Welfare support and drug testing

[Ocean1]

You'll be glad to hear that I won't go into in to the supply of money affecting interest rates and by default inflation rates and by default unemployment and back again. It matters enough to some.

Thank fuck for that, I could do without more horse shit today.

[short-circuit]

Welfare Reforms—Pre-employment Drug Testing for Job Seekers

The thing is the argument is horse-shit.

NZ doesn't have a problem filling vacancies due to overwhelming numbers of applicants on drugs, rather, the number of jobs is steadily drying up as the economy stagnates and the number of people out of work is growing. Local grocery stores can pick and choose between phD grads and rocket scientists...I'm sure they can eliminate the smack addicts.

[husaberg]

The thing is the argument is horse-shit.

NZ doesn't have a problem filling vacancies due to overwhelming numbers of applicants on drugs, rather, the number of jobs is steadily drying up as the economy stagnates and the number of people out of work is growing. Local grocery stores can pick and choose between phD grads and rocket scientists...I'm sure they can eliminate the smack addicts.

Sorry you kind of missed the point

Its going to happen regardless.

Count the times it says reasonable.
There is of course two reasons for this.

Reasonable is a legal term relating to the applications of drug testing, which currently defines when it can be applied.

It is reasonable.

[FJRider]

The thing is the argument is horse-shit.



Totally pointless.

It's going to happen.

If there is a change of goverment in the next election ... it won't be changed back.

If you want it changed back ... vote for the party that wants it as it is now.

Did I say ... it was totally pointless ... ???

[short-circuit]

Nothing to do with it's inevitability - obviously it will be enacted, just that the line of argument being used as justification by these cunts and you retards is so obviously total bollocks. Don't insult anyone else's intellence any further by suggesting it's anything other than bene-bashing

[husaberg]

just that the line of argument being used as justification by these cunts and you retards is so obviously total bollocks. Don't insult anyone else's intelligence any further by suggesting it's anything other than bene-bashing

Say again....

What is the unemployment benefit for in your eyes then. My understanding it is for people that want to find work.

How is it picking on the unemployment beneficiaries.

Also why does it worry you so much. (not meant to be antagonistic BTW)

[mashman]

Referendums aren't worth a pinch of shit. Hoops to go through to get one ... wait for an election to hold one ... and if the result isn't liked by the party in power ... don't need to do anything at all. No binding responsibility to take ANY action. End of story ....
Remember the one we had to decide if MMP was to stay ... ??? remember the action the goverment took after it ... ????

If you don't remember ... there wasn't any.

Remember the golden rule ... The one's with the gold ... makes the rules. And NAH ... the couches will still be full ... if they could get off their arse's ... they'd have a job.

They probably cost a pretty penny too. Shame there aren't more of them... but then even 1 loss would be like blood in the water.

Why would I care about the voting system? If they can't even manage to put a vote of no confidence or something similar on the paper and take it as a registered vote then I highly doubt that changing the voting system is going to accomplish anything. I wonder how many of the flip flop voters woulda ticked that box instead of one of the political parties on show.

heh, that one is kind of engrained into my mind for some bizarre reason.

[mashman]

Reasonable is mentioned a lot, we all know why. Hint there's two reasons for it:shutup:

Because this policy has no basis and is playing on the naivety of people and fear of those who use drugs.

They're bathing in their sarcasm

[mashman]

Thank fuck for that, I could do without more horse shit today.

You're welcome.

[husaberg]

Because this policy has no basis and is playing on the naivety of people and fear of those who use drugs.

They're bathing in their sarcasm

err.......Got sick of waiting and answered it my self anyway.


Sorry you kind of missed the point

Its going to happen regardless.

Count the times it says reasonable.
There is of course two reasons for this.

Reasonable is a legal term relating to the applications of drug testing, which currently defines when it can be applied.

It is reasonable.

[sidecar bob]

Well I guess this thread continues to prove my theory that stoners have an overwhelming need to impose their point of view on others, regardless of how idiotic it is.
Why dont you stoners just start your own businesses & then you can have a job with no drug testing. That would be an awesome idea, instead of relying on others for a hand out, while you turn your brains into clearly what appears to be fuck all.

[short-circuit]

Well I guess this thread continues to prove my theory that stoners have an overwhelming need to impose their point of view on others, regardless of how idiotic it is.
Why dont you stoners just start your own businesses & then you can have a job with no drug testing. That would be an awesome idea, instead of relying on others for a hand out, while you turn your brains into clearly what appears to be fuck all.

I think you'd have to be pretty brainless to assume that those who disagree with you on this topic are all druggies. I don't do any drugs at all alcohol included.

This is all beside the point anyway really (as you would know if you weren't as "naturally" thick as pigshit) as it is about discriminating against a group of people most in need (including children)

[oneofsix]

I think you'd have to be pretty brainless to assume that those who disagree with you on this topic are all druggies. I don't do any drugs at all alcohol included.

This is all beside the point anyway really (as you would know if you weren't as "naturally" thick as pigshit) as it is about discriminating against a group of people most in need (including children)

+1 almost. I do have the occasional drink, about once a month at PnJs although I did have bitters in a drink on Saturday night.

This is about short sighted, knee jerk, discrimatary laws to appeal to the greedies and red necks at the expense of the needy. Now watch some greedy or redneck try and quote "life style beneficiaries".

[sidecar bob]

I think you'd have to be pretty brainless to assume that those who disagree with you on this topic are all druggies. I don't do any drugs at all alcohol included.

This is all beside the point anyway really (as you would know if you weren't as "naturally" thick as pigshit) as it is about discriminating against a group of people most in need (including children)

Yeah, cos people NEED drugs, obviously to raise children etc. I was a bit slow in picking up on that.
My "natural thick as pigshitness" has resulted in me being the owner of a very sucessful business for nearly two decades.
I dont need to rely on others to give me money because im too fuckin lazy & useless to get a job.
Greedy redneck, now theres a good one. What about self supporting taxpayer.

[Paul in NZ]

Well I guess this thread continues to prove my theory that stoners have an overwhelming need to impose their point of view on others, regardless of how idiotic it is.
Why dont you stoners just start your own businesses & then you can have a job with no drug testing. That would be an awesome idea, instead of relying on others for a hand out, while you turn your brains into clearly what appears to be fuck all.

Hey be fair - after all they have created a whole new business sector... Drug testing job applicants....

[mashman]

err.......Got sick of waiting and answered it my self anyway.

I prefer my answers :D... It would be reasonable to accept that some people just won't work, the reason for their decision shouldn't really matter. The basis for that reasoning would be that there aren't enough jobs to go around. It's a beat up, that's the reason for this policy.

I agree that in an ideal world where drugs, were really as bad as people say they are, that people would be tested before they went for a job... but the reality is something entirely different. Dicks will be dicks whether it's booze or drugs and unfortunately some of those people will do these things at work. NOTHING will prevent that (it happens, even in industry's that test). The mitigation being put forwards for your approval misses that FACT entirely. There is no reason for this policy.

[sootie]

What do you think of Gareth Morgan's idea of giving every citizen a basic subsistence allowance? If you want to do more than exist, then you have to earn more by working at something. Part of the attraction here is that it keeps crime down. :innocent:

[mashman]

What do you think of Gareth Morgan's idea of giving every citizen a basic subsistence allowance? If you want to do more than exist, then you have to earn more by working at something. Part of the attraction here is that it keeps crime down. :innocent:

They already receive one don't they? The benefit. Is he expecting drug testing to be a condition in regards to how much "subsistence" a person will receive? No doubt some beneficiaries already work to top up their salary... it may not be tax paying work, it may not even be legal work, but they're doing something... it's just not the social norm... so I can't see it keeping crime down either. Removing the financial system entirely would allow people to "exist" as well as drastically reducing crime. But alas, it seems that we are doomed to be led in the direction of financial solutions to financial problems.

It's as good as his ideas on ACC :innocent:

[oneofsix]

They already receive one don't they? The benefit. Is he expecting drug testing to be a condition in regards to how much "subsistence" a person will receive? No doubt some beneficiaries already work to top up their salary... it may not be tax paying work, it may not even be legal work, but they're doing something... it's just not the social norm... so I can't see it keeping crime down either. Removing the financial system entirely would allow people to "exist" as well as drastically reducing crime. But alas, it seems that we are doomed to be led in the direction of financial solutions to financial problems.

It's as good as his ideas on ACC :innocent:

As I understand Garth's idea you me and John Key, oh and of course Garth himself, all receive the allowance. This is your base NZ living allowance and income is over and above this. If you get sick, injured, unemployed or over age this basic allowance is all you get, if you want more work or (probably Garth's favourite) invest for it.

Sounds more of what has gone wrong with the pension, instead of the wealthy giving back some to those that worked at the lower levels they now all have their hands in the pot, the wealthy more so than the middle class, and even more reason for the life style beneficiaries not to get motivated, the best they can hope for is middle class and we all know that they are the worst abused, work the hardest and pay the most and do the least dodging.

[Akzle]

Well I guess this thread continues to prove my theory that stoners have an overwhelming need to impose their point of view on others, regardless of how idiotic it is.
uhh. whut? it's not the stoners imposing drug testing on everyone else...(nor specifically targeting beneficiaries/politicians.) (drug testing to ensure there are trace levels of drugs in their systems, of course...)

Why dont you stoners just start your own businesses & then you can have a job with no drug testing. That would be an awesome idea, instead of relying on others for a hand out, while you turn your brains into clearly what appears to be fuck all.i did. have you seen the hole i dug?
as far as [a stoner] turning their mind to "fuckall" - the above has been you longest and most sensible contribution to this forum. all the while avoiding stating a position or backing it up with any kind of reason or fact.
i think you'll find, by and large, people who take drugs recreationally, spend a lot more time thinking about shit.

...they now all have their hands in the pot, the wealthy more so than the middle class... the best they can hope for is middle class and we all know that they are the worst abused, work the hardest and pay the most and do the least dodging.
and better yet, arguing with each other/smokers/gays/jews/beneficiaries etc, while keeping thier eyes resolutely averted from the root of whate'er the problem may be.
it's the modern (western) condition - treat the symptom, not the disease. because there is no money in the cure. because when you've taken the pills and alleviated your pain, you can get back to "being a productive member of society"

[mashman]

As I understand Garth's idea you me and John Key, oh and of course Garth himself, all receive the allowance. This is your base NZ living allowance and income is over and above this. If you get sick, injured, unemployed or over age this basic allowance is all you get, if you want more work or (probably Garth's favourite) invest for it.

Sounds more of what has gone wrong with the pension, instead of the wealthy giving back some to those that worked at the lower levels they now all have their hands in the pot, the wealthy more so than the middle class, and even more reason for the life style beneficiaries not to get motivated, the best they can hope for is middle class and we all know that they are the worst abused, work the hardest and pay the most and do the least dodging.

Ahhhh that makes more sense... ta. Garths world, Garths world, party time excellent brrew brrrrrew brrrrrewwwwwww. Good job none of us has any special requirements, especially those who are sick or injured. Does it come with health, dental and travel expense cover? Perhaps a wee drug allowance, or at least a get out of jail free card to grow our own? Soooooooo there's no change for those who receive a benefit for whatever circumstance. I fail to see the point in it.

[mashman]

and better yet, arguing with each other/smokers/gays/jews/beneficiaries etc, while keeping thier eyes resolutely averted from the root of whate'er the problem may be.
it's the modern (western) condition - treat the symptom, not the disease. because there is no money in the cure. because when you've taken the pills and alleviated your pain, you can get back to "being a productive member of society"

oh fer fooksake... put the tin foil hat away man and keep your excuses to yourself.

[FJRider]

i think you'll find, by and large, people who take drugs recreationally, spend a lot more time talking shit.

There ... fixed it for you. You smoke a lot ... obviously .... !!!

[Ocean1]

I prefer my answers :D... It would be reasonable to accept that some people just won't work, the reason for their decision shouldn't really matter. The basis for that reasoning would be that there aren't enough jobs to go around.

I guess I'd preffer your answers too, if I was delusional.

