Should recipients of Government aid be subject to RANDOM drug tests?
 

As the economy continues to deteriorate and more people line up for government assistance, many states are considering drug tests for welfare/public assistance recipients. See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090326/...S XHca_bZn414

Do you agree? If you receive welfare, you should be subject to RANDOM drug testing?

Con: This effectively criminalizes the poor and discourages those who need the help the most. Also, why not drug testing for CORPORATE recipients of taxpayer money--that's welfare too, on a grander scale.

Pro: You can't live in a nanny state without the nanny encroaching into your personal life. You want to remain free, be responsible.



What do you guys think?

wow, that will enrage people...

Yes they fucking should!!!

here is a funny Email i got not too long ago:

~~The Urine Test~~

Like a lot of folks in this state, I have a job.

I work, they pay me.

I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit.

In order to get that paycheck,

I am required to pass a random urine test with which I have no problem.

What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people

who don't have to pass a urine test.

Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check

because I have to pass one to earn it for them?

Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet.

I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sitting on their rear end,

doing drugs, while I work. . .

Can you imagine how much money the state would save

if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check?

Pass this along if you agree or simply delete if you don't.

Hope you all will pass it along, though.

Something has to change in this country soon!!!

I guess we could title that program,

'Urine or You're Out'.

I love people who cry about paying taxes for welfare, which is less than one percent of our budget, yet they want to pay MORE taxes to test those people, who actually are mostly single mothers who are NOT on drugs. Retards.

Here is an idea, legalize liberty and stop the welfare state.

Damn. Someone always has to "claim" that the emperor is naked. How many times does TV have to keep telling you... It's a new nanotechnology fiber that is so advanced that you can see right through it. If everyone agrees on this then it must be true. Only idiots would say the emperor is buck naked because of their empirical senses :winkwink:

Certain positions should be tested such as Law Enforcement any worker that drives a work vehicle, anyone that uses heavy machinery, and a few others.:2 cents:

Of course drugs tests.

It should be a privilege not a right.

We can't have people buying drugs with tax dollars. If they are addicts and want government support they need to get help for their drug addictions. They need to get cleaned up. Then we will help them get paid.

Interesting point. Recipients should report their addictions then they would still get aid but targeted aid--welfare plus drug treatment and counseling. This two pronged approach might save society more money down the line. Agree?

Yes drug test them and to the person that says it costs so much. No it doesn't.

hell I get sick of seeing people that smoke cigarettes ( which are legal ) getting foodstamps. Oh I'm sorry no money for food but you have money for cigs? DOES NOT COMPUTE. Also food stamps should be more like the WIC program. They are only good for certain food products. No getting expensive cuts of meats or losbter and that shit. No getting soda and chips and snack cakes. You can get produce, milk, juice, eggs, cheese( regular not expensive shit like brie )bread, cereal etc.

So which federal "re-education camp" are you posting from? And how did you get permission to even do it? Surely your post will earn you some time in "the box".

Without a doubt. Testing.

Yes. They should also force pregnant women on assistance to not smoke if they want their benefits.

Anyone receiving free medical should be forbidden to smoke. Disability, etc.

Another fake ass republican. Maybe they should make an age limit for riding motercycles. Old people dont have the reflexes to know whats good for them.

Actually, they should drug test those fine members of the House and Senate in DC. After all, they are our employees....:)

:thumbsup

http://www.apa.org/pi/wpo/myths.html

Few people seem to be able to separate myth from fact when it comes to welfare. The truth is that most of the people who find themselves on welfare are just average hardworking people who run into a chain of bad luck.

The article in the OP mentions more people seeking welfare as a consequence of the recession. Those people didn't suddenly start doing drugs, they got laid off. Testing them for drug use is a complete waste of money, money which would be better spent elsewhere. For example, spending that money on helping people find suitable jobs again would be far more productive.

YES!

If you choose to buy drugs instead of food and or shelter, that's your fucking problem.

In mexico a lawmaker announced a bill to drug test all the legislature. The lawmakers clapped stood up and applauded the bill. Then they announced they had brought drug tests and they could all go ahead and take them now. The room cleared out in a mob panic scene.

Thats why it wont work. Everyone does drugs, there would be riots from the poor that get no more checks and the rich will never agree to do anything.

