall also be subjected to random urine, hair or blood test for usage of any drug not prescribed, any illegal drug or any tobacco usage and, if found, be given one warning and then removed from any public assistance program and banned for 5 years.
I agree with you.
Will never fly though, the uber-liberals would go wild. They have no problem telling tax-paying Average Joe that you can't smoke, have to wear a seatbelt, etc. because it's for the best of the greater society.
However, I don't see them telling those who live off the wages of the tax-paying average Joe how they have to spend that tax-payer money they receive or require mandatory drug testing. Figure they wouldn't see that as for the best of the greater society.
Sigh.
BTW - I Have NO problem helping out someone down on their luck. My impression was that you were referring to habitual refuse to work folks.
Prologue. Lottery Players.Ira visits the lottery stand in Chicago which sells more lottery tickets than any other: Hannah's Finer Food & Liquors. There he meets two men who want to get rich quick. Of course, one is trying to win the lottery by spending $3,000 to $4,000 a year on it, so it's hardly something for nothing. But still, he hopes. The other man is a model of hopefulness: he plays the lottery even though he thinks it's fixed and black people never win. That's how much we want to believe we can get something for nothing—even though we know we can't.
I don't think that poor people should smoke cigarettes, drink or play the lottery on a regular basis. And they shouldn't smoke pot or do drugs at all. They just can't afford it. And the odds of winning a lottery ticket are remote, and all those ticket purchases do add up.
Poor people should neither be playing the lottery nor be smoking pot. If I were running things, we would have 2 laws like this:
LAW 1: Any person who recieves and soley relies upon welfare, SSI or other government programs to live shall forfiet any winnings in any public or private lottery or other game of chance and be prohibited from playing in such game.
LAW 2: Any persons fitting the description in Law 1 shall also be subjected to random urine, hair or blood test for usage of any drug not prescribed, any illegal drug or any tobacco usage and, if found, be given one warning and then removed from any public assistance program and banned for 5 years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vec101
I agree with you.
Will never fly though, the uber-liberals would go wild. They have no problem telling tax-paying Average Joe that you can't smoke, have to wear a seatbelt, etc. because it's for the best of the greater society.
However, I don't see them telling those who live off the wages of the tax-paying average Joe how they have to spend that tax-payer money they receive or require mandatory drug testing. Figure they wouldn't see that as for the best of the greater society.
Sigh.
BTW - I Have NO problem helping out someone down on their luck. My impression was that you were referring to habitual refuse to work folks.
I agree with both of you wholeheartedly.
Many of these people receive cash. How are we to know the cash is not being spent on drugs?
I've also heard of those receiving cash actually directly spending the money on cigarettes, lottery tickets, etc.
I'd personally add to your ideas and say that food stamps should only pay for healthy food.
yeah right. the feds can't get their hands on tax dollars on something you can grow yourself. that's why it remains illegal. not enough money to be made from legalizing it.
It's not that outrageous of a possibility. There is a lot of political talk about it.
Published April 30, 2009 @ 10:31AM PST
We just got word that the Rhode Island Senate overwhelmingly passed a bill, 35-2, that would establish “compassion centers†to provide medical marijuana to qualified patients, making access for the seriously ill far safer and more reliable. Legalize Marijuana - Ideas for Change in America
The U.S. should stop arresting responsible marijuana users, Rep. Barney Frank said Wednesday, announcing a proposal to end federal penalties for Americans carrying fewer than 100 grams, almost a quarter-pound, of the substance. Legislators aim to snuff out penalties for pot use - CNN.com
Many of these people receive cash. How are we to know the cash is not being spent on drugs?
I've also heard of those receiving cash actually directly spending the money on cigarettes, lottery tickets, etc.
I'd personally add to your ideas and say that food stamps should only pay for healthy food.
I don't know how it's done in Texas, but in CA you get a card that has EBT food and EBT cash. You get different amounts of money put into each of those accounts. EBT food can only be used on food stuffs, but EBT cash can be used on anything. It's ridiculous.
I don't think that poor people should smoke cigarettes, drink or play the lottery on a regular basis. And they shouldn't smoke pot or do drugs at all. They just can't afford it. And the odds of winning a lottery ticket are remote, and all those ticket purchases do add up.
I don't think that anyone should be able to tell poor people what they can or cannot buy, just because they are poor. But there ought to be absolutely no way that taxpayer money diverted to feed the poor can be used for anything other than the necessities of life.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
