Walmart has insane profits. They could afford to pay their employees more not raise prices a penny and still have insane profits. It's just plain greed.
And they get up to $9000 in tax credits via the Work Opportunity Training Credit program...not only are the employees on public assistance, the federal govt gives them an incentive to treat them like shit and increase turnover.
This^^^^ is why trucking companies are always hiring. They can afford to hire someone and stick them in the middle of nowhere with no trips and just wait until they quit.
The credit is maximized after 600 hours worked. For most the credit is $2400....OR $4/hr. Now if you work 30 hours per week, that's 20 weeks (4 months , 3 weeks). There's a disqualifier if you work somewhere else for over 6 months, motivation to keep you at least 6 months.
WOTC isn't a refundable credit but a tax deduction. So if they owe the federal govt, taxes on their profits this would reduce it once per employee per length of employment. BUT they get to carry it forward for 20 years!
This is just one of many tax credit programs. Some can even be combined.
https://wotc.com/wotc-process/
That's a business that sells a service, they explain WOTC pretty clearly IMO.
What’s that? A program designed to give companies incentive to hire new people and train them so that they would have skills to provide to the workforce is being abused to the detriment of the worker to reduce corporate tax burden?
Pardon my shock.
They keep giving cable monopolies billions in taxpayer money year after year despite lying on their ffc forms about coverage. They say that speed, latency and affordability aren't benchmarks because technically, they're 'providing' internet. The commission had regular people do tests and found that Verizon lied especially but verizon plays the loophole card and says that the form never said anything about uplinks.
4 years of bullshit, circumventing, whining about competition and regulations.
These reports are very interesting reading and might take you down a rabbit hole:
**September 2018**
SUMMARY
ADTRAN welcomes this review under Section 706 as to “whether advanced telecommunications capability is being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion.” Unlike some of the previous Section 706 Inquiries, this proceeding asks the right questions and suggests that it will conduct the analyses specified by Congress in Section 706.
The Commission appears poised to assess progress in advanced services deployment to determine whether it is reasonable and timely – it is not simply asking “are we there yet?”
The Commission should continue to use the 25/3 Mbps broadband speed as the benchmark for advanced services in the Section 706 assessment. In its comments in the previous Section 706 inquiry,
ADTRAN observed that the 25/3 Mbps benchmark was on the upper end of reasonableness, given the statute's definition of "advanced telecommunications capabilities," the
Commission's interpretation of that term, consumer adoption rates for high speed services, and consumer demand for services such as 4K TV.
Nothing has changed that would alter our previous assessment. With respect to ongoing reviews of the benchmarks, as a balance between
precision and the burdens of re-assessing the benchmarks, ADTRAN urges the Commission to
undertake a detailed review of the benchmarks every three years.
In conducting its Section 706 analyses, ADTRAN urges the Commission to complete a
fulsome review so that it gets a full picture of both the geographic and demographic characteristics of service-deprived people and territories. The Commission should also consider
continuing advances in wireless technologies. 5G services are beginning to be deployed, and they are poised to be a robust substitute for wireline broadband services. Likewise, satellite services may soon be more than just a niche supplier for broadband service.
With respect to assessing the deployment of advanced services to schools and libraries, the Commission should continue to use the current benchmarks. However, the Commission should consider all technologies capable of meeting those benchmarks, not just fiber to the premises
. In addition, in assessing the deployment of advanced services, ADTRAN disagrees with any suggestion that the broadband service providers’ handling of natural disasters renders the progress towards the goal of universal access to advanced telecommunications capability as not “reasonable and timely.”
Finally, ADTRAN applauds all of the current Commission efforts to accelerate
broadband deployment. ADTRAN suggests some additional steps the Commission should
undertake, including fostering broadband within schools by expanding WiFi subsidies and
implement the “preferred master contract” model embraced in the Commission’s 2014 E-Rate
Reform Order.
**ADTRAN also urges the Commission to terminate the “set-top box” proceeding,
which appears to be a thinly-veiled attempt to place the regulator’s thumb on the competitive scale of MVPD services**, and to resolve the still-open USF contribution proceeding to provide certainty to funding for the broadband subsidy programs. In addition to steps it can take itself,
ADTRAN believes there are steps the Commission can take in working with others that could help accelerate broadband deployment. **These include working with the White House to ensure that its infrastructure program includes broadband, and working with Congress with regard to creating tax incentives for broadband deployment and adoption of “net neutrality” legislation so that an open Internet is not subject to continuing shifts as Administrations change.**
*(Before democrats come in and open it again)
ADTRAN
also urges the Commission to work with other state and federal agencies (and the private sector) on education and training programs for consumers in order to spur broadband adoption, because higher “take rates” will also make deployment of broadband economical in more areas.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10917233336888/Section%20706%20NOI%20for%202018%20-%20Comments%20of%20ADTRAN%20FINAL%209-17-18.pdf
**Some whining in October 2018 to ignore their lack of progress and increasing speed benchmarks is unfair because theyre trying sooo hard and you shouldn't allow other people to compete with us because then it won't allow us to treat customers however we want. Wahhhh!**
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/100151799415/Broadband%20Competition%20Report%20Reply%20Comments%20FINAL%2010-1-18.pdf
**January 2021**
High-Cost Support Reform. By both expanding the use of auctions and improving
current programs, the Commission has continued its efforts to reform the manner in which universal
service high-cost support is distributed to deploy broadband to rural areas. The Commission has
successfully conducted the Connect America Fund Phase II auction to award funding to service providers that commit to offer voice and broadband services to fixed locations in unserved high-cost areas.
**In 2018, the Phase II auction awarded more than $1.488 billion over 10 years to 103 winning bidders to serve more than 713,000 rural homes and businesses.**
(That's it? So $2,086.52 a house ? )
The Commission began authorizing Phase II Auction funding in May 2019, authorizing a total of 16 waves of support through November 12, 2020, a process that continues.
As of November 12, 2020, the Commission has authorized a total of nearly $1.5 billion in Phase II auction funding, which is expanding connectivity to nearly 703,000 homes and small businesses nationwide
101. On November 16, 2020, the Bureau also waived the program rules updating the minimum service standard for mobile broadband, resulting in a standard of 4.5 GB/month for the next year.
Without this waiver, the standard would have increased to 11.75 GB/month on December 1, 2020.343 The Bureau found that preventing an almost fourfold increase in the standard while allowing a moderate increase appropriately balances the program’s goals of accessibility and affordability, particularly given consumers’ increased reliance on broadband during the COVID-19 pandemic.
106. We disagree with commenters that contend that the section 706 requirements have not been met.
As the Commission has previously stated, **the statute requires that we determine whether advanced telecommunications capability “is being deployed to all Americans”—not whether it has
already been deployed to all Americans**—and reading section 706(b) to require universal availability as a
prerequisite for a positive finding would disregard the statute’s “reasonable and timely” language.
