Wisconsin Congresswoman: mandatory drug tests for anyone claiming $150K in itemized tax-deductions


#1

[Read the post]


#2

Ahahahahahahaha!

Sadly, I fear, the irony will be lost on Scott Walker. Asshole that he is.


#3

At first I was like, “WTF?” Then I was like, “Oh, I see what you did there…”


#4

I love this congresswoman! The very least we can do is ensure that that over-indulgent segment of society that benefits so much from government tax handouts isn’t using that same money to purchase drugs. It’s for their own good!

I propose forced sterilization next for those who insist on having too many affluenza-carrying kids. After all, if anyone gets money that should rightfully go into the government coffers, their bodies are state property, right?


#5

The new anthem of Wisconsin’s wealthiest:


#6

The stupidest part of these laws - which exist only in a few states - is that almost everybody passes the test. Turns out people on welfare don’t have a lot of extra cash for getting high. So states spend millions of dollars to catch a handful of addicts and deny their meager benefits, saving the state thousands.

A big thank-you to the Party of Fiscal Responsibility.


#7

That’s part of what always baffles me about the "Party of Fiscal Responsibility."
From a purely financial perspective, they should be all about things like free healthcare and education, as the data is pretty definitive that it’s WAY cheaper to do those things than to pick up the pieces afterwards. Treating a patient when it’s a minor thing (even for a long time) is far less expensive than having them end up in the ER with some major (but preventable) problem.
But no.
They’re not actually about financial responsibility. They’re about being (and staying) on top at the expense of the many. Fuck that noise.

Edit because phone and rage typing.


#8

Brilliant!

By this proposed legislation alone, she reveals herself to be more subtle, more humane, and to have a better sense of justice than either of the presidential candidates we’re likely to see on the national ballot in November.


#9

Ah, Jeeves! Fill this bally jar with pee, for the tax chappies, would you?

Very good, sir.

And, Jeeves…

Yes, sir?

No drugs, right?

Understood, sir. Will there be anything else, sir?


#10

Does Scott “TEA” Waker want those urine samples for his collection? He is an odd dude…


#11

“Fiscal Responsibility” = “Not paying for anything that might help another person.”


#12

This seems like an abuse of the legislative process. What problem is she trying to solve? I don’t agree with drug tests being required for those receiving social assistance, but I can at least see what’s motivating that.


#13

The problem is that the taxpayers are subsidizing the lifestyles of these one-percenters and then they may be using the money they save for illicit drugs! Why should we give people tax relief for hedonism?


#14

So? How does that solve the problem? What are the consequences for failing the drug test?


#15

You know how I can tell you didn’t read the source article?


#16

Man, I’d love to live in a world where that actually came to pass.


#17

Uhmmm…you can read, can’t you? You just choose not to, is that it?


#18

or piss.


#19

She’s not really accomplishing anything per se, she just thinks she’s being clever and apparently so does everyone here on boing boing.


#20

Touché. Or no. No, don’t, that’d be gross.

Unless it’s your thing. Which is fine, far be it from me to judge. Just wash before we shake hands.