Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am Posts: 8662 Location: IL
Forwards.... I hate 'em. Well, most of 'em.
Anyway, What do you guys think of this one?
------------------------------------------------------------------- THE JOB - URINE TEST (I sure would like to know who wrote this one! They deserve a HUGE pat on the back!)
I HAVE TO PASS A URINE TEST FOR MY JOB... SO I AGREE 100%
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? Pass this along if you agree or simply delete if you don't. Hope you all will pass it along, though . . . Something has to change in this country -- and soon! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think some of these are worth discussion and others just piss me off and make me want to reply like a complete asshole. Anyway, I thought maybe we could use this thread for discussing some of these. Quite often I wonder what someone more intelligent than myself has to say about the topic, and this seems like a good place for it. Also, with many of these being political (especially in the months to come) I figured I'd start this up in N&D. Pluse, like I said, I'm looking for intelligence, not GD.
"And what do you think will happen when all these tens of thousands of poor unemployed drug addicts stop getting the money they need to feed their addictions?"
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:20 am Posts: 5198 Location: Connecticut Gender: Male
I have a split opinion on this. On one hand, I really don't agree with random drug testing, or any drug testing. What I do after work is my business, not my employer's. My body is mine and I won't take a job that requires me to be tested randomly, even if I know I can pass (which as of now I would). Then again, if you're told up front that you will be getting them and you agree to it, then you can not complain.
As for requiring a drug screen to receive social services, I see your point. Maybe if people were told they needed to pass a drug test before qualifying for welfare there would be either less people on drugs, or less people on welfare. Or maybe a requirement of welfare services would be to pass a drug test within 30 days acceptance into whatever program.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 4:01 am Posts: 19477 Location: Brooklyn NY
how many people on Welfare are addicted to hard drugs
_________________
LittleWing sometime in July 2007 wrote:
Unfortunately, it's so elementary, and the big time investors behind the drive in the stock market aren't so stupid. This isn't the false economy of 2000.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:47 am Posts: 46000 Location: Reasonville
Sandler wrote:
I really don't agree with random drug testing, or any drug testing.
_________________ No matter how dark the storm gets overhead They say someone's watching from the calm at the edge What about us when we're down here in it? We gotta watch our backs
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:19 pm Posts: 39068 Location: Chapel Hill, NC, USA Gender: Male
Sober people waste money too.
_________________ "Though some may think there should be a separation between art/music and politics, it should be reinforced that art can be a form of nonviolent protest." - e.v.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 4:01 am Posts: 19477 Location: Brooklyn NY
B wrote:
Sober people waste money too.
usually on legal pharmaceuticals
_________________
LittleWing sometime in July 2007 wrote:
Unfortunately, it's so elementary, and the big time investors behind the drive in the stock market aren't so stupid. This isn't the false economy of 2000.
when i was in college i had to take a drug test to work at Hills department store, (think kmart if you dont know what a Hills is) and the company i work for now is one of the biggest in educating nurses about cancer and they have no drug policy
as im sure most are aware, i would have no problem taking a drug test. i also totally understand the other stance that people are against drug tests since they may be partaking off hours. but from a company perspective, it is wise to require a drug test due to liability issues that may occur. while i have no cold hard facts to back this up, i would imagine alot of manual labor jobs would require a drug test more than "office" jobs due to the fact that a screw up can hurt more than just you (think throwing a pencil into the ceiling and it not sticking so it goes through your eye vs running a crane that you lose control of and take out a dozen or so people)
if you can hold your stance against not taking a job cause of random drug tests more power to you
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am Posts: 8662 Location: IL
I think you are dead-on about the reasons for drug testing. As a teacher I have not been drug tested once in 8 years of work (at three different schools and two different states). My buddies that work factory jobs always have to take a drug test for their job. Another friend who works in the medical field, no drug test.
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 8:52 pm Posts: 2647 Location: Where gila monsters meet you at the airport
There's a willful ignorance from those who resent welfare and use any excuse (this is better articulated than most) to disparage it about it's usefulness.
