Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Staff Contacts | Affiliates | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

Drug users may lose jobless benefits

October 18, 2013

LANSING (AP) — Michigan job seekers who use illegal drugs would be denied unemployment benefits under legislation that moved forward in the state Legislature on Thursday....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Oct-20-13 8:50 AM

Anybody that thinks this is a bad idea has to be on drugs.Its time we addressed these entitlements and ensure they not go to people who think they are owed them but to people who truthfully are entitled.Time to end the the generational abuse of the system and get back to a day when a person had pride in themselves.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-19-13 12:23 PM

Seriously Wacko’s, Wacked, and Wacky,


as you counter,

believe and would have US believe that

“it does not matter” what drugs we use,

and, drug use is, as you say,



1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-19-13 12:22 PM

1) Would you believe your brain surgeon who is on drug’s, is up to cutting away your headache?

2) Would you believe the captain of your airliner is “ok” and up to par flying your family,

while serenaded by drugs or stimulants?

3) Would you believe that your wife, who you impregnated while under some collection of drugs,

would be fine using drugs during her fetuses development?

4) Would you believe that your child’s teacher should be permitted to do drugs,

in order to put up with your kid who was born 'special' under the use of you and your wife's drug use...

5) Would you believe, you and your wife, under the influence of drugs, or whatever, could be an effective parent, let alone be any kind of parent…

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-19-13 12:20 PM

Of course,

drug users spend most of their time, effort and money trying to come up with enough money

to finance their drugs, habit or not.

Clearly, you are misguided,

and under undue influence of some sort of chemical-induced brain-fart.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-19-13 9:19 AM

I haven't touched your comments. 90% of drugs you cannot go to work without severe addiction problems, hence not being able to be sober. Cancer is a different problem with a doctors prescription, that one I can agree with. But a person who is hooked on opiates or IVD cannot function in a job setting.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-18-13 10:41 PM

If you had cancer and no medical procedures were easing your pain except pot, and that made you painless but then you lose your unemployment because your smoking pot so you don't have to feel like your dying of cancer everyday, I bet your stance changes then.

0 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-18-13 10:34 PM

You know I actually agree that I can't stand how people just have kids to reap the benefits from the system. But still I firmly believe that it shouldn't matter what drugs we choose to do as long as we can show up to work sober, not put people in harms way and just do a good job. I could give a sh1t how many times you click "disagree" on my comment, it's not like it'll change my mind.

0 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-18-13 5:52 PM

Is everyone missing the fact that these are people seeking work and unemployment benefits at the same time? That they did work and for the most part lost their jobs through no fault of their own? You usually can't get unemployment if you are fired from your job. The benefits are small next to what they lost. There is a provision already that if you turn down certain jobs you can loose your unemployment anyways. If you apply for a job that is drug tested AFTER you are hired it could be considered you turned down the position since it is an condition of employment. The better question would be is why isn't the legislature passing a law that makes mandatory drug testing for ALL elected officials? We entrust them to make some heavy decisions for us in government. I would like to know they are making these decisions with a stable and sober drug free mind. I have to wonder if any of these elected officials would ever pass such a law that would effect them.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-18-13 4:34 PM

A great example is the "Somebody need to pay for my 15 kids" video on youtube. This happens not only with the benefit bilkers, but drug addicts as well.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-18-13 4:01 PM

I work on the front lines of Michigan's healthcare system. I know all to well of not only the problems of addiction, but the lazy people that come along abusing the Medicare and jobless benefits system and teaching their children how to do it just as they would tie their shoes. Our system is defunct, and our people are lazy.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-18-13 3:16 PM

I don't know how much you know about this "drug war" we're in or the current state of drug culture in general, but believe me anyone who is hooked on whatever it may be, they aren't quitting to go to work. If they wanna quit any serious addiction, they will have to put in atleast a month of rehab before they can function again properly without the substance. You gotta know how these things work and the State clearly doesn't. If you fail a urine test the state should give you the option to go to paid rehab then the chance to take the test again and go back to work. People are going to risky not getting the pay before they quit all together and they will find the loopholes that exist.

