California To Wal-Mart: Enough! No More Taxpayer Subsidized Profits For You

[ClosedCaption]

For years, Wal-Mart—and other large retail operators—have been piling up huge profits by controlling their labor costs through paying employees sub-poverty level wages. As a result, it has long been left to the taxpayer to provide healthcare and other subsidized benefits to the many Wal-Mart employees who are dependent on Medicaid, food stamp programs and subsidized housing in order to keep their families from going under.

With Medicaid eligibility about to be expanded in some 30 states, as a result of the Affordable Care Act, Wal-Mart has responded by cutting employee hours—and thereby wages—even further in order to push more of their workers into state Medicaid programs and increase Wal-Mart profits. Good news for Wal-Mart shareholders and senior management earning the big bucks—not so good for the taxpayers who will now be expected to contribute even larger amounts of money to subsidize Wal-Mart’s burgeoning profits.

How many times have people tried to tell others that just because it's profitable for Wal MArt doesn't mean its good for America? Answer: Too many

Legislation is now making its way through the California legislature—with the support of consumer groups, unions and, interestingly, physicians—that would levy a fine of up to $6,000 on employers like Wal-Mart for every full-time employee that ends up on the state’s Medi-Cal program—the California incarnation of Medicaid.

The amount of the fine is no coincidence.

A report released last week by the Democratic staff of the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce, estimates that the cost of Wal-Mart’s failure to adequately pay its employees could total about $5,815 per employee each and every year of employment.

That's $6000 per employee times how many employees = $$BIG BUCKS$$$

After analyzing data released by Wisconsin’s Medicaid program, the Democratic staff of the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce estimates that a single 300- person Wal-Mart Supercenter store in Wisconsin likely costs taxpayers at least $904,542 per year and could cost taxpayers up to $1,744,590 per year – about $5,815 per employee.”

*snip*

What I always find fascinating is that the very people who are so critical of the subsidies provided by Obamacare to lower-earning Americans (how many times have these people reminded us that “someone is paying for these subsidies&#8221 never seem to have much of a problem with the subsidies we pay to support Wal-Mart’s massive profits by picking up the healthcare tab for so many of the company’s employees. But then, those who support taxpayers doing the job that Wal-Mart should be doing tend to be the same folks who are quick to suggest that nobody is forcing workers to take a job at Wal-Mart. Apparently, these people are operating under the opinion that a Wal-Mart worker earning below the federal poverty level wouldn’t readily move to a better paying job if such a job were available to that worker.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickung...o-more-taxpayer-subsidized-profits-for-you/2/

This move will make other business think twice before thinking they can just get the tax payer to foot their bills

 

[Defiant1]

This bill will go nowhere. I'm sure Walmart is paying the state's minimum wage and would bet they are paying the market rate which is probably above the minimum.

How can you fine a business for obeying the law?

 

[whitehall]

Another suicide attempt by the peoples republick of California. Kick out Walmart and force people to pay more for everything.

 

[Oddball]

Sweeet...In their never-ending brain dead jihad against Wally World, the lolberal nitwits in Sacremento are going to make everyone part-time employees.

That'll help everyone better afford everything, including medical care!

 

[jwoodie]

The Government is here to help you...at the point of a gun.

 

[Katzndogz]

I sure hope this causes Wal Mart to leave California. Fire all those people move. Surely they can find just as many customers in China or India. Or move to Nevada and only sell to California on line. Become another Amazon!

Of course if such a bill did make it into law, imagine what that would do to the agriculture industry and all the low paid illegals they employ.

This bill might be the death knell for democrats in California. It might be the straw that finally makes things so bad, it shows the state exactly what democrats will do when given power.

 

[eflatminor]

This move will make other business think twice before...

...doing business in the People's Republic of Kalifornia. Yes, yes it will.

They broke no law, nor is anyone forced to work at WalMart dumbshit. This would be hysterical if it weren't so pathetic. You central planners put a program like Medi-Cal into place and then bitch when people take advantage of it. The irony is thick and the hypocrisy overwhelming. Good luck with that.

 

[bripat9643]

This move will make other business think twice before thinking they can just get the tax payer to foot their bills

It will make other businesses think twice about opening any branches in California.

Only morons support this kind of punitive tax on business.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Another suicide attempt by the peoples republick of California. Kick out Walmart and force people to pay more for everything.

That's not the choice since Walmart isn't closing stores. The choice is keep Wal-Mart employees subsidized with tax payers money or don't.

 

[ClosedCaption]

This move will make other business think twice before...

...doing business in the People's Republic of Kalifornia. Yes, yes it will.

They broke no law, nor is anyone forced to work at WalMart dumbshit. This would be hysterical if it weren't so pathetic. You central planners put a program like Medi-Cal into place and then bitch when people take advantage of it. The irony is thick and the hypocrisy overwhelming. Good luck with that.

