Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Drug tests for welfare recipients

24

Comments

  • #32
    Royal Irish
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,401 ✭✭✭Royal Irish


    LimerickSports wrote: »
    i think its a very good idea, but could be too harsh, if someone just smoked a joint at a party

    But most people in AH's think people on the dole shouldn't even be at parties. They should be at home eating cold beans out of a tin while looking for a job in a newspaper by candle light.


  • #33
    poppyvally
    Closed Accounts Posts: 341 ✭✭poppyvally


    girl in the striped socks wrote: »
    I don't really think its anyone's business what someone spends their money on,

    " THEIR" money is funded by taxpayers


  • #34
    srsly78
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,157 ✭✭✭srsly78


    Royal Irish wrote: »
    But most people in AH's think people on the dole shouldn't even be at parties. They should be at home eating cold beans out of a tin while looking for a job in a newspaper by candle light.

    So long as the beans in question are not a premium brand.


  • #35
    yammycat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 445 ✭✭yammycat


    poppyvally wrote: »
    " THEIR" money is funded by taxpayers

    and if you lose your job the same will go for you.


  • #36
    MagicSean
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,897 ✭✭✭MagicSean


    girl in the striped socks wrote: »
    Would the same apply with alcohol?
    I don't really think its anyone's business what someone spends their money on, be it alcohol, drugs, prostitutes etc

    Because it's money that should be going to help people instead of to dealers. Personally I all welfare money should be accounted for. No drugs, alcohol, smokes or nights out. if you are struggling and need help then that's fine, i have no problem helping you. If you want luxuries then get a ****ing job and stop scrounging off the rest of us.

    i wouldn't stop there though. A job seeking and skill development diary should be kept by all recipients of JSB and JSA. No single parents allownce should be provided without details of the other parent (with certain obvious exceptions) so the state my persue them for costs. JSA and JSB recipients should be required to perform volunteer work.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    AlmightyCushion
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 35,227 Mod ✭✭✭✭AlmightyCushion


    Markcheese wrote: »
    Look we don't kick people who cheat off the dole ( yes it's a small number) , do you really think we'd drug test ....
    In the uk they use lie detector soft ware during phone interveiws to target investigations on rent allowance ( housing benefit) ... It works , but we wouldn't do it ...

    No they don't simply because lie detection software doesn't work. It's way too unreliable.


  • #38
    Sunnyisland
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,562 ✭✭✭✭Sunnyisland


    Its costs our state an estimated €3.7 billion from alcohol abuse,That's a lot more than all the illegal drug addicts put together,So why don't we start with our biggest addiction first and see how we go from there.


    http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=estimated%20%E2%82%AC3.7%20billion%20cost%20to%20the%20state%20from%20alcohol%20abuse%2C&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CFAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishexaminer.com%2Fireland%2F37bn-the-hidden-price-of-alcohol-165393.html&ei=xqvwT__CMY60hAfkt9GWDQ&usg=AFQjCNFhFnVDczg9kkbNdBdzW6G_Ty7rnA


  • #39
    Varied
    Closed Accounts Posts: 725 ✭✭✭Varied


    Legalisation and taxation would bring in more money than any of these half-measures.


  • #40
    MagicSean
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,897 ✭✭✭MagicSean


    yammycat wrote: »
    Tax payers are paying off 250 billion of banking debts, prawn cocktail munching ass hats who cost us 250 billion, and still you get mad over some lad spending his hundred quid on booze, its hilarious , only in Ireland.

    The money the bankers lost that you all are repaying but are too thick to see anything but the lad drinking on the corner could pay for 2.5 million people drinking benefits for 10 years

    so yea get mad at the guy drinking his benefits, his benefits are 1% of your tax, 99% of your tax goes to the well do do lovie dovies who don't spend benefits on drink, they just sh1t the country down the toilet while trying to get maaad rich. And laughing too because nobody cares, they are too mad they have to work and johnny spends his 100 quid on booze while they have to work, omg i have to work while he drinks (too fukin thick to realise the huge tax i pay is to subsidize gambling bankers and not to pay for Johnny's booze )


    if you are concerned about how anyone spends benefits you are short a few pennies and are part of the problem

    Typical uneducated nonsense. The majority of the annual deficit is public sector wages and welfare.


