[PUG] DRUG TEST all college students, unemployment beneficiaries, public school children!!!

[Billy]

THE DISSENTING VOICE IN THE WILDERNESS....:wave:

OK, I am going to be the dissenting voice here (why do I do this? : - )...

I am FOR drug testing welfare recipients.

Why?

Well, for one thing, I was in the Military for almost 21 years and got drug tested regularly. Ifsomeone was caught doing drugs, they would 1.) Go to jail (depending on what the investigation found - because you WOULD get investigated by the OSI which is the Air Force equivalent of the FBI) or 2. Get a dishonorble discharge and get kicked out of the miliary (i.e. Lose your income and means of support). Also, when you apply for a job with a civilian company, they make you do an intial drug test (not all but many corporations today do) - if you fail, you do not get the job. I do not see where it is being so unfair??

Although I believe in welfare and helping people, I also do not think there is nothing wrong with expecting a person to be drug free - maybe their drug addiction is the reason they can't get steady work? If it is, then the government becomes an enabler and helps the person stay on their drug addiction (not that very many can ever totally kick the habit anyway, though)

Welfare is not a right - it is a free helping hand. If you invited a homeless person to stay in your house, wouldn't you have the right to specify certain rules for them to abide by or certain conventions or behavoir?

My uncle did drugs and it ruined his life and he died at 55 of hepatitis.

I am not saying this because I am a Republican (because I am not, nor am I a democrat either) but I just do not see where it is so egregious?

I am fairly certain there will be many voices to contest what I have said and that is OK. I probably will not respond back, not to be rude and ignore anyone, but because it is just my opinion and I find debate, for the sake of debate, relatively useless and no one is going to change their mind on this because of something someone says. Usually, we are not seeking to learn but to only fight for our already made-up position in our mind. But, please, blast away if you will.... : - ) but do not take my lack of response as being rude or not feeling like I could not have a come-back (because there always a come-back to justify our position, isn't there?). I just wanted to contribute my .02 cents.

So then you agree, we should be drug testing all college students in public universities, school children, assisted living elderly, motorists who drive on the road, people on unemployment, homeowners with sewer hookups, people who enjoy national parks and beaches? So tell me Big Brother, will the choc rations be going up this week as well? Perhaps we should implant all human beings with drug testing microchips, will we also be keeping people from using services for their prescription medications like Oxycotin and Vicodan? I mean those are just heroin in pill form pushed by drug deal- errr Doctors and pharma reps...

So because you were in the military (and on welfare for the record, the government paid for your entire life while you were enlisted with tax money) that makes it ok to pass draconian feel good self-righteous asshole laws that will only serve to punish children whose parents fail drug tests? I wonder, will you be feeding them instead? Because I assure you their parents will still be getting their drugs, only now the kids will have nothing to eat as well, so you can feel good that you got those darkies off the dole right?

 

[Billy]

I can see where you are coming from because I have also undergone the same military and civilian drug testing, however I dont see why you are so eager to let the government into your life by way of sampling your bodily fluids. I dont feel it is right to drug test at all. The way you worded your response gave me the impression that you think drug testing is some kind of rite that you went through and now the next generation needs to go through it.

I find the idea of mandatory drug testing to be stupid, especially when it comes to college students getting tested because they are reading books, not working heavy equipment. They are not going to hurt anyone just because they fell asleep cause they were too high reading their boring text book.

Secondly if you drug test parents it is their children who are going to suffer. Withholding welfare because the parents do drugs is just takign food from their childrens mouths. Unless you write the laws to give the 2 year old the welfare, the parent would still just take the kids money.

Great post.

 

[Sriracha]

It's all based off of bad research.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/23/welfare-drug-testing-georgia_n_1440167.html

From the moment the Florida law took effect in July of 2011 to when a federal judge suspended it with an injunction the following October, a total of 4,086 welfare applicants were drug tested. Of that total, 108, or 2.6 percent, tested positive for drugs, mostly marijuana. The rate of drug use among the general population is above 8 percent. So poor parents seeking assistance in Florida were singled out for drug testing, but it turns out they are actually less likely to do drugs than most people are.

On the other token to counter your argument, why should the government continue to provide services to recipients (welfare, not college) engaging in illegal behavior? If you are tested positive for drugs by your employer, your job can be suspended or lost. If you are driving your vehicle under the influence, your license is suspended.

