Walmart's New Health Care Policy Shifts Burden To Medicaid, Obamacare

Costco is a great company. Walmart is shit.

Look for Costco to do similar, they want to stay profitable. They may try to delay it awhile, but they aren't fools. No company is. We're all screwed. Some of us told you so.
 
Costco is a great company. Walmart is shit.

Look for Costco to do similar, they want to stay profitable. They may try to delay it awhile, but they aren't fools. No company is. We're all screwed. Some of us told you so.

Apparently you don't know much about Costco.

I wonder why Costco is borrowing money in order to pay a $7 a share dividend before the end of the year.

It is really curious how none of the major media types that call out Romney for avoiding taxes aren't jumping all over the rich board members of Costco who voted themselves a bonus sans tax increases.
 
Look for Costco to do similar, they want to stay profitable. They may try to delay it awhile, but they aren't fools. No company is. We're all screwed. Some of us told you so.

Apparently you don't know much about Costco.

I wonder why Costco is borrowing money in order to pay a $7 a share dividend before the end of the year.

It is really curious how none of the major media types that call out Romney for avoiding taxes aren't jumping all over the rich board members of Costco who voted themselves a bonus sans tax increases.

Most interesting don't you think
 
Look for Costco to do similar, they want to stay profitable. They may try to delay it awhile, but they aren't fools. No company is. We're all screwed. Some of us told you so.

Apparently you don't know much about Costco.

I wonder why Costco is borrowing money in order to pay a $7 a share dividend before the end of the year.

It is really curious how none of the major media types that call out Romney for avoiding taxes aren't jumping all over the rich board members of Costco who voted themselves a bonus sans tax increases.

Gives us some "credible" proof and links to back up your claims.
 
Costco will spend $3 billion to pay a special dividend of $7 per share next month ahead of higher tax rates that may kick in come January.

Many companies are making special end-of-year dividend payments or moving up their quarterly payouts because investors will have to pay higher taxes on dividend income starting in 2013, unless Congress and President Barack Obama reach a compromise on taxes and government spending.

More: Costco Special Cash Dividend: Retailer To Pay Shareholders Early To Avoid Fiscal Cliff Tax Boost

Christ, it ain't rocket science...
 
Maybe you could ask Boehner why he hasn't held a vote on Obama's jobs bill - the American Jobs Act?

Probably because it's not a jobs bill. It's just another boondoggle spending bill that Obama will use as a slush fund to bribe voters with.
 
Costco will spend $3 billion to pay a special dividend of $7 per share next month ahead of higher tax rates that may kick in come January.

Many companies are making special end-of-year dividend payments or moving up their quarterly payouts because investors will have to pay higher taxes on dividend income starting in 2013, unless Congress and President Barack Obama reach a compromise on taxes and government spending.

More: Costco Special Cash Dividend: Retailer To Pay Shareholders Early To Avoid Fiscal Cliff Tax Boost

Christ, it ain't rocket science...

So why did you leave off the 'link back'?

Costco to Spend $3 Billion on Special $7 Dividend - WSJ.com

Costco to Spend $3 Billion on Special $7 Dividend

By KAREN TALLEY and STEVEN RUSSOLILLO

In a new twist on the trend of paying big dividends before higher taxes have a chance to kick in, discounter Costco Wholesale Corp. COST +2.00% is paying its shareholders $3 billion and borrowing $3.5 billion to do it.

Dozens of U.S. companies have announced special dividends or moved up dividend payments to get ahead of automatic tax increases that will take effect if the White House and Congress don't negotiate a solution to the so-called fiscal cliff. But Costco is taking it a step further by taking advantage of easy lending terms to make the payout with borrowed funds.

The big-box discounter said it would pay its stockholders a one-time dividend of $7 a share on Dec. 18. The same day, it priced new three-, five- and seven-year notes that will be used to pay the dividend, all at rates of 1.7% and below.

