Posted on 04/27/2011 6:58:06 PM PDT by Altura Ct.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Wal-Mart's core shoppers are running out of money much faster than a year ago due to rising gasoline prices, and the retail giant is worried, CEO Mike Duke said Wednesday.
"We're seeing core consumers under a lot of pressure," Duke said at an event in New York. "There's no doubt that rising fuel prices are having an impact."
Wal-Mart shoppers, many of whom live paycheck to paycheck, typically shop in bulk at the beginning of the month when their paychecks come in.
Lately, they're "running out of money" at a faster clip, he said.
Wal-Mart's ready to do battle on prices
"Purchases are really dropping off by the end of the month even more than last year," Duke said. "This end-of-month [purchases] cycle is growing to be a concern.
Wal-Mart (WMT, Fortune 500), which averages 140 million shoppers weekly to its stores in the United States, is considered a barometer of the health of the consumer and the economy.
To that end, Duke said he's not seeing signs of a recovery yet.
With food prices rising, Duke said Wal-Mart is charging customers more for some fresh groceries while reducing prices on other merchandise such as electronics.
Wal-Mart has struggled with seven straight quarters of sales declines in its stores.
(Excerpt) Read more at money.cnn.com ...
‘Wal-Mart has struggled with seven straight quarters of sales declines in its stores.”
Another sign the recovery is still underway!
Gas went from 3.99 to 4.15 here in North central Ohio.
I’m surprised the numbers are that low.
I just stopped by our local Wal-Mart today. I have to say, their prices weren’t particularly competitive. In many cases, they were higher - often significantly higher - than our local grocery store. My wife bought a few out of season clothes for my son two sizes too big but that was about it.
“do not EVER compare welfare recipients and S.S. people in the same sentence....I am 72 years old, on s.s. and have been paying into it for over 50 years....”
And sorry that you got sucker punched. SS is just another form of welfare. It’s just not as means tested as AFDC or food stamps.
“The 2008 Farm Act removed all asset test restrictions from SNAP eligibility. There is no point in reporting them based on the car. They might also have $500,000 in the bank, as long as they aren’t earning much interest on it.”
So what you’re saying then is that Bill Gates would qualify for food stamps so long as he didn’t choose to put his money in interest or dividend paying investments.
According to leftist theory, Walmart shoppers are all evil rednecks and deserve to suffer. We have a planned economy now, in which the federal government will pick winners and losers.
Can you point me to someplace where Wal-Mart "advocated" for an increase in foodstamp money?
They can also use their food stamps at Papa Murphy’s Pizza and Schwann’s home food delivery (not cheap!). It should be for only BASIC food like rice, beans, bread, etc, and only for those that truly need it which will never happen. It shouldn’t be used for steak, seafood, and pizza for meth heads and lazy mooches. It’s a @&%$# crime against taxpayers and it’s destroying this country. Thanks to the vote buying POS Democrats.
I do, too. Most of it, anyway.
It is just a lot less expensive, typically, on the very same items, than competing chain supermarkets are.
And its store-brand items (which often seem identical to Kroger's store-brand items; many may be manufactured by the same company) are usually less expensive than similar store-brand items elsewhere.
1995 isn't considered 'late model' anymore? I still consider that to be mu "new" car!
I wish I could get Cheerios for 3.99
Alaska bush price? 7.88
Gas is 5.24 a gallon, too
Had Social Security recipients had guaranteed legal claims on their future payments, they'd have have assets in those claims - just as a lifetime annuity holder has an asset. If the receiver has a legal asset, then the payer has a legal liability.
In other words, if Flemming v. Nestor were reversed, the U.S. government would be legally obliged to report the present value of all future Social Security payments - all of them - as a present liability. That's what good accounting practice mandates. If the government doesn't do so, the rating agencies would do it for them.
I'm not sure how huge the unfunded Social Security liability is (not including Medicare), but the government being obliged to do so might make it technically bankrupt. If all future Medicare recipients have an asset in right to future benefits, the U.S. government would be technically bankrupt. The total amount of wealth in the United States is about $70-75 trillion. It's flat-out imposssible for the U.S. government to tax more, and even securing that wealth would require a 100% wealth tax on everyone. Assuming that no wealth would be destroyed by such a tax, and assuming that the collection rate was 100%.
Here's the rock and the hard place: if Flemming v. Nestor were reversed, long-term treasury bonds would have to be rated as junk bonds. Their prices would sink like a stone. If Medicare's legally recognized as an asset, long-term governments would be C-rated - and sink like a stone. A C rating means a high probaility of bankruptcy before the bonds mature and are fully paid off. The only way out of that downgrade would be for the ratings agencies to call attention to the printing press and explain why inflating would not be a disguised default.
All in all, I'd say that not having a court-enforcible right to Social Security payments might not be all that bad. To put it bluntly, that ruling allows the government to legally claim solvency and keep an investment-grade rating on its debt.
There are a couple of things I’ve noticed about the Wal-Mart, a “superstore,” in the last few months:
1) Their prices have not only increased (including food), they are in many cases higher than other grocery stores in our area.
2) They no longer have much of a selection of products, and some products I used to buy there are no longer on the shelves.
Those are 2 reasons why I don’t shop at Wal-Mart regularly anymore. I’m sure I’m not the only one.
I might also add that on several occasions, the price under the item on the shelve rang up higher at the check-out.
“In many cases, they were higher - often significantly higher - than our local grocery store.”
Here in northern NJ Wal-Mart will drive the grocery stores out of business as it did many other businesses; prices are noticeably better, though the selection is more limited. Our chain supermarkets are on the ropes, while many of the Wal-Mart shoppers are just there for groceries.
I would very much like to do online groceries delivery. I think that would be totally awesome, but its not available in my area.
I suspect that if gasoline goes over $5 for more than a week or thereabouts, it could kill the dem party for a decade.
Wow. Small price to pay with VERY large gains.
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.