  • #41
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 3,539 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    While I can see the point in drug tests, they're just not realistic.

    It would cost a bomb to test every person on welfare for drugs.

    Then there's the method of testing. There are many ways to cheat a drugs test, depending on the test, so the tests would have to be very stringent.

    Then there's the fact that the proportion of people who are hard-working people well deserving of welfare are usually a bit embarrassed about it, if not very ashamed (I'm not saying they should be, just that most people I've known on the dole were) about it. Drug testing them would only add to the amount of people out of work that develop depression.

    Take the money that would required to perform the drug tests, and instead use it to pay for house calls merely to check the claimants are in the country. That'd save us quite a lot of cash.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Blowfish
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,112 ✭✭✭Blowfish


    yammycat wrote: »
    how much of the deficit goes to johnny's booze which you are all so concerned about ?
    Total social welfare spending is about €20 billion. It's anyone's guess as to the details of the breakdown of this.


  • #43
    Jester252
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,533 ✭✭✭Jester252


    I would love to see this system in place. Its bad enough that we have to pay for them to get clean so why should we pay for them to get high in the first place.


  • #44
    irishpaddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 65 ✭✭irishpaddy


    poppyvally wrote: »
    Some states in the U.S are testing welfare recipients for drugs .They reckon anyone who can afford drugs dosent need assistance. Does anyone think this is a good idea? or would it work here




    http://www.wsws.org/articles/2012/may2012/welf-m18.shtml

    what the ****. how many of the ****ing bankers that brought the world to almost a standstill are on drugs. they can do more damage by not being on the ball then any social welfare recipient. when you are on welfare. maybe its time to have a time when we say no more, **** you if you think you can live without the poorer people in the world to clean your **** houses etc. if you dont need them to spend their few bob on all the crap the rich make. they should remember to get to the top of the ladder there has to be a first rung on the bottom, so is the bottom rung more needed then the top rung,, maybe.:mad:


  • #45
    srsly78
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,157 ✭✭✭srsly78


    irishpaddy wrote: »
    what the ****. how many of the ****ing bankers that brought the world to almost a standstill are on drugs. they can do more damage by not being on the ball then any social welfare recipient. when you are on welfare. maybe its time to have a time when we say no more, **** you if you think you can live without the poorer people in the world to clean your **** houses etc. if you dont need them to spend their few bob on all the crap the rich make. they should remember to get to the top of the ladder there has to be a first rung on the bottom, so is the bottom rung more needed then the top rung,, maybe.:mad:

    People on the dole clean our houses now!? :confused::confused:


  • #46
    goose2005
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,798 ✭✭✭goose2005


    Royal Irish wrote: »
    But most people in AH's think people on the dole shouldn't even be at parties. They should be at home eating cold beans out of a tin while looking for a job in a newspaper by candle light.

    Candle light, is it? Can't they just read the paper when the sun's out? Or hold it under a street light? And that better be a freesheet, I'll not have these people squandering 1.70 on the Indo.
    MagicSean wrote: »
    Because it's money that should be going to help people instead of to dealers. Personally I all welfare money should be accounted for. No drugs, alcohol, smokes or nights out. if you are struggling and need help then that's fine, i have no problem helping you. If you want luxuries then get a ****ing job and stop scrounging off the rest of us.

    i wouldn't stop there though. A job seeking and skill development diary should be kept by all recipients of JSB and JSA. No single parents allownce should be provided without details of the other parent (with certain obvious exceptions) so the state my persue them for costs. JSA and JSB recipients should be required to perform volunteer work.

    As with the Florida example, such a scheme would consume a mountain of administrative costs and save very little.


  • #47
    up for anything
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,790 ✭✭✭up for anything


    Wouldn't it be much more cost effective to shoot anybody who has been in receipt of any type of social welfare for longer than, say, six months. Also shoot any dependents they have. It wouldn't take long that way to reduce social welfare spending and it would galvanise those who were coming up to their sixth month to take a job, any job. :rolleyes:


  • #48
    charlemont
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,725 ✭✭✭charlemont


    yammycat wrote: »
    and again more begrudgery, how about drug test for the kunting bankers who rightly fuked this country, how about that

    True and I reckon none of them ever get randomly searched on the street either.


