100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: urine test | |
|---|---|
|
Edited by
RKISIT
on
Tue 11/18/08 01:51 PM
|
|
you know if the government had an health insurance policy that would give every american health isurance would we as americans b!tch cause we pay taxes to help other fellow americans get the health care they are entitled too? of course your going to have the pain killer addicts taking advantage of it but at least the kids ,elderly and severe medical conditioned people are getting the health care they need.and the government can piss test the doctors too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
you know if the government had an health insurance policy that would give every american health isurance would we as americans b!tch cause we pay taxes to help other fellow americans get the health care they are entitled too? of course your going to have the pain killer addicts taking advantage of it but at least the kids ,elderly and severe medical conditioned people are getting the health care they need.and the government can piss test the doctors too. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I do not believe we have to make recipients of entitlements they recieve as US citizens prove they are drug free soley on the basis of being on public assistance.
Public entitlements are in place because our society at times does not meet the needs of it's citizen's to find employment, have adequate employment, have adequate education, be born or survive without disability, or be able to fortell the future of what a spouse will or will not do in regards to supporting dependent childrent or what many people forget elderly family members. I firmly believe if we cracked down on public education, availability of dependable birth control or free voluntary sterilization, affordable child care, support enforcement, keeping employment in this country, affordable houseing, and crime enforcement inparticulary gang abatement, drug trafficing, dui, and spouseal abuse we would see a huge reduction in a need for public assistance programs. Give a Mother on welfare child care, medical, and a job and I guarantee you the majority will chuck welfare real fast. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i do wonder this.... here you have to prove that you are looking for a job to be on foodstamps unless you have a child under 1<i beleive that is the age> also if given the chance of an interview you do have to go and if they offer you a job you do have to take the job.... which is all good with me however i wonder this.....if the job requires a drug test and you flunk it do they continue to be able to collect foodstamps?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Winx
on
Tue 11/18/08 03:05 PM
|
|
Oops.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 years of free money, I don't think anyone is complaining on the length of that. If anything thats too long. The apathy of having completely free money for 5 years can be substantial in future productivity and effort. Im not biased I'm just referring to human nature. View it as a drug with a longer quitting time. Welfare is not enough to live on! Even after a person receives it, they are still living in the below poverty level. I highly doubt that they are living happily on that. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Like many 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 do not 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 BUTT, 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?.......Stuart Wow you are truly ridiculous and close minded..............why do people like to kick the fuk out of people that are already down.............how about going after the people who really exploit the system like our congressmen, politicians, lobbyists, freakin bailout wall street..................wow arent they also part of the welfare system that you are addressing........................its so easy to talk about people who YOU THINK DONT DO ANYTHING BUT WHEN IT COMES TO PEOPLE WHO EXPLOIT EACH AND EVERY PERSON IN THE MID LEVEL AND MINIMUM WAGE EARNERS EVERYONE SEEMS TO HAVE A BLIND EYE..............HOW ABOUT WE START AT THE TOP AND WORK OUR WAY TO THE BOTTOM AND SEE HOW MANY PEOPLE WE HAVE LEFT.......................GIVE ME A FREAKN BREAK................ 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is a good idea to require a simple 4 panel test to get on welfare, if the person is not doing drugs...what is the worry? There is to me little to no concern about this issue except to those that do drugs, if you are on welfare for legitimate reasons there is abslutely no reason to even worry about a simple drug screen. I'm not saying most people on welfare use drugs, but a lot do. This could save the already fragile economy millions in a fiscal year being able to legally drop some people from the program, as well it would give more money to those that use the program as a temporary option until they can find work. I disagree with about 100 points you made here: "If the person is not doing drugs what is the worry?" - Well if you are going to apply a 4 panel test you better be quizzing personality before you even look at the drug test. "I'm not saying most people on welfare use drugs, but a lot do" - Think about this equation of words for a minute. Do you think that a person that is legitimately in need of money can afford these "drugs" you are referring to because the