Drug Testing for welfare

B-rad · Posted: Apr 11, 2003 6:58 am Post subject: Drug Testing for welfare

How do you all feel about drug testing people collecting welfare? I just saw the article on CNN.com/ Law and was wondering what you all thought. I feel that it would be a good thing. I personally do not want the $$ that I'm paying towards the people on welfare to be given to drug users that can not hold down a job. I know a lot of jobs requirre drug testing. If someone fails a drug test and can not be hired, yet they are collecting wellfare I feel this is wrong. Why should we support people that are collecting welfare yet are using illegal drugs? I think the stat was something like 28 out of 280 something were tested positive. What if there are actual people out there that need welfare, yet those 28 are taking up the $$? I think it would have been a good step in the welfare reform act.

Neognosis · Ladies Man Joined: 13 Jan 2003 Posts: 17617 City: Webster

I'm against.

1- If addicted to a hard drug like heroin, and not given a free, quality rehab facility, and cut off from receiving welfare, they will steal even more of your stuff then they do now.

2-Being poor does not mean that you lose your right to privacy. The cost of maintaining the civil rights of the poor is well worth the money being spent to keep addicted deadbeats on welfare. What about eh 252 that did not test positive for drugs? We just throw their dignity and right to privacy out the window to save a couple of bucks?

moblsv · Outlaw Joined: 11 Feb 2003 Posts: 228

I am all for a system of "safety nets" for people who fall on hard times. Afterall, one more layoff and I might be on the street. But people who make it a lifestyle piss me off. I am all for Drug testing, required job searches or training, time limits or anything else that weeds out the people who *won't* help themselves. The problem is implementing these requirements without creating situations where the system becomes unreasonable for the honest, hard working person who deserves the assistance.

Based on that rant, I agree that intentionally undermining your job marketability through drug use should not be supported by the tax payer.

OttoNP · Addict Joined: 13 Jan 2003 Posts: 848 City: MI

I think welfare recipients should be drug tested and get the birth control shot. I agree that being poor doesn't make you lose your right to privacy, and you wouldn't. If you don't want to be drug tested or get a birth control shot then just don't collect welfare.

If welfare allows people to live happy, what motivation do they have to get off it? The purpose of welfare is to help people get back on their feet, not a free ride. It's true that many people use it for its intended purpose, but it's abused way too much.

Nick
________
Kitchen Measures

Seth Martin · Moderator Joined: 12 Jan 2003 Posts: 891 City: Orlando

cameraboy - please re-read you #1 statement. No one said anything about treatment not being available.

I am against drug testing people because they are on welfare. But if they cannot get a job, because they fail a drug screen that is required for the job, then i say put them on a program where they have to either get clean or loose the welfare support.

ohsix · Posted: Apr 11, 2003 7:25 am Post subject:

I agree. For the same reasons as Otto.

Crissylicous · Outlaw Joined: 13 Jan 2003 Posts: 193 City: Wonder Lake

I think that I agree that they should be drug tested, I mean I'm not well educated on the subject, but from what I know my opinion is, why should we help anyone who's not willing to help themselfs? I dont know tho, just my thought...

Neognosis · Ladies Man Joined: 13 Jan 2003 Posts: 17617 City: Webster

Seth- Good treatment is not really available. Of course, you can argue this point over the the meaning of "good." My point was that if you take away their money too, and they don't have the will or acess to a program to get off drugs, they will steal more of your stuff.

I'll agree that if a person wants welfair, AND they fail a company-given drug test, then a mandatory drug-treatment program might be a good idea. But mandatory birth-controll? You have to be kidding. You really want to interfere with a person't right to reproduce, regardless of economic factors, just so they can have wellfare? There is NO way that would ever fly in this country, thank God. Some rights are worth wasting tax money.

This is a good topic.