You're right about one thing, it doesn't matter why those who won't work choose that course. And reasonable? ask those that pay for it what's reasonable. It'd be entirely reasonable to expect that those that just won't work man up to the consequences of that decision and pay for their own holiday.

As for the not enough jobs thing? You keep trundling that out, it's bullshit, the sort of last ditched excuse one might expect from one of the "won't work" types. There's no grand financial conspiricy running around killing work opportunities, there's plenty of work out there if the work will get done reliably and well, and if it earns more than the cost of the wages. It's as simple as that.



Dicks will be dicks whether it's booze or drugs and unfortunately some of those people will do these things at work. NOTHING will prevent that (it happens, even in industry's that test). The mitigation being put forwards for your approval misses that FACT entirely. There is no reason for this policy.

You've had another wee turn, haven't you? The dicks the policy is aimed at aren't at work. They don't work. And I'd say that non-working dicks spending handouts on drugs is all the reason the policy needs. As for nothing stopping the drugs thing? That's your cue to roll out the threats again, innit? We'll all be slaughtered in our beds by the nasty addict looking for funds. Bring it on.

[Akzle]

...
As for the not enough jobs thing? You keep trundling that out, it's bullshit, the sort of last ditched excuse one might expect from one of the "won't work" types. There's no grand financial conspiricy running around killing work opportunities, there's plenty of work out there

i take it you'll be the one proponing this "ineptocracy" mantra?

no. there actually is not enough work for everyone, as it is.
even if they rolled out a work for benefit scheme (which i reckon they should) they wouldn't have the work.
(not to mention the amount of free labor that's sitting in prison doing SFA. and they come at a cost 5 or 6 times greater than your average "unemployed" person.)

don't get me wrong, there's plenty to be done. but the jobs aren't there.
the grand financial conspiracy is not killing jobs, but it sure as shit aint making any, and the quest for money has overtaken any more humble, sensible quests the human breed should be aiming for.

[husaberg]

I prefer my answers :D...
Ok i understand you might, but i believe mine are closer to what most people actually think, hense the popularity of the policy.....(Not with beneficiaries obviously) but with the other 90%


It would be reasonable to accept that some people just won't work,
Disagree with you there Mashy, as it is not reasonable, not to work, when there is work available, when on the unemployment benefit. They should all be willing to work surely? Either that, or withdraw the support.



I agree that in an ideal world where drugs, were really as bad as people say they are, that people would be tested before they went for a job... but the reality is something entirely different. Dicks will be dicks whether it's booze or drugs and unfortunately some of those people will do these things at work. NOTHING will prevent that (it happens, even in industry's that test). The mitigation being put forwards for your approval misses that FACT entirely. There is no reason for this policy.

Problem ,most i agree with (not all and not to the extent)But we never will so who cares:shutup:
The reason for the policy.
With regards to you saying there is no reason. The major hurdle you face with that argument is the industry.
wants to test and so does the government. So that's all the reason they need.

[scumdog]

You're all boring me again...:yawn:

[scissorhands]

All these well meaning/ill informed white knights running around pointing guns at windmills... while your all fighting amongst yourselves the real gold is being looted.... fools gold.....

[Ocean1]

there actually is not enough work for everyone, as it is.

You seem to be having as much trouble reading other peoples posts as I have with yours.

As I said, if the expected wages matches the commercial income available to a business from that work then there is plenty of work for anyone that wants it.

Read slowly, it'll come.

[Ocean1]

You're all boring me again...:yawn:

I'm sure you can hold out until the annual Burt fang, can't ya mate?

[mashman]

I guess I'd preffer your answers too, if I was delusional.

You're right about one thing, it doesn't matter why those who won't work choose that course. And reasonable? ask those that pay for it what's reasonable. It'd be entirely reasonable to expect that those that just won't work man up to the consequences of that decision and pay for their own holiday.

As for the not enough jobs thing? You keep trundling that out, it's bullshit, the sort of last ditched excuse one might expect from one of the "won't work" types. There's no grand financial conspiricy running around killing work opportunities, there's plenty of work out there if the work will get done reliably and well, and if it earns more than the cost of the wages. It's as simple as that.

You've had another wee turn, haven't you? The dicks the policy is aimed at aren't at work. They don't work. And I'd say that non-working dicks spending handouts on drugs is all the reason the policy needs. As for nothing stopping the drugs thing? That's your cue to roll out the threats again, innit? We'll all be slaughtered in our beds by the nasty addict looking for funds. Bring it on.

I have asked myself and I find that it is reasonable. the option has been available to all NZer's for how long? Yet some people still take shitty jobs to make ends meet. Yet we'll spend more on those who don't want to work than those who do. Thine ideology is full of awesomeness.

The govt must be lying then, else they wouldn't need to create more jobs would they? Of course there's no financial conspiracy. Economics and growth are all above board. The reason that it isn't a conspiracy is because it's total utter fuckin lunacy... but I wouldn't expect you to understand that given you still class economics it as a conspiracy.

Well fuckin duh. Of course they're not all at work, but I betcha there are plenty that are... again though, you'd have to reevaluate your categorisation of the dicks to understand what is actually happening... and I'll not be holding my breath.


Ok i understand you might, but i believe mine are closer to what most people actually think, hense the popularity of the policy.....(Not with beneficiaries obviously) but with the other 90%

Disagree with you there Mashy, as it is not reasonable, not to work, when there is work available, when on the unemployment benefit. They should all be willing to work surely? Either that, or withdraw the support.

Problem ,most i agree with (not all and not to the extent)But we never will so who cares:shutup:
The reason for the policy.
With regards to you saying there is no reason. The major hurdle you face with that argument is the industry.
wants to test and so does the government. So that's all the reason they need.

You're guessing that that's what people really want given the ranting on KB? Or are you pulling ass hat figures, which I don't mind, to suit your bent? I pickin both. Be great if the public were educated enough to make the decision about how their money is spent. I'm guessing that those who show even a modicum of reason would see it as a zero sum game with potentially dangerous consequences for everyone. I'd say a good 90% of open minded people would see it differently to how you see it.

So you're happy with coercion then? You'd welcome a Police State wouldn't you?

I remember you saying that. If the industry is whining that they can't get enough staff, then ditch the stupid policy and trust people. It ain't hard... but first you'd need to accept that it's the policy that is the issue and not the people. Something I doubt one eyed fucktards are capable of...


You're all boring me again...:yawn:

You've finished the donuts already? You're coming down man, break out the cupcakes.


All these well meaning/ill informed white knights running around pointing guns at windmills... while your all fighting amongst yourselves the real gold is being looted.... fools gold.....

What is this guns at windmills I keep hearing about? The gold is long gone because no one is fighting to keep it... it left with common sense and the brains of a population it would seem.

[Teflon]

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/TKwvCN4BmgI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[scumdog]

I'm sure you can hold out until the annual Burt fang, can't ya mate?

Maybe.

But not with this paranoid bunch...

[Akzle]

You seem to be having as much trouble reading other peoples posts as I have with yours.

As I said, if the expected wages matches the commercial income available to a business from that work then there is plenty of work for anyone that wants it.

Read slowly, it'll come.

there happens to be this thing in NZ. called MINIMUM WAGE.

i maintain that you are wrong, and that there IS NOT "plenty of work for anyone that wants it"

[flyingcrocodile46]

I'd say a good 90% of open minded people would see it differently to how you see it.

:facepalm: I'd bet that not even 90% of 90% of 90% of 90% of 90% of 90% of people would see it differently. I don't know what dole queue you hang out at, but in my experience (hanging with people that work for a living) You need to get off your arse and get a fucking job. :yes:

[flyingcrocodile46]

there happens to be this thing in NZ. called MINIMUM WAGE.

i maintain that you are wrong, and that there IS NOT "plenty of work for anyone that wants it"


I think he is perfectly correct. As long as the unemployed could pull finger and actually perform a productive work task in the economically appropriate period of time, there wouldn't need to be any unemployment. Businessed would be able to profit from their labour.. they would be hired.. that's how businesses work.

The problem is that a percentage of unemployed are unemployable and an even bigger percentage of them have got a shit attitude, are too lazy to get out of their own way and can't be fucked doing anything they don't want to. For a period of time (some longer than others, most unemployed people fit that mould). IMO

The unemployed need confidence and character building support and a good kick in the arse to keep their heads in the right place. Make them wear an electronic zapper collar if you want. Set them to work cleaning community facilities, painting, doing chores for old people etc. If they don't like it they can get a job. No free rides.

[mashman]

:facepalm: I'd bet that not even 90% of 90% of 90% of 90% of 90% of 90% of people would see it differently. I don't know what dole queue you hang out at, but in my experience (hanging with people that work for a living) You need to get off your arse and get a fucking job. :yes:

I did say open minded, thems that aren't neolithic. You sound mighty vengeful, why? Because they're spending your money on drugs? Would you rather see the lot on jail and pay 10 times as much just so that you can feel like "justice" has been done?

[Ocean1]

there happens to be this thing in NZ. called MINIMUM WAGE.

i maintain that you are wrong, and that there IS NOT "plenty of work for anyone that wants it"

Yeah. Trouble is there seems to be no such thing as minimum employee value.

In fact, those beheficiaries WINZ offer employers with a discount of around $180/week represent a wage of around $10 an hour. Still no takers. There's be no takers if they were free. Welcome to the real world.

[scumdog]

there happens to be this thing in NZ. called MINIMUM WAGE.

i maintain that you are wrong, and that there IS NOT "plenty of work for anyone that wants it"

Yer delivery is a tad drab...

[Ocean1]

Mashie. English, please.

The words, not the people.

[FJRider]

there happens to be this thing in NZ. called MINIMUM WAGE.



There are also those that pay contract rates. As such ... you can get paid less than minimum wage LEGALLY ... you need to work hard to get minimum wage.

[husaberg]

You're guessing that that's what people really want given the ranting on KB?


Or are you pulling ass hat figures, which I don't mind, to suit your bent? I pickin both.
Bit of both, but this morning i asked 20 people at work, if they thought of Drug testing people on the dole was a good idea.
18 said hell yes 1 said no no was undecided.
They will be biased though because they were working and they all get drug tested.:laugh:
10 days ago Solid Energy suspended all the staff and contractors here about 280 (Pop about 11000) here probably 1100 in Westport.(Pop about 6000 i guess.)
There was a march on the street with between 3000 to 5000 according to people there no idea of the official count sorry. Where is the protests on the street for the drug policy. where is the petition for the beneficiaries?


Be great if the public were educated enough to make the decision about how their money is spent.

I'm guessing that those who show even a modicum of reason would see it as a zero sum game with potentially dangerous consequences for everyone. I'd say a good 90% of open minded people would see it differently to how you see it.
You mean well educated..... But to your point of view Mashy


So you're happy with coercion then?
You are kind of trying to coerces me there yourself Mashy so i am guessing you are ok with it.

You'd welcome a Police State wouldn't you?
No but at least the trains would run on time lol.
The policy that you say is evil was spelled out prior to the election and was not unpopular. i certainly don't agree with most of the Nats policies and didn't vote for them either, but shit this is what happen they formed a coalition and are governing us.

I remember you saying that. If the industry is whining that they can't get enough staff, then ditch the stupid policy and trust people.
Which bit did i say? Maybe The industry is whining they can't get enough Drug free staff?

It ain't hard... but first you'd need to accept that it's the policy that is the issue and not the people. Something I doubt one eyed fucktards are capable of...
The industry policy won't change. The issue is people not meeting a reasonable policy. and (plus more than 2x the money in Aussie where they still drug test BTW)
Using your words here rephrased.
People on drugs in the industry i work in(one eyed fucktards) Will kill people
Its not tiddly winks.

[scumdog]

People on drugs in the industry (one eyed fucktards) i work in Will kill people
Its not tiddly winks.


Pfft - try telling Axzle et al......

[flyingcrocodile46]

There are also those that pay contract rates. As such ... you can get paid less than minimum wage LEGALLY ... you need to work hard to get minimum wage.

Yes. The problem is that that means the individual actually has to do something in exchange for money. Fuck that. Far easier to skive off and break societies rules while society gives me the money I can't scam or steal from somewhere eh!