Each county's welfare department works differently; however I do find that welfare recipients are less likely (such as in the paragraph above) to not use b/c they do not want their kids removed. Where you apply for TANF benefits is the SAME PLACE where your children can be removed from your home, and they are already under government radar. If you appear to an appointment under the influence, you bet DFCS will get involved in your life. (This doesn't always mean they will remove your children, but implement a safety plan for your family.)

I do believe the government should place more focus on individuals who collect welfare fraudulently. Welfare services is extremely sloppy in their application process.

 

[Billy]

It's all based off of bad research.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/23/welfare-drug-testing-georgia_n_1440167.html



On the other token to counter your argument, why should the government continue to provide services to recipients (welfare, not college) engaging in illegal behavior? If you are tested positive for drugs by your employer, your job can be suspended or lost. If you are driving your vehicle under the influence, your license is suspended.

Each county's welfare department works differently; however I do find that welfare recipients are less likely (such as in the paragraph above) to not use b/c they do not want their kids removed. Where you apply for TANF benefits is the SAME PLACE where your children can be removed from your home, and they are already under government radar. If you appear to an appointment under the influence, you bet DFCS will get involved in your life. (This doesn't always mean they will remove your children, but implement a safety plan for your family.)

I do believe the government should place more focus on individuals who collect welfare fraudulently. Welfare services is extremely sloppy in their application process.

The behavior shouldnt be illegal for 1.

And for 2, welfare is a buzzword for government provided benefits. Lets be real about that. If you take unemployment or college money you are getting a form of welfare. Why pick 1 group to single out if this is some moral thing and not all? That doesnt make sense to me. If you want to use any tax provided benefits you should be put under the same scrutiny. I know plenty og kids who go to college and use their tuition money for drugs, booze and strippers. Shouldnt they have their funds taken away? I know plenty of people on unemployment who smoke weed, shouldnt they not get UE benefits?

Why is the automatic response to bring in your Job and that you have to get drug tested there? Take that up with your job, dont fuck our liberties because you are butthurt over having to be clean to work in what is essentially a PRIVATE entity.

You separate welfare and college tuition benefits, why? Whats the difference?

I can answer that its rhetorical.

Because as a culture we hate the poorer, lower classes. We hate minorities and we hate people we fear to become. Which is pathetic. Because most of us in the middle and upper class TAKE unemployment benefits, and TAKE college tuition Aid... so thats ok. But those darkies on WELFARE! UGH! DRUG TESTS! STOP THEM FROM BREEDING! Phew, I feel better, I have distanced myself emotionally from them... much better.

 

[Lerxst]

Legalize drugs. Problem solved. Rant over.

 

[this is only temporary]

Just for the record, I don't like addicts, regardless of their race or socioeconomic status, and it is true, I would prefer to keep them from breeding, and I'm not in the least butthurt about having to be clean myself.

Although I cannot speak for everyone else in this thread.

And I did say I didn't want to debate about it and then changed my mind. If you owned a business, would you want to trust people to run it who were severely impaired by either prescription or street drugs? And if you were going to enter into a personal/romantic relationship with someone, wouldn't their addiction status matter to you then? Or if you were going to help someone out by giving them money, would you want to know whether they were going to use it to do something illegal/dangerous/not at all what they said they needed it for? Isn't that sort of the same thing? Food for thought. I've got to run.

 

[Sriracha]

[MENTION=1451]Billy[/MENTION] I don't agree on testing welfare recipients. Why? Welfare is intended for children. Parents that are CAUGHT neglecting their children are reported swiftly to Social Services, and most often the reporting agency is their school. It shows when kids go to school repeatedly unkempt, behavior (overly tired or always hungry) or through truancy.

If these parents were on welfare and their children removed, they no longer can receive benefits. This is why you don't see drug addicted parents on welfare. It already has it's natural way of working itself out. Testing them is a mute point.

(and I only agree that marijuana be legalized, but controlled the same as alcohol)

 

[Billy]

Just for the record, I don't like addicts, regardless of their race or socioeconomic status, and it is true, I would prefer to keep them from breeding, and I'm not in the least butthurt about having to be clean myself.

Although I cannot speak for everyone else in this thread.

And I did say I didn't want to debate about it and then changed my mind. If you owned a business, would you want to trust people to run it who were severely impaired by either prescription or street drugs? And if you were going to enter into a personal/romantic relationship with someone, wouldn't their addiction status matter to you then? Or if you were going to help someone out by giving them money, would you want to know whether they were going to use it to do something illegal/dangerous/not at all what they said they needed it for? Isn't that sort of the same thing? Food for thought. I've got to run.