market is out the roof for the drug world right now with oil prices going down. "This could save the already fragile economy millions in a fiscal year being able to legally drop some people from the program, as well it would give more money to those that use the program as a temporary option until they can find work." - This sounds like an act of communism to me. Shun those less fortunate and give the money to people that need it temporarily. Those are the people that are going to take it for granted man, not your average pothead. I just don't like your ideas on pulling EVEN MORE from the already dirt poor and giving it to "more" fortunate individuals. Defeats the whole purpose. My plan on the whole Urine test thing is take it the **** out of the country and base your hiring techniques on in depth interviews and application processes. 90% of companies see that someone doesn't agree to be randomly drug tested and throws their application away. What is this little dipstick trying to prove here, a drug problem, or just another process of screening. I have met a whole ****on of absolute geniuses that do recreational drugs but they could never get a job at even WaL-Mart if they wanted. You take the urine test away so it gives these "drug heads" (I like to call them humans) a chance to get a job at the place of their choosing so they aren't confined to working at a ****hole place that not even job would work at. I know not many people are gonna read this in its entirety so I am am just preparing for a "your a stoner" comment. But I'll give you my genuine reasons for smoking herb and I'll try just about any drug once. I smoke weed because I like it to boot, secondly I was born with acid reflux so the THC and resin coat my esophagus thus temporarily relieving the acid burn. Lastly I have ADHD and it helps me level this problem out. I've been experimental with drugs because I am in absolutely love learning about them and experiencing euphoric (outworldly) feelings outside of being in heaven. I'm more of a thinker so I tend to do these drugs alone and i've never done anything more than twice other than pot. In Oklahoma if your caught with as much as a seed on you your going to jail. If the government were to legalize marijuana this country would cut its deficit by at least 1/3 in 2 years I GUARANTEE you that. Sorry if I got a little cold through any of that, not meant to be offensive or nasty. I've just seen a lot of biased opinions in here so I thought I would stand up for my culture and actually defend the basic human rights that say you don't have to piss in a cup to be accepted you just have to pass an interview. "Think about this equation of words for a minute. Do you think that a person that is legitimately in need of money can afford these "drugs" you are referring to because the market is out the roof for the drug world right now with oil prices going down." --See it all the time, used to know tons of people that were on welfare so they could use money to get drugs. From experience it was 9/10 of the people on welfare did drugs, which ranged from meth to weed. Though given the population it is probably about 3/10 in rough respect. A lot of the people I've seen on welfare have low paying jobs for the sole purpose of keeping welfare. "This sounds like an act of communism to me. Shun those less fortunate and give the money to people that need it temporarily. Those are the people that are going to take it for granted man, not your average pothead. I just don't like your ideas on pulling EVEN MORE from the already dirt poor and giving it to "more" fortunate individuals. Defeats the whole purpose." --Simple really, don't do drugs you can get on welfare...do drugs and welfare is exempted. Many people have to take a drug test to get work, the money they make gets taxed for programs like welfare why not give the same stipulations? It isn't shunning the less fortunate, it is putting requirements on something that is too easy to recieve. That and I never said the money would go to the more fortunate, I said recycle it back into the program giving people already on the program more benefits. I smoke weed as well on occasion, but I have a job that is loose with their drug testing so I have more leniency than most people do. However I think it is fair considering if you are on welfare you won't do drugs at risk of not getting a job, correct? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
buttons
on
Tue 11/18/08 03:02 PM
|
|
another solution is to have jobs that are just handed out such as.... cleaning the parks, doing the landscaping , picking up trash from freeways, serving homeless people food and cooking it for them and doing the dishes, helping out the elderly, i think foodstamps should be earned in such a way rather than just handed out...perhaps the state have a big farm where the food for prisioners are grown and people could work off the food stamps... in no way am i downing people on food stamps i had them once for 6 months as welfare i did also for 2 months . i certainally would of rather earned my foodstamps rather than to be handed to me... i guess thats why i had a job 1 week later after applying and a promotion 2 months after that...i once got food from a church when i was out of food... i asked them if i could do something like work there for a day or 2 to give back... answer was no, talk about self esteem issue that gave me... not being able to earn the food.......
