| next > | post replypost new topic |
Posts: 2606
Joined: August 18, 2005
Posted: February 25, 2012, 6:31 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/plans-drug-te...-220037043.html
THOUGHTS? Ill post mine when I have a minute or 2 or 3 jack -------------------- "The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over." — Hunter S. Thompson[COLOR=blue] | ||
Posts: 8683
Joined: April 24, 2007
Posted: February 25, 2012, 11:11 AM
From a strictly Consititutional standpoint it scares me a little...here's the bad news, as someone who teaches where I do, I support some form of this. This is a severely broken system with little or no oversight.
Last year my daughter applied for subsidized childcare so she could work a full 40 hours...she was told there was a 3-4 year waiting list, but that if she applied for full welfare she'd move to the top of the list...WTF?! The current system is set up so that a parent of an infant can receive benefits for that child for 24 months before they cut you off...the solution: have another baby. One of my students told me her grandfather was coming from their homeland...oh, you must be so excited, I said...yes, he needs heart surgery and my dad told him if he didn't tell them he was sick and came here he could get it for free...WTF?! I work with some children who live in crack houses and 92% of the students in my school are on public assistance. We feed them breakfast and lunch and that might be it for them for the day, so our tax dollars are getting smoked and shot up all the time. Almost all the parents smoke cigarettes, too...the hallways in my school where the kids hang their jackets stink of stale smoke...yet the children are hungry. At the end of the day the parking lot is filled with status SUVs and the mothers have beautifully sculpted nails and high-end handbags..yet they don't work and can't seem to find a job. There is an elaborate network of people who will sign off on the job search paperwork for a few bucks. I am not saying everyone takes advantage, they don't, many parents are working two and three jobs and still struggling to make ends meet...many live two or three families to an apartment and entire families to a single bedroom...the kids can't even find a place to do their homework. BUT, the ones who are using their $$ for drugs and smokes are rampant and they feel entitled to these 'benefits'. They show up high or drunk to pick up their kids and get into scuffles with administration...we've had to call the cops when a parent shows up wasted to pick up a child. I was personally involved with a family of 5 children whose mother was a welfare recipient for all 5 and used ALL the benefits to buy smack, all the children ended up in the system in children's homes and foster care. So yeah, I'd like to see some accountability. I'd like to see more money for social workers to reduce their caseloads so no more kids slip between the cracks. I'd like to see workers assigned to surprise home visits and interviews with children to see what's really going on. I'd like to see less money in benefits and more money going to require a budgeting process...someone looking at where the money is going in utilities and rents and car payments. There shouldn't be a single penny left for drugs...not one. Sorry, but I've seen the reality and it's deeply disturbing. | ||
Posts: 2340
Joined: February 20, 2010
Posted: February 25, 2012, 11:21 AM
i support that bill..for the same reasons momnmore stated. i too work in a similar environment and it disgusts me to see my money given to people using it for ANYTHING other than food and shelter
| ||
Posts: 949
Joined: February 16, 2005
Posted: February 25, 2012, 3:17 PM
I'm fully 100% against it. I think it's a sham to save money by hurting those who need it MOST. It's not going to hurt real addict it's going to hurt their children. The addict is just going to move on to more dangrous means I.E Breaking into your house stealing out of your cars. It's a broken system no matter what the goverment dose. Yes i'm sure some funds are misused. By cutting those funds I personally think your just asking for a rise in CRIME AND DRUG SELLERS. Your opening the door for more harsh means because the addict is goona do anything to get what they want. Also i'm scared it will effect those on m-done I don't get assistance but, I do get a medical card i still have to pay out of pocket for my mdone my medical card will not cover it from a treatment center. The system has always been a mess. I can't see how drug testing will clean it up. Invading personal homes with a iron fist to see how people get and spend their money I think it wrong in everyway. Freedom means your goverment should NOT be able to walk in and take away from you because they disagree on how you spend money food stamps. We already don't have foster homes if the state wants to nit pick the poorest families it's those children who will suffer and pay the cost. Scary as crap where lawmakers want random screening to include nicotine tests if you smoke you could lose a means to feed your family? I don't smoke but, it's not illegal to do it. Also they will be wasting a ton of money on the drug testing money that could be better used.
This post has been edited by zerogirl77 on February 25, 2012, 3:32 PM -------------------- The junk merchant doesn't sell his product to the consumer, he sells the consumer to the product. He does not improve and simplify his merchandise. He degrades and simplifies the client. | ||
|
Posts: 949
Joined: February 16, 2005
Posted: February 25, 2012, 5:53 PM
While at first glance this may seem to be a great idea, really it is an appeal to emotional rhetoric and typical knee-jerk reaction by the public. Under closer scrutiny, the public would see that this is a terrible idea, more bureaucracy, more government control, with no net gain for the public at large or the taxpayer. So look at the reasons, why drug testing of welfare recipients is actually a very bad idea.
The biggest reason that people are supporting this new law is that they believe there will be a major savings to the taxpayer!. This program will be enormously expensive and yet another huge burden on the taxpayers. Is it really worth spending somewhere in the neighborhood of a hundred-grand, just to catch one drug user who may be getting twelve-grand a year in benefits? According to some sources, drug tests may run as high as $75 per test.It would probably be conservative to estimate that the true cost might be three times the cost of the actual test itself. You would need to hire the different social workers who will have to check and double check the paperwork, someone to meet with recipients, A nurse to give the test results, Someone to watch the test being taken.There is substantial risk that people will test positive for drugs even if they did not take any drugs. A “blank” false-positive, or one that would have come up positive regardless of what the specimen actually contained runs about 5-6%, even if it were distilled water. When you add to that the fact that things like poppy-seed buns, can trigger a false-positive, the rate increases to about 15%. Not to mention people who are taking prescription or over the countor medications that can trigger a +. Some sources indicate false-positive rates can run as high as 1 in 2. So there we will see 15-50,000 innocent people kicked off of welfare for using drugs, when in fact they were not drug users at all. plus a cost to to re-test if/when needed. There is a false notion in our society today that people on welfare are there as a matter of choice. While there are certainly examples of people who lie and abuse the system, those instances are much more rare than we are led to believe. Again we can take drug abuse as an example. The popular notion is that most people who are poor and on welfare are drug addicts who simply don't want to work. The facts do not support this notion This post has been edited by zerogirl77 on February 25, 2012, 5:58 PM -------------------- The junk merchant doesn't sell his product to the consumer, he sells the consumer to the product. He does not improve and simplify his merchandise. He degrades and simplifies the client. | ||
|
Posts: 2340
Joined: February 20, 2010
Posted: February 25, 2012, 11:01 PM
addicts already hurt their children
| ||
|
Posts: 8683
Joined: April 24, 2007
Posted: February 25, 2012, 11:59 PM
I am not opposed to public assistance, just to its abuse...and it's not as rare as you think...I see it every.single.day. I plain and simple do not want to subsidize anyone's drug use...and yeah, the kids are already getting hurt.
So Jack, let's hear from you... This post has been edited by MomNMore on February 26, 2012, 12:00 AM | ||
|
Posts: 2606
Joined: August 18, 2005
Posted: February 26, 2012, 3:30 AM
Supporters of the policies always say that public assistance is meant to be transitional and that drug tests are increasingly common requirements for getting jobs. - This is probably true-
Working people today work very hard to make ends meet, and it just dozen’t seem fair to them that their tax dollars go to support illegal things------- but >> Advocates for the poor say the testing policies single out and vilify victims of the recession, disputing the idea that people on public assistance are more likely to use drugs. They also warn that to the extent that testing programs were successful in blocking some people from receiving benefits. The inability to get money for basic needs would aggravate drug addictions and increase demand for treatment. Try to provide for three kids on a monthly welfare check of about $340, plus $640 in food stamps. For many more than you think- >- more than is being portrayed by those saying that the majority of welfare recipients are spending that little money on drugs - its more important to them that the electricity isn't cut off. ( which - would cause eviction from subsidized housing). I believe that the majority who struggle to make ends meet , the idea of taking what little money that they receive to buy drugs seems ridiculous- Are there those who abuse the system? Of course- I think for the people who need the most assistance trying to push this legislation thru sends a bad message** It perpetuates the stereotype that low-income people are lazy, shiftless drug addicts and if all they did was pick themselves up from the bootstraps then the country would’t be in the mess it’s in.**** as ZG mentioned**** Many states have already established ways to prevent people with known drug problems from receiving benefits — about 20 states prohibit unemployment payments for anyone who lost a job because of drug use, and more than a dozen states refuse welfare payments to anyone convicted of a drug felony. I know her in NJ- if your on methadone it causes problems for those trying to get subsidized housing- That aint fair- That isn't a drug you abuse, that should show that you are in recovery- (whole other subject) ----- This year, 36 states considered drug testing for recipients of cash assistance from the major welfare program, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures; 12 states proposed it for unemployment insurance; and some also considered making it a requirement for food stamps, home heating assistance and other programs . - - -NY Times july2011 -------------------------------------------------------------------- So far, most of the proposals have failed to win support because of concerns about legality, stemming from a decade-old federal court ruling. That ruling struck down a Michigan law that mandated testing for all welfare recipients as a violation of the constitutional protection against unreasonable search and seizure . - also from The Times july2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Money has also been an issue -including the cost of testing. . (we all should know this) Many states dont even track what drugs caused failures, but elsewhere the vast majority of cases involved marijuana. - OK its still illegal- but its marijuana- - There are millions of people seeking aid from the state for the first time because they have lost their jobs and they still have children to feed and bills to pay- Now on top of that >these people now have to suffer the indignity of having to undergo a drug test. OK- I guess you know where I stand-> but I do understand both sides I think you have to be very careful when you lump all families who are struggling and have to accept public assistance to just accept a law like this. I think before they just go ahead and pass an across the board testing program, other options should be explored- -Not all welfare families are addicts- and not all addicts need welfare (Id make a helluva politician huh?) Good civil debate you guys**** jack This post has been edited by jackofhartzz on February 26, 2012, 3:52 AM -------------------- "The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over." — Hunter S. Thompson[COLOR=blue] | ||
|
Posts: 949
Joined: February 16, 2005
Posted: February 26, 2012, 9:24 AM
Of course those who abuse the system and use drugs are already hurting their children I agree Fully. I also know from personal experience in most cases it hurts the kids more when a parent is in prison or a child in foster care. Yes they are in bad situations you fix nothing by making life harder on their already struggling parent/parents. It is a fact only a small percent use drugs in general not just those on assistance. It's not only the drug users mis using funds. Senator Arthenia Joyner, a Democrat, disagrees. She sees the tests as invasive and a waste of taxpayer money. So she’s trying to end them. “The general population is at eight percent drug use. We are talking about two percent among welfare recipients. I think that the entire thing is ill founded. ME: Some figures say as many as 20 percent admit they used a drug or drink and recive assistance. So it's not ok to spend millions to find 2-8 percent or even if I say 20 percent. That leaves 80 percent who could be kicked off is they get a false positive or in same states if they just smoke cig's yes they are trying to add Cigarettes. Mom and more I know you see it everyday I lived it. My mom used my dad aND MY NEIGHBORS we lived in the inner city where their is a huge increase in use. It's not just the inner city that gets assistance. A lot of people who live out in suburbs or in the country where jobs are hard to find get food stamps. In rural areas the assistance case load is very high yet drug use very very low. You are seeing it everyday a lot of it but, your seeing a skewed number of the whole.
This post has been edited by zerogirl77 on February 26, 2012, 9:25 AM -------------------- The junk merchant doesn't sell his product to the consumer, he sells the consumer to the product. He does not improve and simplify his merchandise. He degrades and simplifies the client. | ||
|
Posts: 8683
Joined: April 24, 2007
Posted: February 26, 2012, 8:48 PM
Hey ZG, good to be reminded of your background...yes, you've been in the thick of it.
Sorry, I disagree, often the very best thing that can happen is for the child to be placed in foster care and the same holds true for a parent in prison. I have to decide this week about filing against a mother...a child ALWAYS prefers an abusive or truly horrid parent over a foster...but I believe with all my heart that this child will be better off fostered, or at least with some social services oversight...sad, but 100% true. Three of our students witnessed the murder of their mother precisely because the father was NOT in prison where he rightfully belonged. Living this stuff has changed me from socially liberal to 'liberal but extremely agitated'. Mad respect for Jack and ZG...it's okay that we disagree...God bless America and the freedom to have respectful discussions on important subjects. | ||
|
Posts: 949
Joined: February 16, 2005
Posted: February 26, 2012, 10:55 PM
It is nothing personal that we don't all agree everything has many sides. I have changed my mind about many things when gave more facts or just a change in point of view. The daily stress we all have shape how we each see the world. That being said I wanted to pass this on.
I try to not say things like all or everyone every case is unique... just a tiny bit of info that found children sometimes do better Not in foster care but, left with their parents who have been looked at as possibly being abusive/neglectful. Of course in extreame cases foster care is best. USA today food for thought http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation...ter-study_N.htm Children whose families are investigated for abuse or neglect are likely to do better in life if they stay with their families than if they go into foster care, according to a pioneering study. The findings intensify a vigorous debate in child welfare: whether children are better served with their families or away from them. RELATED: Record numbers of foster kids leave program as adults Kids who stayed with their families were less likely to become juvenile delinquents or teen mothers and more likely to hold jobs as young adults, says the study by Joseph Doyle, an economics professor at MIT's Sloan School of Management who studies social policy This post has been edited by zerogirl77 on February 26, 2012, 11:04 PM -------------------- The junk merchant doesn't sell his product to the consumer, he sells the consumer to the product. He does not improve and simplify his merchandise. He degrades and simplifies the client. | ||
Posts: 1059
Joined: August 29, 2011
Posted: February 26, 2012, 11:46 PM
Since I am fairly new to applying for aid this conversation is interesting for me. I got medical for my granddaughter,no problem,I.E.H.P.(Inland Empire Health Program) actually. When my grandson came last week it took one phone call to get the papers sent to me to add him,so he will have it too.
Now food stamps in another issue. I can't get food stamps just for my grandkids, I have to apply for the whole family. My husband has been out of work, disabled for like 4-5 years now. All his disability is long gone as is his unemplyment. He applied for aid but was denied....because I had income. He finally hired an attorney that will take a % of what he gets. He has been denied 2 times already,even with the attorney. For heavens sake, this is something he paid into,all the years he worked, and now that he CAN'T work,we need it. But they keep telling him NO. Now we have to file another appeal, wait another 6 months and hope the 3rd time is a charm. Another year and he can apply for part of his retirement. My ex DIL has been denied 5 times I think...she has MS,has trouble walking and gets injections in her spine for cryin' out loud. She has an attorney too and still hasnt gone very far. Its hurry up and wait.......a long time....It really sucks. -------------------- I NEVER KNEW HOW MUCH LOVE MY HEART COULD HOLD UNTIL SOMEONE CALLED ME GRANDMA. STOP AND LISTEN TO THE BIRDS SINGING IN THE TREES. WHEN THE BIRDS ARE SINGING EVERYTHING IN LIFE IS OK.[FONT=Courier][FONT=Arial] | ||
|
Posts: 2606
Joined: August 18, 2005
Posted: February 27, 2012, 5:14 AM
Disability takes forever granny, , its not uncommon to be denied 2 or 3 times before you get it. Then they are supposed to give you a big ck for all the back pay >starting when you 1st applied- sometimes its 30 grand or so-
Now if it wasn't a medical problem and it were a psychological issue it would probably have went thru already- -at least in NY thats the deal- Now if they wernt giving any aid in Ca,> be it Med *Cal, some form of welfare, food stamps, or child assistance because of your history - -your grandkids would be in foster care by now- - -Parents that couldn't take care of them, and grandparents that tested positive for methadone- -wouldn't that be something?? It would be a travesty- talk soon jack This post has been edited by jackofhartzz on February 27, 2012, 5:18 AM -------------------- "The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over." — Hunter S. Thompson[COLOR=blue] | ||
Posts: 10092
Joined: October 27, 2004
Posted: February 27, 2012, 8:38 AM
Is this in the best interest of all children?
Would this make parents who aren’t being parents now in turn do better or do worse by their children? Will they so call catch everyone? Did this in any form come with this some agenda out of the mind of some idiot who thought hey this will help stop drug addiction … kinda like changing the formula of oxy … kinda like that definition of insanity… Will this lead to a rise in crime, including violent ones? Absolutely! Would I love those who take advantage of the system to get caught, sure would. But will this do that? I highly doubt it. Could you imagine if this was to include SSI …oh even better yet anyone getting benefits through the VA…Really now to be fair shouldn’t this include everyone getting any federal assistance? Oh wait the TN governor is right on that and more, he thinks anyone who get any money should be tested, including lawmakers. actually many states are including law makers and he thought it would have been good to test anyone getting bailout money …and Florida is mandating including all state workers which was already ruled unconstitutional by the supreme court because of illegal search and seizure. Legislation like this freaks me out, and all I can think of is what will be next. The ACLU is having a field day in Florida since as of now it is the only place who is doing this…but then not fairly some area of the state they don't have the facilities to test set up yet....hmmm Coming to a town near you ... -------------------- Well it sucks, now doesn't it? When you make your own bed and then have to lie in the filth. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ There was a glitch due to system overload. Please stand by to find out what future you will design. | ||
|
Posts: 949
Joined: February 16, 2005
Posted: February 27, 2012, 9:18 AM
mistyeyes: I think at 1st any normal reaction is sure it's a good ideal!. They should not be using my tax dollars to get high "I agree' i'm not for making it easier on those using the system...it's crystal clear it's wrong. The other side is I do also fear rise in crime and drug sells + proof the war on drugs increased illeagl sells and gun Violence. The war on walfare will do the same. It gives the goverment too much Invasive Power. What drugs can be included Sub's/ methadone/ smoking ciggrates/ legal drinking for the casual drinker?. I already know once a parent test + it's turned into childrens services case. I lost my children due to being in the hospital with a arm infection from shooting up. Yes I was hurting my kids, at the time did it help them NO. They were placed with my mom and her heavy alcholic boyfriend and my brother who still uses. Taken from me with little looking into where they were put. They went to a trailer court with 11 registered sex offenders on the property. I could have told the state put them with foster parents maybe should have. Things are not always so black and white. I can't even imagine the cost to test all vet's getting VA benifits my dad would be homeless and pennyless. SSI benifits my brother on the streets. Would that fix anything? I can't see how. It will never never stop drug use or drinking or smoking just like making oxy's you can't shoot never fixed oxy addiction people moved on to OPANA's. Side not when children are removed the state always tries to place with family...a lot of times the family in no more stable then the parent they are taking the child from.
This post has been edited by zerogirl77 on February 27, 2012, 9:26 AM -------------------- The junk merchant doesn't sell his product to the consumer, he sells the consumer to the product. He does not improve and simplify his merchandise. He degrades and simplifies the client. | ||
Posts: 20396
Joined: February 12, 2004
Posted: February 27, 2012, 12:52 PM
I disagree with any of my tax dollars ( for which my husband busts his a** to send away) to be spent on drugs, alcohol or tobacco. Period. I think there should be drug testing every month, you do a UA, you pass, you get your check. You get a time limit. Just like with unemployement. You have a certain amount of time and then the money's gone. I also believe in birth control. You have 5 kids you can't afford? You can't have another. Is it goverment getting involved? You bet and they better get started. Start protecting the money that hard working americans make. Stop wasting it, stop thowing it at situations that never get better. Social workers absolutely need more money and less case loads so that they can do surprise home visits and lets start worrying and taking care of the kids instead of depending on thier idiot parents to do so. I don't know how to accomplish that one but something needs to change to protect children. This has gone on for long enough and has gotten worse instead of better. I actually overheard a conversation the other day between two women..first one says, I'm pregnant, this makes number 3, second one says, lucky you, you get more money from welfare. GET A JOB AND QUIT POOPING OUT KIDS! What is wrong with this mentality?
The money that my husband works so hard for should not be spent on drugs and alcohol. How ironic for a family of addict/alcoholics in recovery. There is however, in this state a bill that is being signed into law that require's any welfare recipient to pass a UA before getting their check. Now, it's sad that some may not get the money and then what about the kids? But, I bet they won't keep not passing the UA's. It has to stop somewhere. Feed the kids at school, provide accounts at stores where they can get clothes and food but that the parents can't touch or screw with. DO SOMETHING! Arrrg..this makes me nuts. -------------------- I used Drugs to forget, I got clean to remember. | ||
|
Posts: 2340
Joined: February 20, 2010
Posted: February 27, 2012, 2:51 PM
kind of begs the question, is government interfering by giving welfare? gets into a whole argument about welfare, employer mandated health care etc...as Ive said before...doesnt seem right that out of my paycheck (taxes) I support people I cant claim on my income tax...