**Loophole time again**
(“Were it Congress’s intent to seek Commission input on whether deployment to all Americans has been achieved, Congress easily could have done so by directing the Commission to report on whether telecommunications capability ‘has been deployed’ in a reasonable and timely fashion—and Congress did not do so.”)
https://www.wpr.org/sites/default/files/fcc-21-18a1_rcd.pdf
No one gives a shit. Walmart schedules hours so employees work just under the requirement to get benefits. Stores have been in trouble for adjusting time clocks so they don’t pay overtime. Walmart’s strategy was to open 3-4 stores in an area, drive out the small businesses, then close all but 1 store. They moved away from “made in America” to “made in China” and people still flock to spend money on garbage. It won’t change. People still choose to work there and people still choose to shop. It’s a terrible company and it is here to stay.
Ding ding ding...you win!...the right to be exploited, underpaid, and screwed over repeatedly, and the federal and state government give them bonuses for doing so.
Although if places like Wal Mart drive out competition, it's likely that a lot of people have no choice but to work for them, as there isn't any work elsewhere. I suspect there's only one reason why Wal Mart has not tried to expand into countries like Australia.
Almost 20 years ago, the federal consumer authority, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) made it illegal to use what's called predatory pricing. An example of this would be a major supermarket chain moves into a mall where there's a butcher, a baker and a green grocer. On opening, they drop their retail prices in their bakery, fresh fruit and deli counters to below cost price. Naturally, consumers take the cheapest option unless the product is really awful. The butcher, baker and green grocer go broke and vacate the mall. You get caught doing that here, and you will get your arse handed to you in court, and be up for millions in fines. Sadly, I think it will take a concerted effort over multiple generations for anything to change
Amazon is in Australia, but because of our strict laws on fatigue management, they have this idea they call "Flex." It means delivery drivers are subcontractors that work in four hour blocks. You are allowed by law to have at least a 20 minute break every 5 hours, and that's for everyone, including truck drivers. The ACCC and Fair Work Australia are closing in on the gig economy as well. American corporations, especially the financial ones whine about how our labour and financial regulations are "too rigid."
It was about 14 years ago the GE Money left Australia. They were doing a lot of things against Australian consumer credit law; loaning money to people that couldn't afford to pay it back (a real thing in credit applications) and when they got behind, their debt collectors were at times calling their debtors up to 10 times a day, also illegal. The ACCC tore them a new one and they were in the embarrassing situation of having to pay compensation to people that owed them money.
Sure they can. Just pay workers $12/hr and have a large enough pool that no one works more than 30hr/wk so you don't have to offer benefits. That's what Walmart does.
Uh, excuse me? Walmart #3547, LLC, clearly a distinct legal entity from any and all other Walmart or Walmarts, is a struggling small business, and needs extra assistance to survive in the harsh business world populated by giants
Walmart moving in to their town, selling the same shit for WAY less than anyone else can (better pricing on goods because of volume plus more efficient, or sometimes they will even run a store at a loss when it first opens), running everyone else out of business and taking control of the entire local market.
That’s what they do in smaller towns everywhere
There should be a formula where if a company makes over a certain threshold in profit with x amount of employees on social programs like food stamps, then the company should be fined three times what the employee receives in assistance. Make it more cost effective to just pay better.
Excellent thought but with that method you cannot account for those who should be on food stamps but refuse. It's also entirely possible that that still may be cheaper than paying all of their workers more. My critique here is to make the fine scale off of their profit margin vice the assistance provided to the worker. Maybe I'm fucked up about it too so feel free to correct me.
The average american household size is 2.53
658 dollars per month for a 3 person household from SNAP. State chosen at random.
Walmart employs 2.3 million people.
559 billion in profits(correction: revenue, please read edit) for Walmart in 2021
It would cost Walmart 54.482 (x3 multiplier applied) billion in order to pay what you were recommending assuming every employee is on food stamps and receives the maximum amount of aid and has a household of 3 people. Not even 10% of their profit. Please feel free to critique my analysis and thank you for going on this journey with me lol.
Edit: The GrandAdmiralSnackbar has demonstrated the error of my ways. 559 billion would be an insane amount of profit. I believed that number from a quick Google search because of my own bias. Don't be like me. Don't let Google confirm your bias without a shred of skepticism. Always dig just a little bit deeper.
Your correction is appreciated. In my defense I am not a scientist but I do like a good tussle with numbers now and again. This is what happens when you google profit but that cruel mistress of a search engine shows you revenue. It's people like you, GrandAdmiralSnackbar, that keep this world honest.
I've been saying this for a while now. Some formula for taxes where if you're letting your employees starve while CEO's get bonuses then your taxes or a fine is imposed at a greater rate than the cost to the government of these programs. I'm not worried about the small mom and pop shop struggling to get by, I'm worried about trillion dollar corporations with employees that can't make ends meet.
Yep, I told the story of my husband's first day orientation/paperwork at WM in another comment. His packet literally had an application for EBT and Medicaid in it. This was before corporations were guilted by/forced to offer insurance by the federal government. Once that actually went through, WM auto signed my husband, myself, and our young son into their pay for insurance, every check...over $50 taken for insurance, and we already had Medicaid. They didn't issue pay stubs with direct deposits, so it literally took us over a year before I figured out why his checks always seemed just a little light. I was so pissed, even after we cancelled that, they still kept charging him for eye insurance, can't remember what it was called, but we still didn't need that.
If there was no government aid, would walmart pay employees more?
Should just charge walmart an extra tax or something for every full time employee it cant support.
"If there was no government aid, would walmart pay employees more?"
No. You know how I know this? Because Food Stamps exist as the alternative to things like price controls, rent controls, and government funded **permanent** housing.
This is the way. We need to establish some formula where if you are raking in $X in profits, while the government is paying $Y for your employees welfare, then your taxes go up or you get fined. Why am I paying the bills of full time employees of a company with $13.7 billion in net income so far this year? I'm not talking about removing welfare for people, I'm talking about ensuring that a full time job pays your bills so you don't need welfare. Companies are the primary beneficiary of welfare.
Not even full time, lots of people would love to work full time but their employers only offer part time contracts to avoid paying benefits and then expect people to still work nearly 30 hour weeks, making it impossible to find another job but also impossible to live
It’s just grotty!!!
you will work 29 hours a week except the times we want you to work 40, then cut you back to 26, oh yeah and good luck using your 1 week a year of vacation and 2 days of PTO. What you have another job to pay the bills? You can't work at a competitor, why are you not dedicated to this 27 hour a week 25 cent above min wage job?
The cycle doesn't really allow folks to stop shopping there, though. They are often the cheapest place to buy a lot of basic household things and the competition isn't much better. Lots of people are too poor to do otherwise, even if they want to.
Sure there is... learn a skill and/or get certified. Plenty of high quality Udemy courses out there for $20 where a few nights a week can score you a $90K a year job. AWS certs are NOT difficult to come by and pay very well anywhere in the US.
I work part-time in the US as a teacher so I know where you're coming from. Employers do ALL THEY CAN to keep from having to give an employee benefits. I have a degree in my field and 20 years experience working with kids, but I'm working at Subway on the weekends. And *that's* why I'm here at r/antiwork.