B-rad · Posted: Apr 11, 2003 8:50 am Post subject:

I'm not for mandatory birth control, I agree that would be stepping over WAY too many lines. As for drug testing, I still feel I'm for it. I think it's based souly on the fact that I do not feel someone breaking the law should receive a handout that could possibly go to someone that is not. I can definetly see your point when it comes to the addiction stage of something like crack, herion or coke. But I do think that you can't seperate the drugs. Someone getting busted for weed should get their money revoked just the same as someone getting caught for the big 3.

moblsv · Outlaw Joined: 11 Feb 2003 Posts: 228

The way I see it. This issue is stopping substance *abuse* from interfering with the ability to get a job and get off welfare. This could easily be extended to alcohol and prescription drug abuse as well (that's abuse, not use). I agree that the solution isn't to just kick somebody out on their own because of it. Help with substance abuse should be built into the system.

derrick lenz · Posted: Apr 11, 2003 9:05 am Post subject:

i'm not well educated in the subject of welfare but what about welfare recepiants spending cash on things they don't need such as cable tv, cell phones, etc. (this may already be the case but...) i think there should be someone to oversee the way welfare recepiants spend their cash. it shoud only go towards food, rent, etc.

J_DOGG · Posted: Apr 11, 2003 9:05 am Post subject:

You know what they do to people that steal?
They send them to jail, probably a place a whacked out junky should be....

I'm with OttoNP. something needs to be done to encourage/push them OFF THE SYSTEM! I live near Lawrence MA so don't get me going on the system junkies, they ride around in some phat civics yo, mostly free money they got from the system..

let see if you can pay for dubs while working at Mickey-D's..

I also agree if you are on the system more than one year, and have used all the programs they have for job placement or training skills guess what, time for permanent birth control! I' don't want some chump that can't take care of his or her own bringing another dependant into this world. I'm already paying enough for them.

PEACE

franknbeans · Soul Rider Joined: 29 Jan 2003 Posts: 272 City: Ft. Worth

if you think that welfare people don't have kids to get more welfare, you're in the f'ing clouds. their system works like that, and they will work the System.

As for drug testing, i'm all for it. I'm pretty liberal when it comes to drug use, i respect the privacy of one person's choices, but only if they are buying the stuff with their own money, not mine. I want that money for my OWN stash! Wink

ohsix · Posted: Apr 11, 2003 9:17 am Post subject:

moblsv · Outlaw Joined: 11 Feb 2003 Posts: 228

good point wes

Richie Martin · Posted: Apr 11, 2003 9:47 am Post subject:

I agree.
I have relatives that took so many drugs they are burned out, almost to stupid to work. They collect disability and welfare and spend it on beer and drugs.

And would take it a step further...
I think if you receive welfare you should not be able to own a car, boat etc.
Where do you have to go?? Not to work, and your check is mailed to you.

I am all for getting these lazy asses to work by any means. Why can't they pick up paper off the street? Pay them by the bag.

This is a very short and undetailed of my entire plan, which I plan to put into effect as soon as I am president.

Neognosis · Ladies Man Joined: 13 Jan 2003 Posts: 17617 City: Webster

I don't believe in mandatory drug testing for employees either. It would be bad enough if I had to go on some sort of public assistance. I sure wouldn't want to have to pee into a cup to get it.

I had to take a drug test to get the job I have now. I don't think that was right, either. Two wrongs, you know? The difference is this job is great and made me feel good, public assistance would de-humanize me enough without peeing in a cup to get it.

Two wrongs, you know?

B-rad · Posted: Apr 11, 2003 10:00 am Post subject:

I agree with testing employee's. Most of the places I have worked have a mandatory testing policy if you are involved in an accident at work. They do not want to held liable if you are taking an illegal substance and injure yourself or someone else. I think there are a lot of jobs out there where it should be mandatory to test, someone's rights of privacy draw the line when they take an illegal substance which could cause me to lose my rights to live. I think the job place is one such place that it holds true to test some applicants for certain jobs. I don't want to fly on "coke head airlines" or take a trip in a "stoner amtrack".

