Who's the Biggest Welfare Queen? Wal-Mart!

[gblowfish]

They force their employees to live off federal assistance in many, many ways. Flame away, neocons:

http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/13...ZSJi8.facebook

Good news everyone, after more than thirty years of searching by the news media, Ronald Reagan’s infamous “Welfare Queen” has finally been found. She lives in Bentonville, Arkansas.

“She has eighty names, thirty addresses,” Reagan warned during his 1976 run for President about a nameless, Cadillac-driving woman who’s conning the social safety net. He added: “She’s got Medicaid, getting food stamps, and she is collecting welfare under each of her names.” In total, Reagan said, “Her tax-free cash income is over $150,000.”

For more than thirty years, Republicans have used the existence of this “Welfare Queen” to justify their attacks on public spending and prove that the “welfare state” has run amok. Yet, her identity has never been revealed. After decades of searching, the best and brightest minds in the field of journalism were never able to discover who’s behind the wheel of the “Welfare Queen’s” Cadillac, or if she even existed.

That is until now.

We now realize our mistake. In our search for this “Welfare Queen,” we were looking for actual people when we should have been looking for corporate people. We should have been looking at Wal-Mart.

Wal-Mart is the largest private employer and brought in more revenue in 2011 than any other company in the nation. Wal-Mart pocketed a not-too-shabby $16.4 billion in profits that same year and the six Wal-Mart heirs, the Walton family, own roughly $100 billion in wealth, which is more than 40% of Americans combined.

But, despite making all of this money, Wal-Mart’s business model hinges on mooching from the government. It hinges on being the biggest “Welfare Queen” in the United States.

Because of the “everyday low wages” that the retail giant pays its employees, our government has to step in and provide public assistance to Wal-Mart workers just so they can survive…which is why the Wal-Mart workforce represents the largest recipient of federal aid in the nation.
A Wal-Mart worker makes on average 31% less than a worker for any other large retailer, and requires 39% more in public assistance.

A recent study by UC Berkeley found that Wal-Mart’s low wages are costing the state of California alone $86 million a year to provide public assistance like food stamps and healthcare to the retailer’s 44,000 low-wage employees in the state. The state spends nearly $2,000 every single year on each Wal-Mart employee who can’t afford basic essentials like housing, food, and healthcare with their Wal-Mart paycheck.

In total, it’s estimated that Walmart stores loot more than $2.6 billion every single year from the federal government in the form of tax-payer funded public assistance to their employees. That includes more than one billion in healthcare costs associated with Medicaid, and $225 million in free or reduced-price lunches for school children of Wal-Mart employees.

And now, as reported by the Huffington Post, Wal-Mart is planning to loot even more from us taxpayers, as the giant corporation adopts a new healthcare policy that will deny insurance for any employees working fewer than 30 hours a week.

Wal-Mart routinely forces their workers into part-time schedules, working fewer than 30 hours a week, so many will lose their health insurance under this new policy. When asked for comment by the Huffington Post on how many workers will be affected, Wal-Mart declined to answer.

Make no mistake about it, while it may be individual Wal-Mart employees who are collecting government benefits, the corporation itself benefits tremendously.

If the government didn’t step in to provide food assistance, Wal-Mart couldn’t operate with a team of emaciated workers unable to lift ballets of canned foods or count back the correct change at the checkout lanes.

If the government didn’t step in to provide health insurance, then Walmart stores would be a breeding ground for infectious diseases since their employees can’t afford to see a doctor on their own.

If the government didn’t step in to provide school-lunch assistance, then parents who work at Wal-Mart may have less money to put gas in their car and may not even make it in to work.

How can a business succeed with a sickly, tired, tardy, or altogether absent workforce? It can’t.

And while most businesses understanding that a healthy, happy, productive workforce is good for business, Wal-Mart hasn’t. Instead, Wal-Mart, with its enormous fortune, has shifted this responsibility onto taxpayers like you and me. They are, indeed, among the biggest of the big welfare queens in America.

The only difference is Walmart actually exists and Reagan’s “Welfare Queen” doesn’t.

With the help of “Welfare Queen” argument, Conservatives have targeted individual Americans who rely on public assistance as irresponsible and argued that it’s time to end the “handouts.”

But in reality, it’s time we target the actual institutions of irresponsibility in America – Wal-Mart and the other corporate giants who don’t give enough of a damn about their workers to pay them a living wage stick us with the bill for their well-being.

If a corporation can’t afford to pay its employees enough that each worker can afford basic essentials like healthcare, food, and housing, then that corporation – no matter how big or small it is – shouldn’t be allowed to do business.

No more corporate Welfare Queens in America!

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by mr. tegu

Yes and no. The days that are split she complains but otherwise not an extremely unusual amount. No more than anyone else complains about their jobs. I am fully aware though that my fiance and I both see her job situation as being more unbearable/unfair than she does.

Split shifts do suck. I never used them when I made the work schedule but that was years ago, times do change. Sounds like she is, more or less, content.