  • #49
    MagicSean
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,897 ✭✭✭MagicSean


    goose2005 wrote: »
    As with the Florida example, such a scheme would consume a mountain of administrative costs and save very little.

    That would depend on how it was implemented.


  • #50
    Channel Zero
    Closed Accounts Posts: 333 ✭✭Channel Zero


    MagicSean wrote: »
    Personally I all welfare money should be accounted for. No drugs, alcohol, smokes or nights out

    And how would you like to enforce this? Let's see..

    I have a suggestion. Let's ankle-tag all unemployed people!

    If they attempt to buy a bottle of wine on a Friday night, or God forbid, enter a local pub or restaurant with their loved one on a "night out", the guards can be immediately dispatched to the scene.

    I don't like using these much but here we go, just for you: rolleyes.gif


  • #51
    mattjack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,389 ✭✭✭mattjack


    So mrMattjack, you gave a dirty urine in your test , have you taken any opiates recently ?

    Yes , boss. I had a headache and took some solpedeine.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    Mint Sauce
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,293 ✭✭✭✭Mint Sauce


    MagicSean wrote: »
    Because it's money that should be going to help people instead of to dealers. Personally I all welfare money should be accounted for. No drugs, alcohol, smokes or nights out. if you are struggling and need help then that's fine, i have no problem helping you. If you want luxuries then get a ****ing job and stop scrounging off the rest of us.

    i wouldn't stop there though. A job seeking and skill development diary should be kept by all recipients of JSB and JSA. No single parents allownce should be provided without details of the other parent (with certain obvious exceptions) so the state my persue them for costs. JSA and JSB recipients should be required to perform volunteer work.


    Not everyone on the dole are on it by choice. Someone could be in a well paid or even in an average paid job, and be used to a certain lifestyle, or luxuries, and am including the legal ones in that statement. Yes if they do lose their job they will have to make changes, but shouldn't be expected to become socailly outcast.

    I was unfortunate enough to lose my job two years ago. After 12 months of job hunting, and doing a couple of part time courses, I eventually got a part time job, then on to a full time course before getting a full time job last month. I can tell you for some of that first year it was preaty damn close to depressing at times, I was used to going out a couple times a week, and buying most of what I wanted. All of a sudden I had to cut back and watch all the pennies, had to pay for petrol to travel to interviews and to one of them courses, if i hadn't been allowed to have a little bit of me time or go for the odd pint, and it was the odd one during that time, I think I would have gone slightly mad.

    I do agree with you that people on benefit should be expected to show what they are doing in regards to job hunting or increasing their prospects of finding work, and I dont mean by the current SW standards of just having to sign once a month. In that first 12 months before starting my course I wasn't asked to show anything once.


  • #53
    SocSocPol
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,043 ✭✭✭SocSocPol


    We don't drug test Bus drivers,Train drivers,Ambulance crews,Armed Gardai, Fire Fighters,Nurses,Doctors,or Teachers.
    Yet some "social nazi" thinks we should drug test those unlucky enough to have lost their jobs?
    Maybe if we had have drug tested the politicans and bankers we wouldn't have an unemployment problem at all!


  • #54
    MagicSean
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,897 ✭✭✭MagicSean


    irish-stew wrote: »
    Not everyone on the dole are on it by choice. Someone could be in a well paid or even in an average paid job, and be used to a certain lifestyle, or luxuries, and am including the legal ones in that statement. Yes if they do lose their job they will have to make changes, but shouldn't be expected to become socailly outcast.

    I was unfortunate enough to lose my job two years ago. After 12 months of job hunting, and doing a couple of part time courses, I eventually got a part time job, then on to a full time course before getting a full time job last month. I can tell you for some of that first year it was preaty damn close to depressing at times, I was used to going out a couple times a week, and buying most of what I wanted. All of a sudden I had to cut back and watch all the pennies, had to pay for petrol to travel to interviews and to one of them courses, if i hadn't been allowed to have a little bit of me time or go for the odd pint, and it was the odd one during that time, I think I would have gone slightly mad.

