Quote:
Originally Posted by sperbonzo
I have no issue with what people do with their own bodies. Drugs should all be legal. However, if I am going to be forced to give them my money via threat of violence by the government, then I should have a say in how they spend that money.
.
|
God you are so being played. In your state wanna know how many tested positive for drugs.
http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/...-shows/1225721
Of the 4,086 applicants who scheduled drug tests while the law was enforced, 108 people, or 2.6 percent, failed, most often testing positive for marijuana.
The numbers, confirming previous estimates, show that taxpayers spent $118,140 to reimburse people for drug test costs, at an average of $35 per screening.
The state's net loss? $45,780.
and your gov owns a large share of testing service
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/bu...uspicio/nLq8f/
Given Solantic's role in that marketplace, critics are again asking whether Scott's policy initiatives - this time, requiring drug testing of state employees and welfare recipients - are designed to benefit Scott's bottom line.
The Palm Beach Post reported in an exclusive story two weeks ago that while Scott divested his interest in Solantic in January, the controlling shares went to a trust in his wife's name.
And as Thomm Hartmann says a libertarian is just a republican who wants to smoke pot and get laid.