Quote:
Originally Posted by Despare
Ah see, so an employer can request a drug test for any employee at any time but we can't test a welfare recipient who may show signs of drugs abuse?
|
Actually quite a few people in this thread who are against drug testing said that they support it if the individual is showing signs of abuse so before you have a fucking hissy you may want to read all arguments.
There is a difference between
ALL PEOPLE WHO APPLY FOR WELFARE MUST BE DRUG TESTED IN ORDER TO RECEIVE BENEFITES and
PEOPLE SHOULD BE TREATED ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS AND IF THEY APPEAR TO BE USING THEY SHOULD BE TESTED.
I'm arguing against the
FORMER for all of the reasons that I previously mentioned and vehemently support
REHABILITATION along with other
alternatives to blanket testing that I mentioned. Honestly, I haven't really addressed the details of the latter (to be honest, I do think that if we go down the case worker route and someone is clearly using, the first step to getting them to rehab is most likely a drug test but I haven't given it much thought because I am honestly more troubled by fucking assholes who clearly never needed social services who think EVERYONE ON WELFARE IS LAZY AND A JUNKIE AND MY TAXES PAY FOR THEM THEREFORE TEST THE SHIT OUT OF THEM TO MAKE SURE MAI WELL EARNED MONEY IS NOT SPENT ON DRUGS UR BOOZE IT'S MY MONEY SO I CAN TELL THOSE LAZY IRRESPONSIBLE FUCKS HOW TO SPEND IT) so don't give me shitty comparisons to people who get drug tested by the police because I
never said that I was against testing people who are obviously under the influence (on welfare or otherwise)
As I mentioned before: Worried that people on welfare are spending it on drugs or drug paraphernalia? Perhaps we should have more currency like food stamps that controls what a person can spend it on. Still cheaper than blanket drug testing.
All I'm saying is that I'm against blanket testing for ALL welfare recipients. I've given my reason why and have offered alternative solutions to the problem.