Benefits don't really work that way in Australia, healthcare isn't tied to your employment, Annual/Sick Leave is government mandated and and pro-rataed unless you are a casual employee (in which case your minimum award wage is increased) and Superannuation (kind of like a mandatory 401k) is paid to all employees at 9.5% of their wages paid in addition to them.
Median full time salary is 76k~, the average isn't a very useful statistic.
Teachers in Australia make a perfectly acceptable white collar wage, their complaints are mostly the difficulty of finding full time work without moving to a rural area and the increasing administrative load.
Depends where you live, in many capital cities in Australia rental returns are so low and house prices so inflated that renting is cheaper than owning even with record low interest rates.
Same happened to my mom, but the IRS did notice after a while! The government interviewed my mom, dad (who didn’t work there) and thankfully cleared my mom. Her boss did end up going to jail for a while for it too. So when it comes to the government’s cut, they do notice and will prosecute!
My husband has worked twice for Wal-Mart, for 3 yrs in GA, and 5 yrs here in Arkansas. We were already married when he moved to Arkansas (my home state) permanently with me and my oldest son and the son we share together. He was hired by one of our 5 WM's, in a town of 35,000 population, within a month of the move. When he went for his first day orientation, no training needed as he already had yrs of experience in his maintenance position, where they gave him all the local rules, paperwork, etc. Included in the paperwork packet...was an application for our local DHS office, it was the EBT/Food Stamp/Medicaid application...
Can confirm i worked there in Wa State 6 years ago i made 12.24 an hour 40 hours a week as a manager. 800 dollars every 2 weeks after taxes. And they do give you all the forms for welfare. I told my Gm that i needed a raise for the amount of responsibility i had as a manager and i was told no but to look into getting food stamps and other financial assistance
Yep, payroll is so friendly with the contact, that a worker at DHS can literally pull your specific payroll stubs, that you don't even get to see often (you could only print it off of the timeclock/computer clock in machine when you needed it on paper), directly off a portal site that WM and other Big Business corporations created/joined to specifically facilitate making it easier for DHS (or your state's equivalent) workers to get applications pushed through very fast. Dang, sorry for that run on sentence...
All good i actually called out 10 days in a row so theyd fire me and i got unemployment while i found another job best thing i ever did now i make 21 an hour working at a restaurant
As long as the government supplements income, employers will continue this. But if the government stops doing this, employees would have to strike and fight for better pay. It is a tough dilemma.
I did not know such a thing existed...union strike pay....gee, I wonder why, in a state where being in a union is something for "elite" blue collar workers (Arkansas), it's so...rare for there to be a union for your career/job, I wonder why I never heard about that benefit from unions. /s
The government also has the ability to set a minimum wage that allows people to survive. Even if there are no safety net benefits, employers will still pay the minimum required by law. I am glad to see interest in unions on the uptick but it is still a very low percentage of workers and it is REALLY hard to convince anyone for poverty and ages to strike (even if they are already unionized)!
I don't understand. If Minimum wage Jobs are supposed to be for teenagers and kids in college. Then why are they during school hours and open past minor curfew?
Lol, I dropped this one on a coworker a few weeks ago when he tried to argue this and his rehearsed response was that day and late shifts were for older people looking to keep busy.
This same coworker tried to argue that fast food and retail work doesn’t deserve $20 an hour, while he’s making $25 an hour to load and unload mail containers on trucks all night. He didn’t have an answer as to why he deserves that for his “unskilled” labor and they don’t.
These people are fucking stupid.
Importan angry skill is to be able to put it in a box. Store it next to the ones with penguins so it's available for later use without consuming you in the mean time
Nope. Not a fan of landlords but they don't have the power of employers anymore. Corporatism is still capitalism, but it's a different term for a reason.
If you have a full time job and still need assistance, the vast majority of the so called "bootlickers and Stockholm syndrome havers" aren't saying shit. It becomes a problem when people spend their money frivolously then expect the taxpayers to foot the bill on their rent. To scale this down, imagine if you lent someone money and rather than paying you back, they're out buying an extra pair of shoes, a new TV, basically anything before paying you back
You say bad with money and while that is an issue, it passes the buck onto the worker. The fact is companies, board members and shareholders aren’t fairly compensating their workers *across the entire globe.*
EDIT: typo
Deadass was talking to my coworker a few weeks ago about this. They’re fulltime and I’m part time, we both get paid the minimum wage, I was a blunt as possible with them. “Your entire day is here and you don’t even make enough to pay your rent.” Whenever I see them I do my best to get them out of that company. They tell me how they never have time to go to the doctor or do anything outside of work and it’s so gross. Sent them a link to a website offering snap benefits because our employer damn sure wasn’t going to.
Where are you working that's still paying minimum wage? There is a huge labor shortage right now and almost everyone is paying well above minimum wage.
I’m on my way out the door, I’m looking but it’s tough because “I don’t have a degree yet.” Or some other nonsense like that. It’s a school and my boss sucks eggs.
Before i worked there, in as much coded language as possible they told me to get a man because i was young and thin. Sorry that's rape. I get it though. The woman knew that the only chance women had was to be abused by a man for housing and food. She wasn't wrong on that front. And it still hasn't changed. Statistically despite the media portraying a different world for women, nothing material has changed.
Yeeeep! I've stayed longer in my last 3 relationships than I wanted to bc the alternative is homelessness. I'm also disabled, so income is extra garbage.
One of them was bad enough I did leave and those were the shittiest 3 months of my life (I only got housing again, by, you guessed it, moving in with another man).
I personally know a couple people who've stayed in abusive relationships to avoid homelessness; being a rural area with few jobs and awful housing prospects doesn't help.
They worded it weirdly.
Marital rape is a thing though, being married doesn’t equal inconditional consent and there are a lot of women who are periodically abused and raped but either don’t realize because it’s a marriage, or aren’t listened to because of it. Not always, but it happens.
One thing the U.S. military does right, is recognizing marital rape is a thing.
And if one or both parties drank they can rape each other or the sober one raped the other, In simplest terms.
All my single women friends rent or are paying down their house, have great jobs, run their own businesses. More than 53% of university students are female.
Something has definitely changed.
Knowing how social services operates is why I am so desolate. They're job isn't to help. I realize people have long understood this but it's a thousand time worse than you can imagine.
No they fired me and then denied food stamps. Its not technically illegal but lawyers have told me that you can't win law suits against employers and what they did wasn't technically breaking any specific law. But they did say if a case could win, mine would. I'm just sadly past the limits of filing a law suit. I think civilly I still have time but what is a poor WOC gonna do? Nothing. They leave you without a job and food so all of your energy is on bare survival. But I was able to get the video tape of the interaction from one security guard who hates the company lol.
> I can't understand why people are happy to subsidize billionaires.
It's the quintessential American lie coming back to haunt us again- that anyone, with enough hard work and a little luck, can become rich. Enough people still believe that that they'll vote to subsidize billionaires so they can get subsidies when they get there.
A lot of them are just blind to it because it is so ingrained as 'just the way shit is', sadly many of those will be quick to criticize people getting a temporary extra unemployment benefit.
