Many working people take pee tests to keep their jobs- shouldn't welfare recipients have to for the free $$$?

Question

Why is it that gainfully employed people must take drug tests in order to get and maintain most good jobs, and welfare recipients don't have to and yet they sit around and get our free money?

Wouldn't it behoove our system to drug-test the recipients before handing out monthly checks? It may cost more initially, but in the long run, we'd probably save tons of tax payers' money.

Why the double standard?

I heard this question in the news lately, but I'm curious to see what more people think and why.

Thank you.

Answer 1

Absolutely, I unfortunately was in a situation 5 years ago, where I lost my job due to my daughter having brain surgery, the company I worked for were very uncaring about the situation, and I was fired for missing work to care for her. I ended up on welfare as well as in public housing. Less than a month after moving into public housing, there was a drug bust in the complex and out of 22 apartments on our street, only 2 were not involved in drugs. Mine and an elderly lady 3 units up from mine. Here I was demoralized and humiliated to have to resort to welfare and public housing, while caring for my sick child, and nearly 60 people around me there taking advantage of the benefits, and taking and selling drugs. Fortunately, I was able to get off welfare within a few months, and move on with our lives as productive citizens. I think the recipients should be drug tested every time their case is reviewed. These benefits are there to help people who are having difficulty in their lives not for lazy drug abusers and sellers. Sorry, I know this is too long, but it really does make me angry.

Answer 2

I agree they should have to get tested.

They should be required to work, if you dont work you need to be signed up to do free work such as mop the floors at the court house all day, work at the soup kitchens ect. If they dont work they dont get $$$$

cut food stamps. I know a woman with 5 kids gets 900.00 almost and says has to hide money or they might cut her food stamps. THATS CRAP She only works under the table

2 years and u should be kicked off. If you cant care for your children they need to be handed over to someone that can.

Then we turn around at tax time and give these people 4000-6000 in free money that most paid very very little in. If they are on welfare the state should get that money not them to go blow

This does not mean the people that need help for awhile cause something bad happened........ Thats called helping out.

But something has to be done about the welfare and child support abusers. More men would pay if the woman actually used the money for the kids.I know some do , but alot dont.

Answer 3

What would drug testing do...honestly?

Ok, so a crackhead fails the drug test and is denied welfare. Well, now Crackhead is on the streets with her kids because she can't pay the rent.

Now Crackhead goes to the news and says she's sad and it is unfair what the bad government did to her.
Now the public feels sorry for Crackhead and protests the government, claiming it is discriminating against poor, addicted addicts.

In B.C., where I live, they made the welfare collecting rules a little different. They gave existing welfare clients a time limit to find jobs and made it extremely difficult for to clients to get welfare. They also cut welfare rates to discourage people for wanting to get on welfare.
Unfortunately, they cut it too deep for the people who genuinely need a welfare check. Most these people and their kids are in extreme poverty now, with the "shelter" portion of their cheque not enough to cover rent, forcing them to spend from the "grocery" portion.

Besides, drug testing is too expensive. The standard pee test is about $100, and only covers 5 different drugs. Marijuana is the only drug that stays in your system for any length of time and is the only drug that can be truly monitored. (The rest of the 4 drugs can be stopped 2 days before testing and not be detected).

Hope this helps

Answer 4

Why the double standard? Bleeding heart liberals. Most of them have no idea what it's like to be on the threshold of needing governmental assistance, and I'm sure that there are BHLs out there who honestly believe what they spout (and good for them), but most of them strike me as having liberal views only because they feel guilty for having so much in their own lives or because it's "chic" to feel bad for the down-trodden. As soon as it’s no longer “chic”, they will move on to another trendy issue.

I’m not concerned with the bleeding hearts who would want to make a stink about kicking out crackhead mothers and children. I think that the majority of taxpayers would agree that if their money had to go for welfare at all (which it does), that the money should go directly to *caretakers* of the children of crackhead mothers, instead of crackhead mothers. Using your child to get governmental money for crack is child abuse, and the children should be placed with people who behave more responsibly.

I wasn’t aware that it only takes two days for most drugs to leave the system, but do you honestly believe that the majority of them would/could do without drugs for two days? Most of them aren’t smart enough to know to, either. Definitely drug test them. Awesome idea.

I’m not bashing honest people down on their luck who are on welfare- I’m sure they exist, but I’ve just never heard of one. I think welfare should be for the working poor- you know, the people who send their children into the military (risking their lives) because they can’t afford college, the people with clean criminal records who have graduated from high school and have always held down full-time jobs but can’t afford little luxuries like DINNER? Where are the bleeding hearts when it comes to the working poor, the people who have actually demonstrated a usefulness to the community and who might actually deserve assistance?

Answer 5

That is a great idea,its about time they did thet,I have to have one 3 times a year for my job.So the same should be for anyone on welfare.Its only fair.

Answer 6

They should but the democrats would never do it and they would bash the Republican for trying it.