General Discussion Undecided where to post - do it here. |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
|
![]() |
#1 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
|
the testing has cost $176 million, far outstripping the $60,000 in "savings." So Florida spends 3 million a year on welfare? Somehow I don't think that's right. If ten percent of Floridans are on welfare, that's 1.7 million floridans. If they receive a stipend of 20k a year, that would mean 34 billion dollars a year that Florida spends on welfare. 2 percent of that is 680 million dollars.
So Florida spent 176 million to save 680 million a year. ![]() Edit, Florida spends 11.4 billion a year on welfare. Cutting 2 percent off that number is 228 million. So the state actually still comes out ahead. ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
|
From July through October in Florida — the four months when testing took place before Judge Scriven’s order — 2.6 percent of the state’s cash assistance applicants failed the drug test, or 108 of 4,086, according to the figures from the state obtained by the group. The most common reason was marijuana use. An additional 40 people canceled the tests without taking them.
Because the Florida law requires that applicants who pass the test be reimbursed for the cost, an average of $30, the cost to the state was $118,140. This is more than would have been paid out in benefits to the people who failed the test, Mr. Newton said. As a result, the testing cost the government an extra $45,780, he said. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/18/us...rug-tests.html Okay, where the hell did you get $178 million? |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
|
532446_408839349153963_223048648_n.jpg Even assuming the government lost out on this deal (meaning there was no deterrent effect, which seems hard to account for), the fact they only lost $40,000 or so made this a worthwhile experiment and will help other states considering similar measures. So, again, you are a total retard, and not just because you insist on using douchy terms like teabaggers. |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
|
Forget the $178 million. The $60,000 number is even more implausible. That's welfare benefits for what, ten people? Five people? ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
|
I think we should set aside a 'dope stipend', to ensure that the folks on welfare have access to quality dope instead of having to buy it from some shady dealer with who knows what mixed in. Just imagine the savings on hospitalization from crappy dope! ![]() Would probably have it prescribed for free by a doctor rather than given away so the doctors can offer other medical support. |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
|
I hate every fat white nerd who says "Legalize it because it lowers crime" while they eat their fifth bagel and tell themselves it's okay because they're [Jewish/a New Yorker/forever alone]. THE PEOPLE WHO ARE SELLING THE DOPE, HAVING LOST THEIR INCOME STREAM THROUGH LEGALIZATION, ARE NOT GOING TO THROW DOWN THEIR MAC-10S AND GET A BACHELOR'S IN ABE LINCOLN STUDIES SO THEY CAN ARCHIVE THE GETTYSBURG ADDRESS FOR 25 YEARS. THEY ARE GOING TO SHOOT YOU AND TAKE YOUR WALLET.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
|
I hate every fat white nerd who says "Legalize it because it lowers crime" while they eat their fifth bagel and tell themselves it's okay because they're [Jewish/a New Yorker/forever alone]. THE PEOPLE WHO ARE SELLING THE DOPE, HAVING LOST THEIR INCOME STREAM THROUGH LEGALIZATION, ARE NOT GOING TO THROW DOWN THEIR MAC-10S AND GET A BACHELOR'S IN ABE LINCOLN STUDIES SO THEY CAN ARCHIVE THE GETTYSBURG ADDRESS FOR 25 YEARS. THEY ARE GOING TO SHOOT YOU AND TAKE YOUR WALLET. ![]() |
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|