[mr. tegu]

Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy

take advantage of much quicker check out lanes

It is funny you mention this because when I worked at Hy-Vee I always thought it was funny how much focus the upfront manager put on the checkout lanes. They absolutely freak out at the slightest lines and they always make sure to reiterate that the customers should not have to wait much if at all. I always knew the reasoning but I still couldn't help but think, "screw them they can wait," mainly because I hated getting called from my job to sack groceries.

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by Fish

Depends on which ones you're talking about, but the answer is yes for many of them.

The ones that you appear to believe help Wal Mart thrive.

[La literatura]

Originally Posted by gvtheogioA

Chuc mot ngay lam viec moi vui ve va hanh phuc
Mong rang ban dat duoc nhung gi minh dat ra
Cam on da chia se bai viet tren dien dan cua chung toi
Rat y nghia
Cam on

Are you a little Vietnamese kid employed by Wal-Mart overseas to make shoes? Can you give us some inside info?

[Calcountry]

Originally Posted by gblowfish

They force their employees to live off federal assistance in many, many ways. Flame away, neocons:

http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/13...ZSJi8.facebook

Good news everyone, after more than thirty years of searching by the news media, Ronald Reagan’s infamous “Welfare Queen” has finally been found. She lives in Bentonville, Arkansas.

“She has eighty names, thirty addresses,” Reagan warned during his 1976 run for President about a nameless, Cadillac-driving woman who’s conning the social safety net. He added: “She’s got Medicaid, getting food stamps, and she is collecting welfare under each of her names.” In total, Reagan said, “Her tax-free cash income is over $150,000.”

For more than thirty years, Republicans have used the existence of this “Welfare Queen” to justify their attacks on public spending and prove that the “welfare state” has run amok. Yet, her identity has never been revealed. After decades of searching, the best and brightest minds in the field of journalism were never able to discover who’s behind the wheel of the “Welfare Queen’s” Cadillac, or if she even existed.

That is until now.

We now realize our mistake. In our search for this “Welfare Queen,” we were looking for actual people when we should have been looking for corporate people. We should have been looking at Wal-Mart.

Wal-Mart is the largest private employer and brought in more revenue in 2011 than any other company in the nation. Wal-Mart pocketed a not-too-shabby $16.4 billion in profits that same year and the six Wal-Mart heirs, the Walton family, own roughly $100 billion in wealth, which is more than 40% of Americans combined.

But, despite making all of this money, Wal-Mart’s business model hinges on mooching from the government. It hinges on being the biggest “Welfare Queen” in the United States.

Because of the “everyday low wages” that the retail giant pays its employees, our government has to step in and provide public assistance to Wal-Mart workers just so they can survive…which is why the Wal-Mart workforce represents the largest recipient of federal aid in the nation.
A Wal-Mart worker makes on average 31% less than a worker for any other large retailer, and requires 39% more in public assistance.

A recent study by UC Berkeley found that Wal-Mart’s low wages are costing the state of California alone $86 million a year to provide public assistance like food stamps and healthcare to the retailer’s 44,000 low-wage employees in the state. The state spends nearly $2,000 every single year on each Wal-Mart employee who can’t afford basic essentials like housing, food, and healthcare with their Wal-Mart paycheck.

In total, it’s estimated that Walmart stores loot more than $2.6 billion every single year from the federal government in the form of tax-payer funded public assistance to their employees. That includes more than one billion in healthcare costs associated with Medicaid, and $225 million in free or reduced-price lunches for school children of Wal-Mart employees.

And now, as reported by the Huffington Post, Wal-Mart is planning to loot even more from us taxpayers, as the giant corporation adopts a new healthcare policy that will deny insurance for any employees working fewer than 30 hours a week.

Wal-Mart routinely forces their workers into part-time schedules, working fewer than 30 hours a week, so many will lose their health insurance under this new policy. When asked for comment by the Huffington Post on how many workers will be affected, Wal-Mart declined to answer.

Make no mistake about it, while it may be individual Wal-Mart employees who are collecting government benefits, the corporation itself benefits tremendously.

If the government didn’t step in to provide food assistance, Wal-Mart couldn’t operate with a team of emaciated workers unable to lift ballets of canned foods or count back the correct change at the checkout lanes.

If the government didn’t step in to provide health insurance, then Walmart stores would be a breeding ground for infectious diseases since their employees can’t afford to see a doctor on their own.

If the government didn’t step in to provide school-lunch assistance, then parents who work at Wal-Mart may have less money to put gas in their car and may not even make it in to work.

How can a business succeed with a sickly, tired, tardy, or altogether absent workforce? It can’t.

And while most businesses understanding that a healthy, happy, productive workforce is good for business, Wal-Mart hasn’t. Instead, Wal-Mart, with its enormous fortune, has shifted this responsibility onto taxpayers like you and me. They are, indeed, among the biggest of the big welfare queens in America.

The only difference is Walmart actually exists and Reagan’s “Welfare Queen” doesn’t.

