The Job Urine Test

Discussion in 'The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr' started by Insulation Tim, Jan 20, 2009.

  1. Insulation Tim

    Insulation Tim Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2,468
    Location:
    Ohio
    Found this in my email this AM


    THE JOB - URINE TEST
    (Whoever wrote this one deserves a HUGE pat on the back!)

    Like a lot of folks in this state, I have a job. I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit. In order to get that paycheck, 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 a welfare check because I have to pass one to earn it for them? Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet.. I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sitting on their A--, doing drugs, while I work. . . . Can you imagine how much money the state would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check?
    Pass this along if you agree or simply delete if you don't. Hope you all will pass it along, though. . Something has to change in this country -- and soon!!!!!!!
    I guess we could title that program, 'Urine or You're Out'.
  2. GMFWoodchuck

    GMFWoodchuck New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,369
    Location:
    Binghamton, NY
    I have a problem with people who get gov't handout checks without a urine test too.
  3. USMC-03

    USMC-03 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,825
    Location:
    Peoples Republic of the Pacific Northwest
    How about a urinalysis for those making the laws requiring us to give the government our money so that they may distribute those tax dollars as it sees fit?
  4. GMFWoodchuck

    GMFWoodchuck New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,369
    Location:
    Binghamton, NY
    Yeah, then neither Bush nor Obama would have been our presidents. Which makes me ask...Who would have been?
  5. John11139

    John11139 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2008
    Messages:
    18
    How about a I.Q before they can vote? I guess they sent some one out and asked people how they liked O'Bamma and his running mate Sara Phalen. Most of then didn't even know what they were voting for. Moses is going to lead us to the promis land.
  6. 38 special

    38 special New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2009
    Messages:
    548
    Insulation Tim, Great Post. You are right on the bullseye.
  7. Terry_P

    Terry_P New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2008
    Messages:
    2,513
    Location:
    NH
    Lets see urine test, citizenship papers, wow our welfare roles just decreased by 75%. Good deal.

    I say we give those on welfare a stimulas package. Work or starve-does that stimulate you?
  8. jim summers

    jim summers Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2008
    Messages:
    1,148
    Location:
    I reside in southern Indiana, you can almost step
    Are you sure that all those on assistance can answer all the questions on a urine test?
  9. JetGirl

    JetGirl Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2008
    Messages:
    206
    Location:
    Indiana
    I'm about to take an unpopular position, but being a libertarian leaning conservative, I've had a lot of practice and I'm getting used to it... so bear with me;

    I do have a problem with the government testing people in exchange for money. I think it sets a precedent that will be the most slippery of slippery slopes.
    It's a spring board into drug testing to get your tax returns back...and after that, maybe testing a full panel screen for the same.
    Cholesterol/weight too high? No tax return for YOU. You might spend it on junk food. We'll give you the products we think you need instead.
    Nicotine addiction? No return for YOU! You might smoke it up in public causing second hand smoke victims and straining the public health care system. We're spending it on a 12 step program for you.
    See where I'm going with that?

    By the way, an FYI is in order:
    I do not smoke, do not do drugs, do not drink more than a six pack a year, never had an abortion, etc.
    I do not advocate anyone else doing these things...but I'm not about to put a gun to your head in the name of the state and tell you that you can't do them either.
  10. 94z07

    94z07 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    337
    Maybe off topic...

    If we as a society have already decided to warehouse unproductive and violent people in government housing then why can't we set up areas in NV where the fed already owns 85% of the state and ship them off there?

    Why must normal people flee urban centers when the sun goes down for safety from these dangerous pets?

    I wouldn't require anyone to stay at these camps but that would be the only free ride, the only place where food and shelter are free.

    Why do we ruin our valuable realestate by building projects in otherwise desirable areas?

    Habitat for Humanity is only one small step above this too. They get zoning variences that allow them to build tiny houses on too little land in areas where normal people would have to abide by setback and minimum track sizes.

