RE: Getting While the Getting is Good

RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

TreasureKY -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 6:39:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kalikshama I think there is plenty of blame to go around, with the lion's share going to Walmart, who chose to not follow the documented procedure for outages. I've been thinking about this and have finally put my finger on what was niggling me about it. While I agree that Walmart failed to follow protocol and should be responsible for overcharges, I don't believe that lessens the culpability of the cardholders in the least. What they perpetrated was theft, plain and simple. While someone may argue that Walmart assisted them by allowing unlimited use of their cards... or at the very least did nothing to prevent it... I don't believe that mitigates the crime of theft on the part of the cardholders. Think of it this way... if you leave your car or house unlocked and your belongings get stolen, are the thieves any less guilty of stealing because you did not do what you could have to discourage them?

DesideriScuri -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 6:39:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic One report said that the biggest haul was 700, im pretty sure they could "recover" some of that, perishables be given to food banks or soup kitchens. community service....working in said soup kitchens or food banks...or other community project... but it would cost more to finance the process .... fining them makes little sense, putting them in jail, apart from the loss of freedom will give them better food than they can afford on ebt....how would you like to se them pay for their "crime" That is exactly the problem, Lucy. I don't know how they should "repay their debt." That's what I've been saying. Community service might be the best idea. I can't see fining them as being a legitimate response, either. On that, we agree. quote: quote: WalMart isn't the reason those people are on EBT. I wonder what percentage of those towns walmart workers are on EBT, in which case I disagree for those people... if they had a living wage, they shouldnt need ebt. quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen In many cases they likely are. First off Wal-Mart has driven many small businesses out of business which reduced living wage employment. This was particularly bad in rural areas. Second Wal-Mart pays its retail associates minimum or near minimum wage and many find themselves needing SNAP to survive. Oh, horseshit. If there was another competitor selling products for the same price and paying higher wages, WalMart would have to follow suit or not have enough labor available to fill their needs. Why do you think WalMart has been successful? What do you think the consumers want? If low prices is what the consumer wants, why is WalMart bad for filling that?

TheHeretic -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 7:47:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri How would you be able to hold them responsible without putting a serious impact on their ability to get food in the future? That is a big concern. If those who abused the system are reliant on the system for food, how can they be held accountable and still have help in being able to put food on the table? It's a Catch-22 of sorts. Should they be held responsible? I believe they should be. How they should be held responsible? That, I have no idea on how to do that. Rules and policies vary by state, but here in California (where the glitch also occurred and was exploited by some, but without any frenzies that I heard about) the overuse of the card would be considered an overpayment, and withheld from future benefits. The withholding happens at 5% of the total grant per month for errors on the administrative side, and 10% for errors and minor fraud on the participant side. If the fraud is severe enough, it will result in a sanction and loss of benefits for anywhere from a month or three, all the way up to a lifetime ban on an individual. Outrageous fraud, say the guy in Michigan who bought steak and lobster to resell, and then dropped the receipt in the parking lot where it was picked up and went viral on the internet, will be referred to the district attorney for criminal prosection, but over 95% of fraud cases are handled administratively and never become a matter of public record. If someone with dependent children is sanctioned, the children remain eligible, and the grant is reduced by the amount received for the particular individual. In some cases, those benefits must be received by a third party payee.

TheHeretic -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 7:48:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ExquisiteStings And the big greedy corporations like J.P. Morgan continue to profit from the foodstamp program. They get rich off of other people's poverty. It makes me not want to be a citizen of this country anymore, sometimes. Need bus fare to the airport?

graceadieu -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 8:32:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri How would you be able to hold them responsible without putting a serious impact on their ability to get food in the future? That is a big concern. If those who abused the system are reliant on the system for food, how can they be held accountable and still have help in being able to put food on the table? It's a Catch-22 of sorts. Should they be held responsible? I believe they should be. How they should be held responsible? That, I have no idea on how to do that. That's a good point. It is a tough call. You can't just entirely cut off benefits, that would be unethical, because for a lot of people that's how they feed their children. And you have to make sure that you're not penalizing people who maybe had an honest misunderstanding and spent $5 or $10 over their benefit. But for people who went egregariously over what they were entitled to, I think there does need to be some consequence. Maybe they could have their benefits garnished over time? I'd also hope that if they spent a ton on food, that some of it was to stock up on non-perishable goods that could be relied on later... but maybe it's hoping too much for people to be responsible like that.

slavekate80 -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 8:49:27 PM)
Garnishing is probably the least awful way to do it, yes. Perhaps overages up to a reasonable amount (15% of their monthly benefit, for instance) are forgiven, Wal-Mart eats that, and can write it off as a loss. That would ensure that those who accidentally went over their limit and made an honest mistake aren't punished. It would also let a few people off the hook who deliberately abused the error for a small amount, but especially in a case like this, better to let a few guilty go unpunished than punish the innocent. Anything over the forgiveness amount, they have to repay, by their choice of reimbursing the program directly or having future payments reduced a little until it's paid off. Or the amount could be due at tax time, subtracted from their tax return and tax credits when they file in early 2014.

