Criminalizing unemployed - Sen. Hatch wants unemployed to face mandatory drug tests

[Lonestar_logic]

Oh good grief. any logical person could ascertain that UE insurance is part of your compensation package and therefor YOU pay it. Might as well say that if your employer offers company paid insurance then then that means they pay for your insurance, not you.

Prove it. I've given you facts that shows that it's your employer that pays for unemployment compensation. If you have evidence to the contrary, then by all means let's see it. If not, then .

Your employer's 'contribution' to your UE compensation is part of what your employer is paying you for the job you do. It's not some sort of gift.

Prove it.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Your employer's 'contribution' to your UE compensation is part of what your employer is paying you for the job you do. It's not some sort of gift.

Prove it.

The proof is the fact that they don't give it to people who don't work for them, genius.

What a dopey answer. If you don't work for them then they are not your employer you stupid ****. Your employer pays for UI, not the employee. Now if you have evidence to the contrary then provide it or shut the **** up.

 

[Dis]

I don't agree with THIS. If you are collecting UE isnurance that's money you paid in. I am however pro drug testing welfare fags.

You do realize you have to do more job searches if you are on welfare and do not have a medical reason not to?
On Taniff you only get five years of benefits, you have to eight hours of job search or job training, and if you don't follow their rules you get sanctioned, and if you don't improve your benefits are taken away completely. People on the right should know the facts before they open their stupid mouths.

Wrong. You have to make it *look* like you're doing job searches. There'squite a bit of difference.

In other words, you can talk in to any building you like, demand an application, whether they're hiring or not, apply for a job you're not capable of doing, and put down ridiculous hours that don't match what the employer is looking for, and demand ridiculous amounts of money. After you're finished with that, you stick out a sheet, and insist that the manager "sign" it, thus "proving" you're out looking for work.

Ask me how many times I see THAT in a week.

 

[Care4all]

If a person is recieving a social welfare check, in ANY form, from tax payer money, the drug test should be mandatory.

That INCLUDES social security, medicare, medicaid, unemployment, welfare, food stamps, section-8 housing. Yes, if you live in a housing project with subsidized rent you should get a mandatory drug test monthly when that $50 rent is due. If you can afford to buy crack, you can afford to move into a regular apt and stop leaching off my tax money.

yet these people can be complete, non functioning alcoholics and get a pass? that's pretty messed up.

why should completely innocent people who do no drugs, have never done drugs be subjected to, ''you are guilty, until proven innocent'' intrusion?

 

[Big Fitz]

Fiscal conservatism is just a code word. It is all about trying to turn democracy into an aristocracy.

Whoa whoa whoa! Who put this totally incorrect statement out there??? I definitely missed this little quote from the original.

Fiscal Conservatism is about trying to create an Aristocracy??????????? Excuse me? That is UTTERLY ludicrous. A total lack of understanding of the concept of what Fiscal Conservatism is and a blindness to what big government collectivism is.

Defined:

–noun, plural -cies.
1.
a class of persons holding exceptional rank and privileges, esp. the hereditary nobility.
2.
a government or state ruled by an aristocracy, elite, or privileged upper class.
3.
government by those considered to be the best or most able people in the state.
4.
a governing body composed of those considered to be the best or most able people in the state.
5.
any class or group considered to be superior, as through education, ability, wealth, or social prestige.

Fiscal conservatism does not encourage this. Fiscal conservatism is a philosophy that you need to restrict government by denying it funds that it will abuse and keep as much money as possible in the hands of society at large to do as they please. There is a balance that needs to be struck between the government who's responsibility is to protect the populace from outside threats as well as provide a system for the redress of grievances between citizens. Combine this with a republican form of government with an educated populace (HAH! to our apathetic educated populace right now) and a distinct constitution that provides checks and balances and clean divisions of power, this leads to a very stable long lasting form of government.

An Aristocracy???? How pray tell does denying government funds lead to a ruling class, particularly in a nation like America and there is no regimented class structure. People can go between the classes with remarkable ease because it is a meritocracy. An Aristocracy cannot survive that attitude by itself. You have to have a static class system of nobility and commoner for starters. Plutocrats wrecked this concept with the industrial revolution. I mean Jakkob Fuger (sp?) bailed out the Geman states single handedly yet he had no title or hereditary position during that period. He lived better than most nobles who claimed to have a right to live in splendor.

No, Fiscal Conservatism is not causing an Aristocracy. Collectivist big government, forming a ruling class out of party members, and secures it's positions through ill gotten taxes and force. That is why you must starve the beast before it can form.

 

[Jarhead]

If a person is recieving a social welfare check, in ANY form, from tax payer money, the drug test should be mandatory.