Time for some tough love. If that means they elect to break laws so they get a roof over their heads and free meals... then better that than rewarding them for being antisocial.

[mashman]

Mashie. English, please.

The words, not the people.

ok ok... There will always be unemployed people, especially where there aren't enough jobs (the govt admits this, why won't you?). There are already too many people that are in jobs claiming some form of benefit anyway and that highlights that most people will want to work. Even if there are enough jobs the unemployed will exist. To that end, give those who don't want to be employed/are unemployable their cash to spend on what they would like, instead of wasting money figuring out policy's that will hound them into still being unemployed/unemployable. It's not hard. The money would be better spent on other things.

Essentially it's futile screwing those who have nothing to lose... and doubly futile to believe it will save money, especially if those "types" are willing to go to jail in the first place and cost even more to support. Are you prepared to waste even more money on those who don't conform? (that does not mean that they don't work)

[Akzle]

The problem is that a percentage of unemployed are unemployable and an even bigger percentage of them have got a shit attitude, are too lazy to get out of their own way and can't be fucked doing anything they don't want to. ...

The unemployed need confidence and character building support and a good kick in the arse to keep their heads in the right place. Make them wear an electronic zapper collar if you want. Set them to work cleaning community facilities, painting, doing chores for old people etc. If they don't like it they can get a job. No free rides.
i get all that. except the bit where you say "they can get a job" and as i said, i'm all for the work for benefit schemes. perhaps the scummy mummies could work at a formaldehyde factory... might sort it out.

and that's well and good. except you're tainting everyone with the same brush. some people are genuinely unemployed. between jobs "job seekers" as winz likes to call them now, but the fact remains, that there just innt enough jobs... and with 60-something % of the current workforce unhappy with their jobs... and with companies "tightening the belts" and "sharpening the pencils" there are going to be more and more "job seekers" with less jobs. innit


Yeah. Trouble is there seems to be no such thing as minimum employee value.

In fact, those beheficiaries WINZ offer employers with a discount of around $180/week represent a wage of around $10 an hour. Still no takers. There's be no takers if they were free. Welcome to the real world.yes well. aren't you so glad you're in a caring, democratic, socialist society?
(i believe if you aren't happy, it's YOU who "should fuck off to timbuktu")


Yer delivery is a tad drab...
you are so close to being in the YAFM pile with Figgy and his mates.
just. shut. up.

[FJRider]

The industry policy won't change. The issue is people not meeting a reasonable policy.(plus more than 2x the money in Aussie (where they Still drug test BTW)
Using your words here rephrased.
People on drugs in the industry (one eyed fucktards) i work in Will kill people
Its not tiddly winks.

The average common garden building site labourer ... has the ability to kill somebody (or cause their death) if they're stoned at work.

[flyingcrocodile46]

ok ok... There will always be unemployed people, especially where there aren't enough jobs (the govt admits this, why won't you?). There are already too many people that are in jobs claiming some form of benefit anyway and that highlights that most people will want to work. Even if there are enough jobs the unemployed will exist. To that end, give those who don't want to be employed/are unemployable their cash to spend on what they would like, instead of wasting money figuring out policy's that will hound them into still being unemployed/unemployable. It's not hard. The money would be better spent on other things.

Essentially it's futile screwing those who have nothing to lose... and doubly futile to believe it will save money, especially if those "types" are willing to go to jail in the first place and cost even more to support. Are you prepared to waste even more money on those who don't conform? (that does not mean that they don't work)

You're a habitual pillow biter aren't you?

[FJRider]

Yes. The problem is that that means the individual actually has to do something in exchange for money. Fuck that. Far easier to skive off and break societies rules while society gives me the money I can't scam or steal from somewhere eh!



So they bring in Islanders by the plane load to do the work ... then the bludgers moan "No jobs" ...

[scumdog]

[COLOR="#139922"]you are so close to being in the YAFM pile with Figgy and his mates.
just. shut. up.

Say what???:blink::weird::confused:

[Akzle]

...Far easier to skive off and break societies rules while society gives me the money I can't scam or steal from somewhere eh!

Time for some tough love. If that means they elect to break laws so they get a roof over their heads and free meals... then better that than rewarding them for being antisocial.

who can't steal?
you're saying you're in agreeance with society's rules? you never travel at more than 100km/h? you're never drunk in public?

and you're seriously saying you would rather the state spent 300k$ imprisoning them, than 11K$ paying them to sit on their ass and smoke dope..?
...really?:facepalm::shit:

fuck. you should run for parliament. given the calibre of the average citizen, you'd probably be PM by next week. with taglines like that. woah nelly.

surely it'd be better fiscal policy to take 5% of the money from people at the top, rather than 5% from the people at the bottom. given that 5% of the top 1% is probably 500% of the bottom 5% of the 99%.

[flyingcrocodile46]

i get all that. except the bit where you say "they can get a job" and as i said, i'm all for the work for benefit schemes. perhaps the scummy mummies could work at a formaldehyde factory... might sort it out.

and that's well and good. except you're tainting everyone with the same brush. some people are genuinely unemployed. between jobs "job seekers" as winz likes to call them now, but the fact remains, that there just innt enough jobs... and with 60-something % of the current workforce unhappy with their jobs... and with companies "tightening the belts" and "sharpening the pencils" there are going to be more and more "job seekers" with less jobs. innit .

They need to make themselves employable by getting their heads around the fact that productivity equals profitability. Employers love profits and will grow their businesses as long as it is profitable. Productivity is essential and many (I haven't lumped all of them in as some are transitional) unemployed simply don't care to put themselves out enough to feed themselves. Fuck em. Don't reward them by giving them something for nothing. It pisses off others who are working but aren't much better off and they then decide fuck it I'll play the same game.

If you have an infection do you buy ointment that feeds the infection? No of course you don't. So why are we feeding (and encouraging/rewarding the growth) of such attitudes?

[husaberg]

The average common garden building site labourer ... has the ability to kill somebody (or cause their death) if they're stoned at work.
Not to mention a building engineer/Designer CTV anyone.........
All too true but on guy who worked in the industry who was just, (well incompetent or negligent) killed 70 in this case (thank god Cows) could have been kids though.But something that could also happen er.... a School Bus driver on P, Anyone got kids.............
Having said that i wonder if they test school bus drivers, (bet they do)... But then again they work for f all pay as well, don't they.... .Not enough IMO

[flyingcrocodile46]

So they bring in Islanders by the plane load to do the work ... then the bludgers moan "No jobs" ...

Exackery :blink:

[Ocean1]

Much better, ta.


ok ok... There will always be unemployed people, especially where there aren't enough jobs (the govt admits this, why won't you?). I agree, as long as there's benefits there'll be unemployed.There are already too many people that are in jobs claiming some form of benefit anyway and that highlights that most people will want to work. Agree there, too, but there's that chicken / egg thing: a family of average income can't maintain an acceptable lifestyle without government assistance. But if they were taxed less they'd manage fine. Resitribution of income distorts reality. Even if there are enough jobs the unemployed will exist. To that end, give those who don't want to be employed/are unemployable their cash to spend on what they would like, instead of wasting money figuring out policy's that will hound them into still being unemployed/unemployable. Why, because they'll take it anyway? Bad answer. As bad as my grand daugher telling my wife she's getting cake even though she hasn't washed up.It's not hard. The money would be better spent on other things.

Essentially it's futile screwing those who have nothing to lose... and doubly futile to believe it will save money, especially if those "types" are willing to go to jail in the first place and cost even more to support. Are you prepared to waste even more money on those who don't conform? (that does not mean that they don't work)

Dude. There is a natural default involved for those incapable of supporting themselves. They die.
There's a limit to what everyone else, in a caring society is prepared to give them in order that they can fail without the death thing. There has to be, because there's no natural limit to what the failures will take, wheras we've already exceeded a sustainable cost. In short: the cupboard's bare, work or die.

[mashman]

Bit of both, but this morning i asked 20 people at work, if they thought of Drug testing people on the dole was a good idea.
18 said hell yes 1 said no no was undecided.
They will be biased though because they were working and they all get drug tested.:laugh:
10 days ago Solid Energy suspended all the staff and contractors here about 280 (Pop about 11000) here probably 1100 in Westport.(Pop about 6000 i guess.)
There was a march on the street with between 3000 to 5000 according to people there no idea of the official count sorry. Where is the protests on the street for the drug policy. where is the petition for the beneficiaries?

Conceded. Maybe their wages are going to be ploughed into this new policy.



You mean well educated..... But to your point of view Mashy

I mean seeing the damage that this policy could and probably will do. Tis already keeping those who would be more than capable away from jobs.



You are kind of trying to coerces me there yourself Mashy so i am guessing you are ok with it.

Simple question... t'would seem it was rhetorical though.



No but at least the trains would run on time lol.
The policy that you say is evil was spelled out prior to the election and was not unpopular. i certainly don't agree with most of the Nats policies and didn't vote for them either, but shit this is what happen they formed a coalition and are governing us.

Would there be less train drivers as they're a drain on society? They'd probably be automated.
Aye, that's the state of affairs today. Shit swallowing people, me included to a degree.



Which bit did i say? Maybe The industry is whining they can't get enough Drug free staff?

So it's a health and safety concern? that makes it all the more reasonable then. Great, passed the test today, will spliff up at work to celebrate.



The industry policy won't change. The issue is people not meeting a reasonable policy. and (plus more than 2x the money in Aussie where they still drug test BTW)
Using your words here rephrased.
People on drugs in the industry i work in(one eyed fucktards) Will kill people
Its not tiddly winks.

I will disagree with the people not meeting the policy. We have been getting along fine until now, I see no reason for that not to continue without such overtly stupid measures.
Does anyone ever die where drugs aren't involved?
You're right, it's not tiddly winks, it's people being at work under the influence that are the issue, not those with traces of substances in their system... a gulf in thinking that seems to be seriously lacking.

[mashman]

You're a habitual pillow biter aren't you?

Only if you treat me to dinner first.

[FJRider]

Having said that i wonder if they test school bus drivers, (bet they do)... But then again they work for f all pay as well, don't they.... .Not enough IMO

Often school bus drivers are semi-retired. The hour or so ... morning and afternoon is all the work they do.

You seen the type and NUMBER of pills those elderly bastards take ... ???


In recent months ... how many school bus drivers have passed out while driving their bus. And then made prime time tv news ..

There has been a few ...

[flyingcrocodile46]

who can't steal?
you're saying you're in agreeance with society's rules? you never travel at more than 100km/h? you're never drunk in public?

and you're seriously saying you would rather the state spent 300k$ imprisoning them, than 11K$ paying them to sit on their ass and smoke dope..?
...really?:facepalm::shit:

fuck. you should run for parliament. given the calibre of the average citizen, you'd probably be PM by next week. with taglines like that. woah nelly.

surely it'd be better fiscal policy to take 5% of the money from people at the top, rather than 5% from the people at the bottom. given that 5% of the top 1% is probably 500% of the bottom 5% of the 99%.

You are trying to put words in my mouth. Let me help you understand where I am coming from regarding drug testing of the unemployed and their rights so we understand each other perfectly.

Put tracking collars on anyone on the benefit who isn't doing his pre arranged 40 hours of community service, so that they can be monitored and called up to clean up whatever needs cleaning up in their neighbourhood. Street cleaning, beach cleaning, oil spills, whatever. Give them nothing for nothing.

P.S. Tender management of the jail services to private industry and let them force the guests to do hard labour or the hole. Make it almost profitable to keep them. That'll make it much more palatable to the discerning tax payer who is keen to see his fellow man enjoys the benefit of a fully rounded education.

[mashman]

Much better, ta.

Dude. There is a natural default involved for those incapable of supporting themselves. They die.
There's a limit to what everyone else, in a caring society is prepared to give them in order that they can fail without the death thing. There has to be, because there's no natural limit to what the failures will take, wheras we've already exceeded a sustainable cost. In short: the cupboard's bare, work or die.

