FC Community
Discussion Boards => Off-Topic => Debate & Discuss => Topic started by: sigmapi1501 on January 21, 2012, 12:07:01 pm
-
For it or against it?
I'll admit that politically I am a bit of a tree hugger. But even I don't think this is awful. My friends that work at a steel mill must take a drug test to collect a paycheck. I don't think it's out of line to ask someone to take a drug test to collect government checks as well.
It has to be fair though and not racist, so old folks gotta pee clean too. A big argument might be "What about the kids? Don't make them suffer because the parents are on drugs?" I don't know a good solution to that. I would just say that if a parent can't stay off drugs long enough to collect a check to feed/house her kids, then maybe the kids Are better off somewhere else.
-
I am basically in agreement with you on this one. I also have sympathy when kids are involved and would add that we must also consider that any failing drug tests, knowing they would be required, would likely not be providing for their kids in the first place.
-
I agree. Why should me or you have to pay some druggy to stay home and not work. If they want to be wasted all the time, let them work for it. :bs:
-
It depends on how it would be handled. And considering how Florida handled it, I'd have to say I'm against it. Scam and embarrassment.
http://blog.reidreport.com/2011/03/rick-scotts-new-gift-to-solantic-drug-testing-state-employees/
My friends that work at a steel mill must take a drug test to collect a paycheck.
Do they operate heavy machinery?
-
I have been laid off recently...every job I go to requires drug testing. SO I don't really think it is a big deal. I also believe that if you can't pass a drug test, then your children are probably not getting real good care, and would probably be better off with someone drug free. But........then you see these folks in the child care services that are basically stockpiling kids for the checks.......not the greatest deal for the kids either.
-
As long as it's done properly (testers are treated respectfully; lack of conflict of interest for state/politicians etc), I don't see anything wrong with it. I just started working for a public college (so I'm technically employed by the state of Ohio), and I was required to take a drug test. All my job consists of is making sure some students feed some cats and dogs, walk the dogs, and clean their cages. If someone has to take a drug test to be able to work and get paid, shouldn't those who are given money from the government also be drug-free?
And I'm also torn about the kids of drug users....
-
What if it was a case by case basis. I myself can not work. I have not gone thru the trouble to sign up for any type of assistance. like unemployement even. I have bi polar disorder and I have not found a way to be able to keep a job long. It's a legal disability.
Certain states have made marijuanna legal for medical use for a large range of medical issues. The only thing it protects you from is the harsh consequences for having it.
Say a person with a long term cancer decides that disability is what is needed to survive. PArt of that survival is taking your medications; one of which was one the doctor gave called pot. medical pot.
That person would not be able to get that disability if it was mandatory to pass a drug test. I know that will pot being the example I used, it makes the decision a difficult one. The basis of using it medically is still a very debated, research topic.
I know that what you all are explaining the case being... the people who are just sucking our country dry. from the hard working citizens that paid for it. I totally agree. But thinking a little further outside the box a little, what about those who have to have a certain drug for medical purposes... what then?
I am totally curious to hear any thoughts or comments. I love debates and stay open-minded... i never pick a side lol i play "devil's advacate"
-
People have to take drug tests to gain and retain employment. Students have to take drug tests in order to do extra curricular activities. I'm failing to see how that's a perfectly acceptable practice but it's wrong to require drug testing in order to receive governmental assistance. If I'm not mistaken, there was a clause that if the parents didn't pass the drug test then an acceptable guardian could have access to the money for the children.
-
My friends that work at a steel mill must take a drug test to collect a paycheck.
Do they operate heavy machinery?
I see what youre getting at here. Ok, my brother has to take a drug test to work at a casino. No machinery. My brothers wife has to take one and she sells ad space. So its more than a safety issue. I had a feeling though that this would be a scam to deny people benefits. I guess if there were any easy solutions to drug abuse and poverty, we would have solved them.
-
I am for it. Almost every job requires it now so if your going to government benefits I feel you should do the same.
-
I think it should be mandatory because there will always be people who try to sell their government benefits for drugs and such. and If they fail, they should have a year waiting period.
-
If the politicians want to drug test citizens to get gov't benefits, then they should also be drug tested. Gov't money is gov't money.
