A 1% percenter? Nope, not really.
Not accurate. I do say the program is expensive and does not do what the politicians promised. Also, the data shows that welfare applicants are less likely to use drugs than people making more money. This is the real topic of the thread.
Yes, but that is a different topic. But yes, people should be identified and helped.
Now in the name of money, you have said that states should not be allowed by federal law to test welfare recipients for substance abuse (and I assume alcoholism) but just go ahead and pay the benefits.
Not accurate. I do say the program is expensive and does not do what the politicians promised. Also, the data shows that welfare applicants are less likely to use drugs than people making more money. This is the real topic of the thread.
So people with addictions are in the ditch, probably for life, which may be short. Wouldn't it be wiser to find and identify them and try to treat their addictions than just to say here is this month's check and please go away until next month?
Yes, but that is a different topic. But yes, people should be identified and helped.