image stats
date added
previous votes
log in


indent register
indent recover

To pee, or not to pee

1 star2 stars3 stars4 stars5 stars
To pee, or not to pee

Comments for: To pee, or not to pee
SkullandChains Report This Comment
Date: March 22, 2010 09:12AM

TO PEE OR NOT TO PEE -- Words of wisdom from an unknown person:

Like most folks in this country, I have a job. I work, they pay me.

I pay my taxes & the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit.

In order to get that paycheck, in my case, 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.

So, here is my question: 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 BUTT----doing drugs while I work.

Can you imagine how much money each state would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check?

I guess we could call the program "URINE OR YOU'RE OUT"!
Mrkim Report This Comment
Date: March 22, 2010 09:34AM

Purely common sense proposals like this never make it onto the books though this always leaves me scratchin my head askin Why Not? It would likely shave billions of $$s from the Fed/State entitlement budgets in a matter of only a few years ... and lead to a cottage industry of "clean urine" distributors at the same time.

Problem is that likely 40% or better of the entitlement grabbers wouldn't be able to pass a urinalysis and the entitlement distributors who need their votes to keep 'em in office know it. This alone makes sure it will never happen.

I disagree with urinalysis OTJ in relation to weed as there's no allowance for when you smoked, only that it's in your system, which will show up for at least 3 wks afterwards. Regarding entitlements that 3 wk window would be acceptable as the checks are typically issued monthly grinning

SpazzII Report This Comment
Date: March 22, 2010 10:55AM

.....that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer.... blah blah blah.
DarkKlown Report This Comment
Date: March 22, 2010 11:48PM

More to the point, why do you allow your personal freedom to be invaded by taking a drug test? What a person does in their own time is of no concern to a entity paying them for a few hours of that persons day. I agree, however, that turning up to work while on wackey pills should get you the big shiny boot. If on a Friday night after work a person should choose to go make themselves comfortable in a gutter while staring at the moon, drooling and singing show tunes for a few hours, that's their choice and it's a private choice. You accepting that a employer has the right to test you i think is the main problem in this circumstance.

The question as to why welfare assistance programs exist in the first place is the same reason as to why this is a silly idea. The whole purpose of welfare is to enable people to get back into the workforce without them having to resort to worse means to be able to pull themselves out of poverty. The reason you pay a small amount of tax is to stop people coming and stealing large amounts from your land (people will step on you to survive).

That said one could assume that this would stop you from coming home and finding your house broken into and items stolen. After all your paying protection money to the government so this doesn't happen right? And if you choose not to pay this protection money? what happens? thugs come and take your stuff anyway. Instead of a tax system why don't we get rid of tax and run services like a capitalist society. If you want to be able to qualify for welfare you get 'welfare insurance'. If you want police to come protect you because you are a dirty hippy and don't want to own a gun, you pay 'police insurance'. You could also roll services in so if you wanted to continue with access to all services you currently have you could get just pay 'community membership' which is just 40-50% of your salary (about what you pay at the moment).

Personally I'd love to have some army stock and be on the stock holders board where each month we pick a country to invade. We could ransack each country under the banner of bringing democracy and freedom, if only that was possible!

Freedom exists only because people took a stand and said 'I wont accept this anymore'. It's nice to see your laying down and complaining that people are walking over you.
jgoins Report This Comment
Date: March 23, 2010 07:29AM

Well darkclown. you won't have to worry about capitalism much longer, this damn president and congress are working very hard to turn the US into a socialist state right now.
Mrkim Report This Comment
Date: March 23, 2010 10:34PM

That's an interesting construct DK. The concept is somewhat lacking in accepting the ideology that even when you pay to support the thieves in lieu of them rippin off your goodies, it still happens regardless.

Our cops here are really great about it though. When you come home to find all your shit gone and call 'em up they eventually show up and will listen patiently and take down a full accounting of what's missing and what you value it at. Sometimes they'll even mumble some half hearted BS to impart the idea they might actually give a shit before tellin ya to be sure and let them know if you manage to somehow find some of your shit so they can cross it off their list. Then they rush off to make sure they hit the Donut Palace before it shuts down for the day.

Dunno about how it is in Oz but here we pay pretty dearly for a govt that seems to do whatever the hell they deem is best for us, never mind what we actually think. They treat us to long lines at govt. offices where we're eventually served by brain dead zombies with attitudes who seem best suited to jobs as mannequins from the molasses like pace they move about with.

Whatever you do it's best to never challenge them by asking a procedural question or anything more complicated than what time it is as this will lead to that deer in the headlights look as they search those little mini files they call a brain and then will have to seek their supervisor for clarification while you stand there afraid to turn around and face the folks behind you in line 'cause you know you just managed to piss most of them off in this same moment as was evidenced by the exasperated collective sigh you heard right after posing your query.

We've steadily moved ever closer to a socialistic society here meaning govt gets ever larger while intruding further and further into progressively more areas of our lives, taking an ever larger share of $$ outta our back pockets and all the while confounding businesses every step of the way by making it continually more difficult to turn, much less maintain a profit margin .... unless you contract out to the govt of course

Yeah, you could say I love it here bit that would be stretchin it a bit. I love the ideology we were founded upon, just not the perversion of it we enjoy today drinking

SkullandChains Report This Comment
Date: March 24, 2010 04:57AM

Well, I'm still not convinced the the to pee or not to pee theory would work. For one, in order to make it work effectively, after the would-be welfare recipient quits drugs for a month, passes the pee test, then gets accepted, you'd have to random drug test these people each and every month. Cause you'll never catch them setting up an appointment to see the doctor. And secondly, how many billions of dollars would it cost the tax payers for these drug tests?
jgoins Report This Comment
Date: March 24, 2010 07:28AM

Maybe we should randomly drug test everyone in the nation. I don't do drugs so it wouldn't matter to me. Sound familiar? Isn't it the same attitude which passed all the smoking laws or seat-belt laws or gun laws? When we give up rights that do not affect us we will eventually give up other rights that do.
DarkKlown Report This Comment
Date: March 29, 2010 11:41PM

MrKim: no matter how much you give someone they will ALWAYS want more, not much you can change about that. And some people are unable to accept what they are given and of course they will continue to steal rather than work for it themselves. But i have this faint sliver of a belief that generally people will be happy as long as they aren't starving and they have clothes on their backs, enough that they will work for a better life beyond that.

Police are scum. They don't care about crime, they are more interested in fining people for using mobile phones while stuck in traffic and not moving (*looks at ticket*) than they are catching people who break into every single house in a 2 block radius one by one over the period of 3 days (*looks at report*). So personally i would rather own a gun and defend my own self (*scorns at being unable to own a gun*) than rely on corrupt and lazy government officials.

FYI I've worked for government departments before. On week 2 i was told to slow down on work as i was making everyone else look bad and it's not how it's done.
jgoins Report This Comment
Date: March 30, 2010 08:51AM

Not all cops are bad cops. I blame the legal system which has handcuffed the police with their own cuffs and won't allow them to do their jobs properly. Even if they know who is breaking into those homes they are not allowed to make an arrest until they have all their ducks in a row and have a conviction in hand before the arrest. Therefore the police have better luck enforcing vehicle laws rather than doing other police work. Just obey the speed laws and don't talk on the phone when you are behind the wheel unless you have a hand-free device.
jgoins Report This Comment
Date: March 30, 2010 08:56AM

One other thing, if you had owned a gun would your house have been broken into anyway? Evidentally you were not at home when it happened and most likely when they did break in they would have stolen your gun as well unless you carried it with you like I do. If you were at home when they broke in then why didn't you defend your home with anything at your disposal? when I don't have a gun in my home I will defend my home with a knife or a bat or anything else I can get my hands on and the coroner will have to carry someone out after it is over, either him or me I don't care which.
Mrkim Report This Comment
Date: March 31, 2010 10:30PM

DK, you are certainly right that no matter how much you give, there are always those who will take from others regardless. My point is why should we be supporting them at all?

I know people get down on their luck sometimes and need help to get through tough times, been there myself. The problem we have here in the US however is that there's a whole segment of society who choose to live off of the rest of society simply because they don't want to work for a livin. They can apply for welfare $$ they receive monthly, food stamps they get monthly and receive rent and utility subsidies they receive monthly for YEARS, some even for a LIFETIME. Now it can be said that the government reinforces this behavior and I agree, as do many others, but the government itself simply continues to implement more and more entitlement programs (which all require further expansion of the govt at the state and federal levels, which also has a huge impact on the overall cost of the implementation of these additional entitlement programs) regardless of their costs to our society or that Americans by and large are tired of seeing their tax $$s used in this way.

This takes away any reasonable incentive for people to provide for themselves and all in all leads to an overall downgrading of our society as a whole. And ..... it enamors this segment of society to a particular political party as the democrats are well known as supporters of this type of entitlement BS, which is actually a clever way of pandering the vote for democratic politicians.

As to the Cops, dude, I'm right there with ya! Cops tend to do what brings in the Buck$ a lot more than they tend to be proactive about preventing or apprehending criminals. Not ALL cops are bad, but my thoughts are that even the ones who choose it as a righteous career path for the right reasons become jaded and all too often succumb to the power trip it affords them with the eventuality being that problee 85% or more of 'em are not GOOD cops hot smiley

I'm glad I'm not forbidden to be an armed citizen .... YET drinking