Close
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 25 of 25
  1. #21
    .
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Florissant
    Posts
    4,380

    Default

    Estimate cut to the welfare roles by 80 - 90%. Plenty of return to cover the tests.

  2. #22
    Ammocurious Rucker61's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Fort Collins, CO, USA
    Posts
    3,359

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davsel View Post
    Estimate cut to the welfare roles by 80 - 90%. Plenty of return to cover the tests.
    Where do you get your data, as the results to date in places that have tried it don't seem to meet your claims.?
    Te occidere possunt sed te edere non possunt nefas est

    Sane person with a better sight picture

  3. #23
    .
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Florissant
    Posts
    4,380

    Default

    Straight from my butt.
    Just threw it out there. Not inclined to research the subject since it will never likely happen, and if it did, as you say, it will be so mismanaged and overmanaged that the ROI will likely be negative.
    The idea of people receiving tax payers' money while purchasing drugs irritates me, but I'm not going to get caught up in the already lost battle of trying to fix it.

    Render unto Caesar, and stay off my lawn!

  4. #24
    Zombie Slayer Aloha_Shooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts
    6,537

    Default

    I'd like to see voting rights contingent on passing the same civics test given to naturalized citizens but that'll never happen under this Supreme Court. The societal rules laid out in either The Moon is a Harsh Mistress or Starship Troopers (the book, not the POS movie) also have my approval (and therefore the approbriation of Democrats and other left-wingers).

  5. #25
    High Power Shooter Wiggity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    C Rock
    Posts
    901

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by foxtrot View Post
    Crazy thought:

    What if instead of a legal drinking and pot age, we had a different standard:

    Proof of sufficiency and contribution.

    To be legal to drink or smoke, either you are actively employed and self sufficient (e.g. not living at parents house) or you are retired from active employment. If you are self sufficient at age 15, you are legal. If you are still living with your parents at age 30, you are not. Obviously, it would be very difficult to enforce but this is imagination land here - theoretically motivate some people to get off their duff, and motivate leeches to stay away.


    Sounds awesome if you hate freedom.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •