Ummm, Dumb-dumbs The issue here is the fact that the city is "HIRING" people to handle the overcrowding at foodstamp centers . Not Fingerprinting , Your Personal Politics, Irrational, Borderline racist views and opinions . Can we try sticking to the title issue please !

Why dont they offer the jobs to some of the people on the food stamp line who dont have jobs?

Because the right refuses to fund any jobs programs.

I'm not sure job programs work at all.  You can't suddenly make a doctor from a laid off factory worker.  You can't transform a cook into an engineer by teaching him how to use Windows 7.  All those people who make it sound as if it's easy to switch from one job to another line of job by taking a course are not being realistic.

One problem is the dysfunctional educational system which places high prestige and funding for universities but little prestige and little funding for vocational/technical schools.

I would think some of the people waiting all day on line for food stamps can be taught how to work as a food stamp distributor.  Unless I am missing something, I wouldnt think you would need high levels of education to learn this job.

No but you can train people for lower skilled work. It worked okay for the WPA. What's the difference today?

no it didn't work but you can keep thinking that 

Yes, everyone knows the WPA failed miserably, idiot.

Only the people who don't understand economics make comments on how food stamps are a major problem and should be discontinued. First of all, the amount of people on food stamps is a symptom of what is going on in the economy and not a cause. The real question people should be asking themselves and focusing on is why are so many people making so little money and what can we do about it? Furthermore, we are talking about people buying food. If you take away the ability for people to feed their family you will see a dramatic rise in crime. Because at the end of the day people will find a way to feed their family one way or another. Finally, food stamps are unique in that the money is put right back into the economy unlike major tax breaks or other government handouts. Are there problems or abuses to the program? Of course but the alternative would not only be more costly it would be inhumane. 

Agreed except drug addicts shouldnt get them.  Drug tests should be required.

You get that drug tests are super expensive, right?  & that criminalizing people based on their tax bracket is sort of a HORRIBLE PRECEDENT?

How is this criminalizing?   Is every employee at goldman sachs criminalized bc they have  to drug test to get a job there?  This has nothing to do with their tax bracket.  If they want free govt services, its not too much to ask that a person be clean of illegal drugs.  How do you think the guy who is working hard making $13k feels when he sees drugged out people getting the same food stamps only to turn around and sell them for drugs, he is using to help his family survive.  Im not saying the people should be arrested if they fail but offering free services to those who dont deserve them bc they are squandering their money/food on drugs isn't fair to those who are using food stamps to get by working hard.

Goldman Sachs: Not the government.
Foodstamps: THE GOVERNMENT.

So that is the big problem in your example. Next, I notice that you neglect to address the serious financial concerns of drug testing; in Florida they tried a program like this & it was a disaster. Using tax payer money...why, because you believe in a fable of welfare queens? So just out of SPITE? Sorry, that isn't sound policy. & you know what, maybe you're on to something; we should institute mandatory drug testing for the highest tax brackets! There are less people, so it won't cost as much, & they get such huge tax cuts-- negative taxes, basically-- that you are right, it isn't to much to ask to see if they are clean.

Oh wait, that is ridiculous, because we only treat poor people like they have to prove their innocence. I mean, what possible harm could there be in having arbitrary laws that effect people differently based on their earnings? We have probable cause to search-- they are poor!

bingo 

I havent hammered out the costs of testing.  I cant argue with you on that. youre probably right that its too costly.  How is this mandatory drug testing for any tax bracket?  Its mandatory testing for those who want something for free from the govt.  You dont have to take food stamps therefore you dont have to be tested.  Police and fire department (government jobs) drug test.  So i guess we are treating applicants to these jobs like they have to prove their innocence.  You act like a law like this is arbitrarily based on earnings when it clearly isnt.  It is based on service.  Whoever wants the service, takes the drug test.  You seem to think the poor are entitled to food stamps even if they are coke addicts selling their stamps for drugs. 

No, I don't think the GOVERNMENT is entitled to decide to test people for drugs based on their economic situation. & also, I should mention, unconstitutional. So, I mean-- there is that, there is the whole "oh being poor doesn't preclude you from being a person" thing.

I can see you still don't understand.  No one is being tested based on economic situation.  People would be tested based on their need for a service. I am not saying testing should be done based on economic situation.  

"Oh hey, if they want to starve, that is their prerogative! All I'm saying is that if people want access to the safety net, I want to be able to assume they are breaking the law, & for them to suspend their constitutional rights & any expectations of privacy! Is that too much to ask, in exchange for not letting them starve to death?"

The only one you are fooling with your "no one is being tested on their economic situation/people are being tested on their need for a service" hair splitting is yourself. But hey! Putting fiscally unsound policies in place out of a sense of a weird grudge & moralizing is a bad idea for a whole mess of other reasons too, so take comfort in that.

I have no grudge.  I just dont like seeing tax dollars go to drug addicts.  The choice isnt between get food stamps or starve.  There are many people who dont starve without food stamps.  You can choose to earn money another way and pay for your food.  No one is assuming anyone is breaking any laws.  The drug test is a right to passage.  I didnt know it was in the constitution that we have to blindly give free food to people in need with no recourse. That being said, you do have a point with that it can be a costly process and its not worth the extra cost if its only weeding out a few drug addicts.  In general though I support a system where those who deserve something get it and those who are trying to abuse the system are rejected.  

& I'm saying-- the government provides lots of services, & I don't see anyone clamoring for them to have an assumption of guilt up front. Where are the drug tests for subsidized college loans? For social security? Mortgage reductions? Income tax credit?