Page 1 of 3
1
2
3
LastLast
  1. #1

    On-going decision for payroll tax cut extension in the US

    So the typical crap is going on right now in regards to the payroll tax cut extension. Democrats/Obama want it, Republicans seem to as well. Why can't they just pass it? I have no freaking idea.

    And now, the latest proposal. If any of you are currently unemployed getting unemployment insurance, how do you feel about this proposal?
    http://rsc.jordan.house.gov/News/Doc...umentID=271621

    At a series of listening sessions with business owners throughout the First District conducted earlier this year, Congressman Jack Kingston (R-GA) heard repeatedly about barriers to job creation. Kingston took the views of his constituents to Washington and crafted legislation to address the issue. His legislation, the Ensuring Quality in the Unemployment Insurance Program (EQUIP) Act, would require applicants for unemployment compensation to complete a drug screening assessment as a condition for benefits.
    Personally, this would piss me off. So now the unemployed, in a crappy economy, are assumed to be drug users now, too?

    Just thought I'd post, and see if anyone else seems a bit...perturbed about this kind of proposal.

  2. #2
    I personally have no problem with this, if you can afford to go get high, then you aren't broke enough to need unemployment yet.

    I have friends who have done this before and it has bugged the crap out of me when they are unemployed and getting benefits and still have crap cause they go spend it on some weed or worse. I would like to see them expand this to Food Stamps, WIC and other services that go to people who can't afford to support themselves. Kinda messed up when you see people GIVING away their EBT card for a monthly supply of drugs instead of food.

  3. #3
    Pandaren Monk Slummish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,777
    If I wasn't being drug tested every time I paid into the unemployment insurance system, then it is none of the government's business if I'm using drugs when the benefits of that program are being paid out.

  4. #4
    Titan Adam Jensen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Sarif Industries, Detroit
    Posts
    13,604
    Quote Originally Posted by Chonogo View Post
    So the typical crap is going on right now in regards to the payroll tax cut extension. Democrats/Obama want it, Republicans seem to as well. Why can't they just pass it? I have no freaking idea.
    Because a Republican's head would explode if he agreed with a democrat about anything.

    If a video game developer removed tumors from players, they'd whine about nerfing their loss in weight and access to radiation powers. -Cracked.com

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Slummish View Post
    If I wasn't being drug tested every time I paid into the unemployment insurance system, then it is none of the government's business if I'm using drugs when the benefits of that program are being paid out.
    Not sure how you think that works out.

    Bergtau's Law: As an online discussion grows longer, the probability that somebody will mention Godwin's Law approaches 1.
    Hitler wasn't all bad, I mean, he DID kill Hitler.
    An accident is something that you did not mean to do at all. A mistake is something that you regret doing.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Fugus View Post
    I personally have no problem with this, if you can afford to go get high, then you aren't broke enough to need unemployment yet.

    I have friends who have done this before and it has bugged the crap out of me when they are unemployed and getting benefits and still have crap cause they go spend it on some weed or worse. I would like to see them expand this to Food Stamps, WIC and other services that go to people who can't afford to support themselves. Kinda messed up when you see people GIVING away their EBT card for a monthly supply of drugs instead of food.
    Are you prepared to extend that requirement to all recipients of our tax dollars? That doesn't just include our safety nets. Tax subsidies, Medicare/SS recipients, the whole shebang.

  7. #7
    Pandaren Monk Slummish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,777
    Quote Originally Posted by Bergtau View Post
    Not sure how you think that works out.
    The bottom line is this, it's no one's business but my own whether or not I am a drug user. The government gladly accepted my monthly payments into the system and now they can stfu and pay out when I need it. Comprendo?

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Slummish View Post
    If I wasn't being drug tested every time I paid into the unemployment insurance system, then it is none of the government's business if I'm using drugs when the benefits of that program are being paid out.
    So you are asking them to start drug testing anyone who signs up for the insurance program too? That would result in a lot of people getting fired for drug use.....

    If you are working and can afford the drugs for fun, so be it, but if you can't then you shouldn't be buying it when you are broke.

    I honestly don't think they should fire you for drugs unless you were under their influence while on the job but sorry when you are on your butt, priorities are priorities and if you are getting high when you aren't even making ends meet, your priorities are off.

  9. #9
    Titan Adam Jensen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Sarif Industries, Detroit
    Posts
    13,604
    Quote Originally Posted by Slummish View Post
    The bottom line is this, it's no one's business but my own whether or not I am a drug user. The government gladly accepted my monthly payments into the system and now they can stfu and pay out when I need it. Comprendo?
    So I as a taxpayer should be supporting your drug habit?