-
I agree that they shold be tested. I live in a welfare st. Have seen more then my share of this. Also lived in a border town and you would not believe the stuff that goes on in them. I know some people need some help in their day to day living expense, but think that all these young people need to be working even it is picking up trash for their help instead of setting on their duffs. And all some of they young women are just being used as bread winners. Go have another baby we need need more money . So they go out and have another and we pay for it.
-
What if it was a case by case basis. I myself can not work. I have not gone thru the trouble to sign up for any type of assistance. like unemployement even. I have bi polar disorder and I have not found a way to be able to keep a job long. It's a legal disability.
Certain states have made marijuanna legal for medical use for a large range of medical issues. The only thing it protects you from is the harsh consequences for having it.
Say a person with a long term cancer decides that disability is what is needed to survive. PArt of that survival is taking your medications; one of which was one the doctor gave called pot. medical pot.
That person would not be able to get that disability if it was mandatory to pass a drug test. I know that will pot being the example I used, it makes the decision a difficult one. The basis of using it medically is still a very debated, research topic.
I know that what you all are explaining the case being... the people who are just sucking our country dry. from the hard working citizens that paid for it. I totally agree. But thinking a little further outside the box a little, what about those who have to have a certain drug for medical purposes... what then?
I am totally curious to hear any thoughts or comments. I love debates and stay open-minded... i never pick a side lol i play "devil's advacate"
that makes sense but I would that the new drug testing policy would exclude anyone who is using a particular drug for medicinal purpose. I don't feel they should be penalized for such use considering it it helps them to maintain
-
My real concern about this is that it almost specifically targets marijuana and eliminates other drugs that are far more serious. It also eliminates legal drugs such as alcohol and prescription drugs. Both of these can impair individuals far more than marijuana use. Also, I thought there was an excellent point made from another member about medical marijuana usage. I think before this type of testing is done that it needs to be more broad in it's application or not done at all.
-
I know people who work for the welfare dept and agencies like that and they see the people abuse the system every day! They drive nice cars and have their nails or hair always done up and they're collecting welfare or foods stamps?? I wish the government looked into this a little better and maybe some of that money and help could go to people who really do need it. I don't think a drug test would be out of line at all. It would have to be given to everyone too no matter what race or sex or age or anything. the people who truly need the help would understand this. it's the people who abuse it who would object
-
I know people who work for the welfare dept and agencies like that and they see the people abuse the system every day! They drive nice cars and have their nails or hair always done up and they're collecting welfare or foods stamps?? I wish the government looked into this a little better and maybe some of that money and help could go to people who really do need it. I don't think a drug test would be out of line at all. It would have to be given to everyone too no matter what race or sex or age or anything. the people who truly need the help would understand this. it's the people who abuse it who would object
I work for hennepin county as a mandated reporter, so we see all sorts of low income familys, but most certainly i agree with the abuse of the benefits county may grant one family. Are economy is changing and thosse of us who do what we can and still have to ask for a little assistance may make us very upset too see many individuals abusing the benefits one family may be needing... Great topic :wave:
-
Yes if you get goverment help you should be tested ramdomly for all drugs. And have to make the effort to train for something to support yourslf. If no effort to help yourself cut the funds.
-
I am all for people on welfare having to take drug tests. I would even say people on unemployment should do this too. Many years ago I worked for a collection agency and people would come in on welfare, medicaid, food stamps etc. and act like we owed it to them to remove their debt. And a handful of these people I grew up with so watching them constantly abuse the system is frustrating.
I understand where people are concerned for the children but HELLO you should be concerned that they have drug addicts for parents. If their parents fail well then the children are sent to live with a capable family member and that person gets assistance for taking care of the kids or they are put into the system til their parents can clean up their act.
Imagine how much money our government can save if we implemented this across the board. Maybe we could pay down our national debt or allocate that money back to social security - ya know that program where people who actually work constantly put money into and for some reason are no longer seeing! :wave:
-
This is an awesome thing the government is doing.....especially since so many ppl sit and collect benefits while they hustle n use illegal drugs
-
As a former welfare case worker for many years, I saw blatant fraud like you wouldn't believe! I remember doing home calls early in the morning to HUD apartment complexes. The smell of pot was overpowering as soon as we came on site. One big party! People had their doors open and were going in and out of each others doors according to what they had. There were drug sales going on, people snorting coke, shooting up, pufing on doobies.you name it.