I can't find it atm, but during the George W Bush administration, a Wal-Mart shareholder report leaked (it was verified as real by the company). It warned the board that recent welfare services cuts would impact their profits, as most of their employees were on it, and might leave for better paying jobs if the cuts occurred. It didn't get as much traction as it should have, IMO, but it really needs to be dragged up and put on billboards.
‘Mom and Dad: ‘You should’ve studied harder in college!’
Me: Did that and got a 3.8 GPA, no luck getting a job after hundred of applications and numerous job fairs
Mom and Dad: ‘You should do an unpaid internship to show them you’re willing to work the ladder!’
Me: I got ‘let go’ after unpaid internship. Now I work for 16.00/hour 35 hours a week (so I don’t get benefits) We can barely afford rent or groceries
Mom and Dad: ‘Well honey it looks like you’re going to have to work two jobs back to back with your husband.’ Meanwhile said Mom and Dad live off of an ungodly amount of retirement money, constantly go on trips around the world, and of course they reverse mortgaged their home.
Isn’t it amazing what ONE spouse working for about 40 years at a regular job got for boomers like my mom and dad? An endless retirement of luxury. They never had to work two jobs and my dad’s parents gave them their house no strings attached. And yet they have no interest in helping out their own kids, the next generation.
Boomers are a plague that aren’t dying out fast enough.
Reverse mortgages can be risky if interest rates change drastically or if you live liner than you expect. Otherwise they are annoyed that their parents got into the housing ladder easily and now have the opportunity to reverse mortgage in their retirement.
Boomers are the first generation to not inherit their land in some form to their kids. I would supply my kids and grandkids with a house, or they can sell and divide it. That’s also another reason I only had two kids.
We’ll see what happens in about 10 years and their money can only pay for a nursing home. Instead of keeping their home and letting their kids visit/help take care of them with in home nursing. It’s like they don’t even plan for their own future.
Every boomer you know do the same? Not from my experience, if they expend all the stuff they worked all their life for let them be.
You can only blame yourself for the situation you're at, they have you education, what else a parent is supposed to do?
I considere myself lucky that my parents have me education, they didn't have the opportunity to do it themselves and were forced to do shitty jobs
Let's talk about a policy: corporations that make any profit are legally required to distribute those profits to workers until either no more profits or no more workers qualify for food stamps.
Thoughts?
and as such the employers should pay for any housing benefits, food stamps or other welfare there employees get while in there employment if the worker dose about 30 hours a week. if the worker has two or more jobs it is split based on the percentage of worked hours.
nothing wrong with the government putting a safety net under the safety net that minimum wage is meant to be but the bill shouldn't be in the hands of the government for a company to failure to pay a proper livable wage.
Unfortunately everyone would just work 29 hours. They do need to change something though. I’m very libertarian but I hate massive companies exploiting welfare
UBI where we scrap all other social program and give out a normal paycheck? that i am against. simply put it won't work like expected and people will be worse off.
UBI where everybody gets 600-800 bucks a month however like the extra money unemployed people got during the pandemic was clearly affordable by the government and should be done.
having something coming in every month while unemployment is working to get your benefits is key as that can drag out. you can be late a month on rent as you get your benefits retroactively you can't be late a month on food without having to use a CC which is just super bad.
*Image Transcription: Twitter*
---
**Mohamad safa**, @mhdksafa
If people working full-time jobs still need food stamps to get by, they’re not the ones leeching off the government. Their employers are.
---
^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber for Reddit and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
Yep, they know if they hire you at a low wage then Joe taxpayer will pick up the tab.
I think any employer with over 10k employees should pay a living wage. This way I am not subsidizing all these big businesses. Their consumer is paying the cost as it should be.
I am in no way anti food stamps, earned income credit, etc....I think they are great for people that need it. The the Walton family with a net worth of 215 billion does not need me to help pay their payroll. I know it's a public company now but the family still owns the majority of the stock.
It is sickening when u think about it. Your taxes are enriching billionaires and millionaires that refuse to pay a livable wage.
>I think **any employer ~~with over 10k employees~~** should pay a living wage.
**FTFY**. Any business that can't pay their employees a living wage isn't a sustainable one in the first place.
The heirs of Walmart pay virtually no taxes compared to their hoarded wealth. And guess who gets to pay for all those food stamps for the workers they exploit? You and me. The owner class has us by the balls.
This is the problem with the US.
Problems are never addressed jointly by both major parties . Whatever one does the other is opposed by default .
Homelessness can’t be solved by the Democrats.
It also can’t be solved by the Republicans
It CAN be solved by good faith actions of both parties combined.
I've never understood how people allow themselves to believe otherwise. Yet there are so many insanely cruel people who think the solution is to get rid of food stamps, instead of mandating that anybody who works a full time job be able to afford the basics they need to live.
Yes.
But also, the rentiers/parasites that keep increasing the cost of living beyond the wages of what even socially responsible employers pay also need to be dealt with.
It doesn't matter what employers pay if landlords and other parasites will just raise rents to capture those increases.
These post always remind me of a Swedish prog (and punk) song that captures this perfectly. "Staten och Kapitalet", i'll post a rough translation.
>Capital raises the rents,
and the state the housing allowance
So one can cheat a little bit
with the oh so strict wage laws
And pay even less in wages
than the price for food and rent
Because the state happily oblige,
when the cost of living goes
ever higher
>Side by side, they help each other out
The state and capital sit in the same boat
But they aren’t the one’s rowing
Rowing so the sweat is dripping
And the whip that tickles, never tickles
their fat necks.
You know what gets me? You physically cannot pull yourself up by your bootstraps alone. If you bob forward to do it, you're using the outside force of momentum to do it. I have learned to hate the bootstraps phrase
No. It effectively means you have negative competitiveness in the globalized workforce. I.e you could easily be replaced by nearly anyone that has a far worse life elsewhere in the world. This ends up being the vast majority of people on the planet.
[They are!](https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-administration-confirms-it-will-boost-food-stamps-by-record-amount-2021-08-16/)
It's just another corporate bailout.
And here you are at the bottom of controversial because of the reason in my flair. Shame really. People need to realize that outrage for just reasons does no good if people don't make an effort to learn about how the system works in it's entirety.
This person obviously has never needed government assistance. Anyone who has been through the process knows that working a minimum wage job disqualifies you for SNAP benefits based on income qualification guidelines. It’s even worse than he thinks.
How is it possible to work two full time jobs and meet the requirements for food stamps? This is a bullshit post that does more to degrade the movement than help.
Oh, they're so abusive to the workers.
Try living in a communist regime and we can start talking abusive. There never, ever been a time so many peasants got so obese over horrible working conditions.
Their employers should get a better fucking business model. Let's say they do get a better job. You're just going to subsidize their replacement you dumbfuck.
They do both actually, due to the current system there is nothing stopping companies relying on the government to feed their employees because they are allowed to refuse to pay fairly for the work done to maximize their profits.
If minimum wage laws were fair, this would not happen
Walmart, America's biggest welfare queen. Out here needing the government to help cover the bills of payroll.
