Another idea on how to reduce Welfare expenditure

podge3

This email is doing the rounds over in the UK (and we have much more generous Welfare payments):

The Urine test

This was written by a rig worker in the North Sea - What he says 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 for drugs and alcohol, 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 benefits cheque 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 backsides 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 a benefit cheque?

skearon

podge3 wrote: »

This email is doing the rounds over in the UK (and we have much more generous Welfare payments):

Interesting idea, or is he just taking the piss ? :-)

P. Breathnach

skearon wrote: »

Interesting idea, or is he just taking the piss ? :-)

I think that for a urine test you have to give it.

Alun

Do a Google on any excerpt from that above post that doesn't explicitly mention anything to do with the UK or North Sea Oilrigs etc, and you'll see that it's been floating around in various forms for some time now.

http://www.google.ie/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=lGb&q=Could+you+imagine+how+much+money+the+government+would+save+if+people+had+to+pass+a+urine+test+to+get+a+benefit&start=10&sa=N

Tigger

concept is sound tho
drug thest those who want welfare

Dr Galen

it would probably cost more to administer the pee tested welfare scheme than we'd save

Absurdum

The publicans would never let that happen.

seclachi

And what happens if they fail ? Should the government throw them out on there arse ?

Problem with that is that part of the reason for the dole was to stop people dying of starvation in the streets or stealing in desperation.

I supposed you could force the same people into rehab, but what do you do if they flat out refuse ? Jail them ? Sounds like a police state to me then.

The concept sounds good but I dont think its practical, what can you do with people who are content to live off handouts and have no motivation (And by that I dont mean people who are trying to get off the dole)

ceret

I think anyone proposing this has to say what they would do for drug addicts. There are drug addicts on the dole now. Should they be put out on the street? What would happen to all the thousands of drug dealers if they are getting even less money than now? I don't want to see that happen.

ceret

Not a bad idea, actually.


They could give you a test, and if you fail you get €29 knocked off the €204.

You get called again randomly (maybe when you're signing on? When you're making an enquiry, or by letter, etc.) and if you fail again, another €25 is reduced (leaving you with €150 per week.


Fail a third test and you get a choice of entering rehab and regaining your full dole, or you are cut another €50, and thus brought down to €100 per week.



Of course, you would need to be able to appeal the decisions, obviously. I'm 21 and I've drank three times in my life, and never dabbled in any kind of drugs or anything remotely related to it, so if i failed a urine test, I'd be pretty pissed off. I don't know entirely how accurate they are, but it could be a good idea.


Can't imagine it costing much either. Just get one tester and an assistant for him, and they take people in randomly to test. There's no rush to get through the people, so even if he just nailed one person a week he'd be saving the govt. €25 per week for the forseeable future, and surely would have paid for himself after a few weeks.



If you decline to be tested (without good reason) you are treated as though you failed.




Seems like a plan to me!

ceret wrote: »

What would happen to all the thousands of drug dealers if they are getting even less money than now?

Oh yeah. God help them. They should receive an extra benefit because the nature of their work doesn't have consistent wages.

ArmaniJeanss

Deleted User wrote: »

Can't imagine it costing much either. Just get one tester and an assistant for him, and they take people in randomly to test. There's no rush to get through the people, so even if he just nailed one person a week he'd be saving the govt. €25 per week for the forseeable future, and surely would have paid for himself after a few weeks.

I think it would be far more expensive than that.
The person who takes the sample will be a different person (medically trained) to the scientist who actually examines it (a chemist). There will have to be full time staff who transport the sample from the testing centre to the scientific analysis lab.
There will have to be secure facilities for the storing of these samples (and probably a seperately stored 'B' sample as well - this security will have to be tight enough that it would stand up in a court of law)

The guy who takes the samples will want burly security staff present when he attempts to take samples from Nasher McPyscho.

Administration staff will be needed to ensure that the paper trail has been followed correctly, this needs to be secure enough to stand up in a court of law so these admin staff will run up a legal budget as well.

