Report: Walmart Workers Cost Taxpayers $6.2 Billion In Public Assistance

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: RKWWWW

Do you think Wal-Mart would pay their employees more if we took away the government benefits?

No. If they wanted to pay their employees more then they'd already do that, which they don't. Taking away the government assistance that these people also get along with their pay would only hurt those people and I don't think that is a good way to go either. Therein lies the problem and I'm not sure I have the solution either.

What should happen is that Walmart, which makes absolutely massive profits, should pay their employee's better wages. They could do that and still make an obscene amount of money for themselves. However, the way things Should work is almost never how the Do work. I wish it wasn't that way, but that's how things are now and how they've been in the past too. But there is hope for the future that things could change. Maybe....Got any ideas???

So if we stopped any public benefits to the employees of Wal-Mart, and subsequent to that Wal-Mart didn't pay a dime more, how is Wal-Mart the beneficiary of those benefits?

originally posted by: jacobe001
a reply to: RKWWWW

Here is one such example where one of the Big Banks is reaping in the rewards from Food Stamps, not to mention, the smattering of fast food joints that would love to get in on the Food Stamp Wagon:


Food Stamps: JPMorgan & Banking Industry Profit From Misery

This week’s credit check: A record 43.6 million Americans are using food stamps. JPMorgan’s segment that makes food stamp debit cards made $5.47 billion in net revenue in 2010.

You might think that if you’re on food stamps, big banks won’t be very interested in you. What could they possibly want with someone who’s struggling just to put food on the table? But it turns out that you’re actually part of a profitable business for big bank JPMorgan. While the money to pay for the stamps comes from the government, the technology to access it lies in private hands. Food stamps used to be literally stamps — that is, pieces of paper — but in this day and age paper is so old fashioned. Now you get your food stamps with a debit card, and JPMorgan knows all about creating plastic credit products.

As the head of this division at JPMorgan, Christopher Paton, told Bloomberg, “They act and feel very much like a debit card. A lot of stores increasingly take food stamps.” What convenience! And Paton points out that his bank is the largest processor of food stamps in the country. These are boom times for such services — a new report from the US Department of Agriculture reports that 43.6 million Americans are now using food stamps, nearly 14% of the population, which is a record number. Paton notes this trend himself: “Volumes have gone through the roof in the last couple of years,” he says. “This business is a very important business to JPMorgan in terms of its size and scale.” And the numbers bear him out. According to the company’s most recent quarterly filing with the SEC, the Treasury & Securities Services segment, which is the division that includes the food stamp business, was up 2% in the last three months of last quarter and brought in $5.47 billion in net revenue for most of 2010.

The Big Banks and Big Business have absolutely no problem with taking Food Stamps, if they were against it, they could refuse to take them.

abcnews.go.com...

Fast Food Chains Getting Into the Food Stamp Act

In an ever-growing number of states, if you crave a taco or fried chicken from a fast-food restaurant, you can pay for it with food stamps.
Food stamps - known more formally as the USDA’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program - have been in use for grocery staples, such as bread and milk, since 1934, but now, for the first time, they can be used for fast food in four states across the country.
The number of businesses – including convenience and discount stores, gas stations and pharmacies – that have been approved to accept food stamps has increased by a third over the course of three years from 2005 to 2010, USA Today reports, and fast-food chains are working hard to get a cut of the federal dollars in Florida, California, Arizona and Michigan.
The funds allocated to the food stamp program have increased exponentially, from $28.5 billion to $64.7 billion in that same time frame, according to USA Today, and at a time when people have less money to spend, the bump in federal dollars can mean a lot to the fast-industry.
Yum! Brands, based in Louisville, Ky., which operates a string of restaurants that includes Taco Bell, KFC, Long John Silver’s and Pizza Hut, are among those applying for inclusion in the food stamp program, saying that elderly, disabled and homeless people have difficulty preparing meals, ABC affiliate WHAS reported.

I have seen the claim bandied around a lot where the consumer is responsible for keeping certain business running when they by their products. Noone is forcing the above to take food stamps and in fact they are lobbying to get a cut of that money from Uncle Sam.

The federal government contracts all kinds of businesses to do things cheaper then the Feds can do it. Mischaracterizing this situation as like you are is no different than claiming that Dixie Plywood and Lumber Company is profiting from misery because they supply the materials to build public housing

Food stamps are nothing but funny-money. We should just give the people the money in the first place. They should let fast food places take food stamps. It's no different then someone spending their welfare money there.

Our public safety net was set up decades ago. Now that our economy is tanking, people are casting about trying to place blame. I can't even begin to believe the decades ago a stealth policy was passed by greedy capitalists that paid off 55 years later. Does that seem possible to you? Doesn't to me. Doesn't jive with history either. Big corporation were never supporters of the welfare system, and they took a lot of criticism about it. I wonder how they would have reacted back then if someone had told them that some day the would be blamed for creating it.

originally posted by: jacobe001

originally posted by: RKWWWW

Are you seriously saying the origin our public safety net was from the scheming heads of banks and corporations? That's laughable. I have another wild, crazy theory. Hold on, cuz this is gonna blow your mind!

www.washingtontimes.com...

In the study, “Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups and Average Citizens,” researchers compared 1,800 different U.S. policies that were put in place by politicians between 1981 and 2002 to the type of policies preferred by the average and wealthy American, or special interest groups.

Researchers then concluded that U.S. policies are formed more by special interest groups than by politicians properly representing the will of the general people, including the lower-income class.

“The central point that emerges from our research is that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence,” the study found.

Read more: www.washingtontimes.com...
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

That study is suggesting special interests HAVE LATELY exerted undo influence on political outcomes. But bringing this back to topic, the origin of our public safety net sprang from the public concern for the less fortunate among us, manifested as a bill passed through the House and Senate by the public's own duly elected Representatives, and signed into law by the President, decades ago. There wasn't even a Wal-Mart than. It was the culmination of FDR's dreams.

double post

originally posted by: AzureSky
a reply to: Metallicus
Some people are just not meant to get past working at wallyworld or mcdicks, some people aren't mentally capable of it. Should they lead a less than comfortable life, be a draw on the tax payers, and do it all with a smile?

Most people are capable

Don't buy into and utter crap that states that some humans are more entitled than others to their rights to eat sleep and play.

Do you really not understand the situation at hand? It's a game of dominance and a hot potato of blame, accountability and responsibility. The winners are the sadists. And don't feed me that crap how the poor are living like kings and how the taxpayers are somehow in more grief than the poor. They are not. When you don't have money they tax your life and your well-being, perpetually.

Some people are just more audacious and content with that their wealth and comfort are an exchange for others' suffering and misfortune. Things haven't changed since ancient times...

WalMart is just one example of Corporate Welfare. Big business is sucking all of our money out of us, whether it's giant tax breaks for oil or sports stadium deals where the people pay for the stadium and the team owners take all the profits.

Just a matter of time before some crazy's start targeting these 1%. What will the powers that be do when normal but starving people start going after the rich? All the money in the world wont stop the pitchforks.

originally posted by: BlubberyConspiracy

originally posted by: AzureSky
a reply to: Metallicus
Some people are just not meant to get past working at wallyworld or mcdicks, some people aren't mentally capable of it. Should they lead a less than comfortable life, be a draw on the tax payers, and do it all with a smile?

Most people are capable

Don't buy into and utter crap that states that some humans are more entitled than others to their rights to eat sleep and play.

Do you really not understand the situation at hand? It's a game of dominance and a hot potato of blame, accountability and responsibility. The winners are the sadists. And don't feed me that crap how the poor are living like kings and how the taxpayers are somehow in more grief than the poor. They are not. When you don't have money they tax your life and your well-being, perpetually.

Some people are just more audacious and content with that their wealth and comfort are an exchange for others' suffering and misfortune. Things haven't changed since ancient times...

How can anyone own ocean front property and tell you you cannot go there? We were all born on this earth and have equal rights to everything in it. Everything was owned before I was born. How is it fair those that came before get to control everything and pass everything on to their children with no regard to the rest of us?

What does Chicago cost them?

or Detroit

originally posted by: CB328
WalMart is just one example of Corporate Welfare. Big business is sucking all of our money out of us, whether it's giant tax breaks for oil or sports stadium deals where the people pay for the stadium and the team owners take all the profits.

There are legitimate examples of corporations receiving tax breaks that amount to little more than what could be described as "corporate welfare", but Wal-Mart workers receiving public assistance isn't one of them.

If a person wants more than minimum wage they should finish school, get a skill, show initiative, dress appropriately, and stay off drugs. Walmart is giving jobs to people who are at a point in their life where that is all they can handle. Do not blame Walmart for the downfall of the uninspired.

originally posted by: Xeven

originally posted by: BlubberyConspiracy

originally posted by: AzureSky
a reply to: Metallicus
Some people are just not meant to get past working at wallyworld or mcdicks, some people aren't mentally capable of it. Should they lead a less than comfortable life, be a draw on the tax payers, and do it all with a smile?

Most people are capable

Don't buy into and utter crap that states that some humans are more entitled than others to their rights to eat sleep and play.

Do you really not understand the situation at hand? It's a game of dominance and a hot potato of blame, accountability and responsibility. The winners are the sadists. And don't feed me that crap how the poor are living like kings and how the taxpayers are somehow in more grief than the poor. They are not. When you don't have money they tax your life and your well-being, perpetually.

Some people are just more audacious and content with that their wealth and comfort are an exchange for others' suffering and misfortune. Things haven't changed since ancient times...

How can anyone own ocean front property and tell you you cannot go there? We were all born on this earth and have equal rights to everything in it. Everything was owned before I was born. How is it fair those that came before get to control everything and pass everything on to their children with no regard to the rest of us?

They can do it because that's the paradigm we all currently operate in. If it makes you feel any better there is a Federal inheritance tax that addresses this particular issue.

originally posted by: searching411
If a person wants more than minimum wage they should finish school, get a skill, show initiative, dress appropriately, and stay off drugs. Walmart is giving jobs to people who are at a point in their life where that is all they can handle. Do not blame Walmart for the downfall of the uninspired.

Even Wal-Mart can be the ways and means to a better job in that if you work there for a while, and are a good employee, you can use them for a reference for a job somewhere like Costco or Hobby-Lobby. Costco starts employees at almost $12.00/hour and Hobby Lobby starts all new hires at $14.00/hour. Don't let Wal-Mart use you, use Wal-Mart.

originally posted by: Xeven

originally posted by: BlubberyConspiracy

originally posted by: AzureSky
a reply to: Metallicus
Some people are just not meant to get past working at wallyworld or mcdicks, some people aren't mentally capable of it. Should they lead a less than comfortable life, be a draw on the tax payers, and do it all with a smile?

Most people are capable

Don't buy into and utter crap that states that some humans are more entitled than others to their rights to eat sleep and play.

Do you really not understand the situation at hand? It's a game of dominance and a hot potato of blame, accountability and responsibility. The winners are the sadists. And don't feed me that crap how the poor are living like kings and how the taxpayers are somehow in more grief than the poor. They are not. When you don't have money they tax your life and your well-being, perpetually.

Some people are just more audacious and content with that their wealth and comfort are an exchange for others' suffering and misfortune. Things haven't changed since ancient times...

How can anyone own ocean front property and tell you you cannot go there? We were all born on this earth and have equal rights to everything in it. Everything was owned before I was born. How is it fair those that came before get to control everything and pass everything on to their children with no regard to the rest of us?

www.marxists.org...

a reply to: Metallicus
"Seriously, no one expects to make a living working at a discount store, do they? You probably should be on Federal assistance if you are too stupid to get a better job. It sounds about right."



Are you serious? Or just stupid? Do you know how many degreed people end up working in discount stores?

Do you work for the government and are completely out of touch? They are about the only ones
who have been getting better pay in the last 10-15 years.

Business like to pay less that a living wage because they can.
They hope they can get away paying less because they may be able to evade the taxes that
support the benefits.
Where i live, there are many migrant workers. The wages paid don't pay the social cost. They
overwork for a few years, then suffer injuries and depend on public assistance.

originally posted by: UMayBRite!
a reply to: Metallicus
"Seriously, no one expects to make a living working at a discount store, do they? You probably should be on Federal assistance if you are too stupid to get a better job. It sounds about right."
and get th


Are you serious? Or just stupid? Do you know how many degreed people end up working in discount stores?

No degreed person should expect to make a living working at a discount store unless they have a college degree that's appropriate for advancing their position in the company. If one is working in a discount store and has a degree the store doesn't value, they should find a job in a field where their degree is valued. I take it you know someone who has a degree and is working at a discount store. Tell them to talk to a career counselor.

a reply to: RKWWWW

You are correct, it can be a starting place. Working at Walmart is recommended over sitting at home watching the 60 inch flat screen and answering your Obama phones.

a reply to: links234

So if u raise the minimum. Than Walmart would have to lay people off and give more work to the workers. U would still have people on government assistance now that they are laid off.

originally posted by: amfirst1
a reply to: links234

So if u raise the minimum. Than Walmart would have to lay people off and give more work to the workers. U would still have people on government assistance now that they are laid off.

Or they would keep all their workers, and raise all the prices, to cover the increase in wages. But the whole way that walmart got so popular in the first place is having cheaper prices then all competitors.

originally posted by: Anonex

originally posted by: spurgeonatorsrevenge
And why and the hell do conservatives always come in and shill for the rich Elites?

WTF is that all about?

It is like a compulsion to rush in and bash the working class and also defend the rich, why???

Most non-billionair republicans are poor, paranoid, and uneducated. They are convinced that they are just temporarily embarassed millionaires, being held back by *insert random minority here* rather than who is actually holding us ALL back. The corporations.

We need not just a minimum wage, but a living wage, and a maximum wage.

80% of the businesses in America are small businesses with 20 or fewer employees. Most of those are owned by Republicans who are not poor, paranoid, and uneducated. " Poor, paranoid, and uneducated" better describes a large segment of the Democrat constituency who are warehoused in public housing, fulfilling their role as a permanent underclass playthings of the Democrats.