Before I got my last job I had to take 3 separate urine tests; the first one was for distance, the second was for volume, and the third was for accuracy.

BTW: Anyone who believes in freedom and liberty, while simultaneously cheering on the idea of door-to-door random drug testing, is a total moron!

you have a good point.

You are an idiot. :2 cents:

Name one.

You raise a very troubling dimension. Would mixing aid and rehab fix this issue?

Obviously I do not want people taking welfare money and spending it on drugs. At the same time, I'm afraid this will hurt kids more than drug using adults.

Also, if someone tests positive and therefore has no money to care for their children, will the kids be taken away? It seems they would have to be, or else how will they eat, get to school, etc? Where will they go, to the already drowning foster care system? I don't think drug addicts should be raising kids, but they'll have to go somewhere.

I'm OK with this in theory, but fear what it may turn into in reality.

STFU already. I am not wrong, kid.

No one said dorr-door moron. Ok freedom and liberty means NO WELFARE or FOODSTAMPS or UNEMPLOYMENT or MEDICAID. Freedom means freedom to fuck up and pay the consequences of that and the liberty to pick yourself up by your own bootstraps.

Sorry but if you need for borrow money from me I have the right to dictate the terms of how that money is used. Now you may think I don't, and that's fine, but if you don't wish to comply I'm not obligated to give you anything either.

What are you trying to say? Are you pointing out that no one said "dorr-door moron"?

Well, you may have been right about that 2 or 3 replies ago, but as it stands currently, you have now said "dorr-door moron", and by this response, which quotes your earlier statement, that "no one said dorr-door moron" we have now BOTH said "dorr-door moron", so your point is no longer valid.

What are you trying to say? Are you pointing out that no one said "dorr-door moron"?

Well, you may have been right about that 2 or 3 replies ago, but as it stands currently, you have now said "dorr-door moron", and by this response, which quotes your earlier statement, that "no one said dorr-door moron" we have now BOTH said "dorr-door moron", so your point is no longer valid.

Let's see how your idea of freedom works out, shall we?

Two young people get married and have a baby. They're not exactly wealthy, but they both work hard and manage to get by, and even save some money. Then, one day, the husband gets cancer. His health insurance covers part of the treatment, but not all of it, and because he's too sick to work, the bills pile up. Eventually, he dies, leaving the family in debt. The wife, however, keeps working. Right up until the day the company she works for has to downsize, and she gets laid off.

Freedom, then, means that if she's unlucky and has no family to rely on, she and her child get to starve in the streets?

Obviously, that's bullshit. One cannot have freedom without meaningful options. If you get dropped off in a desert without food and water, a thousand miles from the nearest oasis, you're not free.

Freedom isn't just the absence of interference that libertarians like to yap on about. It's also the presence of meaningful options. Freedom of speech becomes meaningless when one cannot get an education to develop the thoughts upon which speech is built. Physical freedom becomes meaningless without the health care to heal a crippled body.

If you were lying on the street with both of your legs broken, me saying "you're free to walk wherever you want to" would be quite absurd, wouldn't it?

They're not borrowing money from you. They're receiving money from a pool which they themselves paid into when they were working, and will start paying into again as soon as they find another job. It's a bit like the police - you pay for them even when you don't need them right away, so they'll be there when you do need them.

Suggesting that people lose their rights the moment they need assistance from funds they themselves paid into is quite ridiculous, really.

You raise great points Libertine. I like your use of hard-hitting analogies, like the one about being in a desert.

GatorB is an idiot... there are other points in this thread but that covers most of them.

I would definitely agree.

You can't make your money, you are not entitled to have control over how you spend it.

fuck off. who in the fuck are you to say anything about anyone. seriously.

Did I say that? Since when is there a RIGHT to do drugs? Please show me the link where they changed the law.

The food stamp program, medicaid and ADC are a necessity... we have a very large country here. My parents worked hard when I was growing up but there were times when my father lost his job and we were dead broke... I remember a particular time when we ate nothing but potatoes and lentils for a week straight because it was all we had. My father was a farm hand and my mother was going to school to become a nurse while working as a nurses aid in a nursing home. They had 4 children to take care of and occasionally needed a hand up that welfare provided. My father was a Vietnam Vet with some serious mental health issues that the VA never addressed or assisted with. He eventually died from agent orange exposure related problems.

Libertine is right... the majority of people who receive assistance are not drug addicts... The problem that you people have is that either you are spoiled rotten bitches who haven't had to struggle much in your life OR you have a sense of elitism because you think your better than someone who is poor.

There is a serious problem in our society... I agree that people need to help themselves... I did it. I have been homeless twice after being released from prison because I was trying to work to support myself while also trying to attend community college... I got laid off and lost my apartment twice... one of those times I slept in my car (which had a busted transmission and wouldn't move) in November in Michigan. I just kept getting up and dusting myself off and moving forward... only to be knocked down again and again due to layoffs/cut hours at the jobs I got... I worked my ass off and went from being a dish washer in 1994 to kitchen manager in 1996 in multiple jobs. In 1995 I got involved in Amway... a fucking scam that was... but you have to learn lessons from everything you do in life... and Amway taught me to look for opportunity and believe in myself.

This brings me to the basic issue we have in our society among low income people. The majority of them come generations of low income and are told that the only way that they can succeed in life is to get a college degree or learn a skilled trade. Especially low income people who live in the country. I wish I had a dollar for everyone that ever told me that I would never be able to "do that"... or similar.

In early 1996, I had stopped doing Amway because I realized it was a scam... but one of the waitresses that I worked with kept talking about AOL all of the time... I realized that this was an opportunity for me... so my wife and I took out a $3000 personal loan at a local bank and bought a Packard Bell PC with Windows 95 on it.

Over the next year I spent every non-working waking hour teaching myself how to use a PC, build web pages and some programming in a warez version of Visual Basic 4. I bought books and used Lycos and sites like that to find out everything I could. I was telling people that I was going to get out of the restaurant business and start working in computers. They all told me that it would never happen... I need to have a college degree they said... they would make cracks about me spending time playing on the internet and yada yada. I was living in Houghton Lake, MI.

In June of 1997 I got my first computer job that paid $30K to start... I thought I was in the money. I eventually worked my way up to a $50k developer job through Robert Half International by the end of 1998. During the next 2 1/2 years I would be laid off 8 times due to "globalization" or the company selling out...

In december of 2000 I started my own consulting firm because I got a few different jobs via contacts I had made. The biggest of which were building uknowit.com for Herman Miller (it was their online university to teach salespeople and vendors about their office furniture products and sales techniques). It was a site with a Flash frontend and ASP backend. The second job was building a site for a company that insured freight for Steelcase (another furniture manufacturer). This site was Java server pages with a SQL Server backend. I was doing very well... I had made alot of contacts because I joined the local Chamber of Commerce... so I also started hiring employees (only 2) and started doing on-site PC and network support... removing viruses, installing windows, setting up small networks, etc. Life was good.

After Sept 11... my whole world came apart. The companies I was doing business with killed their outsourcing contracts and my business was done. I couldn't afford to pay 2 employees (who were part time before anyway) because I needed that work to feed my family... and even that dried up alot. I ended up having to go back to work as a cook because I couldn't find any work.

In early 2002 I saw a report on CNN where this young guy in Denmark was making tons of money running porn sites... so I got into the porn business that day and it's been uphill ever since. BTW... I want to mention that the first php job I did was for baddog (via someone else who scammed us both). That was http://www.contentshopper.com and I was paid $200 total.

The moral to my story is that while it is entirely possible to raise yourself up by your own bootstraps... it is a real struggle... lots of things happened that I haven't even mentioned above that could have been the end of my entrepreneurship... the biggest of which were people that felt I couldn't do it... or had some moral or political objection to what I was doing. Others were purely haters...

To be continued...

You are completly wrong. You ever wonder why the military and most industries only test 10% of all the specimens they take? Not because they dont want to test everyone, its fucking expensive. very expensive.

Once again you prove that you NEVER have anything of substance to offer.

You've never lived in the south I assume. :1orglaugh

Im down with it, if ur gonna get free money should make sure they cant use it for illegal stuff, great idea, who gives a shit who it 'enrages', be responsible... stop asking for the govt to give us everything