# Urinalysis - motivational picture



## Jarnhamar (6 Feb 2012)

Seen this picture today, figured it'd get a laugh


----------



## gatz (6 Feb 2012)

I know this is a joke thread, but often people who are in a position where they need to collect welfare may be stuck in that position due to a drug problem. These people may have kids to feed - I don't think they or their dependents deserve to starve because of problems that anybody can fall into given the right (well, wrong) circumstances. The issue is solving the drug problem, not taking away their means to live. Keep in mind that "no welfare" would hardly be a motivator to somebody who is corrupted by untreated addiction - they would simply be forced to get their money elsewhere. This manifests as a hazard both to themselves, their dependents, and to the public as a whole.


----------



## larry Strong (6 Feb 2012)

gatz said:
			
		

> I know this is a joke thread, but often people who are in a position where they need to collect welfare may be stuck in that position due to a drug problem. These people may have kids to feed - I don't think they or their dependents deserve to starve because of problems that anybody can fall into given the right (well, wrong) circumstances. The issue is solving the drug problem, not taking away their means to live. Keep in mind that "no welfare" would hardly be a motivator to somebody who is corrupted by untreated addiction - they would simply be forced to get their money elsewhere. This manifests as a hazard both to themselves, their dependents, and to the public as a whole.



If they are pissing - no pun intended - away their welfare money on drugs......what exactly would the kids/family be eating? The welfare pay stub!!!!!!!!


----------



## MJP (6 Feb 2012)

gatz said:
			
		

> I know this is a joke thread, but often people who are in a position where they need to collect welfare may be stuck in that position due to a drug problem. These people may have kids to feed - I don't think they or their dependents deserve to starve because of problems that anybody can fall into given the right (well, wrong) circumstances. The issue is solving the drug problem, not taking away their means to live. Keep in mind that "no welfare" would hardly be a motivator to somebody who is corrupted by untreated addiction - they would simply be forced to get their money elsewhere. This manifests as a hazard both to themselves, their dependents, and to the public as a whole.



Where is your motivational poster?


----------



## Jarnhamar (6 Feb 2012)

Their dependents deserve parents that are not addicted to drugs and I deserve not to use my hard earned money to pay for their drugs.

If it's a matter of their kids starving due to them being kicked off welfare for being addicted to drugs which was caught by drug screening then I say their homes are unsafe living environments for children and protective services should remove the children.

Or, and this may sound a little insane, they could stop taking drugs?


----------



## blacktriangle (6 Feb 2012)

That poster could be a slogan posted outside a lot of Eastern Ontario towns! In some places it's not that far off the mark!


----------



## medicineman (6 Feb 2012)

Parts of BC too...


----------



## larry Strong (6 Feb 2012)

I also firmly believe that along with drug/alcohol screening, welfare recipients should be required to do some sort of meaningful work for the community - and before I get flamed, there are a ton of things that could be done to help your community besides sweeping streets - or be enrolled in some sort of vocational/educational training to try and get them off of welfare.


----------



## ModlrMike (6 Feb 2012)

There is good evidence to suggest that "workfare" ultimately reduces the amounts of people requiring assistance in the long run. The problem is that many "social activists" see workfare as an abrogation of peoples' basic human rights. The feel that it is wrong to force people to work for social benefits.

An interesting paper on the subject, from the Scandinavian perspective, can be found here:

http://www.ilo.int/public/english/protection/ses/download/docs/workfare.pdf


----------



## Fishbone Jones (6 Feb 2012)

Guys, this all started with a joke poster. Lighten up, you're in Radio Chatter.

Milnet.ca Staff


----------



## krustyrl (6 Feb 2012)

Egg-Zactly.!          :+1:


----------



## TN2IC (6 Feb 2012)

Wham...


----------



## ModlrMike (6 Feb 2012)

I agree this thread started as a joke and should probably continue that way. That does not mean that the subject is not worthy of discussion. Perhaps a thread split if more people want to take it in the more serious direction?


----------



## Staff Weenie (6 Feb 2012)

I'll send the Whine Line and MOPE to get the Whambulance. But does it come with a free lolipop?


----------



## armyvern (6 Feb 2012)

How come only chicks are allowed to ride in that whambulance? Is the boys' one blue? I like blue better.  :'(


----------



## Staff Weenie (6 Feb 2012)

The Whambulance is gender-neutral, and caters to any whiny-ass complaint, from muffins in distress to man-cold.


----------



## OldSolduer (6 Feb 2012)

The Hurt Feelings Report is being drafted as we speak.......


----------



## armyvern (6 Feb 2012)

But it clearly utilizes the bitch word.  :blotto:


----------



## armyvern (6 Feb 2012)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> The Hurt Feelings Report is being drafted as we speak.......



As long as it comes with a 200 year pin upon successful completion of report ...


----------



## TN2IC (6 Feb 2012)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> The Hurt Feelings Report is being drafted as we speak.......



I have them for my troops at work...


----------



## Redeye (6 Feb 2012)

While recognizing that the initial post was a "joke", do you folks who want drug tests for welfare recipients realize that the main "test case" proved to be both expensive and pointless?

http://www.choosehelp.com/news/policy-and-legislation/only-2-of-florida-welfare-recipients-fail-drug-test-2013-98-keep-benefit-payments


----------



## vonGarvin (6 Feb 2012)

Redeye said:
			
		

> While recognizing that the initial post was a "joke", do you folks who want drug tests for welfare recipients realize that the main "test case" proved to be both expensive and pointless?
> 
> http://www.choosehelp.com/news/policy-and-legislation/only-2-of-florida-welfare-recipients-fail-drug-test-2013-98-keep-benefit-payments



Here:







You can use it to buy a sense of humour.  Or a uninalysis test.  Your choice   ;D


----------



## Fishbone Jones (6 Feb 2012)

Redeye said:
			
		

> While recognizing that the initial post was a "joke", do you folks who want drug tests for welfare recipients realize that the main "test case" proved to be both expensive and pointless?
> 
> http://www.choosehelp.com/news/policy-and-legislation/only-2-of-florida-welfare-recipients-fail-drug-test-2013-98-keep-benefit-payments



C'mon, even you can do better than that. The article proves nothing. It's an inconclusive story from a partisan website.


----------



## Redeye (6 Feb 2012)

recceguy said:
			
		

> C'mon, even you can do better than that. The article proves nothing. It's an inconclusive story from a partisan website.



True. But since it was primarily a joke thread, I didn't dig deeper. It was widely covered at the time. Before the courts put a stop to it all as being unreasonable search and seizure and all that.


----------



## uptheglens (8 Feb 2012)

Spectrum said:
			
		

> That poster could be a slogan posted outside a lot of Eastern Ontario towns! In some places it's not that far off the mark!



That, sir, is a vile accuracy!


----------

