U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Should people be required to submit to a drug screen before receiving unemployment benefits or welfa
Yes 118 65.19%
No 63 34.81%
Voters: 181. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-14-2012, 07:25 PM
 
17,022 posts, read 9,128,555 times
Reputation: 5686

Advertisements

Should be required to occupy the White House.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-14-2012, 07:37 PM
 
Location: Bay Area, CA
28,272 posts, read 43,632,783 times
Reputation: 18805
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
Public employees should be tested.
I'm a public employee, and have NEVER been drug tested... I mean, what harm is there in a librarian smoking pot after work? Will it affect my ability to recommend books and catalog according to Dewey the following day?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2012, 07:39 PM
 
Location: Bay Area, CA
28,272 posts, read 43,632,783 times
Reputation: 18805
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
When you're taking money out of my wallet and giving it to someone else I have an interest in how those funds are spent.
Not really. They take money from my wallet to fund the military/wars, police & fire, roads, etc - so does that give me a say in how it's spent? Might be nice, but individual taxpayers don't get to call the shots here. Sorry.

And what about the fact that OTHER taxpayers disagree with your opinion? I strongly oppose this idea, but I guess you think your views are more valid? This is precisely why we don't have a say, because if we did, absolutely nothing would ever be funded... even schools and police departments aren't getting much public support these days, so the results could be devastating to a civilized society.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2012, 07:40 PM
 
17,022 posts, read 9,128,555 times
Reputation: 5686
Quote:
Originally Posted by gizmo980 View Post
I'm a public employee, and have NEVER been drug tested... I mean, what harm is there in a librarian smoking pot after work? Will it affect my ability to recommend books and catalog according to Dewey the following day?

Bus Driver's are Public employees too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2012, 07:56 PM
 
Location: Bay Area, CA
28,272 posts, read 43,632,783 times
Reputation: 18805
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesjuke View Post
Bus Driver's are Public employees too.
And drug testing them actually makes sense... but the post I was quoting didn't qualify WHICH public employees, it just said "public employees should be tested." So that would include us librarians, no? It would also include custodians, receptionists, coroners, human resource specialists, groundskeepers, attorneys, and a whole host of other positions. I think some people don't realize that, and think of the term "public employee" as only including the obvious jobs (like teachers, cops, and politicians).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2012, 08:06 PM
 
17,022 posts, read 9,128,555 times
Reputation: 5686
Yep. all should be included.
The rest of us out here are and since the taxpayers pay your salary..................
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2012, 08:08 PM
 
17,022 posts, read 9,128,555 times
Reputation: 5686
Quote:
Originally Posted by gizmo980 View Post
Not really. They take money from my wallet to fund the military/wars, police & fire, roads, etc - so does that give me a say in how it's spent? Might be nice, but individual taxpayers don't get to call the shots here. Sorry.

And what about the fact that OTHER taxpayers disagree with your opinion? I strongly oppose this idea, but I guess you think your views are more valid? This is precisely why we don't have a say, because if we did, absolutely nothing would ever be funded... even schools and police departments aren't getting much public support these days, so the results could be devastating to a civilized society.



Likely was referring to the part that non tax paying individuals are getting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2012, 08:08 PM
 
37,072 posts, read 38,517,160 times
Reputation: 14846
Quote:
Originally Posted by gizmo980 View Post
Not really. They take money from my wallet to fund the military/wars, police & fire, roads, etc - so does that give me a say in how it's spent? Might be nice, but individual taxpayers don't get to call the shots here. Sorry.
Yes but you or I can voice our opinions and that is why we have representatives in government. I don't know what kind of support there is for this type of legislation publically but I'll have to assume the majority support drug testing. Doing a quick search I'm not coming with any major organizations with a poll.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2012, 08:09 PM
 
37,072 posts, read 38,517,160 times
Reputation: 14846
Quote:
Originally Posted by gizmo980 View Post
And drug testing them actually makes sense... but the post I was quoting didn't qualify WHICH public employees, it just said "public employees should be tested."
All of them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2012, 08:11 PM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
61,078 posts, read 30,991,503 times
Reputation: 13017
Quote:
Originally Posted by gizmo980 View Post
And drug testing them actually makes sense... but the post I was quoting didn't qualify WHICH public employees, it just said "public employees should be tested." So that would include us librarians, no? It would also include custodians, receptionists, coroners, human resource specialists, groundskeepers, attorneys, and a whole host of other positions. I think some people don't realize that, and think of the term "public employee" as only including the obvious jobs (like teachers, cops, and politicians).



What happened to equal treatment of everyone.

Your picking the winners & losers, already.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top