    If a video game developer removed tumors from players, they'd whine about nerfing their loss in weight and access to radiation powers. -Cracked.com

  10. #10
    So making sure Recipients of welfare aren't wasting that welfare on something Illegal is bad?

  11. #11
    Stood in the Fire
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Wilmington, NC
    Posts
    359
    Quote Originally Posted by Chonogo View Post
    Personally, this would piss me off. So now the unemployed, in a crappy economy, are assumed to be drug users now, too?

    Just thought I'd post, and see if anyone else seems a bit...perturbed about this kind of proposal.
    Because rather than getting off one's ass and getting a job, you're using cash from an already bankrupt system to pay for illegal drugs. Pass it and let the silly little pot heads cry about it. Quality assurance is not used as a means to an end for an assumption. "Innocent until proven guilty."

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Underbottom View Post
    So making sure Recipients of welfare aren't wasting that welfare on something Illegal is bad?
    I'm pissed off because it's bad for those of us that don't use drugs, and don't condone the use of it. It would drug test ALL of us, even you. If you're okay with giving up freedoms like that, then I've misjudged a lot of people in this country as being freedom-lovers.

    This proposal assumes your guilt, until you prove your innocence by passing a drug test, for funds you've already paid into the system.

    And unemployment insurance is not welfare. If you didn't work prior to filing for it, you can't receive it.

    ---------- Post added 2011-12-08 at 11:37 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Epiphanes View Post
    Because rather than getting off one's ass and getting a job, you're using cash from an already bankrupt system to pay for illegal drugs. Pass it and let the silly little pot heads cry about it. Quality assurance is not used as a means to an end for an assumption. "Innocent until proven guilty."
    Did you read the link? If you pass the test, guess who pays for the cost of the test? Taxpayers. You've just added cost for no good reason beyond suspicion not based in reality, or without any studies done to determine the frequency of drug use among those needing unemployment insurance.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Chonogo View Post
    I'm pissed off because it's bad for those of us that don't use drugs, and don't condone the use of it. It would drug test ALL of us, even you. If you're okay with giving up freedoms like that, then I've misjudged a lot of people in this country as being freedom-lovers.

    This proposal assumes your guilt, until you prove your innocence by passing a drug test, for funds you've already paid into the system.

    And unemployment insurance is not welfare. If you didn't work prior to filing for it, you can't receive it.

    ---------- Post added 2011-12-08 at 11:37 PM ----------



    Did you read the link? If you pass the test, guess who pays for the cost of the test? Taxpayers. You've just added cost for no good reason beyond suspicion not based in reality, or without any studies done to determine the frequency of drug use among those needing unemployment insurance.
    I don't use drugs and I still have no problem pissing in a cup to confirm that whenever I go and apply for my unemployment benefits, I already pissed or even gave hair or blood to get in the job to begin with most likely. And I am not one for giving up my freedoms, I am one for holding people accountable but given the chance, I will fight to the death to defend my freedoms even against our own government so my decedents do not have to do it themselves for our mistakes

    It doesn't assume your guilt anymore than your guilt was assumed when you took the drug test to get the job. You are unemployed, you are not working, you are not getting a paycheck, you are supposed to be spending your money soundly and looking for alternative sources of income. Not getting high with it.

    And I would have no problem using my tax payer money for something like this as it will serve a good purpose and will save us money in the long run.

    I hate how they can fire you for drugs if you are not under the influence of them at work and do not agree with that policy but I wholeheartedly agree with this one.

  14. #14
    Stood in the Fire
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Wilmington, NC
    Posts
    359
    Quote Originally Posted by Chonogo View Post
    I'm pissed off because it's bad for those of us that don't use drugs, and don't condone the use of it. It would drug test ALL of us, even you. If you're okay with giving up freedoms like that, then I've misjudged a lot of people in this country as being freedom-lovers.


    Did you read the link? If you pass the test, guess who pays for the cost of the test? Taxpayers. You've just added cost for no good reason beyond suspicion not based in reality, or without any studies done to determine the frequency of drug use among those needing unemployment insurance.
    I really cannot fathom why you would want to dignify your responses with a cause such as "freedom", but I'll take the bait long enough to school you. Do you not obey traffic laws every day? You do? Well, here's the deal. Take a traffic light for instance. Why not just use a stop sign when there are laws in place to govern proper order of turning or moving at a 4-way intersection? A traffic light is nothing more than a quality assurance check, much like a drug urinalysis.

