Getting a job in america requires taking a drug test

>getting a job in america requires taking a drug test
Yeah because that sure will help your drug addiction that you further pushed into poverty while being alienated you from the public and other people

>let's fire a working class black guy who also makes music so we will see in evening news about how he got into a crime

makes you think

They literally piss test you for working at Burger King in the states.

i don't think it's a good idea to do drugs, or be under the influence of drugs, at work. i think that's a bad thing.

we got to keep the darkies down, this helps since we funnel the cartels to minority neighborhoods to sell their drugs.

Are you really standing up for the degenerate's right to be degenerate?
I thought you were cool, Denmark

>employers should be forced to take drug abusers into their workplace

gee I wonder who's behind this post

It's mostly to determine the company's (and your) liability in accidents. At most jobs you'll be drug tested after accidents on the job that result in significant damages (over $1000, generally), injuries requiring outside medical care, lost work hours, or all 3. They start you off with a drug test before you officially get the job just to make sure you're initially clean. If you fail the drug test after an accident, not only will the employer not pay for your medical care, you're immediately fired and on the hook for whatever damages or, rarely, lawsuits by affected parties that might result.

Some places do random drug screenings just to fuck with people. Others do it based on anonymous complaints; a memorable one is a local hardware store drug tested all of its employees after a customer complained that a couple smelled like marijuana, and nearly half of the employees lost their jobs after failing.

Don't do drugs, kids.

Do business owners have some moral obligation to take a financial loss by employing junkies only to fire them a month or so later?
Assuming your way leads to fewer junkies, why must one group of people pick up the tab for this?

I used to work at a place where everyone was always high but work got done, nobody got hurt. Then some new hire (dork) reported to Heath and safety which lead to all of us being fired. Thanks a lot dork, if I ever meet you somewhere I'll beat the piss out of you.

>everyone must submit to drug tests at any time
>the cameras are for your safety
>we just need your dna sample to provide the best healthcare
>always carry this gps tracker so we can find you in case of an accident
>listen to minitrue

The best way to fight drugs is to make sure those abusing drugs are able to function in society

im not saying anyone should be forced just dont make it harder for druggies than they already have it

>Don't do drugs, kids.
But dont you realise that its a bad way of fighting drugs that you take poor people and make them even poorer?

>Assuming your way leads to fewer junkies, why must one group of people pick up the tab for this?
Because they are successful and therefore have a responsibility to care for people at the bottom of society

Please stop.

>The best way to fight drugs is to make sure those abusing drugs are able to function in society
Can you really look at my flag and tell that bullshit to my face?
You may be under the impression that lil' junky is only harming himself when he snorts cocaine, but do you know how many lives, families, lands, and countries are destroyed just to produce that drug for him?
Offer and demand come in hand, and by buying and consuming drugs you are supporting the bloodshed that its production causes.

>he wants to employ someone with no self control who regularly commits a felony.

it's not about fighting drugs, it's about hiring responsible people

I never denied that it doesn't hurt people more people
That doesn't help drug abusers who need to be cared for

By making it easier for them to be hired we help them

>it's not about fighting drugs
if it isnt about fighting drugs we need to make it about fighting drugs

Didn't mean to imply whether or not I agree with it, just explaining why they do it. Training employees even at a fast food restaurant costs a couple days of wages, and businesses don't want to invest in someone who is unreliable or unstable--like a drug addict. If a company can save a few hundred dollars by lowering turnover and weeding out potentially flaky employees, they'll do it. You only need to be clean for a couple weeks to pass a drug test, and if you're able to refrain from using until then the business really doesn't care unless it's going to interfere with your work. I am leaving out that marijuana use (among other pretty mildly addictive drugs) will come up on a drug test, which is kind of absurd; employers don't care what you do outside of work as long as it isn't going to affect their reputation or the quality of your work.

From a social policy standpoint, we shouldn't be punishing people for trying to get better. There should be more places where a person can try to get clean, but until they're stable an employer isn't going to think much of them.

Shit son, speak English

...

by not hiring them we encourage them to not use drugs if they want a job.