The dividend would have consumed much of Costco's available cash. The company had $4.9 billion in cash on Sept. 2, but about $2 billion of that was held overseas, where Costco wants to keep it due to tax considerations and expansion opportunities.

"We like being in a financially strong position," Chief Financial Officer Richard Galanti said. "With our expansion we like to feel comfortable doing what we want to."

Costco's decision to pay a special dividend follows similar moves by casino operator Las Vegas Sands Corp. LVS -0.60% and department-store chain Dillard's Inc. DDS -0.16% Walt Disney Co. DIS -0.12% said Wednesday it would pay its quarterly dividend in December instead of in January as it has in recent years.

The moves come as companies bet that tax rates on dividends will increase next year, even though it's still unclear how much they will rise, if at all. The Bush-era tax break on dividends is scheduled to end in January if Congress doesn't act, which would cause them to be taxed at the same level as wages and salaries rather than 15%.

As of Wednesday morning, 173 companies had announced special dividends this month, compared with only 72 in the same period a year ago, according to Howard Silverblatt, senior index analyst at S&P Dow Jones Indices. "The sheer number of them is amazing," Mr. Silverblatt said. "I find no precedent like this at all going all the way back to the 1950s."

Costco's announcement came as the discounter said its same-store sales rose a better than expected 6% in November. Its shares closed up 6.3% at $102.58 and are up 23% so far this year. Fitch Ratings lowered Costco's credit rating to A-plus, its fifth-highest, due to the heavier debt load. Standard & Poor's, which had already rated Costco at that level, kept its rating unchanged.

—Kate Linebaugh contributed to this article.
 
By Alice Hines

Walmart, the nation’s largest private employer, plans to begin denying health insurance to newly hired employees who work fewer than 30 hours a week, according to a copy of the company’s policy obtained by The Huffington Post.

Under the policy, slated to take effect in January, Walmart also reserves the right to eliminate health care coverage for certain workers if their average workweek dips below 30 hours -- something that happens with regularity and at the direction of company managers.

Walmart declined to disclose how many of its roughly 1.4 million U.S. workers are vulnerable to losing medical insurance under its new policy. In an emailed statement, company spokesman David Tovar said Walmart had “made a business decision” not to respond to questions from The Huffington Post and accused the publication of unfair coverage.

Labor and health care experts portrayed Walmart’s decision to exclude workers from its medical plans as an attempt to limit costs while taking advantage of the national health care reform known as Obamacare. Among the key features of Obamacare is an expansion of Medicaid, the taxpayer-financed health insurance program for poor people. Many of the Walmart workers who might be dropped from the company’s health care plans earn so little that they would qualify for the expanded Medicaid program, these experts said.

“Walmart is effectively shifting the costs of paying for its employees onto the federal government with this new plan, which is one of the problems with the way the law is structured,” said Ken Jacobs, chairman of the Labor Research Center at the University of California, Berkeley.

More: Walmart's New Health Care Policy Shifts Burden To Medicaid, Obamacare

What the hell is your problem, this is exactly what your dear leader intended, he's trying to force everyone to a single payer system. The only glitch is Maobama didn't forsee the supremes not forcing the states to buy into the expanded medicade. Ever heard, be careful what you wish for, ya just might get it.
 
Probably because it's not a jobs bill. It's just another boondoggle spending bill that Obama will use as a slush fund to bribe voters with.

You mean like the 20% tax cut that Romney was offering in order to get the rich to vote for him. That sounded like a bribe to me. Of course it magically would not cause an increase in the deficit because you can cut taxes and reduce the deficit - just ask George W. Bush. Of wait, that resulted in the largest deficit in US history.

When Republicans talk about tax cuts for the rich, it's rewarding the strivers, even if the tax cuts are paid for with money borrowed from the Chinese. When Walmart workers get food stamps because they can't feed their families on the minimum wage they get, they're shiftless n'eer do wells sucking on the public teat.

Sadly, while Walmart divied up their campaign contributions between both candidates, with Romney getting slightly more than Obama, Walmart employees contributed the bulk of their money to Romney. Talk about voting for the wrong guy to protect their interests. Romney even said "I don't care about those people" and Walmart workers are definitely among the 47% of Americans who rely upon "entitlements" to survive.