Neognosis · Ladies Man Joined: 13 Jan 2003 Posts: 17617 City: Webster

I agree. But do I need to be tested for Marijuana use? I write technical manuals and teach classes. The worst that can happen is my manuals start to look like this:

The tag for capturing a paragraph in West custom XML is <para>. But relax, man, it's a mellow tag. Look at it again. <para> parachute. paramilitary. parabolic. That's a great word. parabolic. say it, dude-para- bol -lic. para-bol-ic. That's groovy. Hey, let's just go have class outside today. I say we all dkdouc9ey9f;zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

B-rad · Posted: Apr 11, 2003 10:16 am Post subject:

Like I said, there are some jobs that I think should have mandatory testing. Obvisously the owners of the company or CEO/ President feel that to provide an atmosphere that is to their (hint hint) moral code, they should drug test everyone. You are chosing to work for them so you have to follow their rules. There is not any drug testing at my current job and I do not think it would ever happen as long as the company ownership stays the way it is. It makes no difference to me one way or the other. But I do see some companies and jobs that make it a serious issue to pass a drug test before being employed.

Neognosis · Ladies Man Joined: 13 Jan 2003 Posts: 17617 City: Webster

The funny thing is, testing is a condition of employment here, but so many people, including people I know as high up as middle management, smoke pot. So we can learn 2 things from this:

1-testing really doesn't keep everyone who smokes pot out of the company
2-the company is running just fine, with a lot of employees doing drugs anyway.

The thing is, Heroin and Coke get cleaned out of your system a lot faster than marijuana. But MJ is by far the least harmful. So if I'm a coke head, and some how I manage to stay clean for 72 hours before my test, I won't get caught. But if I smoka a little mj, I might be f'd. So the coke head gets hired, and the pot user doesn't. I always thought this was funny. Like a coke addict is going to be able to hide their addiction at work for long?

Thing is, I don't do any drugs at all. I rarely even drink. But I hate the idea of being tested. If I lost my job and had to get unemployment or worse, go on welfare, it would be a nightmare to have to be drug tested. I'd rather starve. Maybe that's the idea.

Swass · Guest

Forced birth control, huh?

Jiang Zemin called; he wants to know if you'd like to come over for tea.

B-rad · Posted: Apr 11, 2003 11:04 am Post subject:

Funny Swass.... I think along with the chinese the indians would like some help in controling the population. You cuold investigate a way to propse this to them and get rich quick.

Neognosis · Ladies Man Joined: 13 Jan 2003 Posts: 17617 City: Webster

How about if you don't own a home, you can't have children because you don't pay any school property taxes. You have to be forcefully given birth controll shots until you have either payed the school tax, or you buy yourself a house, and then pay the school tax.

I own a house and I pay almost 2k a year to send other people's (people who just RENT) kids to school. Why should I pay for someones kids to go to school? I say mandatory birth controll, or your kids aren't allowed into school until you pay a school tax!

I know this isn't in line logically with the question of whether wellfare is justified, but it seemed a funny parallel. I mean, if I shouldn't have to pay for people who don't work, why should I have to pay for other people's kids to go to school?

moblsv · Outlaw Joined: 11 Feb 2003 Posts: 228

move to Utah where you can listen to Mormons with 14 kids complain about the lack of money for the schools while they gladly accept all those tax breaks for the kids. Now we're going off topic to another one of my pet peeves Evil or Very Mad

OttoNP · Addict Joined: 13 Jan 2003 Posts: 848 City: MI

My view is just based on seeing and meeting people that blatantly had more kids to get more welfare, they'd admit to it. "Time to have another kid, get a bigger check." The money didn't go to the kids, they used it for cellphones, cars, etc... They also took their kids out of school so they could work, pretty bad. One of them was a cook that made $10 an hour. She took all her kids out of school and had them do all the cooking for her and talked frequently about welfare stuff, like not marrying her boyfriend and father of some of her kids since that would reduce her check. At some point someone called social services since the kids weren't going to school, but I guess she was home schooling them and for whatever reason they couldn't do anything. It's really sad, it will be tough for those kids to succeed without a real education. Also, at some grocery stores people would try to sell you their food stamps so they could spend the money in other ways. I admit I don't exactly how welfare works, but it seems to be quite abused and I don't like my tax dollars going that way. Anyone know what percent goes to welfare?