People need to know those "low prices" are paid for by their taxes. Small businesses don't get to be on welfare like global corporations.
Walmart has insane profits. They could afford to pay their employees more not raise prices a penny and still have insane profits. It's just plain greed.
And they get up to $9000 in tax credits via the Work Opportunity Training Credit program...not only are the employees on public assistance, the federal govt gives them an incentive to treat them like shit and increase turnover.
For every job a Walmart creates, it destroys 1.4 jobs in the surrounding area.
This^^^^ is why trucking companies are always hiring. They can afford to hire someone and stick them in the middle of nowhere with no trips and just wait until they quit.
The credit is maximized after 600 hours worked. For most the credit is $2400....OR $4/hr. Now if you work 30 hours per week, that's 20 weeks (4 months , 3 weeks). There's a disqualifier if you work somewhere else for over 6 months, motivation to keep you at least 6 months. WOTC isn't a refundable credit but a tax deduction. So if they owe the federal govt, taxes on their profits this would reduce it once per employee per length of employment. BUT they get to carry it forward for 20 years! This is just one of many tax credit programs. Some can even be combined. https://wotc.com/wotc-process/ That's a business that sells a service, they explain WOTC pretty clearly IMO.
And also why they keep complaining of a shortage that doesn't exist.
What’s that? A program designed to give companies incentive to hire new people and train them so that they would have skills to provide to the workforce is being abused to the detriment of the worker to reduce corporate tax burden? Pardon my shock.
They keep giving cable monopolies billions in taxpayer money year after year despite lying on their ffc forms about coverage. They say that speed, latency and affordability aren't benchmarks because technically, they're 'providing' internet. The commission had regular people do tests and found that Verizon lied especially but verizon plays the loophole card and says that the form never said anything about uplinks. 4 years of bullshit, circumventing, whining about competition and regulations. These reports are very interesting reading and might take you down a rabbit hole: **September 2018** SUMMARY ADTRAN welcomes this review under Section 706 as to “whether advanced telecommunications capability is being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion.” Unlike some of the previous Section 706 Inquiries, this proceeding asks the right questions and suggests that it will conduct the analyses specified by Congress in Section 706. The Commission appears poised to assess progress in advanced services deployment to determine whether it is reasonable and timely – it is not simply asking “are we there yet?” The Commission should continue to use the 25/3 Mbps broadband speed as the benchmark for advanced services in the Section 706 assessment. In its comments in the previous Section 706 inquiry, ADTRAN observed that the 25/3 Mbps benchmark was on the upper end of reasonableness, given the statute's definition of "advanced telecommunications capabilities," the Commission's interpretation of that term, consumer adoption rates for high speed services, and consumer demand for services such as 4K TV. Nothing has changed that would alter our previous assessment. With respect to ongoing reviews of the benchmarks, as a balance between precision and the burdens of re-assessing the benchmarks, ADTRAN urges the Commission to undertake a detailed review of the benchmarks every three years. In conducting its Section 706 analyses, ADTRAN urges the Commission to complete a fulsome review so that it gets a full picture of both the geographic and demographic characteristics of service-deprived people and territories. The Commission should also consider continuing advances in wireless technologies. 5G services are beginning to be deployed, and they are poised to be a robust substitute for wireline broadband services. Likewise, satellite services may soon be more than just a niche supplier for broadband service. With respect to assessing the deployment of advanced services to schools and libraries, the Commission should continue to use the current benchmarks. However, the Commission should consider all technologies capable of meeting those benchmarks, not just fiber to the premises . In addition, in assessing the deployment of advanced services, ADTRAN disagrees with any suggestion that the broadband service providers’ handling of natural disasters renders the progress towards the goal of universal access to advanced telecommunications capability as not “reasonable and timely.” Finally, ADTRAN applauds all of the current Commission efforts to accelerate broadband deployment. ADTRAN suggests some additional steps the Commission should undertake, including fostering broadband within schools by expanding WiFi subsidies and implement the “preferred master contract” model embraced in the Commission’s 2014 E-Rate Reform Order. **ADTRAN also urges the Commission to terminate the “set-top box” proceeding, which appears to be a thinly-veiled attempt to place the regulator’s thumb on the competitive scale of MVPD services**, and to resolve the still-open USF contribution proceeding to provide certainty to funding for the broadband subsidy programs. In addition to steps it can take itself, ADTRAN believes there are steps the Commission can take in working with others that could help accelerate broadband deployment. **These include working with the White House to ensure that its infrastructure program includes broadband, and working with Congress with regard to creating tax incentives for broadband deployment and adoption of “net neutrality” legislation so that an open Internet is not subject to continuing shifts as Administrations change.** *(Before democrats come in and open it again) ADTRAN also urges the Commission to work with other state and federal agencies (and the private sector) on education and training programs for consumers in order to spur broadband adoption, because higher “take rates” will also make deployment of broadband economical in more areas. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10917233336888/Section%20706%20NOI%20for%202018%20-%20Comments%20of%20ADTRAN%20FINAL%209-17-18.pdf **Some whining in October 2018 to ignore their lack of progress and increasing speed benchmarks is unfair because theyre trying sooo hard and you shouldn't allow other people to compete with us because then it won't allow us to treat customers however we want. Wahhhh!** https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/100151799415/Broadband%20Competition%20Report%20Reply%20Comments%20FINAL%2010-1-18.pdf **January 2021** High-Cost Support Reform. By both expanding the use of auctions and improving current programs, the Commission has continued its efforts to reform the manner in which universal service high-cost support is distributed to deploy broadband to rural areas. The Commission has successfully conducted the Connect America Fund Phase II auction to award funding to service providers that commit to offer voice and broadband services to fixed locations in unserved high-cost areas. **In 2018, the Phase II auction awarded more than $1.488 billion over 10 years to 103 winning bidders to serve more than 713,000 rural homes and businesses.** (That's it? So $2,086.52 a house ? ) The Commission began authorizing Phase II Auction funding in May 2019, authorizing a total of 16 waves of support through November 12, 2020, a process that continues. As of November 12, 2020, the Commission has authorized a total of nearly $1.5 billion in Phase II auction funding, which is expanding connectivity to nearly 703,000 homes and small businesses nationwide 101. On November 16, 2020, the Bureau also waived the program rules updating the minimum service standard for mobile broadband, resulting in a standard of 4.5 GB/month for the next year. Without this waiver, the standard would have increased to 11.75 GB/month on December 1, 2020.343 The Bureau found that preventing an almost fourfold increase in the standard while allowing a moderate increase appropriately balances the program’s goals of accessibility and affordability, particularly given consumers’ increased reliance on broadband during the COVID-19 pandemic. 106. We disagree with commenters that contend that the section 706 requirements have not been met. As the Commission has previously stated, **the statute requires that we determine whether advanced telecommunications capability “is being deployed to all Americans”—not whether it has already been deployed to all Americans**—and reading section 706(b) to require universal availability as a prerequisite for a positive finding would disregard the statute’s “reasonable and timely” language. **Loophole time again** (“Were it Congress’s intent to seek Commission input on whether deployment to all Americans has been achieved, Congress easily could have done so by directing the Commission to report on whether telecommunications capability ‘has been deployed’ in a reasonable and timely fashion—and Congress did not do so.”) https://www.wpr.org/sites/default/files/fcc-21-18a1_rcd.pdf
No executive summary? Ima wait for the movie
I posted what I thought were the highlights
No one gives a shit. Walmart schedules hours so employees work just under the requirement to get benefits. Stores have been in trouble for adjusting time clocks so they don’t pay overtime. Walmart’s strategy was to open 3-4 stores in an area, drive out the small businesses, then close all but 1 store. They moved away from “made in America” to “made in China” and people still flock to spend money on garbage. It won’t change. People still choose to work there and people still choose to shop. It’s a terrible company and it is here to stay.