You keep equating work/personal relationships with GOVERNMENT. They are not the same. Repeat. NOT the same.

 

[MrDoobie]

I mean, if they ARE drug addicts it would be so much better for them if they were denied welfare and both they and their children ended up living in a van, right? That will better society and it will totally help them kick their drug habit.

 

[the]

One side bar: I dont understand why people look down upon others who, or who have to much pride to take for themselves: unemployment. Part of your earnings go towards unemployment insurance (from what I understand), so you paid into it so you might as well collect.

 

[CindyLou]

Employer pays UI. Employees don't pay into UI. Employers have to pay a tax based on numerous factors which goes up or down based when and how many people collect.

 

[Billy]

Part of your earnings

Yeah the rest comes from general taxes paid into the Fed and your employer. If I pay in 1000 over a year and collect 5000 over the next year, its welfare.

 

[Billy]

Employer pays UI. Employees don't pay into UI. Employers have to pay a tax based on numerous factors which goes up or down based when and how many people collect.

And thats only until its exhausted and the unemployed go onto extended federal benefits.

 

[Vicarious]

Just for the record, I, personally, have seen far more addicts who collect Social Security Disability Income or who just straight up mooch off of other people than welfare recipients. I think the whole idea of drug testing welfare recipients is absolutely retarded and a huge waste of money. You would think the trial in Florida would have proven that point, but I keep forgetting that most conservatives lack common sense and like to just ignore hard evidence. Florida has one of the highest rates of prescription painkiller addiction and dependence, so if their welfare recipients tested at only 2.6 percent positive (WAY lower than the average for the general population), then surely that should be a pretty good indicator for the rest of the country.

I admit, since my unemployment benefits ran out a couple of months ago, I have been receiving TANF, Food assistance, etc. I am doing so in order to finish school and because no one wants to hire me part-time because they have to work around my school and my clinical schedules and apparently, they would all rather hire someone with more availability. I don't do any drugs, very rarely drink, and quit smoking before I lost my unemployment. Quite frankly, I'm a bit insulted by these people insinuating that because I'm on welfare so that I can provide my children with food, a roof over their heads, etc. while I'm trying to better my life, that I must be a junkie...or that I'm lazy and just don't want to work, or whatever other such nonsensical, stereotyping bullshit that people come up with. TANF is basically allowing me to get an education in a field that I KNOW will allow me to be completely self-sufficient eventually, while being able to completely concentrate on doing well in school and being here for my kids, rather than having to work full-time, go to school full-time, and never seeing my kids. Working full-time and going to school might work for some people, but really isn't beneficial for a single parent household.

I don't know how anyone would be able to support a drug habit on welfare alone anyway. With 3 kids, I only receive a little over 400 dollars a MONTH. That barely covers my utilities. All I can say is Thank Whatever that I paid off my house last spring.

 

[Billy]

Just for the record, I, personally, have seen far more addicts who collect Social Security Disability Income or who just straight up mooch off of other people than welfare recipients. I think the whole idea of drug testing welfare recipients is absolutely retarded and a huge waste of money. You would think the trial in Florida would have proven that point, but I keep forgetting that most conservatives lack common sense and like to just ignore hard evidence. Florida has one of the highest rates of prescription painkiller addiction and dependence, so if their welfare recipients tested at only 2.6 percent positive (WAY lower than the average for the general population), then surely that should be a pretty good indicator for the rest of the country.

I admit, since my unemployment benefits ran out a couple of months ago, I have been receiving TANF, Food assistance, etc. I am doing so in order to finish school and because no one wants to hire me part-time because they have to work around my school and my clinical schedules and apparently, they would all rather hire someone with more availability. I don't do any drugs, very rarely drink, and quit smoking before I lost my unemployment. Quite frankly, I'm a bit insulted by these people insinuating that because I'm on welfare so that I can provide my children with food, a roof over their heads, etc. while I'm trying to better my life, that I must be a junkie...or that I'm lazy and just don't want to work, or whatever other such nonsensical, stereotyping bullshit that people come up with. TANF is basically allowing me to get an education in a field that I KNOW will allow me to be completely self-sufficient eventually, while being able to completely concentrate on doing well in school and being here for my kids, rather than having to work full-time, go to school full-time, and never seeing my kids. Working full-time and going to school might work for some people, but really isn't beneficial for a single parent household.