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
so, since I am on Medicare and Social Security Disability I should have to take a urine test? and if I fail? you would cut off my Medicare in which case I would die that is your logic? Apparently, yes, that is the logic  One of my best friends, my 2nd dad really, is in the same situation. He is legitimately in need of help, due to the loss of both of his legs and one hand and is legally blind. This is a man who has worked since he was 12, every day, paid into the system, was a teacher, volunteered to coach Little League, volunteered in many other ways. Now that he's in his 60's and is in need, society wants to turn their back on him. He is already made to feel like a criminal for needing help, has to show up on the "system's" whim to make sure he hasn't regrown his legs or regained his eyesight. They check on him to make sure he's not cheating the "system" more than any parole officer would ever dream of checking on their parolees. It's pathetic, really. 
That is sad. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
another solution is to have jobs that are just handed out such as.... cleaning the parks, doing the landscaping , picking up trash from freeways, serving homeless people food and cooking it for them and doing the dishes, helping out the elderly, i think foodstamps should be earned in such a way rather than just handed out...perhaps the state have a big farm where the food for prisioners are grown and people could work off the food stamps... in no way am i downing people on food stamps i had them once for 6 months as welfare i did also for 2 months . i certainally would of rather earned my foodstamps rather than to be handed to me... i guess thats why i had a job 1 week later after applying and a promotion 2 months after that...i once got food from a church when i was out of food... i asked them if i could do something like work there for a day or 2 to give back... answer was no, talk about self esteem issue that gave me... not being able to earn the food....... What about the disabled people, the mentally ill, and the elderly on food stamps? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
so, since I am on Medicare and Social Security Disability I should have to take a urine test? and if I fail? you would cut off my Medicare in which case I would die that is your logic? Medicare and Social Security are totally different from Welfare.with Social Security and Medicare,they pay you what YOU'VE already paid in,it's not coming from someone elses tax dollars. the only time it comes from someone elses is when the reciever is underage and then it goes by what the parents have made. i was on SSI from the age of 4 til the age of 18,so i know about it JT, Many people that are on welfare used to work and pay taxes. And taxes pay for the welfare. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
another solution is to have jobs that are just handed out such as.... cleaning the parks, doing the landscaping , picking up trash from freeways, serving homeless people food and cooking it for them and doing the dishes, helping out the elderly, i think foodstamps should be earned in such a way rather than just handed out...perhaps the state have a big farm where the food for prisioners are grown and people could work off the food stamps... in no way am i downing people on food stamps i had them once for 6 months as welfare i did also for 2 months . i certainally would of rather earned my foodstamps rather than to be handed to me... i guess thats why i had a job 1 week later after applying and a promotion 2 months after that...i once got food from a church when i was out of food... i asked them if i could do something like work there for a day or 2 to give back... answer was no, talk about self esteem issue that gave me... not being able to earn the food....... I used to work for the county and you are required by the state to work or volunteer at least 35 hours of your time to get welfare...........I know thats how it works in California..............for you to get welfare you either have to be looking for a job which they verify or you have to be going to school at least 30 hours a week to receive any type of support..............so people lets get with the times welfare isnt what it used to be and it hasnt been that way for the past 10years............this is what California has been doing i dont know about other states...... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is a good idea to require a simple 4 panel test to get on welfare, if the person is not doing drugs...what is the worry? There is to me little to no concern about this issue except to those that do drugs, if you are on welfare for legitimate reasons there is abslutely no reason to even worry about a simple drug screen. I'm not saying most people on welfare use drugs, but a lot do. This could save the already fragile economy millions in a fiscal year being able to legally drop some people from the program, as well it would give more money to those that use the program as a temporary option until they can find work. I disagree with about 100 points you made here: "If the person is not doing drugs what is the worry?" - Well if you are going to apply a 4 panel test you better be quizzing personality before you even look at the drug test. "I'm not saying most people on welfare use drugs, but a lot do" - Think about this equation of words for a minute. Do you think that a person that is legitimately in need of money can afford these "drugs" you are referring to because the market is out the roof for the drug world right now with oil prices going down. "This could save the already fragile economy millions in a fiscal year being able to legally drop some people from the program, as well it would give more money to those that use the program as a temporary option until they can find work." - This sounds like an act of communism to me. Shun those less fortunate and give the money to people that need it temporarily. Those are the people that are going to take it for granted man, not your average pothead. I just don't like your ideas on pulling EVEN MORE from the already dirt poor and giving it to "more" fortunate individuals. Defeats the whole purpose. My plan on the whole Urine test thing is take it the **** out of the country and base your hiring techniques on in depth interviews and application processes. 90% of companies see that someone doesn't agree to be randomly drug tested and throws their application away. What is this little dipstick trying to prove here, a drug problem, or just another process of screening. I have met a whole ****on of absolute geniuses that do recreational drugs but they could never get a job at even WaL-Mart if they wanted. You take the urine test away so it gives these "drug heads" (I like to call them humans) a chance to get a job at the place of their choosing so they aren't confined to working at a ****hole place that not even job would work at. I know not many people are gonna read this in its entirety so I am am just preparing for a "your a stoner" comment. But I'll give you my genuine reasons for smoking herb and I'll try just about any drug once. I smoke weed because I like it to boot, secondly I was born with acid reflux so the THC and resin coat my esophagus thus temporarily relieving the acid burn. Lastly I have ADHD and it helps me level this problem out. I've been experimental with drugs because I am in absolutely love learning about them and experiencing euphoric (outworldly) feelings outside of being in heaven. I'm more of a thinker so I tend to do these drugs alone and i've never done anything more than twice other than pot. In Oklahoma if your caught with as much as a seed on you your going to jail. If the government were to legalize marijuana this country would cut its deficit by at least 1/3 in 2 years I GUARANTEE you that. Sorry if I got a little cold through any of that, not meant to be offensive or nasty. I've just seen a lot of biased opinions in here so I thought I would stand up for my culture and actually defend the basic human rights that say you don't have to piss in a cup to be accepted you just have to pass an interview. "Think about this equation of words for a minute. Do you think that a person that is legitimately in need of money can afford these "drugs" you are referring to because the market is out the roof for the drug world right now with oil prices going down." --See it all the time, used to know tons of people that were on welfare so they could use money to get drugs. From experience it was 9/10 of the people on welfare did drugs, which ranged from meth to weed. Though given the population it is probably about 3/10 in rough respect. A lot of the people I've seen on welfare have low paying jobs for the sole purpose of keeping welfare. "This sounds like an act of communism to me. Shun those less fortunate and give the money to people that need it temporarily. Those are the people that are going to take it for granted man, not your average pothead. I just don't like your ideas on pulling EVEN MORE from the already dirt poor and giving it to "more" fortunate individuals. Defeats the whole purpose." --Simple really, don't do drugs you can get on welfare...do drugs and welfare is exempted. Many people have to take a drug test to get work, the money they make gets taxed for programs like welfare why not give the same stipulations? It isn't shunning the less fortunate, it is putting requirements on something that is too easy to recieve. That and I never said the money would go to the more fortunate, I said recycle it back into the program giving people already on the program more benefits. I smoke weed as well on occasion, but I have a job that is loose with their drug testing so I have more leniency than most people do. However I think it is fair considering if you are on welfare you won't do drugs at risk of not getting a job, correct? Fear, No disrespect, but...what you have seen in one neighborhood does not equal the statistics for the people on welfare in the United States. They don't add up. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Winx
on
Tue 11/18/08 03:14 PM
|
|