I remember him, he's an ancient meme

>by not hiring them we encourage them to not use drugs if they want a job.
that's not how drug addiction works

Hiring them will give them more money and resources to fuel their addiction, which is probably why they applied for the job in the first place;.

see

Private organisations are allowed to hire who they want. Public organisations can't employ people blatantly breaking the law to work as representatives of public power.

However drugabusers are more than welcome to start their own business if they wish to and not test anyone they employ. Funny how most tend to though.

>drug abusers who need to be cared for
They don't need to be taken care of, they need to be fucking gassed.
Do you think financing crime is not a crime on itself? How noble of you, to think people with blood on their hands need to be babysitted by society.

>Because they are successful and therefore have a responsibility to care for people at the bottom of society
As someone from the bottom of society, no thank you

I don't want to work with heroin addicts.

Jus sayin' brah.

And I say it again: you have no idea of how drug addiction works

>Private organisations are allowed to hire who they want.
Of course but it is an invasion of private freedom to drug test people

>muh corporate freedom

>However drugabusers are more than welcome to start their own business if they wish to and not test anyone they employ.
They have a bit of trouble with that since:
>they are struggling with addiction
>they have no money or work experience since no one wants to hire them

the easiest way to get rid of drugs is actually to make it all legal and not alienating drug abusers from the rest of society but whatever

>As someone from the bottom of society, no thank you
why not?

What worse is trying to get a job with a criminal record no matter how long ago it was.

I worked at a warehouse and a longtime guy getting promoted got fired because of his old as fuck record. Thing is no other Hr or the man who hired him Gabe a fuck but the person who did the firing did for some odd reason at the worst time of the year.

>not american
>saying "muh freedom"

If you had the American flag you could've passed off as retarded, but no. You couldn't even use a proxy.

>why not?
Long ethical explanation said short: I want to be responsible for my life and my actions. I do not want to be nannied and artificially elevated off the success of others. I want my achievements to be my own. If I had to wake up one morning and face the fact that anything I was able to accomplish was because some guy better off than me paid more taxes because they didn't believe I could go on my own, I'd probably go ahead and kill myself.

>be danish pm
>spend taxpayers' money on booze and hookers
>no one complains
>????
>PROFIT

Said no person from the bottom of society ever

I may not be the poorest, but I'm certainly not middle class or higher

Holy shit what the fuck

The health of a prospective employee isn't the concern of an employer. Work must be done.

I quit smoking weed two months ago and, from the money I saved, I got a GTX 1080.
I still have money to spare.
I'm extremely happy.
Meanwhile, my stoner friends still can't pay their bills, let alone blow 800 Eurobucks on stupid shit.

Drugs are for failures, and only the most utter failures would defend their habit.

As long as it's cheaper for companies to turn them away nothing will change. Some places get subsidies for hiring disabled people for menial jobs, maybe they could get one for people that enroll in recovery programs.

That's assuming that more hard work = more success. Someone that's better off than you might have been born into it. Starting from rock bottom with no education or qualifications, becoming lower middle class is something that can take a decade or multiple decades, especially if you don't take government assistance. Poverty is a cycle, and being able to afford lower end appliances, housing, and cars, means more maintenance and being unable to build savings. Any children would struggle to get access to prep classes for college and extracurriculars. Middle class people have more time and resources to ensure ongoing and future success for them and their children. A wealthy person can live off the interest of their investments.

I admire the mindset, but without some flexibility you might be stuck in poverty.

Plenty of working class people believe that.

Yeah, I'm not saying that the poorest citizen in America can become a Rothschild, but just imagine how good it must feel, to be able to provide for your kids a better life than what you were provided, and be able to say it was because of your hard work. That said, I would agree there is a poverty cycle, but I think it lies more in education than getting druggies jobs

the biggest way to ensure someone will get clean (other than completely cutting off all access, which is only doable in certain secure compounds) is giving someone lots of social connections and lots of practical reasons to stay clean
by buying a phone, jewelry, kids toys, and even clothes in the US means you're likely supporting sweatshops, totalitarian regimes, or general awful conditions
no one cares because they need things and they want things, and stuff's happening where they can't see it