1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Drug tests for unemployment benefits approved in Texas

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by bobmarley, May 25, 2013.

  1. FranchiseBlade

    FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    48,541
    Likes Received:
    17,108
    The problem is that the govt. ends up spending way more money because not that many people get dq'd for the drug use, and the drug tests cost a lot of cash for everyone to have to take them. Since not that many people get booted because of the tests they are a huge waste of money.
     
  2. CrazyDave

    CrazyDave Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2002
    Messages:
    6,027
    Likes Received:
    438
    Guilty until proven innocent. Sad day for freedom. More and more everyone is under suspicion before they ever do anything wrong. Those who are ok with it just haven't been presented with their turn yet.
     
  3. Dairy Ashford

    Dairy Ashford Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    14,500
    Likes Received:
    1,829
    So marley is baylorbear? Never picked up on that.
     
  4. thadeus

    thadeus Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2003
    Messages:
    8,313
    Likes Received:
    726
    I am, of course, in favor of this as long as it applies to everyone who ever receives state benefits - including salaries, paychecks, contracts, and even per diems and dry cleaning.

    If it does not extend that far, then this is just another meaningless measure designed to make sure that poor people know their place.

    This is America - if anyone knows anything around here, it's that being poor means you're on the bottom of the totem pole and everyone else has a right to consider you beneath them. We don't really need more laws to do that.
     
    1 person likes this.
  5. chrispbrown

    chrispbrown Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Messages:
    1,907
    Likes Received:
    100
    I get the argument of invasion of privacy, but I think we have the right to drug test these people. Just like a good amount of employers also have the right to drug test. At my job, if you have a BAC of .03 you can be fired. Sounds intimidating and I don't think they have ever tested anyone but it is a regulation put in place to keep people safe and allows for the company to avoid legal problems.

    In an "ideal" world they should legalize all drugs, allow the government to sell them. That way the "drug addicted " employment recipients take the check they got from the government and give it right back to them. Takes violent drug dealers out of business and all that jazz...ideally of course.
     
  6. bobmarley

    bobmarley Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2003
    Messages:
    6,489
    Likes Received:
    318
    [​IMG]
     
  7. bobmarley

    bobmarley Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2003
    Messages:
    6,489
    Likes Received:
    318
    [​IMG]
     
  8. trueroxfan

    trueroxfan Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2008
    Messages:
    4,170
    Likes Received:
    143
    I am amazed that the Ds in the House let this slide, but not welfare. The argument I always hear against unemployment drug testing is that we all pay into it, correct me if I am wrong, but you can't receive unemployment benefits without first holding a job, correct? If so, that you have at least paid the same percentage of your life income to that point as anyone else, so I understand why people could be against it.

    On the other hand, welfare drug testing makes more sense to me. If you are paying for drugs, but you are telling the government you are too poor to buy food, clearly you have allocated some of your income to things that are not important. And while it shouldn't be the government's job to manage what you buy, if citizens are going to give a portion of their taxes to people to supplement their lives, than it should be spent on necessary items.

    The program is called TANF, TEMPORARY Assistance for Needy Families, the program should be intended to provide assistance while families seek new employment opportunities.
     
  9. CometsWin

    CometsWin Breaker Breaker One Nine

    Joined:
    May 15, 2000
    Messages:
    28,028
    Likes Received:
    13,046
    Honestly that's the typical Republican logic BS and by that logic, anyone receiving unemployment benefits is being paid not to steal.
     
  10. Deji McGever

    Deji McGever יליד טקסני

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 1999
    Messages:
    4,012
    Likes Received:
    949
    I'm not a fan of morality police in any context. Whether its a Soviet bureaucrat pushing for new laws to punish "decadence," a religious fanatic wanting new rules for "modesty," or a conservative politician looking for new ways to punish the poor to score points in the culture war, it's all equally evil, invasive, and corrupting to the spirit of man.

    If you humor these kinds of measures, you are by definition an authoritarian.
     
  11. Harrisment

    Harrisment Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2001
    Messages:
    15,392
    Likes Received:
    2,157
    Not sure how this got started. I've met bobmarley many years ago at a bbs meetup, and he looks nothing like the infamous baylorbear puppy shots.
     
  12. Deji McGever

    Deji McGever יליד טקסני

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 1999
    Messages:
    4,012
    Likes Received:
    949
    I think if any government wants to spend money on tests, it should create a comprehensive standardized test similar to the military's ASVAB that tests literacy, math, and basic knowledge of economics, law, history and science and force anyone seeking public office to take it and make the scores publicly available.
     
  13. trueroxfan

    trueroxfan Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2008
    Messages:
    4,170
    Likes Received:
    143
    Just an FYI, the tests will cost $35 and will only be administered to "high risk" applicants.
     
  14. bobmarley

    bobmarley Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2003
    Messages:
    6,489
    Likes Received:
    318
    No worries. It was started by Sam and Mark as a way to illegitimize the fact that I voted for Obama in 08.
     
  15. Ottomaton

    Ottomaton Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2000
    Messages:
    18,141
    Likes Received:
    13,282
  16. fchowd0311

    fchowd0311 Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    46,860
    Likes Received:
    35,361
    Did you read any other part of the thread? This will ADD to the cost not decrease it, thus the very purpose of the tests falls flat on its face.
     
  17. bobmarley

    bobmarley Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2003
    Messages:
    6,489
    Likes Received:
    318
    Don't have a subscription to WSJ. It is usually customary when making a claim that you back it up with evidence for future reference.
     
  18. Ottomaton

    Ottomaton Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2000
    Messages:
    18,141
    Likes Received:
    13,282
    There is a civil war in Syria.

    Do I need to provide you a reference for that, or is basic, simple, common news something that you should be able to figure out for your self?

    I shouldn't have to wipe your @ss when it comes to things that are easy to find. I'm not citing some 80 year old case that nobody's ever heard of. I'm not trying to make some bizarre point levered off of some insane dubious claim that nobody else can figure out. I made an offhand reference to easy to find information.

    I apologize for not treating you like a moron, I guess?
     
  19. bobmarley

    bobmarley Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2003
    Messages:
    6,489
    Likes Received:
    318
    Well this case is nothing like what is happening in Texas.

    Florida made it mandatory for all people who are signing up for WELFARE to be drug screened.

    Texas is screening individuals who are flagged during their questionnaire for unemployment benefits.

    A person who is laid off for a drug reason is disqualified for unemployment benefits. Do you disagree with this policy?

    Sometimes people who are fired due to other reasons besides drugs but are directly related to drugs shouldn't be able to qualify for unemployment benefits.

    That's what I think this is all about.

    Do you think someone who is laid off for drug use should get unemployment benefits?

    Also, if you are laid off shouldn't you stop using drugs anyway because your next employer will probably test you too?
     
  20. Refman

    Refman Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2002
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    312
    It's actually the logical conclusion to what you said. You implied that an addict with no money would commit crimes so we should give them government benefits. By your logic, wouldn't it make more sense to open up evidence lockers all over the country and give them free drugs?
     

Share This Page