There are a lot of posts floating around social networking sites about requiring drug testing individuals applying for government assistance.
Doesn’t it seem odd those who claim to want smaller government and less spending are the ones who so desperately want to enact these laws?
A post from Lorelei on addictinginfo.org shows, based on available statistics, welfare recipients are less likely to be drug users.
And, it has been found time and again, that these laws cost money – they do not save taxpayers a single dime (Google it.). But Lorelei writes, they do seem to profit a few politicians’ corporations.
So we must conclude there’s some disconnect leading supporters to want to continue paying for something unnecessary and useless (This guy has some valuable insight on that issue.).
And, why aren’t they far more worried about the corporate welfare which costs them nearly double the amount of money it does to help the needy in this country?
Corporations make insane profits (n. A financial gain, esp. the difference between the amount earned and the amount spent in buying, operating, or producing something.), and good on them for it. Why do they need subsidies, tax breaks, and special treatment because of it? Especially if “corporations are people, my friend.”
We all pay into the government pool, which in turn provides us with services that have allowed us to be more mobile, profitable, and some of the luckiest people on the planet, overall. Why are we screaming about the assistance given to those in need, and not the welfare given to those aren’t?