And no, Michelle Obama did NOT sit on the Walmart Board of Directors. She did work with the company on her healthy eating initiative, but she is not otherwise connected to the company.
 
Last edited:
Probably because it's not a jobs bill. It's just another boondoggle spending bill that Obama will use as a slush fund to bribe voters with.

You mean like the 20% tax cut that Romney was offering in order to get the rich to vote for him. That sounded like a bribe to me. Of course it magically would not cause an increase in the deficit because you can cut taxes and reduce the deficit - just ask George W. Bush. Of wait, that resulted in the largest deficit in US history.

When Republicans talk about tax cuts for the rich, it's rewarding the strivers, even if the tax cuts are paid for with money borrowed from the Chinese. When Walmart workers get food stamps because they can't feed their families on the minimum wage they get, they're shiftless n'eer do wells sucking on the public teat.

Sadly, while Walmart divied up their campaign contributions between both candidates, with Romney getting slightly more than Obama, Walmart employees contributed the bulk of their money to Romney. Talk about voting for the wrong guy to protect their interests. Romney even said "I don't care about those people" and Walmart workers are definitely among the 47% of Americans who rely upon "entitlements" to survive.

And no, Michelle Obama did NOT sit on the Walmart Board of Directors. She did work with the company on her healthy eating initiative, but she is not otherwise connected to the company.

Not trying to get between a man moment, but why in the world would we not concentrate on taking down our dependence on China? I mean for the best interest of the country and all?

China, like a 'good banker' isn't interested in our reasons for borrowing, (right), just in our ability to pay back or subjugate. Which is more likely? Which of the choices do most liberals favor? Conservatives?
 
Last edited:
Six Walmart heirs are collectively worth over $100 billion. How much is enough?

You have an issue with an entrepreneur who was living proof of the American Dream ?

I don't see you complaining about Steve Jobs, Bill Gates or Zuckerman.

Hypocritical much?
 
Last edited:
Probably because it's not a jobs bill. It's just another boondoggle spending bill that Obama will use as a slush fund to bribe voters with.

You mean like the 20% tax cut that Romney was offering in order to get the rich to vote for him. That sounded like a bribe to me. Of course it magically would not cause an increase in the deficit because you can cut taxes and reduce the deficit - just ask George W. Bush. Of wait, that resulted in the largest deficit in US history.

When Republicans talk about tax cuts for the rich, it's rewarding the strivers, even if the tax cuts are paid for with money borrowed from the Chinese. When Walmart workers get food stamps because they can't feed their families on the minimum wage they get, they're shiftless n'eer do wells sucking on the public teat.

Sadly, while Walmart divied up their campaign contributions between both candidates, with Romney getting slightly more than Obama, Walmart employees contributed the bulk of their money to Romney. Talk about voting for the wrong guy to protect their interests. Romney even said "I don't care about those people" and Walmart workers are definitely among the 47% of Americans who rely upon "entitlements" to survive.

And no, Michelle Obama did NOT sit on the Walmart Board of Directors. She did work with the company on her healthy eating initiative, but she is not otherwise connected to the company.

I was going to correct some of your major errors, but since you don't have a dog in the fight, not going to waste my time.
 
No genius. There will be LESS available care.
No one is going to go to medical school and then work a two year internship followed by a two year residency before they can make real money so that they can pay off their student loans and enormous medical malpractice premiums when the federal government is going to tell them how much their earnings will be.

Meanwhile, on Planet Earth:

More students want to be doctors than ever before
A record number of students applied to medical school in 2012 according to new data from the Association of American Medical Colleges. Applications have risen over the past decade, growing more quickly over the past few years than they did in the mid-2000s.

doctors.jpg

biggest jumps were under Bush.

sure you want to use that graph?
 
Applying, gaining admission to and graduating are all very different things.
 

Forum List

Back
Top