With the help of “Welfare Queen” argument, Conservatives have targeted individual Americans who rely on public assistance as irresponsible and argued that it’s time to end the “handouts.”

But in reality, it’s time we target the actual institutions of irresponsibility in America – Wal-Mart and the other corporate giants who don’t give enough of a damn about their workers to pay them a living wage stick us with the bill for their well-being.

If a corporation can’t afford to pay its employees enough that each worker can afford basic essentials like healthcare, food, and housing, then that corporation – no matter how big or small it is – shouldn’t be allowed to do business.

No more corporate Welfare Queens in America!

After reading your article, I am convinced, the Government should tax away all of the wealth that has been created by Wal Mart and give it to the employees of Wal mart in a class action kind of settlement. Then the Government should seize all of their properties and run them so that everyone can have their fair share.

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by Literature

Are you a little Vietnamese kid employed by Wal-Mart overseas to make shoes? Can you give us some inside info?

Heh. He's a spammer, I found the same text pasted onto a few other message boards.

[blaise]

Originally Posted by gvtheogioA

Chuc mot ngay lam viec moi vui ve va hanh phuc
Mong rang ban dat duoc nhung gi minh dat ra
Cam on da chia se bai viet tren dien dan cua chung toi
Rat y nghia
Cam on

Reported for racism.

[Ugly Duck]

Originally Posted by Dallas Chief

Let me just ask a few questions- How much would a loaf of bread cost at Walmart if they were forced to pay their employees more/provide benefits?

Walmart could afford to pay its employees enough to get off of welfare & still have cheap bread. They'd just have to take a bit less in profit. Corporate profit vs wage disparity has never been more pronounced than it is right now. Taxpayers are also subsidizing the record profit levels of the other major retailers as well. Walmart employees would just face the same working-poor wage level if they went to some other big retailer.

The Department of Commerce said last week that corporate profits hit an all-time high in the third quarter of this year, up more than 18% over last year. It also noted that workers are not benefiting from record profits. In fact, wages have now fallen to a record low of 43.5% of GDP.

Let that sink in for a moment....

After-tax profits are at their greatest percentage of GDP in history.

Workers' wages have fallen to their lowest-ever share of GDP.

[blaise]

Originally Posted by Ugly Duck

Walmart could afford to pay its employees enough to get off of welfare & still have cheap bread. They'd just have to take a bit less in profit. Corporate profit vs wage disparity has never been more pronounced than it is right now. Taxpayers are also subsidizing the record profit levels of the other major retailers as well. Walmart employees would just face the same working-poor wage level if they went to some other big retailer.

The Department of Commerce said last week that corporate profits hit an all-time high in the third quarter of this year, up more than 18% over last year. It also noted that workers are not benefiting from record profits. In fact, wages have now fallen to a record low of 43.5% of GDP.

Let that sink in for a moment....

After-tax profits are at their greatest percentage of GDP in history.

Workers' wages have fallen to their lowest-ever share of GDP.

So, when you go to a store and pay for something do you just tell them that you want to pay extra?

[vailpass]

Originally Posted by mr. tegu

Considering the amount of people in this very thread that are willing to pay more or drive further is evidence that people are turned off by the service among other things. Not sure what your point is other than the people who cannot afford to shop anywhere else "choose" to shop at Wal-mart and put up with the environment. You are either being the devil's advocate or are just plain silly if you don't think people care about the service associated with the stores they shop at.

My point is you are a whiny bastard with high-maintenance tendencies that place you in the should-have-been-a-chick camp.

[HonestChieffan]

Anyone ever tip your walmart employees?

[vailpass]

Originally Posted by Ugly Duck

Walmart could afford to pay its employees enough to get off of welfare & still have cheap bread. They'd just have to take a bit less in profit. Corporate profit vs wage disparity has never been more pronounced than it is right now. Taxpayers are also subsidizing the record profit levels of the other major retailers as well. Walmart employees would just face the same working-poor wage level if they went to some other big retailer.

The Department of Commerce said last week that corporate profits hit an all-time high in the third quarter of this year, up more than 18% over last year. It also noted that workers are not benefiting from record profits. In fact, wages have now fallen to a record low of 43.5% of GDP.

Let that sink in for a moment....

After-tax profits are at their greatest percentage of GDP in history.

Workers' wages have fallen to their lowest-ever share of GDP.

What the hell? You can't be serious with this talk.

[Ugly Duck]

Originally Posted by vailpass

What the hell? You can't be serious with this talk.

Arithmetic, me bucko. Look at the numbers. Wages are at record lows... so low that the employees are on welfare & are subsidized by taxpayers & money borrowed from China. Meanwhile, profits are at record highs. You can't look at those two factors and see any relationship at all?

Bill Clinton explaining the importance of simple arithmetic:

[blaise]

Right, let's force Wal Mart to pay more. Obviously. Let's just raise the minimum wage to $17 an hour and all our problems will disappear!

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by Ugly Duck