![]() |
Urine test
This guy makes a lot of sense!
-S Like a lot of 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 don't 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 ass, 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? |
Yep, this makes a lot of sense, which, unfortunately, is why it will never happen:damn:
|
Quote:
Eloquently and succinctly put. :up: |
I'm sure that someone somewhere would twist it into being a violation of privacy and or Constitutional rights.
|
Ohyoupeoplearejustnastyandevilandfilledwithhateand don'twanttohelpanybodyyoujustwanttobringthemdown!
<pant><pant> Whycan'tyouunderstandthatthesepoorpeoplearevictims andstoptryingtohurtthemwhycan'tyoubenicer!? <pant><pant><pant> Hey, Frame57, is that whiny enough for you? :rotfl: Seriously, as someone who went through a homeless spell and is still in a somewhat tentative position, I have to say I agree completely. In order to get unemployment you have to prove you're looking for work. Private enterprise demands that you meet certain qualifications to do certain kinds of work, but the government that makes these things illegal in the first place is careful not to insult the poor people they're giving it away to? I'm confused...but then that's usually the case. |
Quote:
-S |
Quote:
The state might well save money from some, but the number of homeless and destitute people would sky-rocket as would associated levels of crime and disorder. Unless the state decides to murder anyone with a drug addiction, there's always going to be a problem with this. Alternatively, they could try and remove the black-market source of drugs like heroin etc and have the state supply it to those hopeless addicts, in order to stop them stealing and mugging to feed their addiction. But nothing so compassionate or sensible would pass the lips of a politician, even one appraised of all the facts. Too much like risking their reputation - of course they think ideas like ID cards and such like are great and wasting billions of taxpayers money of failed wars, failed economic handouts, failed billions of aid to countries with perpetual civil war and poverty and famine, failed stock-market bailouts of national financial institutions... the list of stuff that costs more than welfare spending goes on and on and on and on. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Little changes like this are needed to fix what is currently broken. You won't fix it overnight, but we need to move that direction. -S |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:51 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.