Drugs Testing for Benefits

[Mr Bojangles]

I don't think the issue is the feckless people themselves - we could easily find a way of depriving them of benefits if they are not prepared to try. The problem is their chlidren. How can we punish children, just because their parents are spongers?

I sometimes look at chavvy families and wonder what hope there possibly could be for the kids being raised by moronic, lazy socially inept parents.

 

I really think in some cases that the only way to raise the kids from the cess pit of poor upbringing and no future they are in is to remove them from their families and raise them in the care system. That may be a highly undesirable solution in many ways, but can it be worse than leaving them to be raised by feckless cretins?

[Grandad.Malky]

No it shouldn't be allowed unless this testing is also done on all those already in work or those applying for jobs as its singling out one section of the public without good reason.

 

.

 

In the real world this already happens I had a job where random drug and alcohol tests were made and I applied for a job where the medical involved giving a water sample with the toilet door open so that the nurse could see what you were doing.

 

Should claimants be tested when they sign on ………… sounds like a good idea to me.

[Mummytwo]

Actually, I kind of agree with this. In my opinion it's not that simple though.

Here's two hypothetical examples of people on benefits and what I think should happen:

 

A) Bazza, a man in his 30's who has never had a job, has a big TV he likes to sit and watch all day, has a few cans a day and a few spliffs. He has no intention of ever getting a job and is happy to keep milking the system for as long as he can.

 

YES I think he should be denied benefits! He's a leech on society and probably his family & friends. He will never contribute anything back.

 

B) Jacko, a man in his 30's who lost his job 2 years ago, spends most days looking though the local paper and forums for jobs, goes to the job centre regularly but finds nothing, occasionally goes out and approaches local businesses in person in the hope of finding work. He has every intention of finding work and will contribute to society once again when he is employed. He has sold his big TV. Once a fortnight he treats himself to £10 of booze or maybe cannabis, I don't know which one he partakes in.

 

NO I don't see why he should be penalised for this. I've been out of work before and tried my best to find work again, for months. It can crush your spirit if you don't have something to enjoy once in a while.

 

 

The problem is, a urine test doesn't differentiate between the two. Maybe you should have to have a license to gamble though, with one of the qualifying criteria being employment, before you are granted a license. This should stop people on benefits from living in the bookie's.

 

 

I agree with the OP.

 

Though roots, I don't fit into any of your examples.

[VideoPro]

Are you sure it was a British soldier? I've never heard any Briton use the expression "benefits cheque". Giro, dole money, social security, yes but never "benefits cheque". Sounds like an Americanism.

 

Americans spell it as "check" (I was married to one -an American, not a cheque). Otherwise I agree with the rest of your post.

[RootsBooster]

I agree with the OP.

 

Though roots, I don't fit into any of your examples.

 

????

 

I also agree with the OP to an extent, I said that!

[Mummytwo]

????

 

I also agree with the OP to an extent, I said that!

 

Double checked, I misunderstood, I thought you meant that usually the people on benefits fit into those two categories. I do apologise, I'm rather tired.

[RootsBooster]

Yes, but if the rules were that if you failed a drugs/drink test, you wouldn't receive benefit, then how would A & B react? Chap B would say "its a small price to pay until I get back on my feet", and toe the line. Chap A would either accept that he has to change his attitude if he wants benefit, and so also starts to try for work and toe the line (which is the aim of such changes, so a good result), OR he would carry on as at present, and we would no longer support him.

 

To me,the issue is whether they are actively and honestly trying to work, and are able to do so, not whether they use their money to buy legal or illegal drugs (although the two may go together).

 

I don't think the issue is the feckless people themselves - we could easily find a way of depriving them of benefits if they are not prepared to try. The problem is their chlidren. How can we punish children, just because their parents are spongers?

 

Nobody told me that Bazza and Jacko had children!!! I feel like such a monster now

[RootsBooster]

Double checked, I misunderstood, I thought you meant that usually the people on benefits fit into those two categories. I do apologise, I'm rather tired.

 

Okay

[chem1st]

Thought I'd seen this posted before on facebook by an American!

 

It's political propaganda.

 

Punish the unemployed, forget about the bankers, forget about the INFLATION TAX, instigated by QE. (Ever increasing QE)

 

The following link is a blog, with the OP's post, from 2009...

 

http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/job---urine-test/blog-43406/

 

Next link is a leaflet of it, edited to say politicians should pass too and mentioning the introduction of this policy in Florida...

 

http://soulclassics247.com/site/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/To-Pee-or-Not-to-Pee.pdf

 

And finally, a link showing it has been enacted in Florida...

 

http://articles.cnn.com/2011-07-02/us/florida.drug.tests.welfare_1_drug-tests-drug-screening-rick-scott?_s=PM:US

[Cavegirl]

Thought I'd seen this posted before on facebook by an American!

 

It's political propaganda.

 

Punish the unemployed, forget about the bankers, forget about the INFLATION TAX, instigated by QE. (Ever increasing QE)

 

The following link is a blog, with the OP's post, from 2009...

 

http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/job---urine-test/blog-43406/

 

Next link is a leaflet of it, edited to say politicians should pass too and mentioning the introduction of this policy in Florida...

 

http://soulclassics247.com/site/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/To-Pee-or-Not-to-Pee.pdf

 

And finally, a link showing it has been enacted in Florida...

 

http://articles.cnn.com/2011-07-02/us/florida.drug.tests.welfare_1_drug-tests-drug-screening-rick-scott?_s=PM:US

 

Brilliant bit of research Chem1st and very interesting to see once again how this type of propaganda works in action. People really have to start waking up to this- once you understand what signs to look for it's just so obvious! Blame the ones at the top, those with the power to wreck lives, not the ones at the lower end of society who are powerless.