Perry: "I Don't Think You Have a Heart"

[phkrause]

Originally Posted By: Tom Wetmore

A very large percentage of Americans are descendants of illegal immigrants. And many of those are the most vitriolic about "illegals" now.

[Dr. Shane]

Originally Posted By: Shane

Indeed, there are some Americans that refuse to work. However the overwhelming number of those have alcohol and/or drug addiction.

Sorry,that is a crock.Are you saying that most of those on unemployment welfare for 99 weeks are alcohol or drug addicts?

[Dr. Shane]

After the Civil War ended in the United States, states were faced with issues pertaining to immigration and thus, began introducing immigration policies...

The Bracero Program was ended in 1964. Prior to that Mexican workers had a pathway to come to the US so there was no significant illegal immigration from Mexico. Most of the illegal immigration was white Europeans coming into Galveston.

[Dr. Shane]

If you need to learn new language skills to have a better chance,LEARN IT

I have. I speak Spanish quite well. A bunch of white folks are crying about having to learn Spanish but they need to wipe their tears and get up to speed. The US is the fourth largest Spanish-speaking country in the world.

[bonnie]

Those on unemployment are willing to work. I am talking about those that are living off from welfare, not going to school, and have no plan for the future.

[Dr. Shane]

I don't care...

[bonnie]

Quote:

Think again.

National Institute of Health

Proportions of welfare recipients using, abusing, or dependent on alcohol or illicit drugs are consistent with proportions of both the adult U.S. population and adults who do not receive welfare, report National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism researchers in the November American Journal of Public Health.

However, certain age, gender, and ethnic characteristics of the general population group with alcohol or drug problems do not hold true for the welfare group with such problems, according to authors Bridget F. Grant, Ph.D., Ph.D., and Deborah A. Dawson, Ph.D., of NIAAA's Division of Biometry and Epidemiology. These differences help to identify segments of the welfare population that may be appropriate targets for alcohol and drug abuse interventions, suggest the authors.

"NIAAA's National Longitudinal Alcohol Epidemiologic Survey (NLAES) shows that alcohol and illicit drug indicators are far less prevalent among persons on public assistance than has been suggested by either the findings of less authoritative research or some public policy debates," said NIAAA Director Enoch Gordis, M.D. "This exemplifies anew the need for sound science to guide health policy deliberations."

[bonnie]

From DrugAbuse.gov

Several recent studies have estimated the prevalence of alcohol and other drug abuse in various social welfare programs. Since few social welfare programs determine eligibility based on an assessment for alcohol and drug problems, these recent studies focus on the prevalence of alcohol and drug use and frequently use the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse (NHSDA) as the primary data source to calculate their estimates.

Different prevalence studies have applied different criteria for determining use and abuse of alcohol and drugs. Most of the studies have applied some criteria to ascertain alcohol abuse or dependence, but the criteria have varied from study to study. Few studies have applied criteria to determine drug abuse or addiction; instead, they have reported past-month and past-year drug use.

The Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse (CASA) performed a study that focused on alcohol abuse, drug abuse, and women on welfare. CASA estimated that 28 percent of Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) recipients are addicted to or abuse drugs or alcohol (CASA 1994). However, this study did not apply criteria for determining either abuse or dependence and appears to have overestimated the magnitude of the problem. CASA used NHSDA data.

Two studies conducted by the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE) and the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) analyzed patterns of alcohol and drug use among persons enrolled in AFDC and food stamps, the first of which (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services [DHHS] 1994b) did not differentiate levels of impairment. The 1994 study estimated that 8.7 percent of persons receiving AFDC benefits and 10.4 percent of persons enrolled in the food stamps program had three or more episodes of binge drinking per month and that 10 percent had used an illicit drug in the last month. Table 6.11 summarizes findings for persons receiving AFDC and food stamps.

The second study by ASPE and NIDA (DHHS 1994b) analyzed the extent of use and impairment relating to that use. ASPE and NIDA found that 5.2 percent of persons in the AFDC population had a "significant" impairment resulting from alcohol and drug abuse, compared with 2.6 percent in the non-AFDC population. Table 6.12 summarizes the results of the study.

A study by Weisner and Schmidt (1993) analyzed alcohol- and drug-related problems among health and social services agency populations, including welfare recipients, in a northern California county. The study found that welfare recipients were 2.2 times more likely to be problem drinkers, 2.1 times more likely to be illicit drug users, and 12.0 times more likely to be multiple-drug users than were members of the general population. Results of the study are summarized in table 6.13.

The prevalence studies reviewed in this section demonstrate that there are a number of different estimates that can be - and have been - seized upon in the debates over the roles of alcohol and drug abuse in social welfare spending. The data support the conclusion that the rates of alcohol and drug abuse are materially higher among the population of social welfare program beneficiaries; however, the data also demonstrate how much the nature and extent of the problem can be misjudged if meaningful criteria are not applied to the determination of estimates. The following section presents more authoritative data about the frequency with which an alcohol or drug abuse problem actually is the basis for receipt of social welfare benefits.

A recent study of this issue found that rates of alcohol and drug problems among social welfare beneficiaries were actually quite similar to rates for the general population. Grant and Dawson (1996) analyzed the 1992 National Longitudinal Alcohol Epidemiologic Survey (NLAES) and applied DSM -IV clinical criteria. This is arguably the most rigorous assessment done to date, based on rigorous diagnostic criteria.6.3.4.2

[bonnie]

Quote:

I get that.

Did you leave something out of the above?

Quote:

Illegal border crossing is a misdemeanor. Have you ever broke the speed limit or jay-walked? Probably should take the beam out of your own eye before you worry about the spec in your loyal-tithe-paying brother's eye.

