It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

No Savings Are Found From Welfare Drug Tests

page: 7
49
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 10:52 PM
link   
So you are saying they should take any job?
Even sub standard with a very low wage.
That will not give the enough money to live on.
So they end up homeless and end up losing the job.
How low do you want these people to go?
The government has the money to pay out.
It’s on your tax. And don’t think that when you will
pay less tax When you kill off these people.
Its called slavery!
Send the illegal’s home and make more jobs.
And in this so called modern times you should not have to work.
Stop spending on making wars.
And turn it to making a better country.




posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Signals
Solution = random testing. That way, recipients won't go crazy after the initial test.

After OB took away requirements for looking for work, we are a total welfare state now....


Why? Why does someone accepting a program that we offer them also have to forfeit their right to privacy?

Isn't it obvious that drug testing is an invasion of your privacy? Do you not feel humiliated when you are asked to provide a urine specimen?

As an employer I generally see it as an invasion of my employees privacy, and have removed drug testing from any place I have been the chief executive of. My current position is not as chief, but I was still able to convince that the return on investment was not worthwhile (as the numbers show it isn't for the work we do).

Not that I particularly like the stereotype of the brain dead pothead. But a good behavioral interview usually weeds that out. And if not, job performance is all I care about. People obviously intoxicated (based on the good judgement of 2 supervisors) may be asked to submit to a drug/alcohol screening to determine if they are under the influence (as best as available science will allow) at work. I use drug testing as a recourse, not a blanket.

I think it is immoral to do otherwise. I am curious why others do not see the invasion of privacy in being asked to provide a cup of urine to a stranger.



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 11:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddha
So you are saying they should take any job?
Even sub standard with a very low wage.
That will not give the enough money to live on.
So they end up homeless and end up losing the job.
How low do you want these people to go?
The government has the money to pay out.
It’s on your tax. And don’t think that when you will
pay less tax When you kill off these people.
Its called slavery!
Send the illegal’s home and make more jobs.
And in this so called modern times you should not have to work.
Stop spending on making wars.
And turn it to making a better country.


I ran a call center. In my town I have had about 15% of the population work for me at one point or another. When my call center closed, I accepted a job paying a little under half what I was making prior, working as an entry level customer service rep at a payday loan store. My boss had been an employee working 2 levels under me for the prior 8 years. I worked crappy hours, did the crappy tasks (like having to put fliers on cars in parking lots in "marketing" efforts), and got paid what many here would call starvation wages.

If you believe you are responsible for your own destiny, there is no other option.



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 11:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by DocHolidaze
reply to post by RealSpoke
 


its sad you cant admit when your wrong, but in stead try and side step the issue, the test didnt work because people are smarter than is given credit. not because 98 percent of welfare reciepents are drug free.
It’s a lost cause my friend.



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 11:17 PM
link   
reply to post by RealSpoke
 


well it keeps those who hate all welfare receivers and think they all take drugs and spend it on drugs and have massive plasma's and a better standard of living than them happy.

it's just a pity it costs tax payers more because other people are disillusioned about welfare claimants because they heard a news report about a couple of cheats.
edit on 14-8-2012 by lifeform11 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 11:33 PM
link   
reply to post by lifeform11
 


Well, let me tell you...I have a friend....my best friend, actually.

He is a cook for Sonic Drive In. It is a burger hop kind of place. He makes like 9 bucks an hour, and works about 30 hrs a week. In his room he has a 50" LCD, 2 laptops, an xbox (that he plays on xbox live with), about 100 games, 10 or 12 hard drives (that he puts movies on)...he has all sorts of cool toys.

He is on no public assisstance.

He is just smart, he barters well, finds bargains, saves his money...all the things I don't do because I make so much more than him. I used to be that way, and can shift into that condition relatively quickly. But there is a savvy to being broke all the time that allows you to survive and actually enjoy lots of the better things in life. I mean, a 50" tv is still had for under a grand, unless you just don't bother looking around. I got one once for free, and then paid 200 bucks to have some circuit components repaired. I eventually gave it to my sister, and she is having the same repair done tomorrow. Same cost. It seems to last about 5 years before going out....not a bad deal at all.



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 11:45 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


there are so many different things to account for before comparing him to everyone else.

how much rent does he pay? how many people does he need to look after? is he in debt? etc etc.

everybodies situation is different. but good for him that he can makes ends meet and is sensible.

it sounds to me running a one day course on how to manage money along with help to manage finances so that there is no need to claim assistance if your working would be more productive than drug testing everybody.



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by lifeform11
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


there are so many different things to account for before comparing him to everyone else.

how much rent does he pay? how many people does he need to look after? is he in debt? etc etc.

everybodies situation is different. but good for him that he can makes ends meet and is sensible.

it sounds to me running a one day course on how to manage money along with help to manage finances so that there is no need to claim assistance if your working would be more productive than drug testing everybody.




LIke i said, he is smart. He knows he would be a terrible father, and couldn't really afford to give a kid the life he would want. So he has no children. He actually admits he would, until recently, be a horrible husband too. He is just now about to settle down. We were once alike, but our paths diverged a long time ago. But we have been through so much together that I keep our distant relationship with visits 3 or 4 times a year (between business and leisure).