another solution is to have jobs that are just handed out such as.... cleaning the parks, doing the landscaping , picking up trash from freeways, serving homeless people food and cooking it for them and doing the dishes, helping out the elderly, i think foodstamps should be earned in such a way rather than just handed out...perhaps the state have a big farm where the food for prisioners are grown and people could work off the food stamps... in no way am i downing people on food stamps i had them once for 6 months as welfare i did also for 2 months . i certainally would of rather earned my foodstamps rather than to be handed to me... i guess thats why i had a job 1 week later after applying and a promotion 2 months after that...i once got food from a church when i was out of food... i asked them if i could do something like work there for a day or 2 to give back... answer was no, talk about self esteem issue that gave me... not being able to earn the food....... I used to work for the county and you are required by the state to work or volunteer at least 35 hours of your time to get welfare...........I know thats how it works in California..............for you to get welfare you either have to be looking for a job which they verify or you have to be going to school at least 30 hours a week to receive any type of support..............so people lets get with the times welfare isnt what it used to be and it hasnt been that way for the past 10years............this is what California has been doing i dont know about other states...... In Missouri, you have be looking for work or receiving job training to receive welfare (unless disabled). And there is a time limit. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
another solution is to have jobs that are just handed out such as.... cleaning the parks, doing the landscaping , picking up trash from freeways, serving homeless people food and cooking it for them and doing the dishes, helping out the elderly, i think foodstamps should be earned in such a way rather than just handed out...perhaps the state have a big farm where the food for prisioners are grown and people could work off the food stamps... in no way am i downing people on food stamps i had them once for 6 months as welfare i did also for 2 months . i certainally would of rather earned my foodstamps rather than to be handed to me... i guess thats why i had a job 1 week later after applying and a promotion 2 months after that...i once got food from a church when i was out of food... i asked them if i could do something like work there for a day or 2 to give back... answer was no, talk about self esteem issue that gave me... not being able to earn the food....... What about the disabled people, the mentally ill, and the elderly on food stamps? |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Applebutta
on
Tue 11/18/08 03:23 PM
|
|
It is a good idea to require a simple 4 panel test to get on welfare, if the person is not doing drugs...what is the worry? There is to me little to no concern about this issue except to those that do drugs, if you are on welfare for legitimate reasons there is abslutely no reason to even worry about a simple drug screen. I'm not saying most people on welfare use drugs, but a lot do. This could save the already fragile economy millions in a fiscal year being able to legally drop some people from the program, as well it would give more money to those that use the program as a temporary option until they can find work. I disagree with about 100 points you made here: "If the person is not doing drugs what is the worry?" - Well if you are going to apply a 4 panel test you better be quizzing personality before you even look at the drug test. "I'm not saying most people on welfare use drugs, but a lot do" - Think about this equation of words for a minute. Do you think that a person that is legitimately in need of money can afford these "drugs" you are referring to because the market is out the roof for the drug world right now with oil prices going down. "This could save the already fragile economy millions in a fiscal year being able to legally drop some people from the program, as well it would give more money to those that use the program as a temporary option until they can find work." - This sounds like an act of communism to me. Shun those less fortunate and give the money to people that need it temporarily. Those are the people that are going to take it for granted man, not your average pothead. I just don't like your ideas on pulling EVEN MORE from the already dirt poor and giving it to "more" fortunate individuals. Defeats the whole purpose. My plan on the whole Urine test thing is take it the **** out of the country and base your hiring techniques on in depth interviews and application processes. 