    Why should normal people spend hours in commute while dangerous pets who don't want to work anyway are next door to the jobs?
  11. JDS

    JDS Former Guest

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    151
    "Normal people" don't flee urban centers when the sun goes down. You're talking about people with an abnormal and irrational fear of crime.
  12. 94z07

    94z07 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    337
    Maybe where you live it is so. In Atlanta normal people live outside of downtown and leave after work. The "hospitality zone" downtown is safe because the police encourage urban outdoorsmen and the like to leave the area. Step outside that hospitality zone and you're looking for trouble if you stand out in the crowd.
  13. Angryisme

    Angryisme New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Messages:
    196
    Location:
    New Jersey
    You're right on with that!
    Goes for many, Many areas in N.J. too.
    You only go to New Brunswick to get drugs or go to court.
    Camden and Carteret... drug capitals of the country.
    Newark and Jersey city.... Highest auto-theft and Car- jacking rate prolly in the country as well. They will KILL you and take your car!!!
    That ain't no ****.
    I've been shot at driving thru Garfield. Paterson is Just like New Brunswick.
    Trenton is another HOLE in N.J.

    I got pulled over! for stopping at a red light in Elizabeth!!!
    I was told "if you ever come to this town again" "you don't stop at that light"
    are ya kiddin me?!?!?!

    I got pulled over in South Plainfield for being a white boy on some st.
    I was lost!
    But I learned my lesson on going to that slum hole.

    And those are just to name a few.
    Asbury Park, parts of Red Bank, Essex, Kearny, Totowa, and there are many many other holes in jersey just the same.

    Back to the original topic...
    I too am totally disgusted @ working for these un-appreciative, and un-deserving people?

    The welfare system was finally on the road to repair...
    our new pres. wants to Expand the welfare system.

    Kepp working.
    Millions are depending on you
  14. JDS

    JDS Former Guest

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    151
    It's well-documented that the relative actual, vs perceived risk of various sorts is misunderstood by certain people. Take my wife, Please!!

    Most people are more afraid of bear attacks or muggers, than drunk drivers or cancer or whatever, for example. But most people die from heart disease or cancer, while nearly nobody dies from bears or muggers.

    The statistical risk of crime is fairly negligible in Jersey City versus other typical hazards of ordinary life. I've lived in JC for eleven years.

    Violent crime is more common, PER CAPITA, though rare, in places like the wilds of Wyoming or Alaska than in urban United States......References are available if you disbelieve...though intuitively it might be obvious....especially if you're scared of bears.......
    Last edited: Mar 27, 2009
  15. FJF0311

    FJF0311 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    269
    Location:
    Mt. Airy, MD
    Violent crime is more common, PER CAPITA, though rare, in places like the wilds of Wyoming or Alaska than in urban United States......References are available if you disbelieve...though intuitively it might be obvious....especially if you're scared of bears.......[/QUOTE]



    WHAT?

    (This guy ani't gonna pass no urine test.)
  16. carver

    carver Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2008
    Messages:
    15,054
    Location:
    DAV, Deep in the Pineywoods of East Texas, just we
    Your position on this subject is not an unpopular one. The guys here don't really want everyone in this country to have to take a urine test. This is just their way of letting off steam, because of the fact that they do have take urine tests, while those who do noting, don't have to! The real problem here is government! Our government believes, and has convinced some of the public, that they can take care of us better than we can take care of ourselves, if left to our own abilities! In fact, we need a whole lot less government, not more government! Less restrictions, not more! Why should I have to take a urine test to earn my money, while Joe welfare check, or Joe illegal immigrant doesn't have to! Now ask yourself why this is? And be real honest about it!
  17. JetGirl

    JetGirl Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2008
    Messages:
    206
    Location:
    Indiana
    Because if you're working for a privately owned business, the owner/boss has the right to ask for it.
    And the potential employee has every right to say "Screw you" and leave.
    The government shouldn't have the power over this.
    That's not saying that I think welfare should even be a viable option. Personally, that should be a privatized organization funded by donations of your own free will.
    I whole-heartedly agree that there are people who need help and I'm certainly not advocating withholding a basic need from a fellow human. I'm just saying that when the government gets tangled in it, it becomes something dangerous that can set all sorts of precedents that will affect all of us sooner or later. Probably sooner more than later.
    Not a good plan.
  18. FJF0311

    FJF0311 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    269
    Location:
    Mt. Airy, MD
    Although, I have no problems with the job site drug test. I am a electrician, and have had to call a ambulance twice in my career for men hurt due to someone on the other end of the wire who was under the influence, or hung over from drug use. The worse part was the call to the wife, who chewed my butt off (rightfully so.) for allowing this to happen. The fact that the "Law" would not let me fire the man unless I could prove drug use, (How can I do that without a drug test) made neither of us feel better.

