Getting While the Getting is Good

Getting While the Getting is Good (Full Version)

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

Message

TreasureKY -> Getting While the Getting is Good (10/14/2013 9:19:39 PM)
This just stunned me... Shopping Spree quote: Word quickly spread in the Louisiana towns of Springhill and Mansfield that a food stamp glitch was giving recipients an unlimited balance on their Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) cards, causing two local Wal-Marts to be completely ransacked on Saturday night. You can watch the video here. In light of the budget issues, what do you think should happen to the folks who took advantage of this? Should they be cut off of SNAP? Should they have to repay? Should nothing happen to them? Should Xerox or Walmart have to pick up the tab? This is such a large group of people. I can't imagine that these stores would have been deluged in such a short period of time had there not been a concerted effort to spread the word. Am I alone in feeling like this equates to looting?

TheHeretic -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/14/2013 9:52:41 PM)
Wow. If Walmart chose to keep honoring cards they knew were affected by a system failure, I'm not super sympathetic to their losses. If it was a system glitch, then Walmart wouldn't have been the only store available. I wonder what the responses were in those other locations. Such a mob mentality at the promise of "free" stuff though. That's just sad. What is sad too, is how much of that food will just go to waste, because people took more than they could keep. As for penalties to the participants in what amounts to a looting, I think every one of them should get a notice of action on the overpayment, and every penny gets withheld from future benefits. If it can be established that the goods they "bought" were resold, then give the case to fraud for anything from a sanction, to a DA referral, depending on the circumstances. The speed of the news spreading is interesting as well. Facebook? Lobby lawyers with Twitter followers?

DomKen -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/14/2013 10:05:16 PM)
Government policy on overpayments is to hold back future payments. I'm sure these people are in for an unpleasant surprise as soon as the GOP relents and lets the feds reopen.

TreasureKY -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/14/2013 10:10:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Wow. If Walmart chose to keep honoring cards they knew were affected by a system failure, I'm not super sympathetic to their losses. If it was a system glitch, then Walmart wouldn't have been the only store available. I wonder what the responses were in those other locations. I've not seen articles about any stores other than Wal-Mart having this issue, but I did see other articles about 17 States being affected on Saturday after a routine testing of the system by Xerox. Apparently the testing knocked the whole EBT system offline and no one could use their card in 17 States. I didn't really equate the two stories until I saw this article saying that Wal-Mart and Xerox are blaming each other.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 6:48:56 AM)
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.

TreasureKY -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 7:11:47 AM)
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?

NoChaos -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 7:21:40 AM)
This just goes to show the "human nature" of those receiving benefits. If they will steal from Walmart who is to say they won't steal from anyone else. Yes I am sure there will be a record of those guilty of this crime. These people should be prosecuted. In the very least their future benefits should be withheld to cover their spending.

Yachtie -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 7:25:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NoChaos This just goes to show the "human nature" of those receiving benefits. It was a SNAP decision. [8D]

DesideriScuri -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 7:51:13 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? 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.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 7:53:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NoChaos This just goes to show the "human nature" of those receiving benefits. If they will steal from Walmart who is to say they won't steal from anyone else. Yes I am sure there will be a record of those guilty of this crime. These people should be prosecuted. In the very least their future benefits should be withheld to cover their spending. It's only a commentary on the nature of those who abused the situation, not all those who are receiving benefits. quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie It was a SNAP decision. [8D] [sm=Groaner.gif]

PyrotheClown -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 8:15:18 AM)
if any body is able to throw that kind of loss into a tax break,it's walmart

NoChaos -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 8:50:54 AM)
I stand corrected. Some people genuinely do need and deserve assistance. And I am all for giving it to them. The ones that knowingly overcharged their cards are the lowest of low life people. And as far as a SNAP decision I don't think SNAP would promote the abuse of the system.

thompsonx -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 8:57:36 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? One of the richest corporations in the world sees an opportunity to make millions on a system failure and some people instantly find fault with "joe shit he rag man" for taking the same opportunity but for nickles and dimes. Why is it ok for the rich to rip off the system for millions but reprehensible for the not rich to do the same?