I don't know how anyone would be able to support a drug habit on welfare alone anyway. With 3 kids, I only receive a little over 400 dollars a MONTH. That barely covers my utilities. All I can say is Thank Whatever that I paid off my house last spring.

Definitely not conservatives, I live in a very Blue state and many of the people I know here are avowed Christians and Democrats and Humanists who throw all those beliefs right out the window when it comes to this issue. My belief is that they do this, because most people love the smell of their own shit more than they love being internally consistent with their value systems they PRETEND to espouse. It sickens me...

 

[Vicarious]

Definitely not conservatives, I live in a very Blue state and many of the people I know here are avowed Christians and Democrats and Humanists who throw all those beliefs right out the window when it comes to this issue. My belief is that they do this, because most people love the smell of their own shit more than they love being internally consistent with their value systems they PRETEND to espouse. It sickens me...

You're probably right. I've just noticed that it tends to be conservatives who continually post that crap on my Facebook feed. I've argued with several of them until blue in the face, even pointing out the statistical evidence from the Florida trial but apparently you can't fix stupid, so I'm somewhat content in allowing them to wallow in their own ignorance. I just love it when I bring up the fact that my kids and I have used some form of public assistance for years, like medical and childcare, and you don't see me smoking weed or shooting up dope, not to mention I've worked my ass off since I was 16 until I was laid off, blah blah blah...and they're like "Well, naturally, I don't mean YOU". Yeah, whatever, the fuck you didn't.

 

[Faye]

I agree.

It costs so much more to test everyone than to just pay for the few who are on drugs. And even if we did cut the money for the druggies, wouldn't that just make them more desperate and lead to higher crime?

I think the state of florida tried to implement something like this before- I can't remember.

Ah yes, here we go: http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts...testing-welfare-recipients-data-shows/1225721

 

[CindyLou]

Lets not pretend this will catch actual druggies. Most hard drugs leave your system quickly. You're going spend all that money to catch pot smokers. Lol.

 

[Billy]

You're probably right. I've just noticed that it tends to be conservatives who continually post that crap on my Facebook feed. I've argued with several of them until blue in the face, even pointing out the statistical evidence from the Florida trial but apparently you can't fix stupid, so I'm somewhat content in allowing them to wallow in their own ignorance. I just love it when I bring up the fact that my kids and I have used some form of public assistance for years, like medical and childcare, and you don't see me smoking weed or shooting up dope, blah blah blah...and they're like "Well, naturally, I don't mean YOU". Yeah, whatever, the fuck you didn't.

I have a theory that the simpletons who believe this tripe are just insecure about themselves. They are projecting, everyone knows everyone uses public funding of some sort, its the entire basis for the government. Fuck, even if you want to take it a step further, we rob 3rd world nations of their resources to bloat our standard of living to what it is... the West has been doing this for 100s of years. And then to have the audacity to turn around and tell everyone else to strap up their boots and work harder? Its disgusting...

Everyone takes help, but it takes an especially smug type of asshole to delude themselves that their student aid is not welfare, that their unemployment is not a form of welfare, that PUBLIC roads are not a form of welfare. They dont mind those things because those things are nice and great... The people we are talking about are afraid of being poor. More important distinction, they are MORE afraid of being considered poor, so they hate on people who remind them of their fear, of course that would be too simple and too obvious. Projection is the oldest form of mental self trickery in the book, so they try to wrap it up in the air of smug bullshit, I WORK AND PAY TAXES! This isnt about my irrational feelings, this is about principles and economics! They usually become irate when you break it down for them that:

A. they are not holding true to their principles they espouse elsewhere in their lives, or else they are holding true to them and the other 99% of the time when the pretend to give a shit about anybody but themselves they are just lying.

B. Economically testing welfare people is... well not very frickin economical...

When you boil it all down to what the motivation is behind such a belief, again. Its some form of fear. My theory of course, restated now is that its a fear of being part of the population that is demonized...

its like we never left kindergarten. Everyone picks on the poor kid who wears the same shirt to school everyday because they dont want to be the bottom of the totem.

Pathetic.

 

[Billy]

Lets not pretend this will catch actual druggies. Most hard drugs leave your system quickly. You're going spend all that money to catch pot smokers. Lol.

Its funny, Florida has some of the strictest laws on marijuana, and the most amount of people strung out on pills... thats not a coincidence.