    PS I believe the original intent of the (Job urine test) article was to point out that the government would never propose a drug test for their favorite demographic, so why do those who must pay, submit?
  19. JDS

    JDS Former Guest

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    151
    This seems to show that rural crime rates are lower than urban crime rates:
    http://ag.ca.gov/cjsc/publications/misc/urbrurt.pdf



    but there is this, from canada last year;

    (Nat'l Post Canada 6/39/07

    OTTAWA - Country dwellers may be surprised to learn that more murders happen in their neck of the woods, on a per-capita basis, than in Canada's big cities, according to research findings released yesterday.

    The Statistics Canada study, which used police-reported data from 2005, also found that it was Canada's small cities, not the metropolises, that had the country's highest overall crime rates.

    "Crime is not necessarily a large urban phenomenon," said Joy Francisco, one of the authors of the study, which compared crime rates in rural areas with those in small and large urban areas. It is the first time Statistics Canada has performed such an analysis.

    In 2005, police reported 658 homicides with a known location. Of those, 427 were committed in large urban areas, 135 in rural areas and 95 in small urban areas.

    When the population of those areas was taken into account, the rate of 2.5 homicides per 100,000 people in rural areas proved to be the highest. In comparison, the rate was 2.0 in large urban areas and 1.7 in small urban areas.

    That ranking has held constant over the past decade, Statistics Canada says.


    And there's this from 1987...but you know, maybe I'm less right than I remembered....


    http://www.nytimes.com/1987/12/12/u...=rural crime and frontier&st=nyt&pagewanted=2

    Excerpt:
    "In a paper in The Public Interest this spring, Dr. Popper and two colleagues analyzed violent deaths of American youths from 1939 through 1979. They studied rates for 15-to-24-year-old whites, including Hispanic people, and found that the Western states invariably had the highest death rates and the Northeast the lowest. In the states with the highest death rates, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico and Utah, the most dangerous counties were the less populated ones.

    Typically, those counties had higher death rates among their white population than high-crime cities showed for urban blacks, Dr. Popper said.

    ''The rural areas of the West, rather than the American urban ghetto, is where youth is far more likely to suffer violent death,'' Dr. Popper and his colleagues, Michael R. Greenberg and George W. Carey, concluded."

    ----The rate of "violent death" is of course not the same as "crime rate." Last time I read this particular article was 22 years ago, and my memory isn't wat it used to be......sorry.


    Among various statistical analysis, it seems most find that crime is higher in urban areas. But here's one:

    "Kposowa and Breault used Uniform Crime Report and census data from over three thousand counties in their analysis of homicide for the years 1979 to 1981, and found that of the top thirty counties with the highest rates of homicide, twenty-three of them had populations below twenty thousand."
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2009
  20. FJF0311

    FJF0311 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    269
    Location:
    Mt. Airy, MD
    Homicide rates higher in rural areas than urban areas!

    Give me a break! Where do you get this drivel? And better yet why do you think we will swallow this garbage? Then you name states with some of the highest illegal immigrant population, to try and prove 'Ole whitey, is the problem once again. The death rate in Washington, DC as was pointed out by Rumsfeld is higher than that of Iraq. Obama's stomping ground was even higher. I personal, know no one who has been murdered. nor do any one I know. Yet working in DC, I knew many young men who could.
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr The greatest danger since our inception Apr 3, 2014
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr NAACP Holding March To Protest Voter ID Laws, Tells Marchers To Bring A Photo ID Feb 8, 2014
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr THE FENCE TEST! Feb 5, 2014
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr Police issue citations to Obama protesters-for displaying U.S. flag! Dec 11, 2013
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr Putin's Shortest Speech Ever ...... Nov 14, 2013