Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bentway who wrote (651809)	4/18/2012 1:43:18 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1583400

>> AND DIDN'T UNCOVER ALL THAT MANY DRUG USERS, EITHER: NEW DATA It must be done as a matter of process. It is like saying, "We don't need to conduct audits of publicly held companies because we seldom find any issues anyway".

To: bentway who wrote (651809)	4/18/2012 2:15:16 PM
From: i-node	Respond to of 1583400

>>> During the four months the tests were given, just 2.6% of applicants failed, mostly for marijuana use. Everyone who passed was reimbursed for the cost of the test—which totaled $118,140, or more than the state would have paid in benefits to those who failed, according to an ACLU director. That means the program actually cost the government $45,780. To be clear, this conclusion is entirely wrong as it doesn't take into account those who simply decided not to go for the benefit because they knew they would fail the drug test. Which is pretty much everyone who has used drugs, since anyone can determine in advance whether they are going to flunk a piss test or not.