    I do agree with you that people on benefit should be expected to show what they are doing in regards to job hunting or increasing their prospects of finding work, and I dont mean by the current SW standards of just having to sign once a month. In that first 12 months before starting my course I wasn't asked to show anything once.

    If you try and go along the line of giving people what they are use to then the politicans and bankers may as well keep their golden retirement packages.
    SocSocPol wrote: »
    We don't drug test Bus drivers,Train drivers,Ambulance crews,Armed Gardai, Fire Fighters,Nurses,Doctors,or Teachers.
    Yet some "social nazi" thinks we should drug test those unlucky enough to have lost their jobs?
    Maybe if we had have drug tested the politicans and bankers we wouldn't have an unemployment problem at all!

    So you think drugs make you do a poor job?


  • #55
    Mint Sauce
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,293 ✭✭✭✭Mint Sauce


    MagicSean wrote: »
    If you try and go along the line of giving people what they are use to then the politicans and bankers may as well keep their golden retirement packages.

    Not saying give people what they are used to, but dont cut them out altogether. Not talking about illegal or recreational drugs here, but just stuff generally. Obvously the career welfare abusers need to be looked at and monitored, but people who are genually trying should not be outcast and made examples of.


  • #56
    niallu
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 76 ✭✭niallu


    Well those who pay taxes shouldn't see it wasted in some junkie shooting up!

    Most companies have in their contract that they can screen for drugs anyways!

    I don't know who could be against this idea. Take a trip around the quays and see how your tax euros are being spent.

    They say it costs to keep 12 people in prison per annum 1m, I'd love to see the costs for the junkies with the free accom and free methadone.


  • #57
    MagicSean
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,897 ✭✭✭MagicSean


    Channel Zero wrote: »
    And how would you like to enforce this? Let's see..

    I have a suggestion. Let's ankle-tag all unemployed people!

    If they attempt to buy a bottle of wine on a Friday night, or God forbid, enter a local pub or restaurant with their loved one on a "night out", the guards can be immediately dispatched to the scene.

    I don't like using these much but here we go, just for you: rolleyes.gif

    It would be pretty simple. Don't give payments in cash but via an account assigned to your pps number that can only be accessed via laser and cannot be used for certain items. All the welfare officer would have to do is check your statements for anything else.
    irish-stew wrote: »
    Not saying give people what they are used to, but dont cut them out altogether. Not talking about illegal or recreational drugs here, but just stuff generally. Obvously the career welfare abusers need to be looked at and monitored, but people who are genually trying should not be outcast and made examples of.

    On that we agree


  • #58
    scamalert
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,732 ✭✭✭scamalert


    It would be pretty simple. Don't give payments in cash but via an account assigned to your pps number that can only be accessed via laser and cannot be used for certain items. All the welfare officer would have to do is check your statements for anything else.
    smartest answer so far,otherwise anyone need a fresh sample of pee :D


  • #59
    mattjack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,389 ✭✭✭mattjack


    niallu wrote: »
    Well those who pay taxes shouldn't see it wasted in some junkie shooting up!

    Most companies have in their contract that they can screen for drugs anyways!

    I don't know who could be against this idea. Take a trip around the quays and see how your tax euros are being spent.

    They say it costs to keep 12 people in prison per annum 1m, I'd love to see the costs for the junkies with the free accom and free methadone.

    Most companies don't test,its a grey area needing a doctor to test and form an opinion weather or not an employee is fit for work.
    Its dependent too on the nature of the job.
    I think the doctor isn't allowed give the result of the tests to the employer other than say if the employee is fit.


  • #60
    CamperMan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,835 ✭✭✭CamperMan


    a great idea.. and it should be introduced in Ireland :D


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    girl in the striped socks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 653 ✭✭✭girl in the striped socks


    poppyvally wrote: »
    girl in the striped socks wrote: »
    I don't really think its anyone's business what someone spends their money on,

    " THEIR" money is funded by taxpayers
    Assuming they worked at some stage & paid taxes then they are quite entitled to claim whatever money is due to them without feeling under obligation to live like they should be grateful for receiving benefits they have contributed to.
    Just because you receive benefits it doesn't mean you have to be made feel like a criminal by pissing into a pot to prove you don't take drugs.


Advertisement