    Again, dignifying your responses with redundancy. Let me help you out. 100 people apply for ESC benefits and are paid out $100 a week. After the first urinalysis, 15% (15 people, hurr) are found to be using illegal drugs. The average cost for one drug test is $75. Unemployment benefits run on average around 18 months. The state has in fact saved $5,400 PER PERSON over the course of 18 months by drug screening. And believe me, I feel that anything lower than 15% being positive for illegal drugs is being VERY generous.

  15. #15
    Seems like an attempt to prevent people who have payed into the system from getting their money back out. And an added expense on top of that.

    I don't mind it for welfare, but for unemployment insurance? You normally cannot even get it if you were fired for failing a drug test or for many other reasons, if I recall what my friend had to go through.

  16. #16
    Dreadlord Dilbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Savannah, GA
    Posts
    795
    On an off-topic note, since I've met the man in person, I just wanna say Jack Kingston is one of the nicest, most decent men I've ever met. He's also the only representative in the state of Georgia that has actually responded to me on issues when I've written them.

    I hope his legislation gets passed.
    Retired wow player after 7 years.
    IT Technician by trade.

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Fugus View Post
    I don't use drugs and I still have no problem pissing in a cup to confirm that whenever I go and apply for my unemployment benefits, I already pissed or even gave hair or blood to get in the job to begin with most likely. And I am not one for giving up my freedoms, I am one for holding people accountable but given the chance, I will fight to the death to defend my freedoms even against our own government so my decedents do not have to do it themselves for our mistakes

    It doesn't assume your guilt anymore than your guilt was assumed when you took the drug test to get the job. You are unemployed, you are not working, you are not getting a paycheck, you are supposed to be spending your money soundly and looking for alternative sources of income. Not getting high with it.

    And I would have no problem using my tax payer money for something like this as it will serve a good purpose and will save us money in the long run.

    I hate how they can fire you for drugs if you are not under the influence of them at work and do not agree with that policy but I wholeheartedly agree with this one.
    Interesting. If you had to take a piss test to get your paycheck, would you be upset? This is a similar situation.

    I guess I'm just incredulous about it because I've had to take a piss test once in my life for a job, which included minimum wage jobs in fast-food as a kid. It was invasive, IMO, but at the time had no choice as pickings were slim(late 2008 during the big meltdown). I would outright refuse any position offered that required a drug test to be employed after that. Not because I use drugs, because it comes with an assumption before I ever step foot into the workplace.

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Epiphanes View Post
    I really cannot fathom why you would want to dignify your responses with a cause such as "freedom", but I'll take the bait long enough to school you. Do you not obey traffic laws every day? You do? Well, here's the deal. Take a traffic light for instance. Why not just use a stop sign when there are laws in place to govern proper order of turning or moving at a 4-way intersection? A traffic light is nothing more than a quality assurance check, much like a drug urinalysis.

    Again, dignifying your responses with redundancy. Let me help you out. 100 people apply for ESC benefits and are paid out $100 a week. After the first urinalysis, 15% (15 people, hurr) are found to be using illegal drugs. The average cost for one drug test is $75. Unemployment benefits run on average around 18 months. The state has in fact saved $5,400 over the course of 18 months by drug screening. And believe me, I feel that anything lower than 15% being positive for illegal drugs is being VERY generous.
    For Unimployment Insurance? People who had jobs for over a year and were laid off? Most of the time when you are laid off it is weeks in advance. Do you really think they can't stop smoking weed for a month and then pass the test, then start smoking again if they want to?

  19. #19
    Stood in the Fire
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Wilmington, NC
    Posts
    359
    Quote Originally Posted by obdigore View Post
    For Unimployment Insurance? People who had jobs for over a year and were laid off? Most of the time when you are laid off it is weeks in advance. Do you really think they can't stop smoking weed for a month and then pass the test, then start smoking again if they want to?
    And that's exactly why I said anything lower than 15% was being generous. People always have and always will cheat the system. Those people are why this legislation should be passed.

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by obdigore View Post
    Seems like an attempt to prevent people who have payed into the system from getting their money back out. And an added expense on top of that.

    I don't mind it for welfare, but for unemployment insurance? You normally cannot even get it if you were fired for failing a drug test or for many other reasons, if I recall what my friend had to go through.
    It isn't a way to screw you out of getting money out of a system you paid for, it is a way to make sure you don't blow the money on stuff you shouldn't and waste it and screw others in the process by blowing it. Sorry man but there are too many people who will gladly take half or even ALL of their money while unemployed and spending it on drugs. Bad enough they can blow it on beer.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •