Breaking News: Louisiana's Governor To Strip Food Stamps From Walmart Looters

[Sunshine]

My understanding is people recieve around $140-$200 a month per household member, so if a mother has 4 kids and herself, she could easily have close to a $1000 on that card. How in the heck is Walmart supposed to know? They should not be held accountable, even though they have stated they will eat it, which I think is very gracious of them. If anything, the company that administers the system should be held accountable for the failure of their system along with the card holder.

So if the banks computers are down, they are supposed to hand you unlimited amounts of cash at the teller window? Will you come work at MY bank?

they weren't down, they just did not have a limit, in which, having dealt with processors before, they don't tell you at the point of sale what an individual card holders limit is, other than to deny it if you go over. By not being denied did not tell Walmart or the other retailers that they were going over their limits.

It was established in an earlier thread that Wal Mart managers knew what was going down and made the conscious decision to allow it. The cardholders knew as well and continued to buy.

And besides, even if managers didn't know, when people were running around like wild people stripping shelves bare, a reasonable person would have had a clue. It isn't rocket science. Everyday use of those cards doesn't result in bare shelves in a couple of hours.

Shelves at Walmart stores in Louisiana were cleared in a shopping frenzy over the weekend after a glitch in the Electronic Benefits Transfer system allowed government food stamp recipients to make purchases without spending limits.

For two hours Saturday night, customers rang up overflowing cartloads of food at stores in Springhill and Mansfield, La., after cashiers allowed them to use their EBT cards anyway despite not showing limits, KSLA-TV reported.

“It was worse than any Black Friday,” Springhill police Chief Will Lynd told KSLA.

Food Stamp Glitch Leaves Walmart Shelves Bare: ?Like a Tornado Had Came Through? | Video | TheBlaze.com

 

[depotoo]

EBT benefit card glitch sparks Walmart shopping sprees in Louisiana - CBS News

Oct 14, 2013 · Electronic Benefits Transfer system briefly showed no limits on cards, leading some users to clear store shelves

.

 

[NLT]

What they did was theft. Thieves should be prosecuted

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

Absolutely.
In my opinion, two things should happen here:
1) The EBT holders should have the equal amount they overcharged to be deducted from their future balance in equal amounts.
2) WalMart should be fined to the equal amount of everyone who overcharged. The store manager's excuse is unacceptable.
Now, that means taxpayers will get twice their money back. Good.

My understanding is people receive around $140-$200 a month per household member, so if a mother has 4 kids and herself, she could easily have close to a $1000 on that card. How in the heck is Walmart supposed to know? They should not be held accountable, even though they have stated they will eat it, which I think is very gracious of them. If anything, the company that administers the system should be held accountable for the failure of their system along with the card holder.

Go back to the hard copy food stamps. And, no duplicates if you "lose" them as you kept doing with your cards, and stamps before.

Now I can agree with this.

 

[manifold]

As long as it's not a witch hunt, and the offenders get their due process... I say go get'em.

 

[Redfish]

As long as it's not a witch hunt, and the offenders get their due process... I say go get'em.

wow, a liberal that wants to prosecute poor people for stealing----will wonders never cease

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Piyush will get lots of Tea Party votes for that stunt.

Do you agree with him for stripping them of their food stamps?

Not really.

What would be fair is to deduct the value of what they bought from their alotment.

If they have accurate records and you can trust that Wal Mart kept accurate records.

The blame here really belongs to Wal Mart. They know damned well that most people don't have thousands of dollars of credit on their cards and processed the transactions anyway.

Do you also blame 7 Eleven when one is robbed at 3am for being opened all night ?

 

[Sunshine]

My understanding is people recieve around $140-$200 a month per household member, so if a mother has 4 kids and herself, she could easily have close to a $1000 on that card. How in the heck is Walmart supposed to know? They should not be held accountable, even though they have stated they will eat it, which I think is very gracious of them. If anything, the company that administers the system should be held accountable for the failure of their system along with the card holder.

