Because you go for the low hanging fruit first...fix the easy stuff first. You have to start somewhere...if you sit around and wait for 100% solution you will never get anything done.
Because you go for the low hanging fruit first...fix the easy stuff first. You have to start somewhere...if you sit around and wait for 100% solution you will never get anything done.
While forming your opinion, just remember that this test does not indicate if drugs were abused. Simply if drugs were taken. And the tests are not very good about doing that, honestly (due to how quickly some drugs are metabolized from one's system).
Edit to add: The vast majority of drug users are those with depression, bipolar, or other personality disorders who have picked up using these drugs rather than legitimate mood stabilizers. If you truly want to get the junkies out of the system, you need to invest some money into the diagnosis and treatment of their mental health condition. I know spending more money on these kinds of things isn't the popular opinion around here, but if Big Government is flexing its muscles making it's subjects pee in a cup, it can use that muscle to help some people as well.
I would argue that THESE are the wisest words posted in this thread.
I too am on the Gov. dole, as an ODOT employed individual its your tax dollars paying my salary. When I started 20 years ago, drug testing was not part of policy but it is today as well as random testing. Also If I'm in any accident in a state owned vehicle, I automatically get to give a blood sample that same day. Is this wrong? Is this prying into my personal life of shorting some blow while I'm at home and not at work? No, its not. Its a tool to help insure "quality professionals" are being paid by the tax paying citizens of OK. I chose to work here and those are the terms of my employment. If I wanted to quit and hang out my shingle and become self employed so I could smoke a bowl at home (or on the job for that matter), thats my choice.
I choose to not do drugs and keep my current job and I have absolutely no problem with the same policy being applied to any individual receiving tax dollars be it for employment or assistance while your ass gets out and beats the bushes for work rather than sitting on the couch getting high everyday at my expense.
Just a quick synopsis from my point of view with all this madness
Government is a necessary evil that is supposed to ensure that no man gets trampled while also ensuring that competition be allowed to act.
Private business is all about dog eat dog in order to get the money because money is power; all is fare unless limited by Gov't to prevent the small guy from being trampled.
Problem: Private business is Gov't these days.
Now; how does this effect the given topic of "gov't" money going into hand outs? By this:
Its no problem when private business takes risks and doesn't prove to be a sturdy business model because big brother will always be there to provide Tarp, bailouts, low interest large sum guaranteed loans, etc.
When it comes to citizens not in private business, it is a problem to provide those who can't provide for themselves adequately with ends meat the support they need. Now this is regardless of whether they prove to be a citizen who is down on their luck and hardworking or a citizen who lives off of this support.
In both cases, I think a "drug test" should be administered to determine the worthiness of businesses and citizens to receive Gov't aid in one form or another. Giving money to the leaches that live off of gov't aid is no different than the 800 billion bailout that went to corrupt banks or the 500 million guaranteed loan that when to the solar company that was already in the red and went on to file bankruptcy. Yet I hardly see politicians or citizens bickering about that even though the amount of money "lost" on all of that far exceeds gov't aid to citizens.
Government is a necessary evil that is supposed to ensure that no man gets trampled while also ensuring that competition be allowed to act.
Private business is all about dog eat dog in order to get the money because money is power; all is fare unless limited by Gov't to prevent the small guy from being trampled.
Problem: Private business is Gov't these days.
Now; how does this effect the given topic of "gov't" money going into hand outs? By this:
Its no problem when private business takes risks and doesn't prove to be a sturdy business model because big brother will always be there to provide Tarp, bailouts, low interest large sum guaranteed loans, etc.
When it comes to citizens not in private business, it is a problem to provide those who can't provide for themselves adequately with ends meat the support they need. Now this is regardless of whether they prove to be a citizen who is down on their luck and hardworking or a citizen who lives off of this support.
In both cases, I think a "drug test" should be administered to determine the worthiness of businesses and citizens to receive Gov't aid in one form or another. Giving money to the leaches that live off of gov't aid is no different than the 800 billion bailout that went to corrupt banks or the 500 million guaranteed loan that when to the solar company that was already in the red and went on to file bankruptcy. Yet I hardly see politicians or citizens bickering about that even though the amount of money "lost" on all of that far exceeds gov't aid to citizens.
So rather than putting in deterrents we should cut these people off completely? Don't get me wrong I am opposed to net refund gains and lazy people who game the system. While I agree that it is a PR stunt, I also believe we should start implementing systems to retrain and change the "assistance" mindset for the non working class. The Tax system and social security should be next on the chopping block.
If I have to submit to a drug test to earn money to survive, then a government money recipient should do the same. After all, isnt' it only "fair"?
Do you really believe that leeches can be identified by a simple drug test? I'm sure the coefficient of correlation would show some relationship, but you do realize these things can be quite independent of each other. Correlation != causation.
Also, LAWL at thinking that "worthiness" is needed to receive government assistance.
In all honesty, I would prefer that to drug testing or some poor mirage of a retraining/education program. I will back pedal some
to say that a retraining program could work, but I don't believe the government could pull it off successfully. I surmise it would end up with lazy people going to school and on welfare, with no real desire to contribute once retrained.This is a poor argument. I am still amazed people think they must subject themselves to such testing. You are free not to subject yourself to such employment and testing, just as someone in need is free to not apply for welfare. You can apply for other jobs if you so wished. Even many state jobs do not require drug testing. Faculty and Staff at OU do not, for starters.
welfare should be back on comodites & it should be marked as such & be so bad they could not sell it
I put "drug tests" in quotes to imply any test that may supply indicators of worthiness whether it be illicit drug use, employment history, etc; its no different then a private business conducting a background check, drug test, employment history, etc... And thats the problem this day in time - Apathetic people who don't understand concepts of statistics and therefore automatically shut down at the idea of any screening. If gov't and therefore a nation is going to succeed, they can't hemorrhage money and expect to avoid 2008 and 1929 and all.
Similar threads