90% of companies see that someone doesn't agree to be randomly drug tested and throws their application away. What is this little dipstick trying to prove here, a drug problem, or just another process of screening. I have met a whole ****on of absolute geniuses that do recreational drugs but they could never get a job at even WaL-Mart if they wanted. You take the urine test away so it gives these "drug heads" (I like to call them humans) a chance to get a job at the place of their choosing so they aren't confined to working at a ****hole place that not even job would work at. I know not many people are gonna read this in its entirety so I am am just preparing for a "your a stoner" comment. But I'll give you my genuine reasons for smoking herb and I'll try just about any drug once. I smoke weed because I like it to boot, secondly I was born with acid reflux so the THC and resin coat my esophagus thus temporarily relieving the acid burn. Lastly I have ADHD and it helps me level this problem out. I've been experimental with drugs because I am in absolutely love learning about them and experiencing euphoric (outworldly) feelings outside of being in heaven. I'm more of a thinker so I tend to do these drugs alone and i've never done anything more than twice other than pot. In Oklahoma if your caught with as much as a seed on you your going to jail. If the government were to legalize marijuana this country would cut its deficit by at least 1/3 in 2 years I GUARANTEE you that. Sorry if I got a little cold through any of that, not meant to be offensive or nasty. I've just seen a lot of biased opinions in here so I thought I would stand up for my culture and actually defend the basic human rights that say you don't have to piss in a cup to be accepted you just have to pass an interview. "Think about this equation of words for a minute. Do you think that a person that is legitimately in need of money can afford these "drugs" you are referring to because the market is out the roof for the drug world right now with oil prices going down." --See it all the time, used to know tons of people that were on welfare so they could use money to get drugs. From experience it was 9/10 of the people on welfare did drugs, which ranged from meth to weed. Though given the population it is probably about 3/10 in rough respect. A lot of the people I've seen on welfare have low paying jobs for the sole purpose of keeping welfare. "This sounds like an act of communism to me. Shun those less fortunate and give the money to people that need it temporarily. Those are the people that are going to take it for granted man, not your average pothead. I just don't like your ideas on pulling EVEN MORE from the already dirt poor and giving it to "more" fortunate individuals. Defeats the whole purpose." --Simple really, don't do drugs you can get on welfare...do drugs and welfare is exempted. Many people have to take a drug test to get work, the money they make gets taxed for programs like welfare why not give the same stipulations? It isn't shunning the less fortunate, it is putting requirements on something that is too easy to recieve. That and I never said the money would go to the more fortunate, I said recycle it back into the program giving people already on the program more benefits. I smoke weed as well on occasion, but I have a job that is loose with their drug testing so I have more leniency than most people do. However I think it is fair considering if you are on welfare you won't do drugs at risk of not getting a job, correct? OooooO I love this. Finally found an intelligent person who wants to discuss something. BOUT TIME. I believe that if your on welfare you probably have made all the sacrifices you can already. I don't disagree with your point here at all. All i'm trying to say is that the only form of discrimination allowed in the workplace anymore is that against drug users seeing as how they are screened and harassed. I used to be completely clean about 3 years ago from EVERYTHING and my mom started piss testing me in fear that I was doing something "wrong". I passed all 7 of her random tests and I just felt like screaming "YOU ****IN SEE NOW, YOU HAVE IT ON A STRIP SO THERE'S YOUR HARD EVIDENCE", It was soooo degrading for me to do that, even now if I were completely clean I would hate to take a urine test. They ask you to pee in a cup to see if your "prestigious" enough to work at their bloodthirsty and money hungry place of operation. Equal rights, if your not going to alcohol test you can't drug test. Completely bogus. I for one have decided not to drink but do you see me reaping any substantial benefits, other than my liver lasting a little longer. No. You can't accept one thing that messes you up then turn around and say no to something else that messes you up. Some justice would be nice in this situation. I have petitioned this and got 1016 signatures stating that it was an invasion of human rights, general privacy, and if nothing else, The Pursuit of Happiness. It seems to me like an elementary and rudimentary system that is harbored by our state laws and individual companies. That has been 1 year and I never recieved so much as an email back from our great "sInator" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
