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.
Take the kids away from her. They will never grow up to have any kind of a decent chance being raised by a "druggie."
Put them in a home where they can grow up to be "clean," decent and law-abiding citizens which will give them a good life they would not have otherwise have had.
Sure, because kids raised by the state end up very well rounded. If the parent is a completely hopeless case, neglecting basic life needs, that is obviously the lesser of the two evils, but an occational user, though not an ideal parent, isn't necassarily going to be a bad parent.
Besides, a child being the ward of the state, puts the cost back on the tax payer, which is where a previous poster had his issues. In his words, the kids are the problems of the mother and the six father, not his problem. Around the holidays it reminds a little bit of this quote
Quote:
If they are going to die then they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population. -Scrooge
Yes drug test them all, kick them off, take their kids. It's time to stop catering to these idiots nobody forces them to take drugs, be strict and maybe a bunch of them will get off.
Should people be required to take drug tests to receive welfare and unemployment benefits?
*Sorry for the typo in the poll question... the last word is welfare. =)
What would be the purpose of a drug test? Would you also test for other things such as sugar? Consumption of soft drinks? Consumption of fast foods? Or is it just the things that YOU don't like?
Good point. An ETG test for alcohol is accurate up to 72 hours, I've passed with about 14 hours.
I have no personal experience for meth but have done a little research on this topic before, meth shows up for a couple days, cocaine can pass your system in an hour unless, you use constantly then is about 24 hours. Opiates including pills and heroin last around 48 hours in your system.
Marijuana is the killer as it can stick around up to 30 days, but if use is infrequent it can also pass in about 24 hours.
If your drug of choice is LSD or Mushrooms, congratulations, there is no test. Unless they want to dig through your stool a day after ingesting mushrooms, or give you a spinal tap to check for acid.
This is exactly why it's absurd to force taxpayers to pay for drug testing. You can be an alcoholic or a meth head & pass, but not if you take a puff off a joint at a party. Ridiculous.
This would cost alot more money to do as well, are you prepared to pay for it with a possible tax increase?
The cost would be more than offset by savings when the stoners and junkies stop getting that monthly check.
Unemployment payments are meant to tide one through while another job is found. It is not meant to provide income while smoking crack instead of finding one.
No way. The Drug War has given the government FAR too much power already.
There's a big difference between unemployment insurance, which is an insurance system paid for by workers and employers, and welfare, which is the catch-all for every non-productive person--whether unlucky or lazy and lacking in work ethic. It's insane for insurance to start eliminating benefits bases on whether the recipient is a paragon of virtue or not. As for welfare, I'm not a big fan at all, but it already costs too much. Let it be very limited in scope and time.
Of course, due to the extreme cost imposed on the taxpayer by someone on welfare having children, I support very strong incentives for sterilization (or provable dependable birth control) of those who cannot support even themselves, since they are truly "abusing the system." After working in government, I know that for every 1 deserving person, there are 1,000 who are just using the system to line their pockets. The abuse is so rampant that I have come to believe that the government should get out of the "charity" business entirely, since it actually WANTS to give away as much taxpayer money as possible. If charity was left to religion and non-profits, abuse would be a fraction of what it is now, and there would be enough money to take care of the truly needed instead of supporting cities worth of scam artists that use their "disadvantaged" background to cash in on the "free money" our representatives are so quick to give away.
Drug screen is actually rather cheap. Take it out of the money that would have gone to their welfare check. How is that for a solution?
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.
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.
Ridiculous.
