• DPMC Moderators: thegreenhand | tryptakid
  • Drug Policy & Media Coverage Welcome Guest
    View threads about
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Drug Busts Megathread Video Megathread

Drug Tests for the 1 Percent?

slimvictor

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
6,483
The poor must prove they’re clean before they can receive benefits from the government. Why not hold the rich to the same standard?


Ever since the earliest days of government benefits, when social workers would inspect the homes of welfare recipients for cleanliness, the poor have been asked to prove their worth in order to receive help from the state.

Now, a Wisconsin Congresswoman is asking: Shouldn’t the wealthy have to prove their worth for all the government benefits they receive, too?

Congresswoman Gwen Moore (D-WI) is introducing the Top 1% Accountability Act of 2016, which would require drug testing for all tax filers claiming itemized deductions totaling over $150,000. Moore’s bill would require those with the higher itemized deductions to submit a clear drug test to the IRS or take the standard deduction, which is lower. The bill is intended to highlight the fact that it’s not just the poor who receive aid, even if they’re the ones asked to prove their standing. Aid to the wealthy comes mostly in the form of tax breaks, which allow them to keep money that they would otherwise be required by law to pay to the government.

“We don’t drug test wealthy CEOs who receive federal subsidies for their private jets, nor do we force judges or public officials to prove their sobriety to earn their paychecks,” Eric Harris, a spokesperson for Moore told me. “Attaching special demands to government aid exclusively targets our country's most vulnerable individuals and families.”

cont at
http://www.theatlantic.com/business...e-1-percent/487649/?google_editors_picks=true
 
The flip side is the famously wealthy will usually have their personal life/strife published in the media with a destructive fervour that is never afforded to the poor.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.
 
Or... hold them to the same standard as human beings minus the fucking drug tests?

Good way to take a nice step back in the progression of legality for recreational substances.
 
Why not just stop some of the tax breaks from having such a large impact? That would solve way more problems and not seem like a pity party.

As far as political pandering goes this is a great angle. If you are pandering to 99% of the population by subjecting the 1% to such an unreasonable farce then you have sealed your election. I guess the idea behind it is very genuine though. Level the playing field or do away with the mandatory look into the lives of those receiving aid.
 
Congresswoman Gwen Moore (D-WI) is introducing the Top 1% Accountability Act of 2016, which would require drug testing for all tax filers claiming itemized deductions totaling over $150,000. Moore’s bill would require those with the higher itemized deductions to submit a clear drug test to the IRS or take the standard deduction, which is lower.

Sounds like this will go nicely with the civil forfeiture abuses...
 
That's insane. We should be moving away from drug testing.

Yeah just pass the drug test and move on lol. Seriously unless they are allowed to watch you and stare at you drug tests are jokes, especially since most drugs are out in 3-5 days thats a short window.
 
How about we just cut off benefits for the 1%... And then we should ditch the drug tests all around, imagine how much extra money we could put into social services then.
 
How about we just cut off benefits for the 1%... And then we should ditch the drug tests all around, imagine how much extra money we could put into social services then.

Exactly my point. I remember they tried this before on the people receiving state aid...and here is a little factoid about he result.

According to state data gathered by ThinkProgress, the seven states with existing programs — Arizona, Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Utah — are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to ferret out very few drug users. The statistics show that applicants actually test positive at a lower rate than the drug use of the general population. The national drug use rate is 9.4 percent. In these states, however, the rate of positive drug tests to total welfare applicants ranges from 0.002 percent to 8.3 percent, but all except one have a rate below 1 percent. Meanwhile, they’ve collectively spent nearly $1 million on the effort, and millions more may have to be spent in coming years.

Full article here.

You could actually give a decent amount of money, services, or create jobs with that funding...but I believe in my heart of hearts that it is merely a lobbying group or racist/classist state legislators throwing their weight around.
 
The person who wrote this law obviously did so to point out the fact that we are discriminating against the poor with the mandatory drug testing for welfare. Indeed most drug testing is for lower-wage jobs doctors and lawyers don't have the same scrutiny.
 
This is ridiculous. Drug testing people jsut because the amount of money the make? Id understand if they were testing higher gov't because that's because of their job.

With poor people they are saying they have to be tested for programs that give them money. There's no real "if" for the rich side.

This will never pass
 
I'd test the blood and/or urine of every single person employed by the DEA for all controlled substances. Boy that would feel good.
 
This is ridiculous. Drug testing people jsut because the amount of money the make? Id understand if they were testing higher gov't because that's because of their job.

With poor people they are saying they have to be tested for programs that give them money. There's no real "if" for the rich side.

This will never pass

The amount of money given to the rich, with tax breaks / loopholes, etc. is thousands of times greater than that given to the poor.

I don't believe that the government should have the right to test anyone's blood/spit/hair for drugs.
But, if they are going to test the poor, then they should test everyone (everyone who receives money/ benefits / tax breaks etc.)- that is fair.
 
If we test all the DEA and the 1%, they probably wouldn't disclose the results the same as they do for the people on welfare.
 
Top