another solution is to have jobs that are just handed out such as.... cleaning the parks, doing the landscaping , picking up trash from freeways, serving homeless people food and cooking it for them and doing the dishes, helping out the elderly, i think foodstamps should be earned in such a way rather than just handed out...perhaps the state have a big farm where the food for prisioners are grown and people could work off the food stamps... in no way am i downing people on food stamps i had them once for 6 months as welfare i did also for 2 months . i certainally would of rather earned my foodstamps rather than to be handed to me... i guess thats why i had a job 1 week later after applying and a promotion 2 months after that...i once got food from a church when i was out of food... i asked them if i could do something like work there for a day or 2 to give back... answer was no, talk about self esteem issue that gave me... not being able to earn the food....... I used to work for the county and you are required by the state to work or volunteer at least 35 hours of your time to get welfare...........I know thats how it works in California..............for you to get welfare you either have to be looking for a job which they verify or you have to be going to school at least 30 hours a week to receive any type of support..............so people lets get with the times welfare isnt what it used to be and it hasnt been that way for the past 10years............this is what California has been doing i dont know about other states...... In Missouri, you have be looking for work or receiving job training to receive welfare (unless disabled). And there is a time limit. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is a good idea to require a simple 4 panel test to get on welfare, if the person is not doing drugs...what is the worry? There is to me little to no concern about this issue except to those that do drugs, if you are on welfare for legitimate reasons there is abslutely no reason to even worry about a simple drug screen. I'm not saying most people on welfare use drugs, but a lot do. This could save the already fragile economy millions in a fiscal year being able to legally drop some people from the program, as well it would give more money to those that use the program as a temporary option until they can find work. I disagree with about 100 points you made here: "If the person is not doing drugs what is the worry?" - Well if you are going to apply a 4 panel test you better be quizzing personality before you even look at the drug test. "I'm not saying most people on welfare use drugs, but a lot do" - Think about this equation of words for a minute. Do you think that a person that is legitimately in need of money can afford these "drugs" you are referring to because the market is out the roof for the drug world right now with oil prices going down. "This could save the already fragile economy millions in a fiscal year being able to legally drop some people from the program, as well it would give more money to those that use the program as a temporary option until they can find work." - This sounds like an act of communism to me. Shun those less fortunate and give the money to people that need it temporarily. Those are the people that are going to take it for granted man, not your average pothead. I just don't like your ideas on pulling EVEN MORE from the already dirt poor and giving it to "more" fortunate individuals. Defeats the whole purpose. My plan on the whole Urine test thing is take it the **** out of the country and base your hiring techniques on in depth interviews and application processes. 90% of companies see that someone doesn't agree to be randomly drug tested and throws their application away. What is this little dipstick trying to prove here, a drug problem, or just another process of screening. I have met a whole ****on of absolute geniuses that do recreational drugs but they could never get a job at even WaL-Mart if they wanted. You take the urine test away so it gives these "drug heads" (I like to call them humans) a chance to get a job at the place of their choosing so they aren't confined to working at a ****hole place that not even job would work at. I know not many people are gonna read this in its entirety so I am am just preparing for a "your a stoner" comment. But I'll give you my genuine reasons for smoking herb and I'll try just about any drug once. I smoke weed because I like it to boot, secondly I was born with acid reflux so the THC and resin coat my esophagus thus temporarily relieving the acid burn. Lastly I have ADHD and it helps me level this problem out. I've been experimental with drugs because I am in absolutely love learning about them and experiencing euphoric (outworldly) feelings outside of being in heaven. I'm more of a thinker so I tend to do these drugs alone and i've never done anything more than twice other than pot. In Oklahoma if your caught with as much as a seed on you your going to jail. If the government were to legalize marijuana this country would cut its deficit by at least 1/3 in 2 years I GUARANTEE you that. Sorry if I got a little cold through any of that, not meant to be offensive or nasty. I've just seen a lot of biased opinions in here so I thought I would stand up for my culture and actually defend the basic human rights that say you don't have to piss in a cup to be accepted you just have to pass an interview. "Think about this equation of words for a minute. Do you think that a person that is legitimately in need of money can afford these "drugs" you are referring to because the