Urinalysis for Welfare Checks. picture says it all. Shoulda" 1' Otd havre In 115: -‘ma zeal a , l harp In p. 155 nipp. in culur it (or 1' oul?. They did in Florida and it cost them more than it saved, and only like 2% of recipients failed the test. Rant: Every time welfare or any other similar program c Poster
Click to expand
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #1 - sparkyoneonetwo (08/11/2012) [+] (5 replies)
I've had all kinds of jobs... only ever had to take a drug test when I was working at a Target... seems like the most useless job to nee to pass a drug test fur...
#7 to #1 - lefish (08/12/2012) [-]
hey bro, they got a point, what if you shelved the diet coke on the shelf where the regular pepsi goes? Everybody would lose their minds. There would be riots.
User avatar #23 - cancerousiguana (08/12/2012) [+] (4 replies)
They did in Florida and it cost them more than it saved, and only like 2% of recipients failed the test.
Every time welfare or any other similar program comes up, everybody jumps all over it and talks about how lazy everybody on it is and we need to get rid of it, or talks about how we need to take people off of it for whatever reason. I get really sick of people demonizing anybody who receives government money and assumes they must be sitting at home doing nothing with their lives. There are people like that in the system, and I agree there needs to be some kind of reform to prevent abusing the system (I knew a woman who had a kid every 5 years for the sole purpose of remaining on welfare), but there are a lot of people who need some help and are using it properly.
User avatar #17 - GodofTV (08/12/2012) [-]
If people at my job had to take urine tests we'd all be fired...
#6 - anonexplains (08/12/2012) [+] (7 replies)
They actually tried this.

The state ended up spending all sorts of money on urine test kits and the manpower to process all that pee, and at the end of the day found all of TWO people who failed it canceling their benefits saving the state like $60,000 but spending millions in the implementation.

Sometimes your faith in humanity is rewarded. Not often, but sometimes.
#15 to #6 - captnpl ONLINE (08/12/2012) [-]
Think of it this way:

1. People that are on welfare usually stay on welfare. We didn't save $60,000, we saved $60,000 per year for 1-5 years in most states, but in New York they can collect for the rest of their lives.

2. It makes desk jobs with low education requirements. You know who could use jobs like that? People who are on welfare for honest reasons. They're still being paid by the government, but they'll save us more money than they'll take.

3. If people stop getting paid to **** around all day, the schools won't be flooded with so many kids raised without a work ethic.
User avatar #26 - mrgoodbunny (08/12/2012) [-]
You do have to pass one.
In florida, they made the argument that people were using it to buy drugs, where in fact when they instigated the check, only 2% of people failed.

I'm sure if you scroll down you can read all about it.
User avatar #13 - winsauceiswin (08/12/2012) [-]
in no way is the coming statement supposed to be a political plug or start a **** storm but Romney wants to do that with welfare. im saying this simply as a fact and nothing else
User avatar #12 - JHoYouKnow ONLINE (08/12/2012) [-]
It would hold a lot more weight if the politicians agreed to one themselves first. Since "everyone receiving the government's money should have to prove they're clean."
#38 - steavo (08/12/2012) [-]
It's a good idea, because I don't want to pay taxes for a crack addict to get his next fix...but I also don't want to pay taxes for crack addicts to get their piss tested.
#30 - sovietsammich (08/12/2012) [+] (1 reply)
How about we just stop giving out welfare? It was originally started by the churches in Europe to care for the elderly and sick, now it's just overused and abused by lazy people.
#37 to #30 - steavo (08/12/2012) [-]
It's abused by crack addicts who can't get a job.
#25 - anonexplains (08/12/2012) [-]
Welfare is for honest people who spend it on things they NEED. If they fail a drug test it is far more likely that they will spend money collected from hardworking taxpayers on already illegal substances. Besides they don't get in trouble for the drug test if they fail, which is already paid for by the gov. They just are not eligible for welfare. Its practical and is based on principle for everyone to be clean if they want to receive free money from the government.
User avatar #20 - sloar ONLINE (08/12/2012) [-]
Depends on your job mate. If you're operating heavy machinery or somethin you'd damn well better be drug free. Some slack ass wastin their life on a couch smokin dope isn't gonna crush someone.
User avatar #16 - swittig (08/12/2012) [-]
Or get rid of welfare altogether and replace it with workfare, run at the state level
User avatar #11 - fireiskey (08/12/2012) [+] (3 replies)
**** Urine tests. That's like getting fired for being drunk on your day off three weeks ago.
User avatar #21 to #11 - sloar ONLINE (08/12/2012) [-]
You don't seem to understand the facts of drug use - acid flashbacks and dumbasses like you are a good exmaple of why these tests exists
#10 - anonexplains (08/12/2012) [-]
No. Drug testing is unconstitutional.
#4 - shadowrated has deleted their comment [-]
 Friends (0)