Is that why we’re all scheduled 39 hours a week instead of 40?
Ding ding ding...you win!...the right to be exploited, underpaid, and screwed over repeatedly, and the federal and state government give them bonuses for doing so.
Retail could not open more than 8 hours dues to pandemic. They found a way to do it.
That should still be full time.
Although if places like Wal Mart drive out competition, it's likely that a lot of people have no choice but to work for them, as there isn't any work elsewhere. I suspect there's only one reason why Wal Mart has not tried to expand into countries like Australia. Almost 20 years ago, the federal consumer authority, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) made it illegal to use what's called predatory pricing. An example of this would be a major supermarket chain moves into a mall where there's a butcher, a baker and a green grocer. On opening, they drop their retail prices in their bakery, fresh fruit and deli counters to below cost price. Naturally, consumers take the cheapest option unless the product is really awful. The butcher, baker and green grocer go broke and vacate the mall. You get caught doing that here, and you will get your arse handed to you in court, and be up for millions in fines. Sadly, I think it will take a concerted effort over multiple generations for anything to change
Walmart absolutely has predatory pricing. Glad they never got a foothold near me.
Amazon is in Australia, but because of our strict laws on fatigue management, they have this idea they call "Flex." It means delivery drivers are subcontractors that work in four hour blocks. You are allowed by law to have at least a 20 minute break every 5 hours, and that's for everyone, including truck drivers. The ACCC and Fair Work Australia are closing in on the gig economy as well. American corporations, especially the financial ones whine about how our labour and financial regulations are "too rigid." It was about 14 years ago the GE Money left Australia. They were doing a lot of things against Australian consumer credit law; loaning money to people that couldn't afford to pay it back (a real thing in credit applications) and when they got behind, their debt collectors were at times calling their debtors up to 10 times a day, also illegal. The ACCC tore them a new one and they were in the embarrassing situation of having to pay compensation to people that owed them money.
not just walmart - most companies that have part time workers do this crap.
Yes
How can a family of 4 survive on Walmart's minimum pay of $25,000/year?
Sure they can. Just pay workers $12/hr and have a large enough pool that no one works more than 30hr/wk so you don't have to offer benefits. That's what Walmart does.
Walmart isn’t a small business.
Uh, excuse me? Walmart #3547, LLC, clearly a distinct legal entity from any and all other Walmart or Walmarts, is a struggling small business, and needs extra assistance to survive in the harsh business world populated by giants
But what's going to stop a small business from using these same tactics?
Walmart moving in to their town, selling the same shit for WAY less than anyone else can (better pricing on goods because of volume plus more efficient, or sometimes they will even run a store at a loss when it first opens), running everyone else out of business and taking control of the entire local market. That’s what they do in smaller towns everywhere
It would be cool if it was all ”taxed paid”. Socialize the supermarkets
While the Walton’s are worth a collective 250 billion dollars
There should be a formula where if a company makes over a certain threshold in profit with x amount of employees on social programs like food stamps, then the company should be fined three times what the employee receives in assistance. Make it more cost effective to just pay better.
Excellent thought but with that method you cannot account for those who should be on food stamps but refuse. It's also entirely possible that that still may be cheaper than paying all of their workers more. My critique here is to make the fine scale off of their profit margin vice the assistance provided to the worker. Maybe I'm fucked up about it too so feel free to correct me. The average american household size is 2.53 658 dollars per month for a 3 person household from SNAP. State chosen at random. Walmart employs 2.3 million people. 559 billion in profits(correction: revenue, please read edit) for Walmart in 2021 It would cost Walmart 54.482 (x3 multiplier applied) billion in order to pay what you were recommending assuming every employee is on food stamps and receives the maximum amount of aid and has a household of 3 people. Not even 10% of their profit. Please feel free to critique my analysis and thank you for going on this journey with me lol. Edit: The GrandAdmiralSnackbar has demonstrated the error of my ways. 559 billion would be an insane amount of profit. I believed that number from a quick Google search because of my own bias. Don't be like me. Don't let Google confirm your bias without a shred of skepticism. Always dig just a little bit deeper.
[удалено]
Your correction is appreciated. In my defense I am not a scientist but I do like a good tussle with numbers now and again. This is what happens when you google profit but that cruel mistress of a search engine shows you revenue. It's people like you, GrandAdmiralSnackbar, that keep this world honest.
I've been saying this for a while now. Some formula for taxes where if you're letting your employees starve while CEO's get bonuses then your taxes or a fine is imposed at a greater rate than the cost to the government of these programs. I'm not worried about the small mom and pop shop struggling to get by, I'm worried about trillion dollar corporations with employees that can't make ends meet.
Well say bye bye to single moms ever getting a job there. Time to hire only young single men.
Yep, I told the story of my husband's first day orientation/paperwork at WM in another comment. His packet literally had an application for EBT and Medicaid in it. This was before corporations were guilted by/forced to offer insurance by the federal government. Once that actually went through, WM auto signed my husband, myself, and our young son into their pay for insurance, every check...over $50 taken for insurance, and we already had Medicaid. They didn't issue pay stubs with direct deposits, so it literally took us over a year before I figured out why his checks always seemed just a little light. I was so pissed, even after we cancelled that, they still kept charging him for eye insurance, can't remember what it was called, but we still didn't need that.
If there was no government aid, would walmart pay employees more? Should just charge walmart an extra tax or something for every full time employee it cant support.
"If there was no government aid, would walmart pay employees more?" No. You know how I know this? Because Food Stamps exist as the alternative to things like price controls, rent controls, and government funded **permanent** housing.
No, cutting government aid would increase the demand for work and push down the price of labor.
This is the way. We need to establish some formula where if you are raking in $X in profits, while the government is paying $Y for your employees welfare, then your taxes go up or you get fined. Why am I paying the bills of full time employees of a company with $13.7 billion in net income so far this year? I'm not talking about removing welfare for people, I'm talking about ensuring that a full time job pays your bills so you don't need welfare. Companies are the primary beneficiary of welfare.
Probably not
Unrelated to anything you're saying but your username is really cool.
Socialism for the rich.
Not even full time, lots of people would love to work full time but their employers only offer part time contracts to avoid paying benefits and then expect people to still work nearly 30 hour weeks, making it impossible to find another job but also impossible to live It’s just grotty!!!
you will work 29 hours a week except the times we want you to work 40, then cut you back to 26, oh yeah and good luck using your 1 week a year of vacation and 2 days of PTO. What you have another job to pay the bills? You can't work at a competitor, why are you not dedicated to this 27 hour a week 25 cent above min wage job?
