There is a lot of debate whether drug testing should be a requirement for welfare recipients in the United States. Some states have already instituted a version of such a law, while other states have deemed it unconstitutional. It is an interesting debate really, some argue that if people can be drug tested in the private sector for their employment, so should those who receive taxpayer money as income. On the other hand, people argue that it is an invasion of privacy and that the government has no right to know whether you do/don’t take drugs. Another argument against is that the drug testing itself actually costs more money than the savings on not paying “druggies” for their fat welfare paychecks.
My opinion (because you asked) is to pay people regardless AND continue the drug testing. Shame the “druggies” when they get their paychecks by labeling the check as such (perhaps a stamp, or a different colored check). This way when they go to cash it, the people at the bank see that they are druggy losers. It will shame them so much they will turn that welfare money from their next hit into their next opportunity, like starting a new company and creating jobs. In fact, we should give drug users even more money since they are our future job creators. On the flip side, if they use the extra money to buy more drugs, they will O.D. and die, saving taxpayers money in the process. This is so obvious, I can’t believe no one has thought of it before.
And obviously, we should extend the same policy to social security, unemployment, and medicare recipients as well. I don’t want to be paying for a retired meth-head’s next fix.
Let us know what you think at stepasideshow @ gmail.com