So if the banks computers are down, they are supposed to hand you unlimited amounts of cash at the teller window? Will you come work at MY bank?

Walmart should not be reimbursed for any charges that they accepted over the amount of credit the person had on their card.

the amount over spent by the card holder should be deducted from future payments.

this is not complicated.

I agree there should be repercussions for seller and buyer. But I do not agree with criminal prosecution. The amounts involved would be a felony and a year in prison costs the taxpayers too much for this. Both seller and buyer were complicit.

 

[007]

This is just going to play into their war on the poor talking point.

This is a war on crime, not the poor. Only morons and racists would think otherwise.

 

[depotoo]

So if the banks computers are down, they are supposed to hand you unlimited amounts of cash at the teller window? Will you come work at MY bank?

they weren't down, they just did not have a limit, in which, having dealt with processors before, they don't tell you at the point of sale what an individual card holders limit is, other than to deny it if you go over. By not being denied did not tell Walmart or the other retailers that they were going over their limits.

It was established in an earlier thread that Wal Mart managers knew what was going down and made the conscious decision to allow it. The cardholders knew as well and continued to buy.

And besides, even if managers didn't know, when people were running around like wild people stripping shelves bare, a reasonable person would have had a clue. It isn't rocket science. Everyday use of those cards doesn't result in bare shelves.

Shelves at Walmart stores in Louisiana were cleared in a shopping frenzy over the weekend after a glitch in the Electronic Benefits Transfer system allowed government food stamp recipients to make purchases without spending limits.

For two hours Saturday night, customers rang up overflowing cartloads of food at stores in Springhill and Mansfield, La., after cashiers allowed them to use their EBT cards anyway despite not showing limits, KSLA-TV reported.

“It was worse than any Black Friday,” Springhill police Chief Will Lynd told KSLA.

Food Stamp Glitch Leaves Walmart Shelves Bare: ?Like a Tornado Had Came Through? | Video | TheBlaze.com

And if indeed Walmart had done such, do you not think there would have been suits for denying them? Was it unusual so many people were able to buy so much at one time? Yes, but there would also be those that could buy $700 at a time, even a $1000, if they had a large family. Walmart did what they did to keep suits at bay as well as the possibility of angering some EBT holders and causing danger to their employees and customers. If the system had simply been down then they could show it was down. It was not.

And Walmart was not the only retailer this happened to, but they are the ones everyone wants to complain about.

 

[manifold]

I don't think criminal prosecution is either necessary or useful in this situation. Just permanently remove all the abusers from recipient eligibility. Prosecuting them would be costly.

I'd say the exact opposite. Prosecute them for the crimes they committed. But I'm pretty sure that having a criminal record is not necessarily a disqualifier when it comes to welfare programs. These people were stupid, greedy and certainly ungrateful *****, but making them go hungry doesn't strike me as justice.

 

[Sunshine]

they weren't down, they just did not have a limit, in which, having dealt with processors before, they don't tell you at the point of sale what an individual card holders limit is, other than to deny it if you go over. By not being denied did not tell Walmart or the other retailers that they were going over their limits.

It was established in an earlier thread that Wal Mart managers knew what was going down and made the conscious decision to allow it. The cardholders knew as well and continued to buy.

And besides, even if managers didn't know, when people were running around like wild people stripping shelves bare, a reasonable person would have had a clue. It isn't rocket science. Everyday use of those cards doesn't result in bare shelves.

Shelves at Walmart stores in Louisiana were cleared in a shopping frenzy over the weekend after a glitch in the Electronic Benefits Transfer system allowed government food stamp recipients to make purchases without spending limits.

For two hours Saturday night, customers rang up overflowing cartloads of food at stores in Springhill and Mansfield, La., after cashiers allowed them to use their EBT cards anyway despite not showing limits, KSLA-TV reported.

“It was worse than any Black Friday,” Springhill police Chief Will Lynd told KSLA.