Sorry, there aren't enough jobs today, some of you are just going to have to die. That has promise. It works well in other country's around the world. Tell you what, ditch the financial system and everyone gets to live... they may even decide to work too (ok that has a huge hint of tui in there... butcha don't know until you try). Anyhoo, once they're dead who's gonna buy all of the cheap Chinese shit? It'll destroy our free trade status. There's more than enough to go around. Believing otherwise and believing that growth and the pursuit of money is the answer to anything is pretty hard core denial. Trust me, I've surfed the internet and found it out.

In response to the blue:

Fucksake what's with the blue? Hang on, I think I might know :laugh:

As long as there's money there'll be benefits. Go figure.

If people were taxed less they wouldn't receive any services when they needed them as they wouldn't be able to afford those sorts of prices. Who's gonna go under the gun? The emergency services? Politicians (well, the current crop (all parties) I'm ok with that for some reason)? Would the private sector be able to look after those who are unfortunate enough to become unemployed? No, NZ would turn into a slave labour camp over night.

As for the mistreatment of your grand daughter... perhaps if you gave her the cake as long as she did the dishes afterwards she might do it. Or do you think that's sending the wrong message?

[mashman]

Put tracking collars on anyone on the benefit who isn't doing his pre arranged 40 hours of community service, so that they can be monitored and called up to clean up whatever needs cleaning up in their neighbourhood. Street cleaning, beach cleaning, oil spills, whatever. Give them nothing for nothing.

P.S. Tender management of the jail services to private industry and let them force the guests to do hard labour or the hole. Make it almost profitable to keep them. That'll make it much more palatable to the discerning tax payer who is keen to see his fellow man enjoys the benefit of a fully rounded education.

:rofl: It'd be worth murdering people to open up a vacancy to apply for... failing that I can go to jail and do fuck all. The worst that'll happen is that I get a beating for not doing my jail work and end up in hospital smashed on some groovy drug.

[Akzle]

productivity equals profitability. Employers love profits and will grow their businesses as long as it is profitable. Productivity is essential and many (I haven't lumped all of them in as some are transitional) unemployed simply don't care to put themselves out enough to feed themselves. Fuck em. Don't reward them by giving them something for nothing. It pisses off others who are working but aren't much better off and they then decide fuck it I'll play the same game.
ahh. profit.
because that's the most important thing in the world.
oh. fucking. dear.
see. we're never going to agree now. because money is the root of all evil. and you worship money.
enjoy your next incarnation as a peasant.



Dude. There is a natural default involved for those incapable of supporting themselves. They die.
There's a limit to what everyone else, in a caring society is prepared to give them in order that they can fail without the death thing. There has to be, because there's no natural limit to what the failures will take, wheras we've already exceeded a sustainable cost. In short: the cupboard's bare, work or die.
oh if only! if only society could be like that. i'd be on top of a large pile of dead bodies with my ak47.
you don't think, that perhaps the whole system might be a bit fucked? that whole, "money", the "take money off the hampsters" and "give money to the shareholders" and "spend money on roads of national significance".. you don't think there might be some inherent flaw in a medium which is borrowed from a private (profitable!) institution and guaranteed by YOU accepting servitude of another man?
i don't see how that little scheme could go wrong eh?
you don't think that if people were working for humanity, instead of their own selfish gain (money) we might all move forward?

probably not eh, easier to lay the blame on others, however poor and uninfluential they might be. the media sure has you by the snout.

[flyingcrocodile46]

ahh. profit.
because that's the most important thing in the world.
oh. fucking. dear.
see. we're never going to agree now. because money is the root of all evil. and you worship money.
enjoy your next incarnation as a peasant.

Will you be vacating the role anytime soon?

[scumdog]

Will you be vacating the role anytime soon?

You overestimate him I fear...

[flyingcrocodile46]

:rofl: It'd be worth murdering people to open up a vacancy to apply for... failing that I can go to jail and do fuck all. The worst that'll happen is that I get a beating for not doing my jail work and end up in hospital smashed on some groovy drug.

It's pretty clear that you aren't looking at the picture I painted. No drugs dude. Just pain... or the game plan... Pain.. Game plan... pai.. Get it?

[Akzle]

Will you be vacating the role anytime soon?

can't imagine i will. i have food. shelter, money, drugs, friends (believe it or not), whanau, and a whole lot of good karma piling up. my needs are met and i'm happy.
you're starting to smell a bit...
are you happy? you don't sound like a happy person...

[husaberg]

Conceded. I expeced 19 out of 20 to tell you the truth i was disapointed.


I mean seeing the damage that this policy could and probably will do. Tis already keeping those who would be more than capable away from jobs.
This is your point. Now sell me on it? what will the damage be?

Simple question... t'would seem it was rhetorical though.
Nah it was a complex multi faceted question that was misleadingly pointed/designed/phrased to give the response you wanted. That is coercion, hence my answer.

Would there be less train drivers as they're a drain on society? They'd probably be automated.
Aye, that's the state of affairs today. Shit swallowing people, me included to a degree.
Er... the trains was a joke read it again...

So it's a health and safety concern? that makes it all the more reasonable then. G
Yip

I will disagree with the people not meeting the policy. We have been getting along fine until now, I see no reason for that not to continue without such overtly stupid measures.
Sorry don't agree, the employed aren't getting along alright are they. ESP if they are sitting around with nothing better to do than get high.

Does anyone ever die where drugs aren't involved?
Yip of course, but do really sincerely think drug testing doesn't help at all.......... really.

You're right, it's not tiddly winks, it's people being at work under the influence that are the issue, not those with traces of substances in their system... a gulf in thinking that seems to be seriously lacking.
So you don't disagree with the testing....Its just the levels...........

[idb]

ahh. profit.
because that's the most important thing in the world.
oh. fucking. dear.
see. we're never going to agree now. because money is the root of all evil. and you worship money.
enjoy your next incarnation as a peasant.


oh if only! if only society could be like that. i'd be on top of a large pile of dead bodies with my ak47.
you don't think, that perhaps the whole system might be a bit fucked? that whole, "money", the "take money off the hampsters" and "give money to the shareholders" and "spend money on roads of national significance".. you don't think there might be some inherent flaw in a medium which is borrowed from a private (profitable!) institution and guaranteed by YOU accepting servitude of another man?
i don't see how that little scheme could go wrong eh?
you don't think that if people were working for humanity, instead of their own selfish gain (money) we might all move forward?

probably not eh, easier to lay the blame on others, however poor and uninfluential they might be. the media sure has you by the snout.
How do you gain access to the internet to enable you to spread your wisdom to the masses?
And why would you shoot poor people?
And why are you quoting Adele and Meatloaf...they're rolling in money?

I have soooooo many questions............

[mashman]

It's pretty clear that you aren't looking at the picture I painted. No drugs dude. Just pain... or the game plan... Pain.. Game plan... pai.. Get it?

You just changed it... no fair.

[Ocean1]

Busy. But this:


Tell you what, ditch the financial system and everyone gets to live...

If there was no token representing value then how would you pay benefits? Bag of spuds? Paid for with an oil change? Which cost three and a half T shirts? Don't be fucking ridiculous, if there was no currency there’d be no organised charity.

I know you think it’s demeaning for beneficiaries to have to answer for anything. Most of the rest of the world knows the solution to that problem...

[FJRider]

you don't think that if people were working for humanity, instead of their own selfish gain (money) we might all move forward?

probably not eh, easier to lay the blame on others, however poor and uninfluential they might be. the media sure has you by the snout.

I hear you COMRADE ...

BUT ...

If more people were working ... this thread probably wouldn't have happened ... and it's easier (and more productive) to go out and get a job ... than sit on your couch smoking dope, and laying the blame of your misfortunes ... on somebody else ...

[idb]

can't imagine i will. i have food. shelter, money, drugs, friends (believe it or not), whanau, and a whole lot of good karma piling up. my needs are met and i'm happy.
you're starting to smell a bit...
are you happy? you don't sound like a happy person...

That sounds nice...its sounds like you're having a good time with all that food, shelter, money, drugs...haaaang ooonnnnn...did you say you have money?

see. we're never going to agree now. because money is the root of all evil. and you worship money.

[flyingcrocodile46]

can't imagine i will. i have food. shelter, money, drugs, friends (believe it or not), whanau, and a whole lot of good karma piling up. my needs are met and i'm happy.
you're starting to smell a bit...
are you happy? you don't sound like a happy person...

Allways happy to help people understand the worthlessness of their opinions.

I see you are obviously aware that happiness is relative and really boils down to your state of mnd. People who aim low are nearly allways happier with their lot in life as the lower the aim, the closer it gets to what really matters.

As long as they pay their own way all is good. If they are happy that is a bonus, as happiness has nothing to do with material property. Which of course is just another reason why it's pointless giving people money for nothing. It doesn't make them happy. Respect is what makes them happy and if they want that they have to earn it... along with the money.

[mashman]

I expeced 19 out of 20 to tell you the truth i was disapointed.

This is your point. Now sell me on it? what will the damage be?

Nah it was a complex multi faceted question that was misleadingly pointed/designed/phrased to give the response you wanted. That is coercion, hence my answer.

Aye, that's the state of affairs today. Shit swallowing people, me included to a degree.
Er... the trains was a joke read it again

Yip

Sorry don't agree the employed aren't getting along alright are they

Yip of course, but do really sincerely think drug testing doesn't help at all.......... really.

So you don't disagree with the testing....Its just the levels...........

Well I'm sure you could coerce the 19th into shape... iffen he's in the same industry as yourself he's likely gonna be a push over for a bit of propaganda.

Misery for those who have traces of a substance in their blood.

It wasn't complex at all. That's exactly what's happening. You wanting to make it complicated isn't surprising though.

I saw the joke and thought it was shit.

Bwaaaaaa ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaaaa... it doesn't get any better than that.

I disagree with your disagreement.

If there's cause to suspect it's being taken at work, absolutely.

Yes and no, as said above, there needs to be enough of a suspicion that it is being used at work.

[sootie]

SIGNATURE
Ineptocracy: A system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

You know, if you worked on it a bit, I bet you could be quite cynical about how our society works ......

[flyingcrocodile46]

You know, if you worked on it a bit, I bet you could be quite cynical about how our society works ......


Heh! :laugh:

[mashman]

Busy. But this:

If there was no token representing value then how would you pay benefits? Bag of spuds? Paid for with an oil change? Which cost three and a half T shirts? Don't be fucking ridiculous, if there was no currency there’d be no organised charity.

I know you think it’s demeaning for beneficiaries to have to answer for anything. Most of the rest of the world knows the solution to that problem...

You wouldn't need to pay benefits as food would be free. Ya know, walk into the shop and pick it up. Oil changes would be free too. No need to trade anything if it's all free. If there was no currency there's be no need for charity.

I don't think that at all... but I don't see why they should be treated as second class citizens, even those who "deserve" to be treated in such a way. They do, they ignore the solution too and also hope that it would just go away by implementing policy.

[FJRider]

You know, if you worked on it a bit, I bet you could be quite cynical about how our society works ......

That's the the problem isn't it ... 11 % of society doesn't work. So we're going to give them a fair option ...

WORK and earn their own money. Or drug test them ... so they risk loosing their Entitlement if they fail it.

No need to get cynical about it at all ... :laugh:

[husaberg]

can't imagine i will. i have food. shelter, money, drugs, friends (believe it or not), All the basic covered, but So you need drugs then?Not sure thats on your UN list is it?

whole lot of good karma piling up. my needs are met and i'm happy. Rep is like Karma...so i had a look before at yours, you have 1/3 red rep that's like Karma mate....

you're starting to smell a bit... i'am sure impressed with your witty repartee..........

are you happy? you don't sound like a happy person...
I sure find both of you two funny as....
difference is I am laughing with FJ, scumdog (AKA the Yank) flyingcrocodile46 Ocean and Mashy plus the rest, Whereas I'm laughing at you Akeezle.

I think its time you started to try and remove the chip of both your shoulders Akzeezle
Because if you haven't noticed yet, The world owes you nothing.

[idb]

You know, if you worked on it a bit, I bet you could be quite cynical about how our society works ......

Pah!
What do cynics know!!!!