Nick
________
Cheap airsoft clip

Jen · Outlaw Joined: 19 Feb 2003 Posts: 169 City: McQueeney, TX

i agree with derrick, just monitor where the welfare goes to

OttoNP · Addict Joined: 13 Jan 2003 Posts: 848 City: MI

They try to do that with things like food stamps, they just sell them to get cash. You'd almost have to follow them around. Maybe just give them food and pay the rent directly. It'd be hard to implement a successful solution.
________
YAMAHA DSP-1

B-rad · Posted: Apr 11, 2003 11:48 am Post subject:

CB- I fully support your argument about school and property tax. I do not think someone should pay a school tax if they have no children. Sometimes there are a lot of other issues that come up in posts that are not viable to the subject at hand. But that is a good issue.

I'm not saying kill welfare as a whole. Welfare reform needs to take a huge leap before I think it's anywhere close to being used correctly. There needs to be some huge changes, I think implmenting drug tests random or not would be a positive step in this reform. Due to the underfunding, lack of manpower and overall neglect this reform is far from happening.

Sean_Brinston · Posted: Apr 11, 2003 12:08 pm Post subject:

otiswunguy · Addict Joined: 13 Jan 2003 Posts: 871 City: Sammamish

i knew a girl who got section 8 housing. $80 per mo for a two bedroom apt. she stripped for cash and that place was like a half way house. why would she want to try to get a legit job when it would cost her more for rent than the money she would make? i agree with the birth control and would go a step further to say any people with not one but two kids born into a welfare situation, should be spayed or nuetered. these people are just milking the system and if they are not smart enough to find a way out of that situation then their kids aren't going to be any smarter. the solution is simple put these people to work. make them pick up trash,answer phones or any number of jobs that the u.s. pays people to do for them. this would free up a lot of money for programs that really need it. OLD DIRTY BASTARD WTF?
on drug testing, i say pee for enjoyment not employment. what people do on their own time is their business. if an accident happens then test the employee. remember alcohol was illegal at one point too and i bet alcoholics get hired on before an occasional pot smoker does. which is worse?

Neognosis · Ladies Man Joined: 13 Jan 2003 Posts: 17617 City: Webster

I almost can't believe what I just read.

First off, I was being sarcastic about the school tax thing. Because if I don't pay that school tax, and somebody elses kid gets a crappy education, or none at all, they are going to end up stealing my car or robbing my house. Call that tax a "burgulary preventative tax." KIds have to have good schools, or the whole society will crumble from within.

Finally, I am with some of you who say that the system is being abused, and I don't think that's right. However, it's only money. My wife and I only make a combined 70K, and we live pretty good. If welfare helps one or two families that really need it, and use it to get back on their feet, then I think it's worth it.

The right to reproduce as you see fit is sacred. The government should NEVER get involved in that. So these people have too many kids, and things get worse. I'm willing to accept that in order to keep the government out of our reproductive systems.

tyybo · Soul Rider Joined: 02 Mar 2003 Posts: 340 City: Fargo

Im totally for testing, Im totally for helping people who really need it but if there gonna blow money on stuff like that then I dont think i should have to give them any $

J_DOGG · Posted: Apr 25, 2003 8:43 am Post subject:

Cameraboy- just so you know it is a proven fact that the odds of you making more money than your parents is very slim... Don't get me wrong it can and is done all the time but the odds dictate it wont happen.

So if you are a welfare kid, what does your future look like?
Who do you blame for bringing you into this world 50 cards short of a full deck?
The parents obviously didn't care and wont care either way, they are getting paid.

I know one thing little Johnny welfare is going to be taking money from the system just like his parents do.

The idea is to stop the cycle of welfare families.. snip, snip!

PEACE

madCat · Outlaw Joined: 13 Jan 2003 Posts: 106

huh? what? J_Dogg said what? " it is a proven fact that the odds of you making more money than your parents is very slim" Huh? Where did you make this up?

Anyways, back to the subject at hand. I'm totally against big government. Anything that increases the size of government or gives more control to the government over anyone's life, in my opinion is bad. No I don't want another frickin' government agency started to take care of drug testing and babysitting Welfare recipients. That's even more tax money going to the same bad situation. Enough with adding more social programs to government.