Now lets define "Government Benefits" vs "Welfare". Certain government benefits have been paid into over a persons working career like , Military or State Retirement and even Social Security. Then there is SSI, a form of Welfare from the government that you get when you are disabled or over 65, and have no work history to get social security. Some of these beneficiaries are Immigrants.
The most prevalent form of welfare is AFDC, 100% taxpayer supported money where there are children involved. This money is supposed to feed house and clothe the children. If not for the children, the person(s) would not be eligible.
That is the difference.."earned" benefits versus ( I've got my hand out for free government money because I am looking for, but can't find work, or I made poor choices regarding birth control or about a partner who is an absent parent deadbeat who wont pay child support, or because I see no need to work and am a 3rd generation welfare recipient who believes it's the governments obligation to provide for me with no effort on my part, except to squeeze out a pup every now and then, and do a little paperwork) also known as "entitlement benefits". I take offense to the comment that "old people gotta pee, too" which I assume was directed toward Social Security beneficiaries. Get a grip people!!! It's about the kids...How can a parent feed and clothe a child if the welfare check is smoked snorted or injected into a vein? You test clean, you can provide for your kids..you don't you can't, and other arrangements need to be made. Get it straight!
-
I am 100% for this. I live in Colorado and they passed the first house vote for welfare applicants to pass a drug test. I think that if you are receiving money from the government, whether; welfare, unemployment, etc, that you should have to follow the rules of that government that you are receiving money from.
I also agree that the child should not be punished for their parents. But I would think if a parent did not pass a drug test, that probably the proper authorities might be notified and remove the children from the situation.
-
I agree with the drug test. I can't even get my disability for my medical issues and even thought the standards have changed and you can no longer get a check from social securty for being a person who is addicted to drugs or an alcholic there are people who got it before the standards changed and are still doing it I think they should be tested and if they fail they loose there checks. Why shoud that be a disablity for them when they can fix it. I can't get on it for back problems,muscle disease, chronic broncitis, and COPD so why should they get.
Kids are always a concern because the system doesn't always work and the parents are just worried about themselfs. Crap I don't even take my prescriptions medications all the time because they are mind altering and when my son was a mirror forget it I want to be a part of his life and I worked so he could have a good life and be at school and graduate and he did.
-
As a former welfare case worker for many years, I saw blatant fraud like you wouldn't believe! I remember doing home calls early in the morning to HUD apartment complexes. The smell of pot was overpowering as soon as we came on site. One big party! People had their doors open and were going in and out of each others doors according to what they had. There were drug sales going on, people snorting coke, shooting up, pufing on doobies.you name it.
Now lets define "Government Benefits" vs "Welfare". Certain government benefits have been paid into over a persons working career like , Military or State Retirement and even Social Security. Then there is SSI, a form of Welfare from the government that you get when you are disabled or over 65, and have no work history to get social security. Some of these beneficiaries are Immigrants.
The most prevalent form of welfare is AFDC, 100% taxpayer supported money where there are children involved. This money is supposed to feed house and clothe the children. If not for the children, the person(s) would not be eligible.
That is the difference.."earned" benefits versus ( I've got my hand out for free government money because I am looking for, but can't find work, or I made poor choices regarding birth control or about a partner who is an absent parent deadbeat who wont pay child support, or because I see no need to work and am a 3rd generation welfare recipient who believes it's the governments obligation to provide for me with no effort on my part, except to squeeze out a pup every now and then, and do a little paperwork) also known as "entitlement benefits". I take offense to the comment that "old people gotta pee, too" which I assume was directed toward Social Security beneficiaries. Get a grip people!!! It's about the kids...How can a parent feed and clothe a child if the welfare check is smoked snorted or injected into a vein? You test clean, you can provide for your kids..you don't you can't, and other arrangements need to be made. Get it straight!
I completely agree with you. At my last job I saw a lot of people like this.
-
My real concern about this is that it almost specifically targets marijuana and eliminates other drugs that are far more serious. It also eliminates legal drugs such as alcohol and prescription drugs. Both of these can impair individuals far more than marijuana use. Also, I thought there was an excellent point made from another member about medical marijuana usage. I think before this type of testing is done that it needs to be more broad in it's application or not done at all.
