| Yes | 81% | 81% - 118 | ||||
| No | 18% | 18% - 26 | ||||
| Total: 144 | ||||||
This is sarcasm right? In any case, I'd have to seriously say yes, they should. If people on welfare aren't doing drugs, good for them. But if they are spending their money on illegal substances, then obviously their welfare needs to be revoked. If they happen to die because of it... well it sucks to be them, maybe they should've made better decisions in their life.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Along the same lines, should drug users be allowed to starve to death?
well, how much irresponsibility must we overlook?Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Along the same lines, should drug users be allowed to starve to death?
so then have we 'won'? and what comes to the people who fail the tests? do they move out to the streets and/or contribute less to society?Major.League.Infidel wrote:
With less people collecting it, we can use their money to fund the tests.
Last edited by CoronadoSEAL (2008-03-05 21:33:33)
Last edited by mtb0minime (2008-03-05 21:34:45)
fuck them. that money is to help them out between jobs. not to get them highCoronadoSEAL wrote:
so then have we 'won'? and what comes to the people who fail the tests? do they move out to the streets and/or contribute less to society?Major.League.Infidel wrote:
With less people collecting it, we can use their money to fund the tests.
Sounds like a great idea, this could be the first stage of a, "weeding out the rif raf", process. I am alll for it.Major.League.Infidel wrote:
[Idea came to me from an email]
If I have to pass a piss test to get/keep a job, from which I pay taxes to help such establishments such as Welfare, shouldn't people recieving welfare checks have to pass a piss test to receive them? Seems fair to me.
Hmmmmm, forcing them to choose to buy drugs or food....Hmmmmmmmmm, I will say yeah, if drug users CHOOSE to starve to death I can live with that as well. As long as the tax payers do not have to flip the bill for sticking their sorry asses into the ground.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Along the same lines, should drug users be allowed to starve to death?
No doubt the money spent would be off set by the money saved by kicking ineligible receivers the fuck off of welfareCoronadoSEAL wrote:
sooo much money involved in the testing. who is going to pay for it? definitely not the people getting the welfare...
Last edited by ReTox (2008-03-06 08:21:03)
Last edited by G3|Genius (2008-03-06 08:22:05)
ya, but heres the thing....i dont look at it as forcing people to do it.ReTox wrote:
There is no doubt that abuse of the system happens but blaming everyone for the sins of a few is not the way to go. Making someone take a drug test with the assumption they're a drug addict looking for their next fix is humiliating to those who truly need the help. Imagine having to be searched every time you leave a store because someone shoplifted there at one time. Dragnets for government policy are always a bad idea. Too many innocents get hurt that way... just ask the US Japanese during WWII.
I do support social workers requesting a drug test if they have suspicions and some shred of proof to back it up but other than that I thought we lived in countries where you are innocent until proven guilty.
Then again, the west is changing... and not for the better.
Yes throw in the drugdealers rapists kiddyfiddler, murderers and fatties toFlaming_Maniac wrote:
Along the same lines, should drug users be allowed to starve to death?
I've never had to give a urine sample for anything except medical procedures. I didn't even need to do it when I joined the military. I was asked if I had taken drugs and said yes I smoked pot... "how long ago"... months I said. Still wasn't asked to take a drug screening test. In fact I was complimented on telling the truth.Parker wrote:
ya, but heres the thing....i dont look at it as forcing people to do it.ReTox wrote:
There is no doubt that abuse of the system happens but blaming everyone for the sins of a few is not the way to go. Making someone take a drug test with the assumption they're a drug addict looking for their next fix is humiliating to those who truly need the help. Imagine having to be searched every time you leave a store because someone shoplifted there at one time. Dragnets for government policy are always a bad idea. Too many innocents get hurt that way... just ask the US Japanese during WWII.
I do support social workers requesting a drug test if they have suspicions and some shred of proof to back it up but other than that I thought we lived in countries where you are innocent until proven guilty.
Then again, the west is changing... and not for the better.
if i go and get a job, they will make me piss in a cup. if i want the job, i do it, or dont get money.
i think its the same theory.....were you offended when you had to pee in a cup for your job, or did you just know that was how it works?
well, i guess you are lucky that you havent been subjected to the same stereotypical discrimination that most of us have had to endure to find employment.ReTox wrote:
I've never had to give a urine sample for anything except medical procedures. I didn't even need to do it when I joined the military. I was asked if I had taken drugs and said yes I smoked pot... "how long ago"... months I said. Still wasn't asked to take a drug screening test. In fact I was complimented on telling the truth.Parker wrote:
ya, but heres the thing....i dont look at it as forcing people to do it.ReTox wrote:
There is no doubt that abuse of the system happens but blaming everyone for the sins of a few is not the way to go. Making someone take a drug test with the assumption they're a drug addict looking for their next fix is humiliating to those who truly need the help. Imagine having to be searched every time you leave a store because someone shoplifted there at one time. Dragnets for government policy are always a bad idea. Too many innocents get hurt that way... just ask the US Japanese during WWII.
I do support social workers requesting a drug test if they have suspicions and some shred of proof to back it up but other than that I thought we lived in countries where you are innocent until proven guilty.
Then again, the west is changing... and not for the better.
if i go and get a job, they will make me piss in a cup. if i want the job, i do it, or dont get money.
i think its the same theory.....were you offended when you had to pee in a cup for your job, or did you just know that was how it works?
I live in Canada though, I learned in school about national heroes who design universal health care and draft the UN charter of human rights for everyone. Maybe I'm idealistic but discrimination based on a stereotype just isn't in my human nature or nurture and I do see this idea of welfare recipients as drug abusers as a stereotype.
I guess First Nations people should pass a breathalyzer before receiving their benefits as well?
Companies in Canada have provisions for drug screening the same as the US but it is my understanding that those screenings are usually limited to those positions that require high security, life and limb (doctors, EMTs), or top executive positions. But that is speculation, I know no one who has actually had to take a drug test to gain employment. In fact, everyone I know who has a government job has never been asked to provide for a drug test. Including my parents who together have worked for the government for over 50 years.Parker wrote:
well, i guess you are lucky that you havent been subjected to the same stereotypical discrimination that most of us have had to endure to find employment.
or is it different cause we are being paid by a company, and not the government?
Last edited by ReTox (2008-03-06 09:10:06)