tj444 -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 11:39:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 sure you will have a few extreme cases of people with multiple carts, but I doubt they would be the norm.. it only lasted 2 hours, from what I read, so after finding out about the glitch, how do you fill up 10 carts that fast? it makes me wonder how accurate the story really is.. I don't always believe everything in every article i read.. Did you watch the video and see the photos? This wasn't a case of just a couple of people trying to game the system. They cleared the shelves and cases of an entire Walmart grocery section. i have been in a walmart when there were lots of shelves with not much food on them.. In addition to that, there have also been articles about walmart not having a good enough supply of stuff/food on the shelves & not stocking them well.. it is annoying when you go to a store/Superstore and some of the items you went there for are outta stock.. (grrrrr).. that was well before the glitch so how does anyone know how full the shelves actually were before the glitch?

NoBimbosAllowed -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 11:44:54 PM)
is that mouse nose on a manboob, tj444?

tj444 -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 11:47:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NoBimbosAllowed is that mouse nose on a manboob, tj444? where the heck do you get a manboob from? me thinks you need glasses, dude! [:D]

NoBimbosAllowed -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 11:49:09 PM)
Not here, man. And there was an ep of Bing Bang Theory where that TOTALLY could have been Raj Koothrapaly's manboob.

tj444 -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/16/2013 12:00:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NoBimbosAllowed Not here, man. And there was an ep of Bing Bang Theory where that TOTALLY could have been Raj Koothrapaly's manboob. well,.. I have never watched big ban theory and have no idea who Raj Kootwhoever is.. no need to post pics of the guy to show me tho.. I happen to really like my little mouse with its cute twitching nose.. seeing your said manboob would be such a turn off & destroy my mouse's cuteness!!! [:'(] Please let me keep my twitching nose mouse illusion as it is.. [:D]

petitespot -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/16/2013 2:27:49 AM)
I wish my nip could do that. 8(

DesideriScuri -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/16/2013 3:04:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slavekate80 Garnishing is probably the least awful way to do it, yes. Perhaps overages up to a reasonable amount (15% of their monthly benefit, for instance) are forgiven, Wal-Mart eats that, and can write it off as a loss. That would ensure that those who accidentally went over their limit and made an honest mistake aren't punished. It would also let a few people off the hook who deliberately abused the error for a small amount, but especially in a case like this, better to let a few guilty go unpunished than punish the innocent. Anything over the forgiveness amount, they have to repay, by their choice of reimbursing the program directly or having future payments reduced a little until it's paid off. Or the amount could be due at tax time, subtracted from their tax return and tax credits when they file in early 2014. WalMart isn't going to be able to get repayment from those that abused the system. And, this is another Catch-22. If WalMart demands repayment of overages, that could seriously impact the program for every beneficiary of the program, not just those that abused the situation. WalMart will likely have to eat all overages past the $50 limit they are supposed to stop at in emergency cases. Sucks to be them for this, but they didn't follow protocol. I think Xerox is tossing in overage payments up to $50/card with overages. That takes care of the situation on the business side. I do wonder if this was a punishable crime, and if there are going to be arrests and prosecutions.

thishereboi -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/16/2013 5:23:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri FR I think WalMart is going to have to eat this. If there is a process set up for potential failures and it isn't followed, whoever isn't following the process should be held accountable. WalMart Corp. decided to go ahead and honor the cards so the people can still get food for their families is a benevolent act, in and of itself, but if they didn't follow the proper process, imo, it becomes a charitable act, and anything over the EBT limits is their charity. Now, it will be interesting to see if they will be allowed to claim the cost of goods for tax purposes. The news spreading far and wide so quickly isn't surprising, but it is a sad commentary. ABC reported last night that Walmart was going to have to absorb the cost. Apparently there is an emergency procedure that limits sales to $50 per cardholder, and Walmart didn't follow it. But does that really absolve the cardholders? It isn't as if they are anonymous, and despite the fact that the system wasn't working properly, they would have known that they weren't entitled to benefits enough to cover eight shopping carts worth of food. Should they be held responsible? I think they should but I doubt that they will.

thishereboi -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/16/2013 5:31:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 FR- I think with some people, even with SNAP, they end up at the end of the month with more days than food. I mean, if a person has a tight budget they will take whatever they can when they can.. I expect they know they will "pay" at some point.. but putting food on the table today is the survival instinct most people have.. I expect a lot of the food would be storable or freezeable so they can feed their family tomorrow as well.. it would be different if the carts were filled with cases of beer, imo.. Yeah, yeah, call me a bleeding heart (liberal?) but to me its like when someone is caught stealing a can of tuna, as opposed to a fur coat.. I will have at least some sympathy for the tuna thief and none for the fur coat thief.. As far as Walmart goes.. bad press either way but imo more bad press if they turned people buying food away.. that would seem much more "heartless", I would think.. and while it has been said they could have done an emergency limit of $50, that doesn't go far for a family with 4 kids.. I expect some get legit amounts on their cards greater than that amount, so I can see their point to allow the purchases.. jmo.. We get people trying to use their cards and finding out they have no more money on a regular basis. My favorite was the chick who started screaming at me about how was she was going to make it another 2 weeks without food stamps. I suggested she stop buying 5 dollar sandwiches everyday and start packing a lunch. Strangely enough that just seemed to piss her off even more. Now I have a lot of sympathy for the ones who honestly try to make ends meet and I would do what ever I could to help them out. But the ones who blow it at high priced convenience stores and then can't understand why they are now broke, not so much. Walmart knew what was going on and allowed the purchases. I think they should also be held responsible too.

PeonForHer -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/16/2013 5:48:27 AM)
FR Father Christmas and his gang of North Pole terrorists are at it again, I see. Meanwhile, in the UK there are reports of people returning some types of (entirely legally gained) food back to the food banks because they've later realised they can't afford the fuel to cook them.

Lucylastic -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/16/2013 6:06:51 AM)
Walmart has no regrets about allowing a wild shopping spree at two of its Louisiana stores when an electronic glitch lifted the spending caps on the cards of food stamp recipients. "We know we made the right choice," Walmart spokesman Kory Lundberg told ABCNews.com today. The chain has no regrets even though Louisiana's Department of Children and Family Services said food stamp recipients should have been limited to $50 each during the emergency and that Walmart will have to pay the difference. Lundberg declined to comment about how much the company may have lost or why it did not follow the emergency $50 limit. Shelves in the Walmart store in Springhill, La., were cleared Saturday, when the store allowed purchases on EBT cards that didn't show limits. Another Walmart spokeswoman Kayla Whaling said, "Our focus was to continue serving our customers." Food stamp recipients jammed into Walmarts in Mansfield and Springhill Saturday when word of the glitch spread. Springhill Police Chief Will Lynd said some customers were buying eight to ten grocery carts full of food. The store in Mansfield temporarily closed because of overcrowding and Mansfield Chief of Police Gary Hobbs said some shoppers left with up to eight carts of food and then went back for more. The food shelves were left bare and all the meat was sold as well, Lynd said. The shopping frenzy was triggered when the Electronic Benefits Transfer system went down because a back-up generator failed at 11 a.m. EST Saturday during a regularly-scheduled test, according to Xerox, a vendor for the EBT system and based in Norwalk, Conn. The outage erased limits on the EBT cards. The EBT system was affected in 17 states, where individuals and households access programs like Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, and other programs. http://abcnews.go.com/Business/walmart-food-stamp-shopping-spree-choice/story?id=20579980

papassion -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/16/2013 10:11:33 AM)
What is the difference between the people who loaded their carts knowing it was not legal, and someone walking by a nice car and seeing the keys inside the ignition, so they take It?

graceadieu -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/16/2013 10:47:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: slavekate80 Garnishing is probably the least awful way to do it, yes. Perhaps overages up to a reasonable amount (15% of their monthly benefit, for instance) are forgiven, Wal-Mart eats that, and can write it off as a loss. That would ensure that those who accidentally went over their limit and made an honest mistake aren't punished. It would also let a few people off the hook who deliberately abused the error for a small amount, but especially in a case like this, better to let a few guilty go unpunished than punish the innocent. Anything over the forgiveness amount, they have to repay, by their choice of reimbursing the program directly or having future payments reduced a little until it's paid off. Or the amount could be due at tax time, subtracted from their tax return and tax credits when they file in early 2014. WalMart isn't going to be able to get repayment from those that abused the system. And, this is another Catch-22. If WalMart demands repayment of overages, that could seriously impact the program for every beneficiary of the program, not just those that abused the situation. WalMart will likely have to eat all overages past the $50 limit they are supposed to stop at in emergency cases. Sucks to be them for this, but they didn't follow protocol. I think Xerox is tossing in overage payments up to $50/card with overages. That takes care of the situation on the business side. I do wonder if this was a punishable crime, and if there are going to be arrests and prosecutions. Yeah, I think that Walmart will end up eating the cost. If they legally were supposed to only let each person spend $50 and chose not to, the situation is pretty much their fault. And they can still deduct the cost of the goods from their taxes, and they might even be able to make a claim on their insurance for stolen property, so they're not too much in the hole. When I mentioned garnishing benefits for people who went way over their limit and had to have known it, I didn't mean to pay Walmart - I meant as a civil penalty. I don't think people should get arrested and get a criminal record over this, but a civil fine is fair. If you're entitled to $X/month, then that's what you're entitled to. Maybe people should get more (I think so), but defrauding the system isn't the way to go about it.

Yachtie -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/16/2013 10:53:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: papassion What is the difference between the people who loaded their carts knowing it was not legal, and someone walking by a nice car and seeing the keys inside the ignition, so they take It? More like knowingly going overdrawn on a bank account. Not illegal, but still responsible. Kinda like going to a restaurant when the CC machine is down, it takes an imprint for batching later. There is risk. The card might be declined. I find it interesting that SNAP rules say, under such circumstance, the limit is $50. I believe that's the same limit one is held to for CC fraud.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.589844E-02