[Akzle]

How do you gain access to the internet to enable you to spread your wisdom to the masses?
And why would you shoot poor people?
And why are you quoting Adele and Meatloaf...they're rolling in money?

I have soooooo many questions............
to answer your questions...
a shitty old laptop and cellphone
who said it would be the poor i would execute?
nono.. i believe adele was rolling in the deep...
ask away. educating yourself costs nothing.

...haaaang ooonnnnn...did you say you have money?
i did say money. but money is a means to an end. as your mate ocean pointed out, i can't swap all my tie-dye T shirts for oil. i don't endeavor to have a lot of it for it's own sake, nor do i agree with any/everything behind it. but i use it to buy cool shit that should last my lifetime, and that i can even hand on down to the grandkids.
i COULD just go and take the shit that i want off someone like you. i've got the guns... but that wouldn't sit well with my morals.
i don't allow myself to be a slave to it. i don't share it with your government.
would that i didn't need it. and i'm sure you'll all get here oneday. i'm praying for meteors. and tidal waves.

[Ocean1]

You know, if you worked on it a bit, I bet you could be quite cynical about how our society works ......

Story of my life, Ocean1 could try harder.


You wouldn't need to pay benefits as food would be free. Ya know, walk into the shop and pick it up. Oil changes would be free too. No need to trade anything if it's all free. If there was no currency there's be no need for charity.

Have you any idea how old that falacy is?


I don't think that at all... but I don't see why they should be treated as second class citizens, even those who "deserve" to be treated in such a way. They do, they ignore the solution too and also hope that it would just go away by implementing policy.

Yeah, I feel sorry for most of them too. Enough to buy them food and shelter. Not drugs I can't afford myself. And face it, the long term unemployed aren't actually citizens at all, they don't meet the most basic criteria: they contribute nothing. They're where thay are because they made poor choices starting way before they lost their job, and there's absolutely nothing you can do that'll change that behaviour.

[Akzle]

...Not drugs I can't afford myself. ..

shit man. if that's your only problem.. whaddaya want.. i'll post you some..

[husaberg]

Well I'm sure you could coerce the 19th into shape... iffen he's in the same industry as yourself he's likely gonna be a push over for a bit of propaganda. The disagree was a she actually.


Misery for those who have traces of a substance in their blood.
Missery for those, that choose, even though, they knew they, will get tested, and sent down the road, if they test positive, to a substance that impairs their function, an illegal one at that...........



I disagree with your disagreement. which one?


If there's cause to suspect it's being taken at work, absolutely.
What if its being taken on the way to work or 5 minutes before work Mashy were is the line in the sand.......after-alll its not at work

Yes and no, as said above, there needs to be enough of a suspicion that it is being used at work.

OK Mashy, but how pray-tell, will you, decide who to test, in a reasonable manner?
Isn't random the fairest manner?




ask away. educating yourself costs nothing.

i'm sure you'll all get here oneday. i'm praying for meteors. and tidal waves.

Er.... Time to ask for your money back.... you sure got ripped off..... Hurry before the world ends Heny Penny.........

[idb]

to answer your questions...
a shitty old laptop and cellphone
who said it would be the poor i would execute?
nono.. i believe adele was rolling in the deep...
ask away. educating yourself costs nothing.

i did say money. but money is a means to an end. as your mate ocean pointed out, i can't swap all my tie-dye T shirts for oil. i don't endeavor to have a lot of it for it's own sake, nor do i agree with any/everything behind it. but i use it to buy cool shit that should last my lifetime, and that i can even hand on down to the grandkids.
i COULD just go and take the shit that i want off someone like you. i've got the guns... but that wouldn't sit well with my morals.
i don't allow myself to be a slave to it. i don't share it with your government.
would that i didn't need it. and i'm sure you'll all get here oneday. i'm praying for meteors. and tidal waves.

But...money is the root of all evil you said.
Not just some...all.
How can you allow yourself and to your grandkids to be corrupted by it?
You're condemning them to a life of inherited corruption!

[mashman]

Story of my life, Ocean1 could try harder.

Poor Mrs Ocean.



Have you any idea how old that falacy is?

Likely as old as the falacy's against the idea... ad still not yet tried in modern day society to see if it will work (which it will).



Yeah, I feel sorry for most of them too. Enough to buy them food and shelter. Not drugs I can't afford myself. And face it, the long term unemployed aren't actually citizens at all, they don't meet the most basic criteria: they contribute nothing. They're where thay are because they made poor choices starting way before they lost their job, and there's absolutely nothing you can do that'll change that behaviour.

How do you know that they don't contribute to their community? Some of them are there they are by choice, some by ignorance, some by circumstance (yes I understand the argument against that, but if your head ain't right for whatever reason, you need time to get it right) etc... and there is absolutely everything that can be done to "change" the behaviour (embrace it even). Levelling the playing field first and foremost.


The disagree was a she actually.

Missery for those that choose even though they know they will get tested and sent down the road if positive to a substance that impairs their function an illegal one at that...........

which one?

What idf its being taken on the way to work or 5 minutres before work Mashy were is the line in the sand.......

OK Mashy, but how pray-tell, will you, decide who to test, in a reasonable manner?
Isn't random the fairest manner?

She's obviously intelligent.

Propaganda, no more, no less.

The last one.

There are signs. I suggest they look into it, because as you point out drugs can be taken at any time.

As I said above. Look for the signs of being under the influence. A damn sight cheaper than a blood test to start with.
Only of you're looking for under the influence and not trace.

[husaberg]

She's obviously intelligent. She is, and is a lovely person. but remember she passes her drug test though.

Propaganda, no more, no less.Say what, they took drugs when they knew if they test positive they got let go (which they were told it would happen prior to the implementation of testing) it isn't propaganda, because it happened Cause and effect.


There are signs. I suggest they look into it, because as you point out drugs can be taken at any time.
As I said above. Look for the signs of being under the influence. A damn sight cheaper than a blood test to start with.
Only of you're looking for under the influence and not trace.
ok using the Mashy Mantra We then drug test the forgetful, the irritable,the poor work attenders, the happy, the quiet, the loud, the sleepy,The shy withdrawn, the sad,the ones that smell funny, the clumsy the ones, the ones with a lower sex drive, the anxious,and so on..... come on Mashy is that fair.
What if they want to target someone unfairly as well. or if some of the people (as in basically everyone is covered there) that meet some of these impossible array of symptoms, surly there would be some innocent people that would feel aggrieved or a bit agitated when singled out......

If its so easy to detect how come some people miss the symptoms of serious addictions of all types (not just drugs) even close family and friends.

[scissorhands]

Because most people have unhealthy addictions [junk food, arguing, motorbikes] themselves and dont want to appear as hypocrites

many others profit from others mistakes and ignorance

Imagine who[and how many] would be out of work, if everyone was sorted

[husaberg]

Gee no issues here

come the armageddon, you'll be the first to go hungry. failing that, you'll be first against the wall.

i think that beneficiaries who get kicked off a benefit will end up robbing you moaning white cunts to get their $$
i think all drugs should be legal. (thereby eliminating the "need" to test, and freeing up a stack of prison space, a saving a fat fucking stack on policy enforcement costs.)
any other questions?


it's like cops paying tax. or politicians.



i operate some of THE most dangerous machinery in the country on a weekly basis. i don't drink much because i can't afford it, but i smoke like a train. and haven't hurt anyone to date. (anyone that i didn't intend to hurt, that is.)

. when i say coffee.. i mean the kind that paralyses children and causes heart problems in otherwise-healthy adults. most people make it with water. i make it with coffee. and grind and snort a couple of beans if i want a real kick.


you're more optimistic than me. i'm praying for meteors. (http://www.space.com/14810-asteroid-earth-impact-risk-2012da14.html) (it'd be more fun to watch)
anyone know about space wars?:rolleyes:


i complain. and i sure as shit don't vote. i reserve the right to make my own decisions, as a thinking adult.
why would i vote for someone to make decisions for me? especially if that person was a politician???!!!
the day i vote will be the day "hang the lot of the fuckers" is on the polling form.

i COULD just go and take the shit that i want off someone like you. i've got the guns... but that wouldn't sit well with my morals.
i don't allow myself to be a slave to it. i don't share it with your government.
would that i didn't need it. and i'm sure you'll all get here oneday. i'm praying for meteors. and tidal waves.

ahh. profit.
because that's the most important thing in the world.
oh. fucking. dear.
see. we're never going to agree now. because money is the root of all evil. and you worship money.
enjoy your next incarnation as a peasant.

oh if only! if only society could be like that. i'd be on top of a large pile of dead bodies with my ak47.
you don't think, that perhaps the whole system might be a bit fucked?
you don't think that if people were working for humanity, instead of their own selfish gain (money) we might all move forward?
robably not eh, easier to lay the blame on others, however poor and uninfluential they might be. the media sure has you by the snout.


can't imagine i will. i have food. shelter, money, drugs, friends (believe it or not), whanau, and a whole lot of good karma piling up. my needs are met and i'm happy.
you're starting to smell a bit...
are you happy? you don't sound like a happy person...

[Ocean1]

How do you know that they don't contribute to their community?

Au, ya got me, I'm pre-judging them innit? I do that, though because over the years I've dealt with a fairly large number of them, and of those, far from contributing almost all were a significant drag on their community. So when I generalise just go ahead and assume that I mean that comfortable majority, eh?


Some of them are there they are by choice, some by ignorance, some by circumstance (yes I understand the argument against that, but if your head ain't right for whatever reason, you need time to get it right) etc... and there is absolutely everything that can be done to "change" the behaviour (embrace it even). Levelling the playing field first and foremost.

We've done this, it doesn't matter why they're there. And yes I understand that some are not capable of holding down a normal job and never will be, they're the reason the benefit's there in the first place. But they're the very last ones that should be using their dole to indulge in experimental pharmacuticals.

As for the lavel field? You've got it backwards again, the whole purpose of the benefit system is to tilt the field substantially in their favour. Testing 'em for drugs isn't going to change that, at worst it'll cull some of the "won't work"ers out of the herd of "can't work"ers the dole's supposed to be for.

[Edbear]

Au, ya got me, I'm pre-judging them innit? I do that, though because over the years I've dealt with a fairly large number of them, and of those, far from contributing almost all were a significant drag on their community. So when I generalise just go ahead and assume that I mean that comfortable majority, eh?



We've done this, it doesn't matter why they're there. And yes I understand that some are not capable of holding down a normal job and never will be, they're the reason the benefit's there in the first place. But they're the very last ones that should be using their dole to indulge in experimental pharmacuticals.

As for the lavel field? You've got it backwards again, the whole purpose of the benefit system is to tilt the field substantially in their favour. Testing 'em for drugs isn't going to change that, at worst it'll cull some of the "won't work"ers out of the herd of "can't work"ers the dole's supposed to be for.

This is the point of the legislation that some don't seem to understand.

There is a real difference between the two groups. One group deserves all the help they can get, the other deserves nothing at all. So just answer which group one belongs to and there is the answer to whether you should be drug tested or means tested in any form.

Beggars can't be choosers. If you need a hand out from the taxpayer you play by the taxpayer's rules. Same as if you borrow money, you have conditions to adhere to.

There are two principles that are commonly misquoted and misrepresented. One is that "money is the root of all evil." Incorrect, it says in fact, "the love of money is the root of all sorts of injurious things and by reaching out for this love, many have stabbed themselves all over with many pains."

Second is that, "he who does not work, neither shall he eat." Also wrong as it actually says, "he who does not want to work..."

It is all down to attitude really, and if one is genuinely in need through circumstances beyond their control they should be given assistance, both financially and in support of them improving their chances of working, whatever that means, be it retrainig, relocating or health. The unemployed owe society that pays them a debt of gratitude and a responsibility to find a way to provide for themselves. And if that means doing work they would rather not do, tough!

[Banditbandit]

Yeah yeah .. but what about the unintended impact on the families?

In many cases there is more than one person dependent on a welfare payment. If you cut benefits to people who have children because the beneficiary chooses to use drugs then there will be consequences on the children, and other dependents, who need that money for ood and shelter.