Danno

ceret wrote: »

I think anyone proposing this has to say what they would do for drug addicts. There are drug addicts on the dole now. Should they be put out on the street? What would happen to all the thousands of drug dealers if they are getting even less money than now? I don't want to see that happen.

Remove their dole and give food vouchers instead. Fcuk the druggies anyways. Wasters. The millions this country is loosing to drugs would probably sort out half of the buget shortfall anyways.

Absurdum

So what if someone buys you a pint? Is that gonna be banned? What if you have an old bottle of whiskey?

Silly idea :rolleyes:

now how about checking out betting shops to see who's on the dole?

dvpower

That email has been doing the rounds for years. Its designed to appeal to the reactionary elements of society, and it works every time.:rolleyes:

ceret

Deleted User wrote: »

Can't imagine it costing much either. Just get one tester and an assistant for him, and they take people in randomly to test. There's no rush to get through the people, so even if he just nailed one person a week he'd be saving the govt. €25 per week for the forseeable future, and surely would have paid for himself after a few weeks.

Unless you can get the doctor and all staff to work for less than €25 per week, it'll never pay for itself. You're then paying more for something than you're saving. That means the government saves more money with the status quo.

OMD

Wouldn't it make a lot more sense to test all workers and sack those who fail.

gurramok

Yes. Some people do have illegal drugs in their system while working.

On the welfare front, wouldn't it be an incentive to keep your dole to be drug-free?

Max Power1

We should do the urine test for drug usage and they should get 0 if positive for any hard drugs (excluding weed). Alcohol shouldnt come into it as it isnt illegal if over 18.

Rantan

Useless idea, testing 400,000 people for drink and drugs on a regular basis is absolute madness and whoever thinks its a good idea is absolutely mad too!
Oil rig workers are tested due to the high risk nature of their work, in their environment any intoxication could lead to death. Why not introduce drug testing for the entire workforce as well as welfare reipients? That would be fair?

Tigger

dosent hqave to be pee testing saliva testing is very possaible and can bye administered by a technician

its cheap and would be price reasnoabl;e

cavedave

How about the other way round though. Would you fail to take PRSI from people who take drugs? If they don't receive the benefit of the insurance why should they pay into it?

How about taxing income due to drug use? All the vat on beatles albums? they were so high they let Ringo sing. The income tax you get of forensics teams? you wouldnt get many rape and murder convicitions of it without Mullis and his LSD inspired DNA analysis technique.

"What if I had not taken LSD ever; would I have still invented PCR?" He replied, "I don't know. I doubt it. I seriously doubt it.

Pretty much every field of science has major contributions made by druggies (Erdos in pure maths for example). Will you give up the income caused by these discoveries as well?

Tigger

cavedave wrote: »

How about the other way round though. Would you fail to take PRSI from people who take drugs? If they don't receive the benefit of the insurance why should they pay into it?

How about taxing income due to drug use? All the vat on beatles albums? they were so high they let Ringo sing. The income tax you get of forensics teams? you wouldnt get many rape and murder convicitions of it without Mullis and his LSD inspired DNA analysis technique.


Pretty much every field of science has major contributions made by druggies (Erdos in pure maths for example). Will you give up the income caused by these discoveries as well?

not really relevant its jobseekers allowance not get uop and smoke a spliff allowance

if people want research grants or to be musicians then thatys cool but they shouldn't get jobseekers either , what they should get is patronage from the state and with the money saved we could give them that

Daithinski

Max Power1 wrote: »

We should do the urine test for drug usage and they should get 0 if positive for any hard drugs (excluding weed). Alcohol shouldnt come into it as it isnt illegal if over 18.

Let me see, weed shouldn't count, but under age drinking should, because thats illegal.

Ridiculous-er and ridiculous-er.

Whoever came up with this idea should be drug tested.

Reducing the welfare bill by thinking up wacky ideas to kick people of the dole is the wrong way of approaching the problem.

Dole queues drop when jobs are created.