I agree with you here. I think many people forget that even legal prescription drugs can be and are abused. These drugs are very harmful and can be deadly in certain cases. I think all of this has to come into play. However, my brother-in-law is subject to random drug tests at his place of employment that even test for prescription drugs that he does not have a prescription for. So maybe this will be part of the screening process for governmental assistance.
-
If i had to take a drug test at work and i had too) then by golly so should those that benifet from all of us that have worked and are still working. Let them get out and cleaned the streets and such to earn that check (oh i forgot that would be demeaning). Put me in to change the system and it would get done, because i don't care. They would have to earn that check somehow and not be on drugs.
-
I think the best way this system can work is if non-cash benefits (food stamps, food boxes, housing, decreased utility bills, etc..) would continue as normal but any cash benefits would require a drug test (unemployment, ssi, etc..) that way children are not caught up in the crossfire losing their home and not having food to eat but we are also not paying for people with drug problems to promote their lifestyle.
-
I think they should be tested and receive treatment accordingly. Many people receiving benefits get high on drugs: Alcohol, marijuana and casino chips!
-
I am all for drug testing for people receiving public assistance. I would like to see our tax money is not supporting someone's habit especially ones with kids. Many people are using those checks and selling their food stamps for drugs or alchohol and not their kids.
-
I agree with drug testing for government benefits. If people should get welfare or food stamps, they should be tested if they're clean or not. Give a one year penalty for those to fail before reapplying.
-
Against it !
-
we are going to pay more if the state takes the kids
-
Yes, I agree and I'll be one of them that needs testing to get benefits, then so be it... folks getting Government Benefits should not be taking drugs or using the Government Benefits to get drugs???
-
If the criteria is "getting gov't benefits" then drug test the politicians as well. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. It's way past time to start holding these people in office more accountable.
-
If the criteria is "getting gov't benefits" then drug test the politicians as well. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. It's way past time to start holding these people in office more accountable.
I wonder how many politicians would pass even their state's DUI minimums for alcohol if random, unannounced testing were implemented, (let alone testing for other drug use)?
-
If they have $ to buy drugs, why do they need government benefits?
I think staying off drugs is a reasonable requirement.
-
I am for it, but then there will be a market for selling your urine. There is always a way around it.
-
I think that people should have to be drug tested for government benefits.
Anywhere I have ever worked, I either had to take a drug test in order to get hired and/or there was the possibility of random drug testing days.
Why should it be any different for those on government benefits?
-
I think that everyone has the right to make bad choices for themselves, including their bodies. However, I don't want my hard earned tax money to imply support of those bad choices. On the flip side, I know that a lot of people who receive help from the gov't aren't aren't taking drugs. I believe that they should be free of the risk that they could get HIV or other diseases because other recipients are taking drugs. I know you're going to say that needle safety is higher than it's ever been, but there is still a risk. There was a lady in CO a couple of years ago who had TB and she was a nurse who administered meds to patients in a few cities and infected them. Plus, giving them a shot means tax payers are paying money for those supplies.
So, you could say that I am conflicted. I don't want to support people who are taking drugs, I don't want to pay for mindless drug testing for those who are obviously not taking drugs, and I don't want to increase people's odds of getting a disease if there's some creep using dirty needles.
-
I think that everyone has the right to make bad choices for themselves, including their bodies. However, I don't want my hard earned tax money to imply support of those bad choices. On the flip side, I know that a lot of people who receive help from the gov't aren't aren't taking drugs. I believe that they should be free of the risk that they could get HIV or other diseases because other recipients are taking drugs. I know you're going to say that needle safety is higher than it's ever been, but there is still a risk. There was a lady in CO a couple of years ago who had TB and she was a nurse who administered meds to patients in a few cities and infected them. Plus, giving them a shot means tax payers are paying money for those supplies.
So, you could say that I am conflicted. I don't want to support people who are taking drugs, I don't want to pay for mindless drug testing for those who are obviously not taking drugs, and I don't want to increase people's odds of getting a disease if there's some creep using dirty needles.
I'm a little unclear on where the needles and shots come in to play... ???