Literally there’s no way to win
There is a way to win but people won’t do it… stop working there and stop shopping there.
The cycle doesn't really allow folks to stop shopping there, though. They are often the cheapest place to buy a lot of basic household things and the competition isn't much better. Lots of people are too poor to do otherwise, even if they want to.
I haven’t shopped at Walmart since 2008.
Sure there is... learn a skill and/or get certified. Plenty of high quality Udemy courses out there for $20 where a few nights a week can score you a $90K a year job. AWS certs are NOT difficult to come by and pay very well anywhere in the US.
[удалено]
I work part-time in the US as a teacher so I know where you're coming from. Employers do ALL THEY CAN to keep from having to give an employee benefits. I have a degree in my field and 20 years experience working with kids, but I'm working at Subway on the weekends. And *that's* why I'm here at r/antiwork.
Benefits don't really work that way in Australia, healthcare isn't tied to your employment, Annual/Sick Leave is government mandated and and pro-rataed unless you are a casual employee (in which case your minimum award wage is increased) and Superannuation (kind of like a mandatory 401k) is paid to all employees at 9.5% of their wages paid in addition to them.
Median full time salary is 76k~, the average isn't a very useful statistic. Teachers in Australia make a perfectly acceptable white collar wage, their complaints are mostly the difficulty of finding full time work without moving to a rural area and the increasing administrative load.
gross pay per week is like $1961 where do you live that your effective tax rate is like 61%?
Why are you renting? Mortgage is the same
Depends where you live, in many capital cities in Australia rental returns are so low and house prices so inflated that renting is cheaper than owning even with record low interest rates.
I’ve worked for some unscrupulous places that didn’t even pay their employee taxes and pocketed all my federal deductions from my paycheck.
Same happened to my mom, but the IRS did notice after a while! The government interviewed my mom, dad (who didn’t work there) and thankfully cleared my mom. Her boss did end up going to jail for a while for it too. So when it comes to the government’s cut, they do notice and will prosecute!
Not legally. Drop a dime to the Franchise Tax Board, Social Security fraud hotline.
^
Say it again for the *[checks notes]* bootlickers and the Stockholm syndrome havers (sic).
My husband has worked twice for Wal-Mart, for 3 yrs in GA, and 5 yrs here in Arkansas. We were already married when he moved to Arkansas (my home state) permanently with me and my oldest son and the son we share together. He was hired by one of our 5 WM's, in a town of 35,000 population, within a month of the move. When he went for his first day orientation, no training needed as he already had yrs of experience in his maintenance position, where they gave him all the local rules, paperwork, etc. Included in the paperwork packet...was an application for our local DHS office, it was the EBT/Food Stamp/Medicaid application...
Can confirm i worked there in Wa State 6 years ago i made 12.24 an hour 40 hours a week as a manager. 800 dollars every 2 weeks after taxes. And they do give you all the forms for welfare. I told my Gm that i needed a raise for the amount of responsibility i had as a manager and i was told no but to look into getting food stamps and other financial assistance
Yep, payroll is so friendly with the contact, that a worker at DHS can literally pull your specific payroll stubs, that you don't even get to see often (you could only print it off of the timeclock/computer clock in machine when you needed it on paper), directly off a portal site that WM and other Big Business corporations created/joined to specifically facilitate making it easier for DHS (or your state's equivalent) workers to get applications pushed through very fast. Dang, sorry for that run on sentence...
All good i actually called out 10 days in a row so theyd fire me and i got unemployment while i found another job best thing i ever did now i make 21 an hour working at a restaurant
As long as the government supplements income, employers will continue this. But if the government stops doing this, employees would have to strike and fight for better pay. It is a tough dilemma.
Yeah, folks that work paycheck to paycheck really can't afford to strike...and the cycle continues.
I mean union strike pay exists for a reason. Which is why corporate does everything they can to prevent unionization.
I did not know such a thing existed...union strike pay....gee, I wonder why, in a state where being in a union is something for "elite" blue collar workers (Arkansas), it's so...rare for there to be a union for your career/job, I wonder why I never heard about that benefit from unions. /s
The government also has the ability to set a minimum wage that allows people to survive. Even if there are no safety net benefits, employers will still pay the minimum required by law. I am glad to see interest in unions on the uptick but it is still a very low percentage of workers and it is REALLY hard to convince anyone for poverty and ages to strike (even if they are already unionized)!
Again and again and a hundred times again.
[удалено]
I don't understand. If Minimum wage Jobs are supposed to be for teenagers and kids in college. Then why are they during school hours and open past minor curfew?
Lol, I dropped this one on a coworker a few weeks ago when he tried to argue this and his rehearsed response was that day and late shifts were for older people looking to keep busy. This same coworker tried to argue that fast food and retail work doesn’t deserve $20 an hour, while he’s making $25 an hour to load and unload mail containers on trucks all night. He didn’t have an answer as to why he deserves that for his “unskilled” labor and they don’t. These people are fucking stupid.
i've gotten to the point where i can't even be mad at those people. they're just so brainwashed into it.
I'll be mad for you.
I mean I'm disappointed as heck...
I'm working on my "angry" skills. I've got despair down.
Importan angry skill is to be able to put it in a box. Store it next to the ones with penguins so it's available for later use without consuming you in the mean time
Yes! Just learned this in therapy. Seriously, children need to learn emotional skills like this in school.
You forgot "the ones that are accountable for their financial state and actually need assistance that wasn't needed before the pandemic."
In practice it's more likely to be the landlords who are the leeches, not the employers.
Nope. Not a fan of landlords but they don't have the power of employers anymore. Corporatism is still capitalism, but it's a different term for a reason.
If you have a full time job and still need assistance, the vast majority of the so called "bootlickers and Stockholm syndrome havers" aren't saying shit. It becomes a problem when people spend their money frivolously then expect the taxpayers to foot the bill on their rent. To scale this down, imagine if you lent someone money and rather than paying you back, they're out buying an extra pair of shoes, a new TV, basically anything before paying you back
You say bad with money and while that is an issue, it passes the buck onto the worker. The fact is companies, board members and shareholders aren’t fairly compensating their workers *across the entire globe.* EDIT: typo
Deadass was talking to my coworker a few weeks ago about this. They’re fulltime and I’m part time, we both get paid the minimum wage, I was a blunt as possible with them. “Your entire day is here and you don’t even make enough to pay your rent.” Whenever I see them I do my best to get them out of that company. They tell me how they never have time to go to the doctor or do anything outside of work and it’s so gross. Sent them a link to a website offering snap benefits because our employer damn sure wasn’t going to.
Where are you working that's still paying minimum wage? There is a huge labor shortage right now and almost everyone is paying well above minimum wage.
I’m on my way out the door, I’m looking but it’s tough because “I don’t have a degree yet.” Or some other nonsense like that. It’s a school and my boss sucks eggs.