I have no real answer .. yes beneficiaries should not be using our money to buy illicit drugs (not a moral statement - I like illicit drugs, but I earn my money to buy them) ... but chopping benefits will affect other innocent peple as well. That is not the answer ...

[FJRider]

Yeah yeah .. but what about the unintended impact on the families?

In many cases there is more than one person dependent on a welfare payment. If you cut benefits to people who have children because the beneficiary chooses to use drugs then there will be consequences on the children, and other dependents, who need that money for ood and shelter.

I have no real answer .. yes beneficiaries should not be using our money to buy illicit drugs (not a moral statement - I like illicit drugs, but I earn my money to buy them) ... but chopping benefits will affect other innocent peple as well. That is not the answer ...

And that beneficiary that chooses to use drugs ... knows full well that his family might suffer if the test comes back positive. They would then learn what "responsibility for your actions" really means ...

[Edbear]

Yeah yeah .. but what about the unintended impact on the families?

In many cases there is more than one person dependent on a welfare payment. If you cut benefits to people who have children because the beneficiary chooses to use drugs then there will be consequences on the children, and other dependents, who need that money for ood and shelter.

I have no real answer .. yes beneficiaries should not be using our money to buy illicit drugs (not a moral statement - I like illicit drugs, but I earn my money to buy them) ... but chopping benefits will affect other innocent peple as well. That is not the answer ...


And that beneficiary that chooses to use drugs ... knows full well that his family might suffer if the test comes back positive. They would then learn what "responsibility for your actions" really means ...

You are both right. Unfortunately some people need things to be spelled out to them. You have to actually tell the drug users or wasters of money that they owe their families and that their kids come first. If they need help to kick the habit, offer it to them, if they refuse the help they demonstrate they have no sense of responsibility to their kids and should be made aware they stand to lose them if that is the only way to see that the kids are provided for.

I can see a value in providing non-negotiable vouchers for food, medicine, etc. that is linked to their ID so cannot be swapped, but that will still require monitoring to ensure the kids are actually being fed.

This shouldn't be too big a problem as the ones falling into this category are in the minority, albeit a fairly significant one. CYF's and WINZ get a lot of flack, some of it justified, however we have no other means to provide these services and I have no doubt that those in the positions of authority do actually care about people and are genuinely frustrated at the number of those who rort the system or who have no inclination to better themselves.

PS. I have given out too much rep lately...

[Banditbandit]

I have no doubt that those in the positions of authority do actually care about people

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

SERIOUSLY ????

[Banditbandit]

And that beneficiary that chooses to use drugs ... knows full well that his family might suffer if the test comes back positive. They would then learn what "responsibility for your actions" really means ...

Bwhahahahaha .. "learn what "responsibility for your actions" really means ...

What planet do you live on??? These people are never responsible for their actions ... it's always someone else's fault ...

[Edbear]

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

SERIOUSLY ????

Yup!


Bwhahahahaha .. "learn what "responsibility for your actions" really means ...

What planet do you live on??? These people are never responsible for their actions ... it's always someone else's fault ...

He did say they would learn what it means, not that they know already. Just that some need to be educated with the proverbial baseball bat.

[oneofsix]

Bwhahahahaha .. "learn what "responsibility for your actions" really means ...

What planet do you live on??? These people are never responsible for their actions ... it's always someone else's fault ...



He did say they would learn what it means, not that they know already. Just that some need to be educated with the proverbial baseball bat.

:eek: I shouldn't have watched "Beyond the Darklands" last night. That baseball bat comment take on related but unintended meaning. :laugh:

Trouble with the people referred to is not only do they blame others for their choices they pass the consequences on to others, usually their kids.

[Edbear]

:eek: I shouldn't have watched "Beyond the Darklands" last night. That baseball bat comment take on related but unintended meaning. :laugh:

Trouble with the people referred to is not only do they blame others for their choices they pass the consequences on to others, usually their kids.

Whoops! Perhaps not the best analogy in the light of that... :weird:

But you're right. Personal reponsibility is a dying faculty of society. People genuinely don't seem to understand what it means these days. :no:

[FJRider]

Finding out what happens ... and learning. May often be two different things ...

[Akzle]

But...money is the root of all evil you said.
Not just some...all.
How can you allow yourself and to your grandkids to be corrupted by it?
You're condemning them to a life of inherited corruption!

real easy. i am not corrupted by it.

[flyingcrocodile46]

real easy. i am not corrupted by it.

Well you sure aren't a tower of virtue, so what is it that fucked you up so badly?

[FJRider]

Well you sure aren't a tower of virtue, so what is it that fucked you up so badly?

probably the drugs ...

[husaberg]

probably the drugs ...

Nah it will be the system, or the government.:bleh:

[FJRider]

Nah it will be the system, or the government.:bleh:

Corporate stress ....

[flyingcrocodile46]

Corporate stress ....

Shame of bed wetting.. Oh! hang on that's mine.

[SPman]

Drugs....work....just combine the two......

<iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/EYnEHBRlxQA" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" width="420"></iframe>

I got a nail in my head and I know that I'm gone
When I'm driving the tractor on the drug farm
Got a knife in my back got a hole in my arm
When I'm driving the tractor on the drug farm........

[husaberg]

Corporate stress ....
Nah...........



probably not eh, easier to lay the blame on others,

[mashman]

She is, and is a lovely person. but remember she passes her drug test though.
Say what, they took drugs when they knew if they test positive they got let go (which they were told it would happen prior to the implementation of testing) it isn't propaganda, because it happened Cause and effect.

ok using the Mashy Mantra We then drug test the forgetful, the irritable,the poor work attenders, the happy, the quiet, the loud, the sleepy,The shy withdrawn, the sad,the ones that smell funny, the clumsy the ones, the ones with a lower sex drive, the anxious,and so on..... come on Mashy is that fair.
What if they want to target someone unfairly as well. or if some of the people (as in basically everyone is covered there) that meet some of these impossible array of symptoms, surly there would be some innocent people that would feel aggrieved or a bit agitated when singled out......

If its soeasy to detect how come some people miss the sytoms of serious addictions of all types (not just drugs) even close family and friends.

And yet she still didn't say yes? Obviously brighter than most.

The propaganda is the reason the policy is in place in the first place. By all means choose not to see it and by all means ignore the fact that people can get "stoned" anytime they like, which blows the health and safety excuse out of the water... unless of course you choose to ignore it.

Look into their eyes. FFS if you knew anything at all you might actually be dangerous. :rofl: they;re already targeting people unfairly, but that's using my logic and common sense v's your unwavering need to follow the rules.

Because they're not looking for drugs and are probably not aware of how to spot someone who is taking drugs.


Au, ya got me, I'm pre-judging them innit? I do that, though because over the years I've dealt with a fairly large number of them, and of those, far from contributing almost all were a significant drag on their community. So when I generalise just go ahead and assume that I mean that comfortable majority, eh?

We've done this, it doesn't matter why they're there. And yes I understand that some are not capable of holding down a normal job and never will be, they're the reason the benefit's there in the first place. But they're the very last ones that should be using their dole to indulge in experimental pharmacuticals.

As for the lavel field? You've got it backwards again, the whole purpose of the benefit system is to tilt the field substantially in their favour. Testing 'em for drugs isn't going to change that, at worst it'll cull some of the "won't work"ers out of the herd of "can't work"ers the dole's supposed to be for.

I agree there are some drop kicks. There are also plenty, plenty of smart cunts who are perceived as drop kicks, because they are doing the same things that the drop kicks do. So no, I won't accept your generalisation, primarily as I've lived amongst them loser folk and they're anything but a majority from what I've seen.

Why not? I'm still to see a single reason why they shouldn't be allowed their own individual brand of entertainment, ya know, a little enjoyment... other than they shouldn't use the money charitably given to them by society to do anything other than hunt for mythical jobs.

:rofl: really? tilted in their favour? you have to be trollin me. At worst it'll cost someone their life. As I've said before, offering no alternative to people who have nothing to lose can turn out really rather bad. But by all means let's see what happens. With any luck nothing, but I'm not gonna hold my breath.

[oneofsix]

Tuhoe now own Te Urewera. (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/7653374/Historic-Treaty-settlement-for-Tuhoe) Plenty of green there.

:jerry:

[husaberg]

And yet she still didn't say yes? Obviously brighter than most. one out of twenty matches your philoshy so you asume she must be brighter than everyone else. Only problem is it doesn't fit in to your overwelming support against drug testing does it.
Anyway here is another STRAW grasp that too Mashy

The propaganda is the reason the policy is in place in the first place. By all means choose not to see it and by all means ignore the fact that people can get "stoned" anytime they like, No one ignores it Mashy that's why they test for it:clap:

which blows the health and safety excuse out of the water... unless of course you choose to ignore it.No one ignores it Mashye that's why they test for it:clap:
I find it interesting, that it's propaganda only, if it doesn't fit with your values and beliefs.


Look into their eyes. FFS if you knew anything at all you might actually be dangerous. :rofl:
Mashy you are over looking the products designed to mask the eye effects, you are also over looking the fact we wear safety tinted glasses, but i guess you didn't know that.PS Don't worry Mashy i don't consider you dangerous at all either.

they;re already targeting people unfairly, but that's using my logic and common sense v's your unwavering need to follow the rules.
If everyone gets test what can be fairer than that.
to back it up Whats more fairer than random testing it takes out the human factor and bias,For, race/ethnicity, age, gender and appearance but as i said sometime its conceivable the more "random" people get tested.



Because they're not looking for drugs and are probably not aware of how to spot someone who is taking drugs.

They don't need to spot someone Mashy. FFS they test for drugs, Are you not getting that. we don't all stand together watching dvd's all day contemplating how great we are. We are out working out who is the smartest Kardashian. The work is sometimes alone sometime in pairs, sometimes in groups, sometimes for weeks on end, sometimes overseas.

Look Mashy i get it, IYM illegal drugs are great,They never cause accidents. One one ever does stupid stuff while under the influence of them etc etc.
Everyone else is just wrong about them that's why we encourage people to give them to babies.

[Akzle]

Well you sure aren't a tower of virtue, so what is it that fucked you up so badly?

i'm not?
shit.
and here i was thinking there weren't nothing wrong with me.
are you the messiah? please, tell me what is so unvirtuous about my person?


Do you live in a rap video?
they want the nigger with the biggest nuts. well guess what? he is I and I am him.... :D

okay. white cnuts. Prepare to be incensed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTm49jSF93s

[mashman]

one out of twenty matches your philoshy so you asume she must be brighter than everyone else. Only problem is it doesn't fit in to your overwelming support against drug testing does it.
Anyway here is another STRAW grasp that too Mashy
No one ignores it Mashy that's why they test for it:clap:
No one ignores it Mashye that's why they test for it:clap:
I find it interesting that it's propaganda only if it doesn't fit with your values and beliefs.

Mashy you are over looking the products deigned to mask the eye effects, you are also over looking the fact we wear safety tinted glasses, but i guess you didn't know that.PS Don't worry Mashy i don't consider you dangerous at all either.

If everyone gets test what can be fairer than that.
to back it up Whats more fairer than random testing it takes out the human factor and bias,For, race/ethnicity, age, gender and appearance but as i said sometime its conceivable the more "random" people get tested.

They don't need to spot someone Mashy. FFS they test for drugs, Are you not getting that. we don't all stand together watching dvd's all day contemplating how great we are. We are out working out who is the smartest Kardashian. The work is sometimes alone sometime in pairs, sometimes in groups, sometimes for weeks on end, sometimes overseas.

Look Mashy i get it IYM drugs are great,They never cause accidents. One one ever does stupid stuff while under the influence of them etc etc.
Everyone else is just wrong about them that's why we encourage people to give them to babies.

How often are people tested?

[husaberg]

How often are people tested?
Everyone pre employment.
Like i said before every overseas contract (prior to leaving) all the companies insist on that.
random is well, random but approx 4-6 weekly based on previous experience, but depends, its err random.could be every second week then 2 months....
last visit, while in Western Aussie everyday everyone. All the employees for the company, we were contacting for were as well that's they system i guess. Alcohol too.