Regardless, circumstances may not be the same today...buteveryone has the chance to make better decisions along the way. More mouths to feed when you can't afford it is one such decision.



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by RealSpoke
reply to post by DocHolidaze
 


Passing a drug test is actually quite difficult.......I know there is all these myths about all the different ways you can cheat the system but it isn't really true.

Regardless, it didn't work, and was a huge waste of money and did not affect the welfare applicant rate.


Those myths are true - I see my delinquent son passes his every time when directed by his 'case worker'. He even smoked the night before being tested...



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Signals
 



After OB took away requirements for looking for work, we are a total welfare state now....


He didn't take away any requirements. He gave more powers to the states to run their welfare program. You are buying into right right propaganda.

www.washingtonpost.com... html



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 12:43 AM
link   
Wait a minute though, think of the pandora's box being opened here.

Our economy is screwed and welfare is like the biggest income source around these days.
And if you start cutting everyone off arbitrarily before the economy is fixed, especially drug abusers, what do you think will happen?

It will create a whole new class of thieves/criminals.

What will these people who have nothing to lose do when they need food?
They will steal it.

Do our prisons really need to be full of people who stole food?
Aren't they ultra-overcrowded already?

Sorry but I am afraid no one is thinking ahead, our govt seems too amazingly inept and idiotic these days.

Meanwhile, the corporate big wigs are counting their free millions and laughing it up on their yachts while sipping their expensive drinks.
edit on 15-8-2012 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 12:49 AM
link   
Also I find it highly disturbing that people are worried more about welfare than they are about the criminal syndicate that is gutting our economy piece by piece.

No one dares stand up to our overlords and demand a fair system, or demand that international trade treaties be rescinded (which are the ultimate cause of our economy collapse).

But everyone sure has all the time in the world to chase after some petty druggy to build their false confidence about themselves or whatever illogical reasons they have.

We need to prioritize our problems in this world, and I am sorry but cutting off druggies and turning them into outright thieves or even possibly violent criminals over food access is NOT a priority.

My priority is PREVENTING crime, not facilitating and inducing it through horrific policy which is the staple in this sick and twisted world.

If you wanna-be heroes want to actually fix something in this nation - take action against the government.
Not the people, that is absurd.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 12:56 AM
link   
Also ask yourselves, let's be logical here, ask yourself :

Why do people do drugs? In particular the poorer people?

Oh yeah, because their lives suck. It's exactly like the guys at the bar every night. It's because their lives suck and drinking or doing drugs seems to improve their worthless life a tiny bit.

I don't think they should be denied that small bit of satisfaction before they die their meaningless pitiful deaths.

Hell, we need to end this fallacious "War on Drugs" because it is destroying the very fabric of this nation in all of the wrong ways.

What happened to the claims of "rehabilitation"? Seems to me people are foaming at the mouth with desire for punishment and misery.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 01:00 AM
link   
If the govt actually cared about "HELPING" us, they would take those 2% who failed the drug test and offer them therapy or counselling or whatever it takes to help them kick their addictions.

But nope, they are now forced to go to the street for money illicitly now, and most will probably become thieves or drug dealers or prostitutes or whatever as a result of their hardships in order to make ends meet.

But that would be common sense.
Something this govt certainly doesn't have, nor the majority of the populace for that matter.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 01:22 AM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


Of course they know this is what will happen. But hey we got to make sure those guaranteed occupancy rates we gave the private prisons stays up don't we?



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 02:00 AM
link   
Proof enough that Big Govt doesn't fix problems? Big Govt welfare doesn't fix problems and Big Govt drug testing doesn't fix it either.
But maybe the drug testing forces a few people to go straight for a few days.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 03:06 AM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 



If the govt actually cared about "HELPING" us, they would take those 2% who failed the drug test and offer them therapy or counselling or whatever it takes to help them kick their addictions.

Cannabis is not addictive. The 2% probably have a healthier drug habit than the 98%.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 



But maybe the drug testing forces a few people to go straight for a few days.

More likely it will encourage people into harder drugs, traces of which remain in the body for a far shorter time frame.
edit on 15-8-2012 by DrinkYourDrug because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 05:24 AM
link   
If i was told I had to take a drug test I would make sure I passed. I dont do drugs but I must say it isnt hard to see why the results may be skewed



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 06:16 AM
link   
reply to post by DrinkYourDrug
 


I agree. A 30 day cleanse period is needed to be "clean" for pot. Where as Opiates its 5 days, Cocaine 3 days.... Drugtesting in this manner really seems geared towards marijuana users.... Which, lets face it, are probably the most tame drug users.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 06:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

So just because some of your tax dollars are going to them, you think it gives you the right to look into their private lives and make decisions based on your own morality?


I dont want any possibility my hard earned money is going to drugs. Again, why is it so much to ask that if you get free money, you have to submit to a drug test? I really dont understand why you're so against it. It makes no sense.



new topics

top topics



 
49
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join