Georgia : Drug Test for Unemployment , Welfare Recipients coming soon

Why is it that the people who need help the most , have to jump through the most
hoops. Before these people were on UI they had jobs , with no Drug Testing involved.

According to these Reps in the Vid, the reason people are out of work has to be
because they are too drugged out to work, not that fact that Unemployment is
running between 17 and 18%.

Personal Thought : Even if the very Few who are using drugs are cut off , they are
not going to stop, the money for the drug use will have to be met, so be prepared
for a further increase in Crime.

Thoughts?

I honestly think this is a wonderful idea and should be mandatory for EVERYONE getting any type of government assistance. All of us who spend week in and week out working hard and paying taxes should know that those people who our tax dollars are being spent on are not out buying illegal drugs when they should be buying food or paying billings with OUR tax dollars.

Why is it that the people who need help the most , have to jump through the most hoops. Before these people were on UI they had jobs , with no Drug Testing involved.

I know, that's a good question. It's the same way with the jobs. The lower the pay the more crap you gotta deal with.

Personal Thought : Even if the very Few who are using drugs are cut off , they are not going to stop, the money for the drug use will have to be met, so be prepared for a further increase in Crime.

Pretty much. Most of the people on UI aren't druggies, why are Americans letting these moronic politicians create and pass laws like this! It's heart breaking, it really is.

reply to post by Sean48

It's going to be all too easy to use a test that gives lots of false positives to kick people off benefits.

Then, as you rightly pointed out, people will have to live in a more dangerous state, because starving people will obtain money/food food any way they can.

We're all addicts, when it comes to food. Remove a desperate family's safety new and you're in trouble.

Oh come on now!
First off unemployment is insurance that the ex employer pays into, not you!

You know more money goes to alcohol abuse.
They do not test for drunks, yet the money is still "pissed" away.
Add testing for both, and you would have some fairness.

However everyone needing any type of govt. assistance including alcoholics should just quit their addiction, or they will be screwed harder.
Since everyone can get govt. med. assistance later in life, why don't we just drug test everyone in the nation at least once a week.

A better solution, that almost every company in america uses, is to require recepits as proof of legal purchase with the govt. money.

This way if John's friends with jobs come over to get him drunk and high, he can still feed the family and live with some dignity.

Control,
Everyone wants some!

[edit on 20-3-2010 by SLaPPiE]

I guess the guys caught out are expected to become respectable citizens once they miss the rent checks and are out on the street?

Hasn't the War on Drugs already criminalized enough people in society? In areas like Detroit...there just aren't enough jobs to go round. There are already systems in place (rightly or wrongly) to encourage the bone-idle back to work. Allowing a policy of drug-testing will only criminalize more people, increase poverty, put more people on the streets and generate crime.

A minority of the unemployed don't want to work...this BS would throw a net over the majority that do.

These a**holes need to get busy generating the economy and increasing jobs. Abdicating their responsibilities and blaming the unemployed for not working is standard deflection and scapegoating.

Well I'm against any sort of stateor federal funded "welfare".

EI is another story, that's fine, I think we should be giving people more EI.

However, welfare? Without a debilitating condition there are far too many people to take advantage of this and have the tax payer foot the bill for their choice of lazzy lifestyle.

Good on you Georgia, test them and those that break the rules and who are using tax payer money to fund a drug habit will get thrown out.

Those who don't d othat, have nothing to worry about.

~Keeper

to be honest with you my personal opinion is that this will undoubtably create the false impression on the masses that 'obviously' using illegal substances must CREATE an inability to work, or somehow get you unemployed, this is farther from the truth than you'd like to beleive, lots of people use drugs recreationally and medicinally and hold down great jobs, from dish washing jobs, to working hospitals as nurse practitioners and doctors

i doubt there is an intentional 'conspiracy' to create this illusion that drugs inevitably make work impossible and are somehow always connected with unemployment, but it is a by product that the masses will start to assume

either way it's good motivation for those that do better without drugs

reply to post by Sean48


My thoughts?

Let's drug test the WELFARE recipients.
Now we will see the numbers drop!

Unemployment shouldn't need drug testing.

Allready being discused here....www.abovetopsecret.com...

but I made the mistake of putting it in the drug form so it got ignored.

You know if you ever had been convicted of selling drugs you are not eligible for food stamps. I'm sure they mean well but it wont solve anything. It will likely cost more to administer the drug tests than the amount they save after kicking some people off the 'payroll'. Like drug testing in the job market, those with a little bit of wits that don't want to quit will find a way to pass their tests.

Originally posted by indigothefish
to be honest with you my personal opinion is that this will undoubtably create the false impression on the masses that 'obviously' using illegal substances must CREATE an inability to work, or somehow get you unemployed, this is farther from the truth than you'd like to beleive, lots of people use drugs recreationally and medicinally and hold down great jobs, from dish washing jobs, to working hospitals as nurse practitioners and doctors

Your absolutely right. Anyone that has ever held a job knew of fellow employees that did some type of recreational drugs. Whether it be illegal drugs or misuse of prescription drugs. Heck, even Rush Limbaugh was using prescription drugs illegally and he was gainfully employed.

Frankly, this seems to be nothing more than lawmakers acting out on stereotypes. I wouldn't be surprised to see a religion test requirement soon. With lawmakers claiming that people of religion are somehow more honest and less likely to file fake claims.

I wonder how much money the state loses to substandard building and fake cost overruns by contractors covering the expense of their drug use.

Originally posted by tothetenthpower

Those who don't d othat, have nothing to worry about.

~Keeper

You are not correct here. Everyone should worry. These tests are far from 100% accurate. What about the false positives and false adulterations that occur? I, personally, am a VICTIM of this. I do not use drugs and alcohol but, guess what... I got FIRED from a job I had had for 18 years because the test WAS WRONG - ruining my reputation at the time. I have since been vindicated - financially, reputation-wise, and I got my job back with all pension, backpay with interest, etc.. restored, BUT I had the resources available to me to put up the FIGHT. Do these people have the resources????? I somehow doubt it.

I used to think like you do until I was proved wrong. I am totally against any kind of drug or alcohol testing unless they use hair folicle testing which is way more accurate (still not 100%) - which they won't because it's too expensive - it's cheaper to use the bogus urine test and then deal with the people that fail these tests on an exception basis - those that fight it and those that can't - and it IS the government we're talking about.



[edit on 20/3/2010 by Iamonlyhuman]

reply to post by Iamonlyhuman


Understandable.

However I wonder what the stats are on the actual ammount of false tests that come back positive?

I'm sure it's probably about 10% or so, which is good when you consider all the errors in human handling.

I am more worried about tax payer money going to lazy slops then the hard working american who lost his job cause it's cheaper to produce the product in India. Which is why I would support this, but not drug testing of people on EI.

I definetly see where you are coming from. I don't drug test any of my employees, what they do on their own time is their business not mine.

As long as I don't see it effect their performance, I don't care.

~Keeper

[edit on 3/20/2010 by tothetenthpower]

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman

 

Understandable.

However I wonder what the stats are on the actual ammount of false tests that come back positive?

Lol, there are no stats on those for obvious reasons... just government audits of the labs they use.

I'm sure it's probably about 10% or so, which is good when you consider all the errors in human handling.

Until you're one of the 10%... then that percentage is horrible. AND, considering the human implications of it... being labeled a drug user while trying to get a job isn't good at all ESPECIALLY if you aren't one.

I am more worried about tax payer money going to lazy slops then the hard working american who lost his job cause it's cheaper to produce the product in India. Which is why I would support this, but not drug testing of people on EI.

I definetly see where you are coming from. I don't drug test any of my employees, what they do on their own time is their business not mine.

As long as I don't see it effect their performance, I don't care

EI is only given to those who are let go from their jobs through no fault of their own... meaning performance wasn't an issue. There is absolutely no reason to drug test these individuals.

Oh, and kudos about not testing your employees, actually it's a good business decision seeing that it can be VERY expensive when someone sues you for a false positive or false adulteration - in my case the defendants, the nameless company and the federal government, both were large enough to absorb the cost to them for their actions against me - in the case of a smaller company, it could have put them out of business.



[edit on 20/3/2010 by Iamonlyhuman]

I don't really see the point to drug test for unemployment. When you DO have a job your employer pays into this fund, not you. When you lose your job your given a certain amount of time to recieve the benefits and to find other work. If your FIRED, that is where the issue comes in. Employers don't want to just give up that money THEY paid in. So I think thats where the drug test is coming in....but I am ALL IN FAVOR of a drug test for welfare....unemployment can't really be abused, since their is a time limit AND your employer has to agree to the benefit, welfare on the other hand, for many...its a disgrace

So now our corrupt politicians want to scapegoat people in society allready struggling.Theres always going to be people who abuse the system.The idea will just create more misery i.m.o.

reply to post by Iamonlyhuman



Like I said, I DO NOT support EI drug testing.

As far as the other stuff goes, I agree that if in that situation, it would be very horrible and I would probably feel exactly the way you do.

EI is a little different in Canada, you can get it for various reasons.

~Keeper

Originally posted by Sean48


Why is it that the people who need help the most , have to jump through the most
hoops. Before these people were on UI they had jobs , with no Drug Testing involved.

According to these Reps in the Vid, the reason people are out of work has to be
because they are too drugged out to work, not that fact that Unemployment is
running between 17 and 18%.

Personal Thought : Even if the very Few who are using drugs are cut off , they are
not going to stop, the money for the drug use will have to be met, so be prepared
for a further increase in Crime.

Thoughts?

So if it was your way they would be able to use drug AND be on welfare?

reply to post by tothetenthpower

I definitely see where you are coming from. I don't drug test any of my employees, what they do on their own time is their business not mine.

Good on you Georgia, test them and those that break the rules and who are using tax payer money to fund a drug habit will get thrown out.

It might not seem so to you, but from where I'm looking this seems a bit hypocritical? If you don't have a problem with drug use, why so keen to penalise one section of society for it? If you do have a problem, why turn a blind eye to one section of society?

If it's a case of the unemployed doing something for pleasure whilst not working...where do we draw the line? Are they allowed to do drugs at night? Not allowed TV?

I'm not criticising you, just attempting to point out that these policies are far from straightforward and are borne of our perceptions of fairness. Penalising our perceived 'villains'...the lazy welfare cheat getting high on tax dollars...will appeal to some people. For the majority of the unemployed, they'll be forced to comply with more political expediency and scapegoating. Unfortunately IMO it'll take another increment of freedom from ALL of us.