[scumdog]

okay. white cnuts. Prepare to be incensed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTm49jSF93s[/color]

Why??:confused:

[husaberg]

Tuhoe now own Te Urewera. (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/7653374/Historic-Treaty-settlement-for-Tuhoe) Plenty of green there.

:jerry:

OK that confuses the hell out of me.
i thought Tuhoe didn't er....sign the treaty. so er... how can it be a treaty settlement.
oh ell they now have lots of space for security training now anyway.:msn-wink:
Least they get off there arse's occasionally too as well, you got to respect that.



Why??:confused:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=WeYsTmIzjkw#t=2s

[flyingcrocodile46]

Why??:confused:

Cause they make shit music? Who the fuck knows what the dysfunctional twat wants to tell us... could be anything. I remember one of them on his knees making a distracting racket while rustling around in the store cupboard. When I asked him what he was looking for he said 'Da goo' I said 'what', and he shouted out 'da glue' then picked up a bolt shook it and repeated 'da glue'.

We got there in the end. I sacked him.

[jasonu]

Nah it will be the system, or the government.:bleh:

Maybe he fell of his high horse and got brain damage.

[jasonu]

okay. white cnuts. Prepare to be incensed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTm49jSF93s[/color]

I thought Flight of the Conchords only had 2 guys in it. Best laugh I have had in a while.

[mashman]

Everyone pre employment.
Like i said before every overseas contract (prior to leaving) all the companies insist on that.
random is well, random but approx 4-6 weekly based on previous experience, but depends, its err random.could be every second week then 2 months....
last visit, while in Western Aussie everyday everyone. All the employees for the company, we were contacting for were as well that's they system i guess. Alcohol too.

So plenty of time to go on a P bender, drop some disco biscuits and coke yer head off before the next test... unless they receive a surprise attack that is.

Has anyone ever been caught carrying pre-prepared pee (that's wee wee not the drug pseudohavingfun).

[scumdog]

So plenty of time to go on a P bender, drop some disco biscuits and coke yer head off before the next test... unless they receive a surprise attack that is.

Has anyone ever been caught carrying pre-prepared pee (that's wee wee not the drug pseudohavingfun).

Oh, I see what you're trying to say: that everybody should be allowed to work when they're stoned etc...:blink:

or is it everybody that's stoned etc should have to work?:confused:

[mashman]

Oh, I see what you're trying to say: that everybody should be allowed to work when they're stoned etc...:blink:

or is it everybody that's stoned etc should have to work?:confused:

Only if they think they can get away with it <_<

[husaberg]

So plenty of time to go on a P bender, drop some disco biscuits and coke yer head off before the next test... unless they receive a surprise attack that is.

Has anyone ever been caught carrying pre-prepared pee (that's wee wee not the drug pseudohavingfun).

like i said its random so who knows when......
Its been a while now so could be tomorrow.. next week... who knows. i just added up how many times and divided by how long ago it started.
The boss in the sister depot got tested last time
re the BYO pee, Not here anyway....Think someone (at a large SOE involving er,,,coal) got caught through with some he has prepared.
The testing company had to wait about 30 minutes before i could "feel in the mood to pee one time". ( I must be shy)
I had just gone weewee when i won the lotto draw for the day. So i can't imagine how bad it would have been for someone, if you were worried about the result.

But realistically the guys they know the score, they know what they have to lose. I would say IMO its easier to stay straight isn't it.


Also Mashy.I have some bad news re the one lady objector in the team. i took in a copy of the national policy today, she read it and changed her mind when i asked why she said the counseling and second chance policy Swayed her, and now says she is in favour.
She also said she thought about it and feels its only fair that if she get's tested then its also fair the recipients of her tax money do too.
she doesn't favour. The work one test and out policy all the levels though and probably never will, I empathise with that sometimes too.

It begs a question for you though, Why don't you currently take drugs. Don't worry its not designed to be a loaded question, but why not at the moment?

[husaberg]

I thought Flight of the Conchords only had 2 guys in it. Best laugh I have had in a while.






they want the nigger with the biggest nuts. well guess what? he is I and I am him.... :D

okay. white cnuts. Prepare to be incensed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTm49jSF93s


Shit i didn't get it at all. Should i be angry Alkeeezel asked me to watch it and therefor waste my time........

I also don't get why, i was supposed to be racially incensed by it. The talentless dude in the middle was whiter than me?

Did he actually mean "be pepared to see the results of incest"

OH yeah the Concords rock. But then again they are clever.....

[FJRider]

like i said its random so who knows when......


And ... prior to going on a benefit .. and as a pre-employment condition.

[mashman]

like i said its random so who knows when......
Its been a while now so could be tomorrow.. next week... who knows. i just added up how many times and divided by how long ago it started.
The boss in the sister depot got tested last time
re the BYO pee, Not here anyway....Think someone (at a large SOE involving er,,,coal) got caught through with some he has prepared.
The testing company had to wait about 30 minutes before i could "feel in the mood to pee one time". ( I must be shy)
I had just gone weewee when i won the lotto draw for the day. So i can't imagine how bad it would have been for someone, if you were worried about the result.

But realistically the guys they know the score, they know what they have to lose. I would say IMO its easier to stay straight isn't it.

Also Mashy.I have some bad news re the one lady objector in the team. i took in a copy of the national policy today, she read it and changed her mind when i asked why she said the counseling and second chance policy Swayed her, and now says she is in favour.
She also said she thought about it and feels its only fair that if she get's tested then its also fair the recipients of her tax money do too.
she doesn't favour. The work one test and out policy all the levels though and probably never will, I empathise with that sometimes too.

It begs a question for you though, Why don't you currently take drugs. Don't worry its not designed to be a loaded question, but why not at the moment?

I understand that these people know the score... but the attitude of, because I have to then someone else should too, is damaging. I see and hear it day in day out and wonder what happened to people that would twist them so badly that they ignore the fact that not everyone is as capable or able to handle situations as them. In regards to the issue and because someone else gets tested therefore so should someone else, if it's health and safety then fine, yes I understand it entirely, but I still don't agree with it as I see drugs as relatively benign and on a par with alcohol. I find it amusing that as long as a drug isn't in your system, then you are deemed not to be a drug user where that really isn't necessarily the case. I get that it's an indicator and that it may highlight issues, but it's like calling everyone that claims some form of benefit lazy... and there are plenty of fucked up people who don't take drugs. All of these things make a mockery of drug testing imho... and those who want bene's tested because they receive money are after nothing more than revenge, coz it certainly they certainly aren't after fairness, else we'd all need to be drug tested (probably not too far away) and those on the dole would be paid more.

I don't currently (last time was this weekend :drool: and before that a couple of monthish ago) because I don't... no real reason for it, spent a year or 2, maybe 3 (didn't keep score) years not so long ago where I was a very regular cannabis user, don't crave it, but do miss it. Since "stopping" I've put on weight, I don't sleep anywhere near as well and I'm not as relaxed (understatement mrs m would likely say). There's a fuckload more to it than just getting stoned... but I wouldn't understand those who just wanna get stoned or those who don't get stoned at all to understand what I get out of it... and should I decide to go back to being a regular user someday, I'll potentially run the risk of losing my job should a drugs test be a part of my job and needlessly so as far as I'm concerned... but again, I don't expect people to understand the perspective.

[husaberg]

but the attitude of, because I have to then someone else should too, is damaging.

In regards to the issue and because someone else gets tested therefore so should someone else,
I see and hear it day in day out and wonder what happened to people that would twist them so badly that they ignore the fact that not everyone is as capable or able to handle situations as them.

and those who want bene's tested because they receive money are after nothing more than revenge, coz it certainly they certainly aren't after fairness, else we'd all need to be drug tested (probably not too far away) and those on the dole would be paid more.


if it's health and safety then fine, yes I understand it entirely, but I still don't agree with it as I see drugs as relatively benign and on a par with alcohol.

I have grouped these together, but i can agree that everyone's different. Capable or able or unable of handling different situations and so forth.

But people will always expect certain levels of parity of behavior and treatment it's only human nature to expect that.

I don't see it as kicking beneficiaries or unfair treatment i see it as expect a certain level of behavior to meet the general public's expectations of who should be recieving a benefit (personally i would also include the DPB in here but its not in the policy) .

The policy is from my reading of it does not seem draconian in anyway to me.
As it allows for counseling, treatment, second chances and follows pretty closely to the treatment Landcorp, Transpower, Solid Energy, Asurequality and all the other SOE's i am aware of.

All it is asking that the people on the unemployment benefit meet the conditions a lot of employers would expect for an employee or potential employee.This i see as reasonable.

This i see as a responsibility of the person receiving the unemployment benefit,Something the rest of society has contributed to through tax.

I have lived a little and while i do see Cannabis to be rather be-nine.
I do see the effects of heavy and or habitual users as damaging. The damage i see is hard to define but it seems to rob a lot of people of their self motivation, their ambition, desire, the inner drive (for want of a better description their get up and go.
I am not saying its everyone and that some people are not going to be like that anyway. but it is a definite trend i have observed.These loss of vigour/internal motivation are the last thing that someone on the unemployment benefit needs.

P the other amphetamines and high grade stimulants i don't see a place for, neither any of the unperscribed opiates.

Don't get me wrong a lot of the recreational drugs, i see as relatively harmless for the majority of users.
Same for alcohol. for a lot of people alcohol is sadly also a problem, But not for everyone hence why we test for this all the time "check points etc"


but it's like calling everyone that claims some form of benefit lazy... and there are plenty of fucked up people who don't take drugs. All of these things make a mockery of drug testing imho...
I would never say all beneficiaries are lazy. Saddly some do defiantly use it as a out. A free ride, and that's not what the unemployment benefit is for.


I don't currently (last time was this weekend :drool: and before that a couple of monthish ago) because I don't... no real reason for it, spent a year or 2, maybe 3 (didn't keep score) years not so long ago where I was a very regular cannabis user, don't crave it, but do miss it. Since "stopping" I've put on weight, I don't sleep anywhere near as well and I'm not as relaxed (understatement mrs m would likely say). There's a fuckload more to it than just getting stoned... but I wouldn't understand those who just wanna get stoned or those who don't get stoned at all to understand what I get out of it... and should I decide to go back to being a regular user someday, I'll potentially run the risk of losing my job should a drugs test be a part of my job and needlessly so as far as I'm concerned... but again, I don't expect people to understand the perspective.
Thanks for sharing this it makes it easier to understand where you come from

[mashman]

I have grouped these together, but i can agree that everyone's different. Capable or able or unable of handling different situations and so forth.

But people will always expect certain levels of parity of behavior and treatment it's only human nature to expect that.


I dunno about that. I think as long as people are honest and don't do something stupid that injures others, like being under the influence at work or murder, I highly doubt parity comes into it. I assume that's what you were aiming at? That's all I expect of anyone.



I don't see it as kicking beneficiaries or unfair treatment i see it as expect a certain level of behavior to meet the general public's expectations of who should be recieving a benefit (personally i would also include the DPB in here but its not in the policy) .

The policy is from my reading of it does not seem draconian in anyway to me.
As it allows for counseling, treatment, second chances and follows pretty closely to the treatment Landcorp, Transpower, Solid Energy, Asurequality and all the other SOE's i am aware of.

All it is asking that the people on the unemployment benefit meet the conditions a lot of employers would expect for an employee or potential employee.This i see as reasonable.

This i see as a responsibility of the person receiving the unemployment benefit,Something the rest of society has contributed to through tax.

I have lived a little and while i do see Cannabis to be rather be-nine.
I do see the effects of heavy and or habitual users as damaging. The damage i see is hard to define but it seems to rob a lot of people of their self motivation, their ambition, desire, the inner drive (for want of a better description their get up and go.
I am not saying its everyone and that some people are not going to be like that anyway. but it is a definite trend i have observed.These loss of vigour/internal motivation are the last thing that someone on the unemployment benefit needs.

P the other amphetamines and high grade stimulants i don't see a place for, neither any of the unperscribed opiates.