MasterCaneman -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 9:01:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri 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? 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. The most that will happen is they'll have their future benefits reduced by a percentage until the balance is cleared. You know who gets to do that? Us. The only ones who'll get further punishment were the ones caught in line when the system went back up and showed the correct balance.

thompsonx -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 9:02:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NoChaos I stand corrected. Some people genuinely do need and deserve assistance. And I am all for giving it to them. The ones that knowingly overcharged their cards are the lowest of low life people. Also the poorest thus perhaps the reason they were on ebt.

thompsonx -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 9:05:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NoChaos This just goes to show the "human nature" of those receiving benefits. [8\|]

tj444 -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 9:11:13 AM)
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..

TreasureKY -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 10:23:29 AM)
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. I don't think anyone wants to see people suffer and I can understand where you are coming from. However, your question, "how can they be held accountable and still have help in being able to put food on the table?" could apply to any criminal prosecution situation. How is anyone who is caught and imprisoned for a crime supposed to make it up to society from behind bars? How are they to remain responsible for their family and obligations while imprisoned? Of course, there is a huge difference between this and robbing a bank at gunpoint, I know. But I believe the principal is similar. I suppose if I were in charge of deciding what to do, I'd proceed with criminal charges. After all, taking something that does not belong to you and that you are not entitled to is theft. I'd likely look towards something like community service for sentencing if convicted, however. Perhaps a bit more severe if warranted. quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 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.. I don't doubt that SNAP benefits fall short of what is needed, but we're talking upwards of eight to ten carts full of food for some people. Seriously... do you have any idea how much that is? One woman bought $700 worth of food. On Sunday I made one of my "stock up" grocery trips. Firm and I don't eat much on our own, but with six children between us we typically have at least one staying with us at any given time. Right now we have a teenage granddaughter staying with us on a semi-permanent basis, as well as one of my adult sons visiting for a month of advanced work training. As we live out in the middle of nowhere, and because I absolutely loathe running out of anything, when I buy, I buy a lot. I had to shop half the store and check out before doing the other half because there wasn't enough room in one cart. The second trip didn't quite fill the cart, but let's just say I had two full carts. I'm going to have to have Firm hook up our upright freezer in the garage today because there isn't enough room in the house refrigerator/freezer... and it's one of the large varieties, too. I also have a 100 square foot pantry/storage room with floor to ceiling shelves, and it's pretty full. I cannot imagine where I'd put TEN shopping carts full of food.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 10:32:59 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.. That's not really the point, though. I don't know what all was "bought" fraudulently, so there may have been a lot of it that is perishable. What are the odds that someone who is relying on an EBT card for food is going to have loads of freezer space for frozen foods? Obviously, canned foods are easily stored, but breads? You have to freeze those, and that shit takes up a lot of space. quote: 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.. How is this bad press for WalMart (since they allowed the use of EBT cards when they shouldn't have)? The decision was made to allow the cards to be used so people could still buy food. And, $50 is plenty for a family with 4 kids for a day or two, when the system would likely be back up. They would just have had to come back to shop for the rest.

tj444 -> RE: Getting While the Getting is Good (10/15/2013 11:30:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri 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.. That's not really the point, though. I don't know what all was "bought" fraudulently, so there may have been a lot of it that is perishable. What are the odds that someone who is relying on an EBT card for food is going to have loads of freezer space for frozen foods? Obviously, canned foods are easily stored, but breads? You have to freeze those, and that shit takes up a lot of space. quote: 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.. How is this bad press for WalMart (since they allowed the use of EBT cards when they shouldn't have)? The decision was made to allow the cards to be used so people could still buy food. And, $50 is plenty for a family with 4 kids for a day or two, when the system would likely be back up. They would just have had to come back to shop for the rest. I expect some have freezers and some don't.. I grew up really, really poor but we had a huge freezer.. personally, I cant understand not having one, even a small one, to take advantage of freezable food on sale.. Imo, it was a lose-lose PR situation for Walmart, either way... if they cut people off then the "bleeding hearts" (like me?) would be on their case, if they let people buy whatever they can they get the "tough love crowd" (usually the Rs) on their case.. For some people (like me), grocery shopping isn't something they can do every day so why should they be forced to come back if they do all their grocery shopping on one day a week? If I had been in Walmart's shoes I don't know what I would have done, perhaps I would have tried calling those in charge of EBT and ask them what they wanted done and that way, covered my arse (maybe Walmart did that?).. but this only lasted 2 hours, from what I read, so how easy would it be to get someone at the EBT to come back with an answer? l suspect longer than 2 hours..

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125