Posted on 02/01/2014 9:01:30 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Wal-Mart stores and its Sam's Club chain are apparently hurting from the cuts in the federal food stamp program that went into effect in early November.
The impact from the government's reduction in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits had a much greater effect on the world's largest retailer than originally expected by the company. Combined with consumer fears about the economy and winter storms that also hurt store business nationwide, the cuts made a bad situation for Wal-Mart even worse, according to a statement from Wal-Mart Chief Financial Officer Charles Holley carried by the Associated Press.
The estimated $5 billion cut from the program dragged down store sales over the Christmas period, more than offsetting the usual bump from the holiday season during the fiscal fourth quarter.
Noting that about 20 percent of Wal-Mart shoppers use food stamps, Morningstar financial analyst Ken Perkins told Reuters, "Wal-Mart caters to lower-income consumers which have been hit disproportionately hard relative to higher-income consumer."(continued)
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
You say that like it's a bad thing!
Weaning them from food stamps would not be a bad thing; the violence that would ensue could be.
VA disability is like an insurance policy for military members.
Are you saying that if Bill Gates gets in a traffic accident and his car is wrecked, Progressive shouldn’t have to pay for a new car?
Would it? Urban renewal and cleaning out the nest of vipers in power might be worth it.
It is going to happen anyway.
Put simply, the able bodied and lazy shouldn’t get anything.
In any form, may I add!
I’m not sure I agree VA disability is like insurance paying for a wrecked car. Wouldn’t it be closer to workman’s compensation? The rules for that vary significantly from state to state. Some pay based on the level of impairment, some pay based on loss of earning potential, some cover the actual existing financial losses that are suffered, and some pay a combination of the above. If I understand it correctly, the third approach, for example, would only pay if the person wasn’t employed. If they found a job, the disability would be cut off.
Disability is a very difficult subject. No one wants to prevent the truly disabled, including vets, from being helped. On the other hand, the disability rolls are growing rapidly. There was a time, I think, when most Americans avoided these programs out of sense of pride and self reliance. Now, people, including vets, seem to use every opportunity to get a bigger cut from Uncle Sam.
Again, I don’t know of anyone who would deny payouts to someone who had their legs blown off in combat. Those vets deserve medical care for life as well as compensation for the loss of their limbs.
No one is stopping any vet from applying for disability. Like I wrote earlier, the military itself encourages everyone to apply to see how much they can get. I guess it’s that attitude that disappoints me. Combine that with knowing/meeting many “disabled” vets who show absolutely no evidence of disability whatsoever (I know. I know. I’m no doctor, and there’s always mental things like PTSD...for vets I know were never in combat of course), and I get the sense (anecdotally of course) that some of these folks shouldn’t be on disability.
Nice sidestep.
You do post like a person who creates his personal creations of reality in his head rather than as a valid observer of reality.
If you prefer a different grocery store, then shop at it, but you clearly are on a mission against one specific grocery store, so is the entire American left.
Sidestep? OK. If Bill Gates got in an accident, his insurer—assuming the car was covered—would have to pay for it. By the same token, if Bill Gates claimed a neck injury that prevented him from turning his head—assuming medical was covered—he’d be paid for that, too. If, however, the insurance company subsequently saw Bill Gates laughing and joking while swinging his head side to side, they’d nail him for fraud.
Like I wrote, this disability stuff isn’t clear cut. I think most agree society has an obligation to the truly disabled. I think most also believe able bodied, fully employable adults should take care of themselves. Do you disagree?
Much better answer.
America has always taken care of the men who offer up their lives and bodies and youth for the tribe.
“Much better answer.”
I try. FReegards.
You realize that there are huge swathes of NY and NJ that are dependent on Wegman’s and Whole Foods. Wally World’s quality is crap, ditto Pathmark and A&P.
Me too! Do let’s keep each other honest!
“....but you clearly are on a mission against one specific grocery store....”
Huh? I think Walmart is a huge success story. That said, for anyone there to be complaining about a “loss of business” due to the minuscule cutback in Food Stamps is a little specious. Beyond that, Walmart is a magnet for the low-income shopper, and I got tired of having to “fight” to keep my place in the checkout line when the local prick from the ME shows up and thinks he can just cut in.
That’s nice, you can choose any grocery store to shop at that you want, if you don’t want to shop at Walmart.
The Walmart haters do keep 10s of millions of us from shopping at our preferred grocery store though.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
