Vermont Senate Passes Ski Area Bailout

[MEtoVTSkier]

I'd say that's a rare case of taxpayer money fantastically well-spent.

I agree, even though all shapes and forms of government need to drastically cut spending, if it is keeping the users of the program clean, it's a fairly small price to pay.

 

[ScottySkis]

I agree, even though all shapes and forms of government need to drastically cut spending, if it is keeping the users of the program clean, it's a fairly small price to pay.

Except mostly people who use Cannibus are faikd the test. It take up to 30/days for Cannibus to clear someone system. Almost all other narcotics are out of some one system in less then 3 days.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

 

[VTKilarney]

Only 2.6% of people either didn't pass the test or refused to take it.

Fraud is often an issue with these types of programs. Are they monitoring who actually pees in the cup?

EDIT: I see that they 2.6% does not include people who refused to be tested.

 

[VTKilarney]

This supports my suspicion that welfare recipients do not use drugs at a drastically lower rate than the overall population:
http://www.saprp.org/pm_keyResFind.cfm

I'm not saying that I support denial of welfare benefits due to drug use. I'm just saying that the data may not reflect reality due to test manipulation or failure to include refusals.


.

 

[steamboat1]

http://drugrecognition.com/Use Statistics.htm

 

[BenedictGomez]

EDIT: I see that they 2.6% does not include people who refused to be tested.

Don't you think you can logically conclude that a high percentage of the refusers are people who would fail the test?

 

[VTKilarney]

Don't you think you can logically conclude that a high percentage of the refusers are people who would fail the test?

Sounds logical to me.


.

 

[deadheadskier]

Define high percentage? How would one even make an estimate?

 

[steamboat1]

In the case of FL. even if you add in the 40 people who refused to take the test it still only comes out to 3.5% who failed.

 

[VTKilarney]

In the case of FL. even if you add in the 40 people who refused to take the test it still only comes out to 3.5% who failed.

This is where it gets confusing. Other sources say 1,600 did not submit tests.

The only thing I know for sure is that people are spinning the data no matter which way they lean.

Reliable data suggests that welfare recipients use drugs at a rate that is consistent with non welfare recipients. Some studies show slightly less, some studies show slightly more. I don't see why Florida would be an aberration, which suggests that there is something happening underneath the data.

 

[steamboat1]

This is where it gets confusing. Other sources say 1,600 did not submit tests.

If that were the case then over 40% failed. Do you believe that?

 

[Tin]

I'm amazed this discussion is still happening. Just goes to show you can make numbers show whatever you want depending on your view.

 

[steamboat1]

I agree, even though all shapes and forms of government need to drastically cut spending, if it is keeping the users of the program clean, it's a fairly small price to pay.

As Scotty pointed out the majority of those who failed the test was because of marijuana. They don't test for alcohol although they should. Here in NYC people who work on the Staten Island Ferry are randomly tested for both drugs & alcohol. I'm not sure if the same applies for other transit workers. They will lose their jobs if they test positive for either.

 

[steamboat1]

Reliable data suggests that welfare recipients use drugs at a rate that is consistent with non welfare recipients. Some studies show slightly less, some studies show slightly more. I don't see why Florida would be an aberration, which suggests that there is something happening underneath the data.

Florida is not an aberration though. All 7 states that have drug tested welfare recipients had similar results. Florida is not included in these results since they no longer test welfare recipients.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2015/02/26/3624447/tanf-drug-testing-states/

 

[VTKilarney]

Florida is not an aberration though. All 7 states that have drug tested welfare recipients had similar results. Florida is not included in these results since they no longer test welfare recipients.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2015/02/26/3624447/tanf-drug-testing-states/

Did you read that article? Several states get their figure from a self-reporting questionnaire. As I said, neither side should be cocky about the quality of the data.


.

 

[BenedictGomez]

I'm amazed this discussion is still happening. Just goes to show you can make numbers show whatever you want depending on your view.

Especially when your "source" is Thinkprogress = LULZ.

Didnt even bother clicking the link, but I'm 100% sure the conclusion was against testing welfare recipients.

It's akin to asking Mark Levin what he thinks about gay marriage and then acting "surprised" that you find he's against it.

Did you read that article? Several states get their figure from a self-reporting questionnaire.

Shhhh..... you're not supposed to be intelligent enough to understand the statistical implication of that fact, you're just supposed to blindly accept their ideological conclusion that this is a failure.

 

[ScottySkis]

It's a mostly a fake argument, and not just in Vermont, but everywhere. There is a political entity that attempts to further this false belief, and attach "racism" to it, but the reality is very few people "go to jail" for little amounts of pot.

When they do, there's often additional charges (carrying an illegal handgun, etc...) to the MJ, but people who are intentionally trying to misconstrue the statistics to further this false belief as a weaponized political issue, will count this as a "jail for MJ" data point, which completely ignores the real reason they were sent to the clink.

h


http://reason.com/archives/2012/02/08/new-yorks-illegal-pot-crackdown
http://marijuana-arrests.com/scandals-nypd.html

 

[Tin]

Especially when your "source" is Thinkprogress = LULZ.

Didnt even bother clicking the link, but I'm 100% sure the conclusion was against testing welfare recipients.

It's akin to asking Mark Levin what he thinks about gay marriage and then acting "surprised" that you find he's against it.

It works in both directions. :wink:

 

[ScottySkis]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/t/story?id=95475&page=1#.UFxiia51iUN

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
Man shoot and killed drug raid at wrong house. How much does cost in money death of inconent people this shit is crazy and out of hand.

 

[BenedictGomez]

It works in both directions. :wink:

Yes, that's why I used the specific example that I did.