Don't get me wrong a lot of the recreational drugs, i see as relatively harmless for the majority of users.
Same for alcohol. for a lot of people alcohol is sadly also a problem, But not for everyone hence why we test for this all the time "check points etc"

I get it, I really do. You expect something from someone else because that is the position you are in. Likely similar to what I'm saying below no doubt you would retort. The difference being that I'm not expecting anyone to be forced into being tested under the threat of losing money. I'm only expecting people to not be under the influence at work... and should they fuck up whilst under the influence, then by all means hammer them hard, but not until any damage has been done. Yes I know that's "dangerous" and that's why such legislation exists, but I will state again, accidents happen whether under the influence or not. I'm not too happy about personal responsibility being legislated away to the extent where it stops people from being allowed to have a job.



I would never say all beneficiaries are lazy. Saddly some do defiantly use it as a out. A free ride, and that's not what the unemployment benefit is for.


Then "target" the individual directly, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater... but that's not likely eh, we're too happy to take the easy road by tarring everyone in that position.



Thanks for sharing this it makes it easier to understand where you come from

Maybe ya do... but that's not why I'm "arguing" for beneficiaries not to be tested, not really anyway. I see the flaws in the testing methodology and if you can't tell that someone is under the influence, i.e. impaired, at any given point in time, then I won't justify the test as "valid"... shame that isn't the logic. As I've said previously, accidents happen with or without people being under the influence, who's to say that had the person been "straight" that the accident wouldn't have still happened? Tis like that poor fella and his passengers in the balloon that crashed. I highly doubt that drugs cannabis was a factor, but that was the drum that was being beaten by the media. The dangers of drug use? I don't see it.

[FJRider]

Then "target" the individual directly, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater... but that's not likely eh, we're too happy to take the easy road by tarring everyone in that position.

"Everyone' is not being "tarred" ... just the one's that use drugs. Being under the influence of booze is "frowned on" now in the workplace. (and it's legal to buy if you are old enough) Why should being under the influence of illegal substances be ok ... ???



The proposed new rules about putting children in day-care doesn't seem to be getting much attention ... more time for mum and/or dad to have a smoke without the kids about ... maybe ...

[Ocean1]

"Everyone' is not being "tarred"

Is a fucking good idea, though...

[mashman]

"Everyone' is not being "tarred" ... just the one's that use drugs. Being under the influence of booze is "frowned on" now in the workplace. (and it's legal to buy if you are old enough) Why should being under the influence of illegal substances be ok ... ???

The proposed new rules about putting children in day-care doesn't seem to be getting much attention ... more time for mum and/or dad to have a smoke without the kids about ... maybe ...

They are. They are all being tarred as they are all subject to drugs tests... irrespective of whether the job is real or not :shit:. Why shouldn't being under the influence of illegal (reefer madness) substances be ok?

Do you have any idea why some of these kids aren't in day-care? I know of a few, that I won't go into as they were part of a system I built for a govt org... but there's always the, because they want to spend more time with their kids and when the parents meet, the kids get to socialise.

[mashman]

Is a fucking good idea, though...

If you have to tar them again, would that make them re-tarred?

[Ocean1]

If you have to tar them again, would that make them re-tarred?

Only if you use feathers too.

[Madness]

reefer, madness?

Why not old chap?

[FJRider]

They are. They are all being tarred as they are all subject to drugs tests... irrespective of whether the job is real or not :shit:. Why shouldn't being under the influence of illegal (reefer madness) substances be ok?

I live next door to a pub. My street is the next one along from it's main entrance/car-park. I have been followed into my street by plod ... thinking (assuming ... ???) I'm trying to avoid a checkpoint. I am tarred with the brush that some DO attempt to avoid them. I don't mind being tested ... if I have nothing to hide.


Do you have any idea why some of these kids aren't in day-care? I know of a few, that I won't go into as they were part of a system I built for a govt org... but there's always the, because they want to spend more time with their kids and when the parents meet, the kids get to socialise.

I know of a few reasons ... one is they're too dam lazy to take them. I understand there is a number of free hours available ... so one reason can't be money ...

[short-circuit]

http://i795.photobucket.com/albums/yy239/blkst3/564240_4493580347342_528778105_n.jpg

[mashman]

I live next door to a pub. My street is the next one along from it's main entrance/car-park. I have been followed into my street by plod ... thinking (assuming ... ???) I'm trying to avoid a checkpoint. I am tarred with the brush that some DO attempt to avoid them. I don't mind being tested ... if I have nothing to hide.

Lucky bugga... but not everyone is tested right?



I know of a few reasons ... one is they're too dam lazy to take them. I understand there is a number of free hours available ... so one reason can't be money ...

Some may well be lazy. That doesn't mean that the kid won't get an education and it also doesn't mean that the kid will be unhealthy. Money is most definitely up there. Travel being a big issue.

[FJRider]

Lucky bugga... but not everyone is tested right?

Well .... just everybody they catch. But the assumption that I could be too drunk to drive ... how dare they think that.

I have never been caught drunk driving .(well ok I have ... just not charged ... but that's got nothing to do with it ... right ... ???)


Some may well be lazy. That doesn't mean that the kid won't get an education and it also doesn't mean that the kid will be unhealthy. Money is most definitely up there. Travel being a big issue.

Perhaps the tar brush is being used here too ...

The Goverment provides 20 hours of free child care. So why should money be an issue ... ???

[mashman]

Well .... just everybody they catch. But the assumption that I could be too drunk to drive ... how dare they think that.

I have never been caught drunk driving .(well ok I have ... just not charged ... but that's got nothing to do with it ... right ... ???)

Perhaps the tar brush is being used here too ...

The Goverment provides 20 hours of free child care. So why should money be an issue ... ???

Your driving must be shit.

Have you any idea how far some of these ECE's are away from where some people live? Tain't cheap to do those sorts of K's... especially if work is in the opposite direction.

[FJRider]

Your driving must be shit.

Shhhhhh ....


Have you any idea how far some of these ECE's are away from where some people live? Tain't cheap to do those sorts of K's... especially if work is in the opposite direction.


In some circumstances ... funding or assistance to get the childcare can be provided.

Maybe the parents could get a part-time job while the kid(s) are in day-care. As this proposed legislation is for beneficiaries ...

[scumdog]

Who made up those 'stats'?:blink:

[FJRider]

http://i795.photobucket.com/albums/yy239/blkst3/564240_4493580347342_528778105_n.jpg

#1 under the same name anyway ...

#2 That they know of ...

#3 Some parents find they have more important things to spend their money on ... than their kids ...

#4 Depending on how long it is before the kid turns 16 ...

#5 Most kiwi's prefer to work. Some just prefer not to ...

#6 So when the recession ends ... they'll all be back at work ... ???

[mashman]

Shhhhhh ....

In some circumstances ... funding or assistance to get the childcare can be provided.

Maybe the parents could get a part-time job while the kid(s) are in day-care. As this proposed legislation is for beneficiaries ...

My apologies, your secret is safe with me

I believe there are "traveling" carers.

Have you been to the pub? I did mention that it was financially prohibitive when work is in the opposite direction.


Who made up those 'stats'?:blink:

I know... there's no way the stats posted could be anywhere near as true as that given that our glorious leaders tell us something entirely different. Why would they keep the truth from us?

[mashman]

#1 under the same name anyway ...

#2 That they know of ...

#3 Some parents find they have more important things to spend their money on ... than their kids ...

#4 Depending on how long it is before the kid turns 16 ...

#5 Most kiwi's prefer to work. Some just prefer not to ...

#6 So when the recession ends ... they'll all be back at work ... ???

#7 Never underestimate the power of denial ...

[FJRider]

#7 Never underestimate the power of denial ...

I wont .......

[98tls]

http://i795.photobucket.com/albums/yy239/blkst3/564240_4493580347342_528778105_n.jpg

Tell me thats a wind up eh,ive seen some shit stats posted on here over the years but thats shot straight to the top.:facepalm:

[imdying]

More propaganda... sure they're small looking percentages, but the numbers and dollars involved are not.

Whilst we continue to live in this little fairyland named democracy this is the sort of shit we'll have to put up with.

[Banditbandit]

More propaganda... sure they're small looking percentages, but the numbers and dollars involved are not.



Yes, that's true. The dollars are high - and that is because more than 50% of all our welfare payments are to old age pensioners.

http://www.parliament.nz/NR/rdonlyres/022C2B15-1522-4140-999C-49CF45B43F46/512/0013Benefits1.pdf

[imdying]

Big deal, the other half are not.

[sidecar bob]

http://i795.photobucket.com/albums/yy239/blkst3/564240_4493580347342_528778105_n.jpg

Whats Pakeha?

[imdying]

Whats Pakeha?Pretty sure it's a race of dumb gob shites that were too stupid to do the job properly in the first place :laugh:

[mashman]

Whats Pakeha?

They generally have a the opposite skin tone to a Pakestani

[mashman]

I wish I could find the ?SoPHIE? report that Winston001 posted some time back as it had some interesting stats from what I remember. Too many people being a drag on the system and not positive contributors. Essentially people not being paid enough to cover an evermore expensive cost of living. Funny that. Perhaps they should just ask for a pay rise :facepalm:

[avgas]

http://i795.photobucket.com/albums/yy239/blkst3/564240_4493580347342_528778105_n.jpg
Sounds like a good reason to get rid of it then. Clearly no one is using it.
Much better solution then closing schools.

[wharekura]

Pretty sure it's a race of dumb gob shites that were too stupid to do the job properly in the first place :laugh:
Im sure they tried hard enough on Tuhoe regarding scorched earth policy when trying to get Te Kooti.

[short-circuit]

What? No one saw the Harold?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10833879


Exactly.... fucking cunts

[Ocean1]

What? No one saw the Harold?

Only for the horoscopes.

The uncle reckons there's other cool stories in there sometimes, but then he lies like a saussage in fat too.

[short-circuit]

Only for the horoscopes.

The uncle reckons there's other cool stories in there sometimes, but then he lies like a saussage in fat too.

Yeah you're right - it is a dumbed down right wing rag....but these cunts can't seem to help themself and no spin can be put on this shit to make it seem sensible or acceptable.

[FJRider]

Only for the horoscopes.



So ... which star sign said "You're coming into money" ... ??

[mashman]

New drug rules for adventure tourism (http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/14903507/new-drug-rules-for-adventure-tourism/)

tis one way to make jobs available I guess. Honestly I detest such fuckin stupid legislation. Oh but cannabis is an illegal substance. Yes, I know it is and I also know why it is, and wrongfully so if there were any common sense applied. I wish they'd hurry up and get to my industry, can't wait to hit the dole and rob some rich folks to feed my family.

[Fatjim]

http://i795.photobucket.com/albums/yy239/blkst3/564240_4493580347342_528778105_n.jpg

That is the biggest pile of horse shit I've ever read. Common sense just those with kids who earn under 70k that are getting social support are more than 0.2% of the population, let alone those on welfare.

Benefit fraud is miniscule???? WTF? whose the charlie that thought that up?

[Akzle]

umm. riddle me this:
just from all you nationalist/anti-socialist-wannabe dweebs.. what if my employment is the cultivation of cannibis. i keep the local economy awash with cash (all tax paid on...maybe it's from a beneficiary, so YOU paid the tax, but the tax HAS been paid...)


...should they drug test me?

[scumdog]

umm. riddle me this:
just from all you nationalist/anti-socialist-wannabe dweebs.. what if my employment is the cultivation of cannibis. i keep the local economy awash with cash (all tax paid on...maybe it's from a beneficiary, so YOU paid the tax, but the tax HAS been paid...)


...should they drug test me?

Hmm...Yep...

[sootie]

Solo Mum in Otara with 10 kids - all boys - gets a visit from welfare.
Welfare: "What are all your kids names"
Solo Mum: "thats Trev, and Trev, and Trev, and .... they are all Trevors"
Welfare: " Doesn't that get confusing"
Solo Mum: "Nah, at dinner time I just call out Trev & they all come"
Welfare: "How about if you just want to speak to one of them"
Solo Mum: " That's easy, I just use his surname" :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: