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

a reply to: NthOther

Look at it from this perspective. The Walton's are using the System to Subsidize their own payroll. Meaning that the Walton's themselves essentially are the one's who are on public assistance by not paying their employee's enough and therefore the tax payers make up the rest for them. That money the Walton's are "Saving" by paying low wages is actually the Tax Payers money which they are in effect stealing by using a completely corrupt and broken system. That "Savings" or "Subsidized Profit" is in addition to their actual profits that they make by selling crap.

That is the Lie that Corporations use and then spin to make it seem like Welfare is the evil born because of the poor. Actually it's the Evil which is born from the Rich and Their Greed.

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: links234

Maybe Wal-mart should just close and make all those people unemployed.

Don't get paid enough then work somewhere else.

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.

Maybe the Walmart employees can live in tents and hunt feral cats.

Maybe Walmart should stop pay the F%#%#$% CEO more money in an hour, than 1 of his his employees get paid in a year?

Oh of course, Walmart couldn't find someone to work for less than $11,000 an hour, I forgot.

America is subsidizing the Walton family, because $80 Billion is not enough for some people.

originally posted by: roadgravel
It just kills people to think that the biggest retailer, making huge amounts of money, should pay their workers a bit better.

No wonder the US work ethic is terrible for the most part.

Shut up slave!

The employees should live in tents and eat cow pies!

These middle American retards are really... well retarded.

originally posted by: AzureSky
a reply to: Metallicus

They should.
Considering most of the jobs being offered these days are minimum wage crap work. What's a middle class again? Oh right it's been destroyed. I hear russia has a wonderful middle class where half the countries wealth sits. How is wealth distributed in the US? 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?

Note: Costco pays its employees a wage people can survive on.

You are speaking communisms

May the Ghost of small government, J Edgar Hoover small government your commie ass when you are in the bathroom.

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???

It's called "ME TOO!" Syndrome. Humans (not all but quite a few) have an instinctive nature to identify with what would be the "higher ideal" and since our society is valued by how much wealth you have established, and since "conservatives" are about preserving that generational wealth that is why you see the responses.

That's why tv programming has been dumbed down to Honey Boo Boo, pawn shop master, and inbred southerners doing whatever...

It's to make "You" feel better about your crappy Wendy's job because "those people" are a train wreck...

Well you know the Walton family have worked really hard for- Hahahaha! Im sorry i cant even complete that sentence without bursting into laughter. The idea that a company that is incredibly profitable does not pay their worker's a living wage is BIG RED FLAG when it comes to running a healthy and stable society.

Call me a socialist who's just so so SOOOO jealous of other peoples wealth, that im all hardcore about a fair's day work earning a fair day's pay - Should probably lock me up for being CRAAZZZYYY.

I think everyone who works for walmart and doesnt make a living wage should just go onto welfare. Quit your jobs just live off the state, doesnt make much difference anyhow. If the company you work for is going to treat you like scum then you might as well live up to it.

I was waiting to see it, yet nobody has come with it. Even though it's been scrubbed from the wiki, Hillary Clinton still serves on the board of directors for the corporate walmart. She has since 1994. If this hasn't been a planned end-around, I don't know what is.

Another thing that people don't realize, welfare goes straight back into the American economy.

McDonalds does the same crap.Low wages,no benefits.Its not as if these monster size companies can't afford to pay their slaves a living wage and healthcare.I think they should be ashamed of themselves and should be forced to by the government to take care of their workers.IF they want to continue to operate here.Just my 2cents having had worked at a mcds for 2 years in the past.They work full time yet are always broke.A disgrace.

a reply to: TDawg61
does not mickeyD also have an obamacare exemption?

a reply to: links234

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

Hmmm.

How much would it cost Taxpayers if Walmart didn't exist ?

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: links234

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

Hmmm.

How much would it cost Taxpayers if Walmart didn't exist ?

Is that your way of suggesting that Gov. subsidized Payroll for Walmart is a good thing because Walmart is actually saving customers more money selling stuff they can afford than they are giving up with their tax dollars???

I took the @store job entry exam there once.

It seemed that all the questions were catered to attract/hire imbeciles only.

"If a customer asks you this...what would you do/say?"

I answered as I saw fit, NOT; "go look for a supervisor for help"
handle the customer's query myself...serve the customer.

Needless to say, I wasn't a viable enough for such a "job."

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: links234

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

Hmmm.

How much would it cost Taxpayers if Walmart didn't exist ?

That's an interesting proposition. The decreased tax load as evidenced by this thread would be a nice immediate effect, but you have to look at the niche this company fills to truly get an idea of the effects removing this country would have. Wal-mart fills a niche created by the widened wealth gap. As people make less and less money every year, they can afford less and less things. Along comes the Waltons and Wal-mart that cuts many corners to offer the cheapest crap so that these people can afford to get by day to day. However, one of the corners that is cut, is wages, letting the government provide the rest. Wal-mart becomes part of the cycle of poverty. As they pop up around the country, especially in small towns that have been decimated by dropping wages, they become ingrained into the system and people become reliant on them because they have no other recourse to get by.

If you were to remove Wal-mart from the country, a huge problem would occur. Suddenly a large portion of rural America would no longer be able to survive day to day. Expect rioting to occur which could escalate to the point of tearing our country apart. The only way to prevent this, is to put all the ex-employees on FULL government assistance which would probably result in a bigger tax burden on the American public. It's sad when a company that feeds and helps perpetuate America's descent into third world status is also a required asset that keeps our country from falling apart altogether.

Maybe we should cut the assistance programs and see if wal mart and the rest can find some extra money for their employees before they starve to death!!!

Since our elected officials aren't even trying to find a better solution to the problem and by the time it's all said and done there isn't going to be enough of a middle class to foot the bill and I really have no faith the the rich businessmen will foot a dime of it! And the end result will be the same!

a reply to: mOjOm

I don't know.

That's why I asked the question.

a reply to: xuenchen

it costs x amount of money to sustain a worker
it costs y amount of money for that worker to provide for their family
x and y are both variables dependent on what the businesses chooses to charge for the goods needed. And thus if the businesses did decide to raise their prices on those things that really matter they would just be adding to the cost of keeping their own employees provided for!
It costs more for that worker to to receive part of their substanance through the god only knows how many agencies that has been tasked with dispersing those funds since each agency has their own army to do just that!
It would be cheaper if the employers would just pay their employees a fair wage for a fair day's work.

originally posted by: dawnstar
Maybe we should cut the assistance programs and see if wal mart and the rest can find some extra money for their employees before they starve to death!!!

If they did that at some point there would be trouble, the Waltons probably wouldnt shell out anyway - Its not them starving eh?

People need to start voting with their feet.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: links234

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

Hmmm.

How much would it cost Taxpayers if Walmart didn't exist ?

More than likely would be far less. If there hadn't been a Walmart then all the small businesses that they ran out of business would still be running and paying their people a livable wage.