It says alot, when people like you, who claim mathematical formula's are the truth, which is applied into scientific analysis, don't believe in this stuff, and throw the majority of scientific consensus out the window as soon as it leads to policy conclusions you don’t like?
Tooner, While we are at it.....Lets drug test all well-to-do suburban kids. I'm tiring of my tax dollars paying police overtime on the war on drugs. Only to have these kids on the streets the next day. Lets just drug test one class of people, it's the American way, isn't it ?
I have no problem if one chooses to be reckless, like the X-games, because the end result usally results in the daredevil being effected. But your example of recklessness with tobacco, effects innocent people in a confined area. The EPA has classified secondhand smoke as a Group A carcinogen. Alcohol is legal, but using it recklessly effects millions of innocent people from phyical death and injury to emotional scars and broken families. Yet there's no talk of banning alcohol, just free marketeers complaining it's regulated to much. So instead of demonizing the big bad Gov't is raising your Whopper from $2 dollars to $2.25 and your bottled water 10 cents, bring your lunch from home and refill your water bottles with filtered tap water...
BTW....Sporting and Racing events are already curtailed by the price of tickets vs the profitability determined to be made...
LOL...None of our Military Ind Complex war mongering supporters are touching this one Wkmac. And Acorn's subsudized funds are a drop in the bucket compared to AmorGroup and LM/NG. If your going to punish Acorn for a few bad apples, lets be consistent and revoke funding for these Org's. Or is this one big fat political witchhunt......Good point as always wkmac
Diesel, You may drug test them also. Fine with me.
As for testing only one group of people, I am saying yes, if we have to pay for reckless behavior which at this point today, they do not pay for their healthcare, then yes we should curtail this reckless behavior. If the funds disappear, so will much of the abuse. The other side was talking about tax payers having to pay for reckless behavior, yet we have been for years. And there is no punishment to them who are unemployed due to drug and alcohol abuse. Why is this so? I know there are many, many unemployed right now through no fault of their own. We are not talking about them here. I am talking about the generation after generation addicted to welfare. They could test positive, and still get govt money, but they are not checked. Yet Other side thinks smokers should be punished for buying a legal, yes deadly product and using it. I dont argue the point tobacco is deadly, my Mom died from lung cancer. I just think the double standard goes way over the line. It seems only the productive are brought in line here. Seems only the productive have to give up anything.
Yes and you have told me before, just what a small amount of money is spent on welfare. Just like Obama tells us he will get rid of fraud in Medicare to pay for this new healthcare takeover. Well seems like if we got rid of a lot of fraud we may have the money to cover those who need help with care.
Lets get rid of the fraud, fund the program, as it is, then worry how to expand it to cover those not eligible now. Its simple and would not require a take over of the health care system. Easier to figure out how to cover a small percentage, than throw out the baby with the bathwater and have a new baby.