| ||
|
Posts: 949
Joined: February 16, 2005
Posted: February 27, 2012, 4:54 PM
We have already had big changes in reform welfare reform. Laws in place DO put TIME limits on how long you can get benifits, they don't let people get assistance forever on end. PLEASE read http://apps.state.or.us/caf/fsm/05tf-n.htm I do support reform and helping people to get off state assistance it should have limits. Also to get aide you must be working or in a job program or in some schooling or trade school. It is not a perfect system some people find ways around the rules that's gonna happen with anything even drug testing. The people who abuse their own perscription meds will not be caught with drug testing. They will have doctor coverage for their drugs. I would bet you a lot more people mis use their meds then the % of street drug users. Cowgirl, momg I respect both your stands on the issue. I do see why and where that mind set comes from. I work full time & my fiance works full time, it is my tax dollars also. This could very well rise all our taxes. Would you both still stand by drug testing if it did cost you more in tax dollars? The cost of the test and the extra case workers will have to come from somewhere. It's not my just my personal opinion research backs this testing will cost. momg very good point... all social programs are goverment interference in our daily lives. In a Extreme situation I would take No or little goverment complete abolishment of social services including disability over more goverment control. Every man women child for themself would be a better option then a goverment with too much control. WW2 Hitler's Reign of Terror good example of a goverment having too much control. I would support a collaspe of the whole food stamp/cash assistance program over spending more money on it by drug testing and getting more social workers. The Grand Cayman islands have no taxes at all, they also have no social services you don't work you don't eat. The issue with that is the people who need it and don't misuse don't have it. The country has the highest per capita income in the Caribbean it's a beautiful country. In some cases I think social services do more harm then good. Sometimes the helping hand is the hand holding you down. Like a enabler to a drug addict. I know that seems to conflict with me not supporting drug testing on those on state assistance. I have read a lot about the topic what i've learned it's not a good solution "in my opinion."
This post has been edited by zerogirl77 on February 27, 2012, 4:59 PM -------------------- The junk merchant doesn't sell his product to the consumer, he sells the consumer to the product. He does not improve and simplify his merchandise. He degrades and simplifies the client. | ||
|
Posts: 8683
Joined: April 24, 2007
Posted: February 27, 2012, 4:57 PM
Welfare was intended to be a leg up, not a way of life. Granny, your family is an example of the broken system, and so is my daughter...we also have paid in our entire lives for what? To be told she has to go on full-boat welfare to get subsidized childcare? who the hell needs childcare if they're not working?
Tina, I also doubt that it will fix the problem and I don't know what will, but we need to start making change on a lot of different fronts...the kids that I see are not really benefiting from any of it, but their parents sure are. I consider myself socially liberal in most ways, but I have issues with this. I drive home through this city and see people, healthy people from 18-50 sitting on their stoops, hanging at the storefronts, smoking, drinking from brown bags, blocking side street traffic while they do deals in the middle of the day in the middle of the road, handing off their money for the junk and not a care about who sees it, including the kids...and I see these same people dropping kids off in the morning late for breakfast and yelling at the staff for starving their kids...picking up their children at school...or NOT, just plain forgetting about them...so I'm not so sure it can get much worse. This is not stereotyping, this is my experience and I live it every day. ZG, kids who stay with their families and have a good social worker, and have parents who made some mistakes out of stress or poverty...I get that, and I always want that, not just to swoop in and snatch kids from parents who need some help, but to work with them and teach them. There are more of those families than the more extreme. ...but there are still an awful lot of extremes. 70% of the kids in my school have witnessed domestic abuse in one form or another (usually drugs and alcohol related)...we have a 'trauma room' for kids melting down and getting violent...I get professional development in Non-violent Crisis Intervention and Teaching Traumatized Children (most schools get PD in reading and math - lol)...100% of the kids in my class this year have a family member who was involved in, or a victim of, gun violence (100%!!!!)...and the guns are around for the drugs. Okay, I can't post on this anymore because the more I write, the more it makes me feel like what I do isn't going to change a thing, and I cannot allow myself to believe that...too depressing and demoralizing. I've said my bit...thanks for letting me weigh in though. This post has been edited by MomNMore on February 27, 2012, 5:17 PM | ||
|
Posts: 2606
Joined: August 18, 2005
Posted: February 27, 2012, 8:26 PM
M&M-
'I think I might have asked you once before - but I forgot Where iN Mass/Boston are you teaching?? You dont have to answer it you dont want to- -When I was up there Roxbury, Mattapan, and I guess Dorchester had some of the worst school systems in that state- -but they were tring that whole "busing thing " at that time- - geeez, Im gettin old... I hear from an old friend of mine that out west a bit, Worcester has gotten worse thru the yrs I love Boston and that state, I dont get a chance to go back to often - Hell, I even love Fenway-but I didnt love the fans throwing peanuts at me for 9 innings- -hahA This post has been edited by jackofhartzz on February 27, 2012, 8:27 PM -------------------- "The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over." — Hunter S. Thompson[COLOR=blue] | ||
|
| post replypost new topic |