Really getting desperate aren't you?

If I jaywalk and am hit by a car I pay the price.So no,Can't recall jaywalking for years. That however does not result in

taxpayers paying the price for me. Can't recall a sanctuary city for that either.Yes, I have broken the speed laws. The three traffic tickets in a row for 180.00 for the last one,fines I had to pay for and a threat that I would be trying to explain to a judge why I should keep my liscence managed to convince me that it was not wise.To say nothing if I had harmed another.I didn't ask to be excused or someone else to pay for my misdeeds.

[bonnie]

I know it has to be a racial thing otherwise some cannot sound nearly as righteous as they want others to believe they are.

When I was still working I worked with dozens of immigrants,welfare,students and thenothers just wanting the extra income of a part time job. The pay was mediorce but great incentives and bonuses even for those working part time.

I was responsible for training new hires in my dept.

It did not take but an hour with a new hire,regardless of the skin color,or if they talked funny the type of employee they would be.

What seperated the employees was not the skin color. It was self respect,motivation,a desire to do better and not live off others.

There were those that did only enough to get by and that was not always willingly.

We had those that grabbed every extra 15 minutes they could get,took every online lessons the store offered free for advancement,worked another partime job to make it.

Skin color did not dictate that.

One of the employees is a perfect example of what seems foreign to you.There were three working in my dept with similar backgrounds and age.

I offered the class and booklet to one of the employees.Blond and blue eyed.She more or less sneered at the idea and said,"They don't pay me enough to work that hard" She didn't have to.Subsidized housing,WIC,and medical made sure she didn't have to.

The immigrant with dark skin and that talked funny just looked at her and then said to me"She is STUPID"

When this immigrant was losing her apt and looking for another she could afford,I gave

her the number of the subsidized housing. For a couple of days she gave me the cold shoulder and I couldn't figure out what I had done.

When I finally asked her she told me she didn't like it that "because she was black I thought she needed welfare"

I offered to have her stay with me if she could not find a place to live soon enough.She would only agree to that if she paid or cleaned my house for that.

We should not be catering to anyone that does not put forth their best effort whatever that may be.

[phkrause]

Not sure were you got those stats about drug use of welfare, the Governor said the same down here in FL and so far they've found that less than 2% have tested positive for drug use. There now really upset at the amount of money its costing for this program. Which is what they said before this got put into play.

[bonnie]

Not sure were you got those stats about drug use of welfare, the Governor said the same down here in FL and so far they've found that less than 2% have tested positive for drug use. There now really upset at the amount of money its costing for this program. Which is what they said before this got put into play.

DrugAbuse.gov and National Institute of Health

Shane said most on welfare are drug and alcohol addicted.If you read what the above actually says it disagrees with Shane

"NIAAA's National Longitudinal Alcohol Epidemiologic Survey (NLAES) shows that alcohol and illicit drug indicators are far less prevalent among persons on public assistance than has been suggested by either the findings of less authoritative research or some public policy debates," said NIAAA Director Enoch Gordis, M.D. "This exemplifies anew the need for sound science to guide health policy deliberations."

[phkrause]

DrugAbuse.gov and National Institute of Health

Shane said most on welfare are drug and alcohol addicted.If you read what the above actually says it disagrees with Shane

No I didn't read it, but thanks for the info. From the news reports here in FL, they don't agree with Shane either, and so far the results don't agree either. Now that doesn't mean that I don't agree with welfare receipiets(sp) having to be drug tested! They need to find a better way to do this! But that is the problem, how to do this for the least amount of money!

[Dr. Shane]

Shane said most on welfare are drug and alcohol addicted.

[Dr. Shane]

so far they've found that less than 2% have tested positive for drug use.

Couple of things to keep in mind. A drug test costs about $35. As an employer, I get my employees drug tested and that is about what I am paying for it. So random drug testing welfare recipients is money well spent.

The second thing is that illegal drugs isn't the whole problem. Alcoholism is also a major problem, probably a bigger one. Drug testing welfare recipients isn't going to reveal if they are alcoholics because alcohol is legal - they don't check for that.

Remember, welfare is a safety net. Most people don't spend more than two or three years on it. They go on and off it. They use it between jobs. That is what it is there for. My point is that those that abuse it and try to live on it for decades tend to have issues with substance abuse.

[bonnie]

No. Let's see what Shane *really* said.

Originally Posted By: Shane

I am talking about those that are living off from welfare, not going to school, and have no plan for the future.

[phkrause]

Florida’s welfare drug testing costs more than it saves!

http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/08/floridas-welfare-drug-testing-costs-more-than-it-saves/

[Dr. Shane]

The drug testing may not pay for itself but it is costing them $30/test. Is that too much to identify the ones that need help?

[phkrause]

and here's another one

http://warmsouthernbreeze.wordpress.com/2011/08/27/florida-taxpayers-[censored]-at-gov-rick-scott/

I have no idea what the cost is but it doesn't sound like $30 to me. Again as I mentioned I am in agreement with drug testing, but lets get the cost down. I believe they should have to pay it.

[Dottie]

The last I heard was that the testing did actually save more, by not putting those who failed the test on welfare, that it actually cost. Done by an independent research company.

[Dr. Shane]

I have no idea what the cost is but it doesn't sound like $30 to me.

From the link you posted:

"The state paid about $1,140 for the 38 negative tests"

1,140/38 = 30

[Dr. Shane]

It seems Florida is drug testing every recipient every month. That does seem rather excessive. I think random drug testing would achieve the same result with a lot less cost. However most of the ones they are wanting to identify are probably not using illegal drugs. It isn't illegal to be an alcoholic.