Show of Hands

Okay maybe cocaine.

This is a response to that type of legislation. I think she makes a fine point. And I agree, if we drug test for government benefits then test everyone that benefits from the government, including the rich and famous. Oh and how about elected officials being subject to random drug tests too.

I came here to say the exact same thing.

I agree. They are just wealthy welfare recipients.

It's an absurd idea to think giving away money that has been forcibly taken from people is the same as allowing someone who has earned their money to keep it.

There is no logic in comparing the two.

Agreed Mark3.

I do think drug testing congress may be at least as beneficial as drug testing welfare recipients. Though I'm not for that either, only because it's been proven to be a colossal waste of money.

Egad, why don't we just drug test everyone.

I think *Gwen

Or just get rid of it altogether and have a flat tax.

That would be rewriting it

There's a little more to it than just rewriting it. The IRS has to be abolished first.

The wealthy aren't getting taxpayer money like welfare recipients.

Kscott, what do you think those bank bailouts were?

Is the legislation only for the bankers? NO. Even if it were it would be discriminatory.

And yes, I'm against ALL bailouts due to mishandling of funds. However, the bailout money didn't go straight to their pockets but rather to the institutions. They never should've been able to give bonuses though.

kscott - I think the analogy is that they're getting itemized deductions; the implication being (I suppose) that they don't deserve deductions if they are using the money for illegal drugs. Note that I called it dumb (not that I support drug testing for anyone who gets other government benefits, though); I'm just suggesting why it was done.

DrW - The bank bailouts didn't have anything to do with individuals' personal income tax, though, and weren't really even intended to be helpful to the corporate owners either, but to the country's economy. Only slightly similar situation, and not a good analogy.

Susan, a person using their personal income to buy drugs is not equivalent to a business getting a bailout. They're not related. I see you addressed that in the 2nd part of your comment.

Yep, exactly why I said it wasn't a good analogy.

I agree. As long as I don't have to pay them welfare and food stamps because they can't work.

I don't know what that's got to do with the poll topic, but since you brought it up, obviously my comment means that those on welfare shouldn't be drug tested either.

His point is that if you're spending money on drugs then you can't go to the govt and complain that you don't have enough money for food and healthcare.

If you want to party it's your business. But if you are getting free money from me for sitting around, then you need to be looking for a job. And you're not going to pass a drug test for work. If you want to party , you can do it on your own dime. How can you be fine with that?

Sure you can. Lots of people do.

"And you're not going to pass a drug test for work."
You sure about that? There's plenty of ways to fool a drug test. I smoked marijuana less than an hour before my drug test.

"How can you be fine with that?"
Because it's none of my business who chooses to use drugs, nor yours, nor the government's.

WRONG!! If they're getting taxpayer money then it IS our business.

You're entitled to your opinion, definitely. But don't make me chuckle by trying to tell me my opinion is "wrong" 😂😂😂

Laser, as a business owner, do I have the right to deny a job to you if you do drugs or drink on the job?

Well now we've gotten way off topic. Curious as to why you clarified "on the job". If you're trying to draw a parallel between being on the clock for an employer and those on welfare being "on the clock" for the government... Good luck with that.

Your opinion is wrong. If I'm forced to pay money towards someone's living expenses you're damn right it's my business whether they're working the system.

It's a little off topic but we're still talking about drug testing for benefits. But, an employer has the right to deny employment to someone based on drug use. I'm not sure how that works in Colorado, but should I have the right to deny my money to go to someone based on drug use? It's my money in both circumstances. Should I be okay with paying people to sit around and use my money to party with? I work pretty hard for my money. Shouldn't I have a say in who gets it?

Again, your opinion is just as valid as mine. Don't worry though, I won't stoop to the level of trying to call it "wrong". Disagreeing with it doesn't make it wrong. One day you'll learn.

I hope you understand that as a federal employee, I am technically paid with money that is collected as tax revenue. Is it your business what I do in my free time? Nope 😋

The government is taking my hard earned money at gun point. Should I just be a pansy and just agree to every use of my money that "they" deem important? Because we all know that they know better than I how my money should be spent.

Did you work for that money and provide a service to the community? Did the people that paid your salary get something for their hard earned money? That's not the same thing as welfare.

Here's the thing, Breck. Once you pay your taxes, it's no longer your money. It's now the government's, and it's up to our elected officials to decide what to do with it. When somebody patronizes your business, is the money they handed over to you still their money after the transaction is complete? Do your customers have a right to know how you spend the money that was once theirs?

(Much less, have any say whatsoever in how you spend *your* money?)

You're half right, the boss of the company has the right to decide if he wants to pay you to work. If he doesn't want to employ you, because you do drugs and aren't doing your job, then he can deny you more work and let you go. Same with you, but you work for the government, so maybe the rules are different since it's almost impossible to fire you.

If you don't like how the government spends *their* money, keep that in mind the next time you go to the polls. But to suggest that the government should be forced to use even more of *their* money to drug test those who receive assistance from *them*, while at the same time violating those folks' personal freedoms, seems ridiculous to me. But again, just my opinion, and opinions are just opinions. My opinion is no more right than yours, and vice versa. And the world keeps a'spinnin.

Nah, it's not impossible to fire me. In fact, some folks want to abolish my agency entirely. I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that I'm doing drugs while on the clock, but now we're too far too topic that I almost forgot what the original poll topic was, which is dealing with drug testing wealthy folks with deductions, which I oppose (see my original comment).

Good debate laser. Thanks. Gotta go. See ya.

Have a great afternoon Breck 🙂

"I hope you understand that as a federal employee, I am technically paid with money that is collected as tax revenue. Is it your business what I do in my free time? Nope 😋"

Apples and oranges and totally unrelated. You're paid to do a job. And as long as you're doing it then there's no issue with that. But welfare is provided to people doing nothing.

"When somebody patronizes your business, is the money they handed over to you still their money after the transaction is complete? Do your customers have a right to know how you spend the money that was once theirs?"

Not surprisingly this is a dumb comment. A patron willingly gives you remuneration in exchange for a product or service. NOT even close to what taxes are.

You're pretty late, Breck and I already concluded this discussion. But you're right, public schools, postal service, paved roads, etc etc aren't services. 😂😂😂 You're too cute Scott. Have a good night!

LOL, postal service? This isn't the 90s. I send my kids to private school so shouldn't have to fund other people's kids. Keep trying!

LOL just because you choose not to use the services that you pay for doesn't make them nonexistent. Just makes you not very bright.

Nonexistent? Are you high? Who said that would make them nonexistent? It makes them not MY services. Follow the logic, kiddo. And if it's too difficult, just ask an adult for help. SOH needs a teen version for young, naive users like you.

Not your services? So you're not a taxpaying American?

(This is too good)

If you don't want to pay the cost of living in a developed, civilized society (nor utilize the services and benefits offered to you in return by an organized governmental system), perhaps the USA isn't for you. There's places on earth that may suit you more appropriately.

I know I've given you a lot to ponder regarding your future, so I'll let you get to it. Take care sweetheart 😘

I pay more taxes each year than you earn before taxes are taken out. The Constitution doesn't provide for the govt to take taxes for all the things we pay taxes for now. The govt has been overreaching for more than 100 yrs.

"I pay more taxes each year than you earn before taxes are taken out."

You pay more than 70k in taxes? Bullshit. Get real LOL.

She believes that Paul Ryan is "Criminalizing the poor." You can't make this stuff up.