FxrAndy Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 Subject: THIS GUY MAKES A GOOD POINT The Urine test Making this a poll to see what the UK members think to this THIS GUY MAKES A GOOD POINT This was written by a rig worker in North Sea - he makes a lot of sense! I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit. In order to earn that pay cheque, I work on a rig for a drilling contractor. I am required to pass a random urine test, with which I have no problem. What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don't have to pass a urine test. Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get benefits because I have to pass one to earn it for them? Please understand that I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet. I do on the other hand have a problem with helping someone sit on their arse drinking beer and smoking dope. Could you imagine how much money the government would save if people had to pass a urine test to get benefits? Please pass this along if you agree or simply delete if you don't. Hope you will pass it along though, because something has to change in the UK, and soon!
TeeJay Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 I think that's reasonable, no reason why people on benefits shouldn't take tests, afterall, the benefits are for them to survive on, not pay for smack... In my experience, the only people afraid to take tests, are those who know they will fail them...
maxman Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 I voted yes. I also think that this should be implemited in the States. Those doing drugs and sitting on ther boo boo's will not take kindly to such a absured idea. Mike
Nanuq Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 While we're at it, why not demand the politicians making these laws also pass the test?
strattakan Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 While we're at it, why not demand the politicians making these laws also pass the test? Well, if they do this here in Brasil (and i would love it), we probably lost the president (love it also)
FxrAndy Posted January 28, 2009 Author Report Posted January 28, 2009 While we're at it, why not demand the politicians making these laws also pass the test? They dont??????????
jraines87 Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 Since I'm not a UK member I did not vote in the "Poll", but I agree with that statement.... we'll wait for phoband to explain why this is a bad thing...
Demsey Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 Not so sure this is exclusive to UK, it has been going around the internet (maybe a 'Snopes' would shed light) and is a 'talking point' on conservative talk radio when "Biden" hasn't said anything stooooopid in a while, or there isn't any fresh dirt to be unearthed on one of President Obama's Cabinet appointees, along with it's cousin; "Food stamps should be rationed per percentage of body fat of the recipient. No Cheetos and chocolate moos for obese poor ten year olds weighing in at fourteen stone." Just cut taxes on working citizens, and perpetuate the Clinton doctrine with regard; You can float on social service handout for just so long. Then, get a job (don't tell me there are no jobs, every Mexican jumping the fence on Saturday has a job on Monday) or pick up a hand gun and three strikes; free food and shelter forever. I have no problem with tax dollars going to "No possibility of parole".
HauteHippie Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 While we're at it, why not demand the politicians making these laws also pass the test? While we're at it, why not demand that voting on measures dealing with tax revenues and distribution be limited to those who actually pay taxes?
Nanuq Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 While we're at it, why not demand that voting on measures dealing with tax revenues and distribution be limited to those who actually pay taxes? "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship." "Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage." -Alexander Tyler
jonthebhoy Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 mmm! This is fine as long as all possible other, perhaps more proactive steps have been exhausted and I don't think this is the case. Rather Orwellian if your asking me and a step away from the "steralisation after 2 kids" lobby. JTB
Shundi Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 While we're at it, why not demand that voting on measures dealing with tax revenues and distribution be limited to those who actually pay taxes? If only.... I'm sure that'd violate a few amendments though.
Rxus Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 I would love this in the states, but you know Obama and his brigade of left wing hippies would say that random drug testing for those receiving government benefits violates their freedoms or some other silly excuse. Why O why didn't Bill O'Reily run for president
FxrAndy Posted January 28, 2009 Author Report Posted January 28, 2009 "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship." "Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage." -Alexander Tyler Wow great quote Bob!
KB Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 and be as clean as the people who earn the money I'm having a bit of a problem with this part of the statement, does the UK actually believe their entire workforce is drug free? Ken
GrantR Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 I utterly agree... And with regard to our work force being drug free, that's not the issue. If you earn money you deserve the right to spend it on whatever you want... However if your living off benefits you shouldn't have the right to squander it away on drugs. Least not in my books.
GrantR Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 mmm! This is fine as long as all possible other, perhaps more proactive steps have been exhausted and I don't think this is the case. Rather Orwellian if your asking me and a step away from the "steralisation after 2 kids" lobby. JTB In my country you would have to be tested to have the right of having kids... Part of the problem in Britain is lower class children having children, causing generations of useless and lazy scroungers... Harsh i know, but true.
Demsey Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 the problem in Britain is lower class children having children, causing generations of useless and lazy scroungers... "Give us your poor, your tired, your huddled masses and the odd lazy scrounger, longing to be free..." There. Can we start a gun control thread now? Because I don't believe guns kill people, people kill people. But then again I don't think cameras take pictures, pictures take pictures, or that toasters make toast. Toast makes toast!
GrantR Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 Demsey, i assume nothing said in that last post was supposed to make sense...?
Demsey Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 Demsey, i assume nothing said in that last post was supposed to make sense...? Demsey: Hunter, what time does your watch say? Hunter: It doesn't, you have to look at it.
GrantR Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 Demsey: Hunter, what time does your watch say? Hunter: It doesn't, you have to look at it. Thought as much, just wanted to make sure
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now