It's not as if anyone is living a quality life on welfare, certainly they're not getting so much money in that it's funding a huge drug habit. And the Clinton-backed welfare reform of the '90s did a great deal to curb abuses of a system that was being misused at the time ... I find it really sad that 10 years later, the system is still such an easy target for hatred.
But philosophically, there's just a disconnect with those who hate welfare. Even if there are still a few stragglers on the welfare roles who could be working but are collecting welfare instead it is now (and probably always was) a tiny minority. So, what's going to happen if you cut off the welfare check that keeps them able to eat and have a roof over their head and heat during the winter? They'll be homeless. And hungry.
I personally think it's shameful how easily we tolerate this society that's so self-centered that it ignores a huge portion of people who lack the most basic necessities. But even putting that argument aside, can't even the most self-centered, uncaring person grasp that it's much easier to pay a few pennies of taxes to welfare programs than to get mugged or burglarized by a person driven to desperation?
I find most emails like this incredibly disingenuous. The premise that leads, that the writer has no problem working and paying taxes and supporting welfare is total BS.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 4:43 pm Posts: 7633 Location: Philly Del Fia Gender: Female
mray10 wrote:
There's a willful ignorance from those who resent welfare and use any excuse (this is better articulated than most) to disparage it about it's usefulness.
It's not as if anyone is living a quality life on welfare, certainly they're not getting so much money in that it's funding a huge drug habit. And the Clinton-backed welfare reform of the '90s did a great deal to curb abuses of a system that was being misused at the time ... I find it really sad that 10 years later, the system is still such an easy target for hatred.
But philosophically, there's just a disconnect with those who hate welfare. Even if there are still a few stragglers on the welfare roles who could be working but are collecting welfare instead it is now (and probably always was) a tiny minority. So, what's going to happen if you cut off the welfare check that keeps them able to eat and have a roof over their head and heat during the winter? They'll be homeless. And hungry.
I personally think it's shameful how easily we tolerate this society that's so self-centered that it ignores a huge portion of people who lack the most basic necessities. But even putting that argument aside, can't even the most self-centered, uncaring person grasp that it's much easier to pay a few pennies of taxes to welfare programs than to get mugged or burglarized by a person driven to desperation?
I find most emails like this incredibly disingenuous. The premise that leads, that the writer has no problem working and paying taxes and supporting welfare is total BS.
I agree, especially with this last point. These emails are usually started by some random un-educated weirdo who has a random half-thought one day and *thinks* it's profound. Then they send it to 100 people, and 25 or so other uneducated people read it, accept it without thinking beyond the words printed on their screen, and THEY pass it on to 100 people. After that a few times, it'll pic up some other stuff. . . maybe someone will try to give it weight by claiming someone famous or ACTUALLY smart (or Andy Rooney tee hee) thought of it and they'll send it to 100 people. . . you catch my drifties.
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 8:52 pm Posts: 2647 Location: Where gila monsters meet you at the airport
NaiveAndTrue wrote:
mray10 wrote:
There's a willful ignorance from those who resent welfare and use any excuse (this is better articulated than most) to disparage it about it's usefulness.
It's not as if anyone is living a quality life on welfare, certainly they're not getting so much money in that it's funding a huge drug habit. And the Clinton-backed welfare reform of the '90s did a great deal to curb abuses of a system that was being misused at the time ... I find it really sad that 10 years later, the system is still such an easy target for hatred.
But philosophically, there's just a disconnect with those who hate welfare. Even if there are still a few stragglers on the welfare roles who could be working but are collecting welfare instead it is now (and probably always was) a tiny minority. So, what's going to happen if you cut off the welfare check that keeps them able to eat and have a roof over their head and heat during the winter? They'll be homeless. And hungry.
I personally think it's shameful how easily we tolerate this society that's so self-centered that it ignores a huge portion of people who lack the most basic necessities. But even putting that argument aside, can't even the most self-centered, uncaring person grasp that it's much easier to pay a few pennies of taxes to welfare programs than to get mugged or burglarized by a person driven to desperation?
I find most emails like this incredibly disingenuous. The premise that leads, that the writer has no problem working and paying taxes and supporting welfare is total BS.
I agree, especially with this last point. These emails are usually started by some random un-educated weirdo who has a random half-thought one day and *thinks* it's profound. Then they send it to 100 people, and 25 or so other uneducated people read it, accept it without thinking beyond the words printed on their screen, and THEY pass it on to 100 people. After that a few times, it'll pic up some other stuff. . . maybe someone will try to give it weight by claiming someone famous or ACTUALLY smart (or Andy Rooney tee hee) thought of it and they'll send it to 100 people. . . you catch my drifties.
I'm not even sure it's that. These kinds of emails are similar enough in tone and tenor that I don't much get the impression that it's some bored rant that randomly ends up getting broad play. I think it's being professionally done at some level. It's like viral marketing but political.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 4:43 pm Posts: 7633 Location: Philly Del Fia Gender: Female
Peeps wrote:
people dont live an extrodinary life who get welfare?
i can think of one distinct case where ODB was busted for collecting a check
My brother is trying to get on Welfare. He's sooooo big on himself being a "single dad" that his already over-amped entitlement complex is getting WAY out of control. He already get WIC for Emily.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 10:40 am Posts: 2114 Location: Coventry
I refuse to be told when I can and can't take my coat off, go to the toilet, get a cup of water, etc. Why? Because someone on the dole isn't subjected to such conditions, nor will I be.
_________________ "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them" -Karl Popper
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 11:15 pm Posts: 25452 Location: Under my wing like Sanford & Son Gender: Male
mray10 wrote:
There's a willful ignorance from those who resent welfare and use any excuse (this is better articulated than most) to disparage it about it's usefulness.
It's not as if anyone is living a quality life on welfare, certainly they're not getting so much money in that it's funding a huge drug habit. And the Clinton-backed welfare reform of the '90s did a great deal to curb abuses of a system that was being misused at the time ... I find it really sad that 10 years later, the system is still such an easy target for hatred.
But philosophically, there's just a disconnect with those who hate welfare. Even if there are still a few stragglers on the welfare roles who could be working but are collecting welfare instead it is now (and probably always was) a tiny minority. So, what's going to happen if you cut off the welfare check that keeps them able to eat and have a roof over their head and heat during the winter? They'll be homeless. And hungry.
I personally think it's shameful how easily we tolerate this society that's so self-centered that it ignores a huge portion of people who lack the most basic necessities. But even putting that argument aside, can't even the most self-centered, uncaring person grasp that it's much easier to pay a few pennies of taxes to welfare programs than to get mugged or burglarized by a person driven to desperation?
I find most emails like this incredibly disingenuous. The premise that leads, that the writer has no problem working and paying taxes and supporting welfare is total BS.
Excellent.
_________________ Now that god no longer exists, the desire for another world still remains.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 4:43 pm Posts: 7633 Location: Philly Del Fia Gender: Female
I love taking drugs tests for work. They always send me out somewhere during business hours, it takes FOREVER because I can never pee enough, and I end up getting paid to waste half a day reading magazines and watching daytime TV in the waiting area.
There's a certain irony to the fact that people are reading and posting this email while they're getting paid to work, no?
There's no RM test, yet. At least not a legal one.
I've said it before: if you have to make your point with a forwarded e-mail, you probably don't have one.
_________________ This year's hallway bounty: tampon dipped in ketchup, mouthguard, one sock, severed teddy bear head, pregnancy test, gym bag containing unwashed gym clothes and a half-eaten sandwich
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
He's sooooo big on himself being a "single dad" that his already over-amped entitlement complex is getting WAY out of control. He already get WIC for Emily.