Food Stamp Glitch Leaves Walmart Shelves Bare: ?Like a Tornado Had Came Through? | Video | TheBlaze.com

And if indeed Walmart had done such, do you not think there would have been suits for denying them? Was it unusual so many people were able to buy so much at one time? Yes, but there would also be those that could buy $700 at a time, even a $1000, if they had a large family. Walmart did what they did to keep suits at bay as well as the possibility of angering some EBT holders and causing danger to their employees and customers. If the system had simply been down then they could show it was down. It was not.

And Walmart was not the only retailer this happened to, but they are the ones everyone wants to complain about.

That is ridiculous. I have a law degree and I don't know a single attorney who would pursue such a suit. Just go across the street to Kroger. If they wanted to keep the store secure all they had to do was lock the doors and put up a 'closed' sign. DUH!

 

[Sunshine]

I don't think criminal prosecution is either necessary or useful in this situation. Just permanently remove all the abusers from recipient eligibility. Prosecuting them would be costly.

I'd say the exact opposite. Prosecute them for the crimes they committed. But I'm pretty sure that having a criminal record is not necessarily a disqualifier when it comes to welfare programs. These people were stupid, greedy and certainly ungrateful *****, but making them go hungry doesn't strike me as justice.

So you think stealing $100 from Wal Mart is work paying $30,000 to keep the person in prison a year. Groovy.

 

[depotoo]

You also must remember that Walmart in LA has a history of what happens when chaos ensues, such as after Katrina.

The fact that Walmart is willing to eat the loss should suffice.

What happens to the EBT carholders is all on the states and the feds.

 

[Sunshine]

What they did was theft. Thieves should be prosecuted

Mitigating fact: Store managers watched and did nothing to stop it.

 

[manifold]

Right, prosecute them, send them to prison, put their children in foster care while they are gone. 3 hots and a cot for the perps, and the state pays the foster family. Real smooth move Ex Lax.

what would you do? give them double benefits for the next 12 months because their feelings might have been hurt when someone on the news called them cheats?

See my last post. I've worked in prisons. The cost of incarceration is too much for a mere 'cheat.'

Prison?

You do know that quite a few people convicted of crimes don't get incarcerated, right?

This isn't even close to a jail-able offense, but a lengthy stretch of community service... you betcha.

 

[Redfish]

So if the banks computers are down, they are supposed to hand you unlimited amounts of cash at the teller window? Will you come work at MY bank?

Walmart should not be reimbursed for any charges that they accepted over the amount of credit the person had on their card.

the amount over spent by the card holder should be deducted from future payments.

this is not complicated.

I agree there should be repercussions for seller and buyer. But I do not agree with criminal prosecution. The amounts involved would be a felony and a year in prison costs the taxpayers too much for this. Both seller and buyer were complicit.

I already said that I agree on that.

 

[manifold]

I don't think criminal prosecution is either necessary or useful in this situation. Just permanently remove all the abusers from recipient eligibility. Prosecuting them would be costly.

I'd say the exact opposite. Prosecute them for the crimes they committed. But I'm pretty sure that having a criminal record is not necessarily a disqualifier when it comes to welfare programs. These people were stupid, greedy and certainly ungrateful *****, but making them go hungry doesn't strike me as justice.

So you think stealing $100 from Wal Mart is work paying $30,000 to keep the person in prison a year. Groovy.

Hey strawman, where did I say they should go to jail?

oh yeah, I didn't.

 

[Avatar4321]

People need to learn to be honest. That includes Walmart in this.

Absolutely.
In my opinion, two things should happen here:
1) The EBT holders should have the equal amount they overcharged to be deducted from their future balance in equal amounts.
2) WalMart should be fined to the equal amount of everyone who overcharged. The store manager's excuse is unacceptable.
Now, that means taxpayers will get twice their money back. Good.

How is deducting the overcharged amount from their accounts be just? EBT money is not theirs. It's a gift from the tax payers. The only one being hurt is the tax payer.

 

[Avatar4321]

This is just going to play into their war on the poor talking point.

This is a war on crime, not the poor. Only morons and racists would think otherwise.

Like I said. It's going to play into war on the poor Democrat talking points