Let's hear you bitch about Welfare recipients using that "it's not against the law" logic for some REAL IRONY

The Irony isn't as thick as you being against this while also being against tax dollars going to the poor.

Eflat wants Walmart to continue to push more employees onto our tax dollars while complaining about people who are using those tax dollars. Who does he blame? Walmart? Don't be silly, he blames the employee for not making enough and "stealing" his taxes.

Not Walmart tho.

 

[bripat9643]

Another suicide attempt by the peoples republick of California. Kick out Walmart and force people to pay more for everything.

That's not the choice since Walmart isn't closing stores. The choice is keep Wal-Mart employees subsidized with tax payers money or don't.

THere's a simple solution: end the programs that subsidize Walmart employees. Walmart isn't to blame for that. Turds like you are.

 

[bripat9643]

This move will make other business think twice before...

...doing business in the People's Republic of Kalifornia. Yes, yes it will.

They broke no law, nor is anyone forced to work at WalMart dumbshit. This would be hysterical if it weren't so pathetic. You central planners put a program like Medi-Cal into place and then bitch when people take advantage of it. The irony is thick and the hypocrisy overwhelming. Good luck with that.

Let's hear you bitch about Welfare recipients using that "it's not against the law" logic for some REAL IRONY

The Irony isn't as thick as you being against this while also being against tax dollars going to the poor.

Eflat wants Walmart to continue to push more employees onto our tax dollars while complaining about people who are using those tax dollars. Who does he blame? Walmart? Don't be silly, he blames the employee for not making enough and "stealing" his taxes.

Not Walmart tho.

Walmart doesn't "push" anyone onto our tax dollars. Working there is totally voluntary. Walmart pays the market rate for labor. This is just a transparent scheme to turn some arbitrarily determined government cutoff line into a mandatory lower wage limit.

 

[ClosedCaption]

So all the righties are here to defend paying more in taxes for Wal-Mart. Interesting

 

[martybegan]

So all the righties are here to defend paying more in taxes for Wal-Mart. Interesting

No we would rather end the government programs, a thought that cant cross your statist mind.

Also by specifically targeting one company, you may be creating a bill of attainder, which is of course unconsitutional.

 

[Katzndogz]

Next, start fining the Federal Government for all the military families in the state getting food stamps!

YEAHHHHH!

 

[Meathead]

So all the righties are here to defend paying more in taxes for Wal-Mart. Interesting

No, we should get rid of the entitlements so we don't have to pay more in taxes.

 

[bripat9643]

So all the righties are here to defend paying more in taxes for Wal-Mart. Interesting

No one pays more in taxes because of Walmart. They pay more because of idiots like you who believe we are obligated to provide people with a given minimum income.

 

[Oddball]

This move will make other business think twice before...

...doing business in the People's Republic of Kalifornia. Yes, yes it will.

They broke no law, nor is anyone forced to work at WalMart dumbshit. This would be hysterical if it weren't so pathetic. You central planners put a program like Medi-Cal into place and then bitch when people take advantage of it. The irony is thick and the hypocrisy overwhelming. Good luck with that.

Let's hear you bitch about Welfare recipients using that "it's not against the law" logic for some REAL IRONY

The Irony isn't as thick as you being against this while also being against tax dollars going to the poor.

Eflat wants Walmart to continue to push more employees onto our tax dollars while complaining about people who are using those tax dollars. Who does he blame? Walmart? Don't be silly, he blames the employee for not making enough and "stealing" his taxes.

Not Walmart tho.

Wal-Mart isn't the only employer in the state that employs entry-level employees that qualify for federal and state handout programs...In fact, I'd bet the farm that they don't employ but a small percentage of the total of those workers.

But let's not let that stop lolberal freaks like you from prosecuting your loony jihad against Wally World, as a pretext to end up fucking over the very people you claim to be trying to help.

 

[bendog]

Well, I don't see any reason to call closed caption a name. I don't like Obamacare and expanding medicaid has always seemed crazy to me. Certainly we need some public insurance to pick up workers who become disabled and lose thier insurance, not to mention disabled kids, and while it galls me that we buy "scooters" for people who have eaten themselves to diabetes and disability, the option is pretty much to let die in the streets, which despite the gop's current view on social compacts isn't really where we are as a nation.

But I don't see any reason not to tax uber profitable multi-nationals who refuse to provide healthcare as a benefit to pay for employee healthcare. There's the thread of why the gop is dead to kids. Here's the answer again. The gop views the govt as having no biz in solving a problem in society: low wages and people not having employer sponsored healthcare. Good luck selling that message.

 

[ClosedCaption]

So all the righties are here to defend paying more in taxes for Wal-Mart. Interesting

No we would rather end the government programs, a thought that cant cross your statist mind.
Also by specifically targeting one company, you may be creating a bill of attainder, which is of course unconsitutional.

A thought that is impossible fantasy land bullshit. So it's easy to get behind it. That and Unicorn Rentals