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-18-13 2:54 PM

It's a small start to a bigger process. It will never be perfect, but at least they are trying on this one. Maybe if they can tune and refine it for the best it will motivate people to quit drugs and work for a living.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-18-13 2:50 PM

Why would people wanna quit a wonderful thing like pot to go be a slave to the system to get minimum wage, IF you're even lucky enough to find a job you like. And prescription pills? Try again, as long as it's your prescription and a doctor is giving it to you, no regular joe employer is going to know if you take it as needed, regularly, or abuse it. Don't even get me started on how many different kinds of urine tests there are and other loopholes. Frankly, I don't smoke pot or even cigarettes but it doesn't mean I can't stand up and argue their position. This is really ******** and just a way to identify people as 2nd class citizens when really if you didn't know your next door neighbor was a drug-user, you'd say he's a good guy that's how it should be. The State doesn't need to know what we do off the clock.

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-18-13 1:44 PM

I don' think people quite get this one. It's not just the pot heads in our community. It's the meth addicts, prescription pill abusers, I.V. drug abusers, and all the other people that we have problems with taking our hard earned money away. If your biggest problem in the world is quitting marijuana to get benefits, then I think you are in for a reality check.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-18-13 1:16 PM

Just in case you haven’t heard about the ‘labor-pool’ in delta country,

employers who insist on pure, positive urine tests have used-up the pool of people who can p and pass the p test.

Potential employers say that’s a poor pure pool.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-18-13 1:02 PM

This is the most ridiculous thing ever. Why do so many people care if someone wants to smoke a joint once in awhile. If you qualify for unemployment, you apparently worked somewhere. I know so many people who work in jobs that drug testing applies and they get around it. So now we are going to spend more money drug testing people who earned that unemployment. When are we going to start drug testing people who want to buy a gun and/or give mental evaluations. We won't do that though because we would be infringing on citizens rights. There has never been a documented case in history where a person was killed or killed someone under the influence of marijuana. Just 92% of people receiving welfare are the working poor. Did you know that? If they drug tested everyone who works at Wal-Mart randomly I can guarantee at least 2/3 of the employees there would test positive.

1 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-18-13 11:55 AM

Why stop with drug-users/abusers?

Not only should drug-users be targeted,

but habitual offenders,

driving under the influence, and

habitual progenitors who rely on welfare to raise their spawn.

Habitual welfare drug-users and abusers,

progenitors should be placed on the ‘top-of-the-list’ at the unemployment office,

for the next job available…

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-18-13 11:55 AM



EVERY business,

EVERY tax-abatement recipient,

EVERY church,

EVERY religion, and

any business or corporation who pay zero taxes, should be


if such businesses and religions

wish to continue in a

tax exempt,

tax abatement, or

zero tax paying status.

Once these tax free-loading businesses and religions

were forced to hire the welfare recipients,

perhaps society would benefit.

This would be a


out of the box idea.

Businesses and religions that put people to work,

could continue to keep their tax exempt status as long as they hire a given number of new welfare recipients every year.

The minute they quit hiring the welfare handi-capped,

zip goes their tax break,

tax exemption, or

tax abatement schemes.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-18-13 11:52 AM

A WPA type


program should be instituted, much like the CCC’s and WPA projects years ago.

Such long-term welfare habitués could be automatically enrolled to

re-familiarize them with the working world.

General skills could be enforced,

becoming healthy,

losing weight,

waking up,


getting to work,


going home,

cooking meals,

raising children,

helping with home-work,

going to bed dog-tired, and

sleeping without the use of chemical aids

should be the order of the day.

Welfare as a way of life would not be tolerated,

the rich,

their corporations and businesses

would be required to take a proactive role

to support the concept that

‘everyone-works in Michigan’…

Such programs would be well received by all taxpayers.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 19 of 19 comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web