Welfare support and drug testing

**Edbear** · 11th September 2012, 09:10

Originally Posted by Ocean1

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** · 11th September 2012, 09:26

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** · 11th September 2012, 10:04

Originally Posted by 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 ...

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** · 11th September 2012, 11:00

Originally Posted by 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 ...

Originally Posted by FJRider

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** · 11th September 2012, 11:12

Originally Posted by Edbear

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

SERIOUSLY ????

**Banditbandit** · 11th September 2012, 11:15

Originally Posted by FJRider

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** · 11th September 2012, 11:17

Originally Posted by Banditbandit

SERIOUSLY ????

Yup!

Originally Posted by Banditbandit

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** · 11th September 2012, 11:31

Originally Posted by Banditbandit

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 ...

Originally Posted by Edbear

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.

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

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** · 11th September 2012, 11:42

Originally Posted by oneofsix

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

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...

But you're right. Personal reponsibility is a dying faculty of society. People genuinely don't seem to understand what it means these days.

**FJRider** · 11th September 2012, 11:49

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

**Akzle** · 11th September 2012, 13:12

Originally Posted by idb

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.