That INCLUDES social security, medicare, medicaid, unemployment, welfare, food stamps, section-8 housing. Yes, if you live in a housing project with subsidized rent you should get a mandatory drug test monthly when that $50 rent is due. If you can afford to buy crack, you can afford to move into a regular apt and stop leaching off my tax money.

yet these people can be complete, non functioning alcoholics and get a pass? that's pretty messed up.

why should completely innocent people who do no drugs, have never done drugs be subjected to, ''you are guilty, until proven innocent'' intrusion?

In the business world, many companies give drug tests to those that have never done drugs; innocent people who are "guilty until proven innocent"...


So the unemployed will be subjected to it if they want to become employed and get a paycheck so what is wrong with subjecting them to it so they can get a paycheck when unemployed?

Furthermore, for those that do drugs, it will be an impetus to stop doing drugs.

I dopnt understand the outrage.

 

[Immanuel]

If a person is recieving a social welfare check, in ANY form, from tax payer money, the drug test should be mandatory.

That INCLUDES social security, medicare, medicaid, unemployment, welfare, food stamps, section-8 housing. Yes, if you live in a housing project with subsidized rent you should get a mandatory drug test monthly when that $50 rent is due. If you can afford to buy crack, you can afford to move into a regular apt and stop leaching off my tax money.

yet these people can be complete, non functioning alcoholics and get a pass? that's pretty messed up.

why should completely innocent people who do no drugs, have never done drugs be subjected to, ''you are guilty, until proven innocent'' intrusion?

In the business world, many companies give drug tests to those that have never done drugs; innocent people who are "guilty until proven innocent"...


So the unemployed will be subjected to it if they want to become employed and get a paycheck so what is wrong with subjecting them to it so they can get a paycheck when unemployed?

Furthermore, for those that do drugs, it will be an impetus to stop doing drugs.

I dopnt understand the outrage.

Do you really think it would be an impetus to stop doing drugs? If their own health, family, children isn't enough to get them off of drugs why would random drug testing?

Immie

 

[Jarhead]

yet these people can be complete, non functioning alcoholics and get a pass? that's pretty messed up.

why should completely innocent people who do no drugs, have never done drugs be subjected to, ''you are guilty, until proven innocent'' intrusion?

In the business world, many companies give drug tests to those that have never done drugs; innocent people who are "guilty until proven innocent"...


So the unemployed will be subjected to it if they want to become employed and get a paycheck so what is wrong with subjecting them to it so they can get a paycheck when unemployed?

Furthermore, for those that do drugs, it will be an impetus to stop doing drugs.

I dopnt understand the outrage.

Do you really think it would be an impetus to stop doing drugs? If their own health, family, children isn't enough to get them off of drugs why would random drug testing?

Immie

They need the money to do the drugs. If the cant get the money, they wouldnt be able to do the drugs. So in that "circle", they may come to their senses.

 

[topspin]

not all jarheads are morons, but thiers no proof here that they aren't

 

[Ravi]

Just how many people collecting unemployment do you morons think are spending it on drugs?

 

[Jarhead]

Just how many people collecting unemployment do you morons think are spending it on drugs?

A small percentage at best.
Who said they are spending it on drugs? I simply responded to one who impliers that some do.
My point was that those that seek jobs are many times subjected to drug tests by the prospective employer, so if that is considered acceptable, then why is it not considered acceptable to do the same for those that collect unemployment?

It will only help. Not hurt.

 

[Jarhead]

not all jarheads are morons, but thiers no proof here that they aren't

If you saw the thread and why I said what I said, you would have understood.
I was not saying the unemployed use their unemployment checks for drugs.

I responded to one who implied some may do it.

 

[Ravi]

People that collect unemployment earned their unemployment. It is a stupid imposition on those that were laid off through no fault of their own. Only a regressive ass republican could come up with such a stupid plan.

I pray that the next Republican presidential candidate runs on that platform. Hopefully the stupidity will spread and they'll demand those living on social security are also drug tested...as well as all those in public schools, those that travel on public roads, anyone that might be served by police or fire.



You go!

 

[Care4all]

If a person is recieving a social welfare check, in ANY form, from tax payer money, the drug test should be mandatory.

That INCLUDES social security, medicare, medicaid, unemployment, welfare, food stamps, section-8 housing. Yes, if you live in a housing project with subsidized rent you should get a mandatory drug test monthly when that $50 rent is due. If you can afford to buy crack, you can afford to move into a regular apt and stop leaching off my tax money.

yet these people can be complete, non functioning alcoholics and get a pass? that's pretty messed up.

why should completely innocent people who do no drugs, have never done drugs be subjected to, ''you are guilty, until proven innocent'' intrusion?

In the business world, many companies give drug tests to those that have never done drugs; innocent people who are "guilty until proven innocent"...


So the unemployed will be subjected to it if they want to become employed and get a paycheck so what is wrong with subjecting them to it so they can get a paycheck when unemployed?

Furthermore, for those that do drugs, it will be an impetus to stop doing drugs.

I dopnt understand the outrage.

it gives government power, they do not constitutionally have...they are not employing you in a dangerous or complicated job....it is a government ''reach'' in to the private lives of citizens, that employ them(the gvt worker) with their tax dollars.

if you can show me where in the constitution they have been given this power, i'd appreciate it.

 

[Care4all]

yet these people can be complete, non functioning alcoholics and get a pass? that's pretty messed up.

why should completely innocent people who do no drugs, have never done drugs be subjected to, ''you are guilty, until proven innocent'' intrusion?

In the business world, many companies give drug tests to those that have never done drugs; innocent people who are "guilty until proven innocent"...


So the unemployed will be subjected to it if they want to become employed and get a paycheck so what is wrong with subjecting them to it so they can get a paycheck when unemployed?

Furthermore, for those that do drugs, it will be an impetus to stop doing drugs.

I dopnt understand the outrage.

it gives government power, they do not constitutionally have...they are not employing you in a dangerous or complicated job....it is a government ''reach'' in to the private lives of citizens, that employ them(the gvt worker) with their tax dollars.

if you can show me where in the constitution they have been given this power, i'd appreciate it.

*the 20 plus years i worked, i never was required to take a drug test.

 

[Care4all]

the employee's unemployment compensation is EARNED according to the State

 

[Jarhead]

yet these people can be complete, non functioning alcoholics and get a pass? that's pretty messed up.

why should completely innocent people who do no drugs, have never done drugs be subjected to, ''you are guilty, until proven innocent'' intrusion?

In the business world, many companies give drug tests to those that have never done drugs; innocent people who are "guilty until proven innocent"...


So the unemployed will be subjected to it if they want to become employed and get a paycheck so what is wrong with subjecting them to it so they can get a paycheck when unemployed?

Furthermore, for those that do drugs, it will be an impetus to stop doing drugs.

I dopnt understand the outrage.

it gives government power, they do not constitutionally have...they are not employing you in a dangerous or complicated job....it is a government ''reach'' in to the private lives of citizens, that employ them(the gvt worker) with their tax dollars.

if you can show me where in the constitution they have been given this power, i'd appreciate it.

Constitution?
No where in the constitution.
But just like healthcare, it can be interpreted as part of the "well being" thing.
Dont get me wrong. I do not agree with the idea. I simply debated what you said referring to it as an example of "guilty before being proven innocent".
There are valid reasons to institute it. But valid reasons are not always valid reasons to compromise the constitution.
Problem with a text "debating board" is one tries to debate and their "stance" is taken out of context as they do not have the chance to explain themselves when their post is taken out of context. Many posts are responses to poosts and do not include earlier posts.

Like earlier. I never said all those, or many of those that are unemployed use drugs. I simply rtesponded to an earlier post saying that those that DO use drugs and are unemployed would possibly unintentionally benefit from having to take a drug tes.

And then I have Ravi and Topspin exude their sentiments based on them assuming something I feel...that I dont believe in at all.

Gets a little old. But whatever.

 

[Jarhead]

the employee's unemployment compensation is EARNED according to the State

It is not earned as they do not pay for it like they pay for disibility.
The first and second employer of record pays it along with the state.
It is an entitlement, and one I do not disagree with.

 

[uscitizen]

Just how many people collecting unemployment do you morons think are spending it on drugs?

why Ravi everyone knows that all govt money is spent on drugs and such.
sheesh....

And everyone who got laid off is an illegal drug user.

 

[Bfgrn]

yet these people can be complete, non functioning alcoholics and get a pass? that's pretty messed up.

why should completely innocent people who do no drugs, have never done drugs be subjected to, ''you are guilty, until proven innocent'' intrusion?

In the business world, many companies give drug tests to those that have never done drugs; innocent people who are "guilty until proven innocent"...


So the unemployed will be subjected to it if they want to become employed and get a paycheck so what is wrong with subjecting them to it so they can get a paycheck when unemployed?

Furthermore, for those that do drugs, it will be an impetus to stop doing drugs.

I dopnt understand the outrage.

it gives government power, they do not constitutionally have...they are not employing you in a dangerous or complicated job....it is a government ''reach'' in to the private lives of citizens, that employ them(the gvt worker) with their tax dollars.

if you can show me where in the constitution they have been given this power, i'd appreciate it.

You are not allowed to ask that question! Don't you know, the Constitution was written in the shape of a hammer that can only be used by 'conservatives'. This isn't invasion of privacy, it's a purity test.