market is out the roof for the drug world right now with oil prices going down." --See it all the time, used to know tons of people that were on welfare so they could use money to get drugs. From experience it was 9/10 of the people on welfare did drugs, which ranged from meth to weed. Though given the population it is probably about 3/10 in rough respect. A lot of the people I've seen on welfare have low paying jobs for the sole purpose of keeping welfare. "This sounds like an act of communism to me. Shun those less fortunate and give the money to people that need it temporarily. Those are the people that are going to take it for granted man, not your average pothead. I just don't like your ideas on pulling EVEN MORE from the already dirt poor and giving it to "more" fortunate individuals. Defeats the whole purpose." --Simple really, don't do drugs you can get on welfare...do drugs and welfare is exempted. Many people have to take a drug test to get work, the money they make gets taxed for programs like welfare why not give the same stipulations? It isn't shunning the less fortunate, it is putting requirements on something that is too easy to recieve. That and I never said the money would go to the more fortunate, I said recycle it back into the program giving people already on the program more benefits. I smoke weed as well on occasion, but I have a job that is loose with their drug testing so I have more leniency than most people do. However I think it is fair considering if you are on welfare you won't do drugs at risk of not getting a job, correct? OooooO I love this. Finally found an intelligent person who wants to discuss something. BOUT TIME. I believe that if your on welfare you probably have made all the sacrifices you can already. I don't disagree with your point here at all. All i'm trying to say is that the only form of discrimination allowed in the workplace anymore is that against drug users seeing as how they are screened and harassed. I used to be completely clean about 3 years ago from EVERYTHING and my mom started piss testing me in fear that I was doing something "wrong". I passed all 7 of her random tests and I just felt like screaming "YOU ****IN SEE NOW, YOU HAVE IT ON A STRIP SO THERE'S YOUR HARD EVIDENCE", It was soooo degrading for me to do that, even now if I were completely clean I would hate to take a urine test. They ask you to pee in a cup to see if your "prestigious" enough to work at their bloodthirsty and money hungry place of operation. Equal rights, if your not going to alcohol test you can't drug test. Completely bogus. I for one have decided not to drink but do you see me reaping any substantial benefits, other than my liver lasting a little longer. No. You can't accept one thing that messes you up then turn around and say no to something else that messes you up. Some justice would be nice in this situation. I have petitioned this and got 1016 signatures stating that it was an invasion of human rights, general privacy, and if nothing else, The Pursuit of Happiness. It seems to me like an elementary and rudimentary system that is harbored by our state laws and individual companies. Regarding your mom: After somebody has been using, it takes time to earn the trust again. She probably did it because she cares about you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
another solution is to have jobs that are just handed out such as.... cleaning the parks, doing the landscaping , picking up trash from freeways, serving homeless people food and cooking it for them and doing the dishes, helping out the elderly, i think foodstamps should be earned in such a way rather than just handed out...perhaps the state have a big farm where the food for prisioners are grown and people could work off the food stamps... in no way am i downing people on food stamps i had them once for 6 months as welfare i did also for 2 months . i certainally would of rather earned my foodstamps rather than to be handed to me... i guess thats why i had a job 1 week later after applying and a promotion 2 months after that...i once got food from a church when i was out of food... i asked them if i could do something like work there for a day or 2 to give back... answer was no, talk about self esteem issue that gave me... not being able to earn the food....... I used to work for the county and you are required by the state to work or volunteer at least 35 hours of your time to get welfare...........I know thats how it works in California..............for you to get welfare you either have to be looking for a job which they verify or you have to be going to school at least 30 hours a week to receive any type of support..............so people lets get with the times welfare isnt what it used to be and it hasnt been that way for the past 10years............this is what California has been doing i dont know about other states...... In Missouri, you have be looking for work or receiving job training to receive welfare (unless disabled). And there is a time limit. You are right Winx even in Cali you only have 5 years so I wish people would get a grip and complain about something legitimate............. 
|
|
|
|
|