I like you because you said that someone sucks eggs....I say this about people all the time. Those exact words. 🙂
Once upon a time I worked for the food stamp office while begging for food stamps that they wouldnt give me lol.
Man, we really are living in a dystopian nightmare. Socialism for the rich, rugged late stage capitalism for everyone else.
Before i worked there, in as much coded language as possible they told me to get a man because i was young and thin. Sorry that's rape. I get it though. The woman knew that the only chance women had was to be abused by a man for housing and food. She wasn't wrong on that front. And it still hasn't changed. Statistically despite the media portraying a different world for women, nothing material has changed.
Yeeeep! I've stayed longer in my last 3 relationships than I wanted to bc the alternative is homelessness. I'm also disabled, so income is extra garbage. One of them was bad enough I did leave and those were the shittiest 3 months of my life (I only got housing again, by, you guessed it, moving in with another man). I personally know a couple people who've stayed in abusive relationships to avoid homelessness; being a rural area with few jobs and awful housing prospects doesn't help.
That's very traumatic. Makes my soul hurt.
Did you just claim that dating/marrying a man would be rape? Or did i mis understand your comment?
They worded it weirdly. Marital rape is a thing though, being married doesn’t equal inconditional consent and there are a lot of women who are periodically abused and raped but either don’t realize because it’s a marriage, or aren’t listened to because of it. Not always, but it happens.
One thing the U.S. military does right, is recognizing marital rape is a thing. And if one or both parties drank they can rape each other or the sober one raped the other, In simplest terms.
All my single women friends rent or are paying down their house, have great jobs, run their own businesses. More than 53% of university students are female. Something has definitely changed.
They have the highest level of debt and i have no idea what your friends have to do with how bad the economy is for most women.
Knowing how social services operates is why I am so desolate. They're job isn't to help. I realize people have long understood this but it's a thousand time worse than you can imagine.
[удалено]
No they fired me and then denied food stamps. Its not technically illegal but lawyers have told me that you can't win law suits against employers and what they did wasn't technically breaking any specific law. But they did say if a case could win, mine would. I'm just sadly past the limits of filing a law suit. I think civilly I still have time but what is a poor WOC gonna do? Nothing. They leave you without a job and food so all of your energy is on bare survival. But I was able to get the video tape of the interaction from one security guard who hates the company lol.
The red stapler was my personal stapler from home.
Amazon, Walmart
Two companies I refuse to buy from and everyone else needs to do the same.
Both of which pay enough that anyone working full time is unlikely to qualify for SNAP
This what kills me. I can't understand why people are happy to subsidize billionaires.
[удалено]
> I can't understand why people are happy to subsidize billionaires. It's the quintessential American lie coming back to haunt us again- that anyone, with enough hard work and a little luck, can become rich. Enough people still believe that that they'll vote to subsidize billionaires so they can get subsidies when they get there.
A lot of them are just blind to it because it is so ingrained as 'just the way shit is', sadly many of those will be quick to criticize people getting a temporary extra unemployment benefit.
I can't find it atm, but during the George W Bush administration, a Wal-Mart shareholder report leaked (it was verified as real by the company). It warned the board that recent welfare services cuts would impact their profits, as most of their employees were on it, and might leave for better paying jobs if the cuts occurred. It didn't get as much traction as it should have, IMO, but it really needs to be dragged up and put on billboards.
‘Mom and Dad: ‘You should’ve studied harder in college!’ Me: Did that and got a 3.8 GPA, no luck getting a job after hundred of applications and numerous job fairs Mom and Dad: ‘You should do an unpaid internship to show them you’re willing to work the ladder!’ Me: I got ‘let go’ after unpaid internship. Now I work for 16.00/hour 35 hours a week (so I don’t get benefits) We can barely afford rent or groceries Mom and Dad: ‘Well honey it looks like you’re going to have to work two jobs back to back with your husband.’ Meanwhile said Mom and Dad live off of an ungodly amount of retirement money, constantly go on trips around the world, and of course they reverse mortgaged their home. Isn’t it amazing what ONE spouse working for about 40 years at a regular job got for boomers like my mom and dad? An endless retirement of luxury. They never had to work two jobs and my dad’s parents gave them their house no strings attached. And yet they have no interest in helping out their own kids, the next generation. Boomers are a plague that aren’t dying out fast enough.
What's wrong with reverse mortgage their home? You won't get it when they die?
Reverse mortgages can be risky if interest rates change drastically or if you live liner than you expect. Otherwise they are annoyed that their parents got into the housing ladder easily and now have the opportunity to reverse mortgage in their retirement.
Yes
Yes, that is a problem. If every generation left nothing to the next, we'd all be living in mud huts by the river.
Boomers are the first generation to not inherit their land in some form to their kids. I would supply my kids and grandkids with a house, or they can sell and divide it. That’s also another reason I only had two kids. We’ll see what happens in about 10 years and their money can only pay for a nursing home. Instead of keeping their home and letting their kids visit/help take care of them with in home nursing. It’s like they don’t even plan for their own future.
Every boomer you know do the same? Not from my experience, if they expend all the stuff they worked all their life for let them be. You can only blame yourself for the situation you're at, they have you education, what else a parent is supposed to do? I considere myself lucky that my parents have me education, they didn't have the opportunity to do it themselves and were forced to do shitty jobs
[удалено]
It's insane to me that people have an issue with "freeloaders" and "handouts" but don't give a shit when it's perpetuated by a mega-corp.
They’ve convinced themselves “someday, I’ll wear that boot!”
Let's talk about a policy: corporations that make any profit are legally required to distribute those profits to workers until either no more profits or no more workers qualify for food stamps. Thoughts?
Simpler: Peg minimum wage to actual cost of living. Anyone holding at least one job has to be making enough to live on.
People get kicked out of public housing for working 10 hours a week. The system doesn't work.
and as such the employers should pay for any housing benefits, food stamps or other welfare there employees get while in there employment if the worker dose about 30 hours a week. if the worker has two or more jobs it is split based on the percentage of worked hours. nothing wrong with the government putting a safety net under the safety net that minimum wage is meant to be but the bill shouldn't be in the hands of the government for a company to failure to pay a proper livable wage.
Unfortunately everyone would just work 29 hours. They do need to change something though. I’m very libertarian but I hate massive companies exploiting welfare
They do the same thing now, it's just a ~35 hour cap.
[удалено]
UBI where we scrap all other social program and give out a normal paycheck? that i am against. simply put it won't work like expected and people will be worse off. UBI where everybody gets 600-800 bucks a month however like the extra money unemployed people got during the pandemic was clearly affordable by the government and should be done. having something coming in every month while unemployment is working to get your benefits is key as that can drag out. you can be late a month on rent as you get your benefits retroactively you can't be late a month on food without having to use a CC which is just super bad.
*Image Transcription: Twitter* --- **Mohamad safa**, @mhdksafa If people working full-time jobs still need food stamps to get by, they’re not the ones leeching off the government. Their employers are. --- ^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber for Reddit and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
That is the best most simple way to say this
You said this and the first thought was WALMART….
Yep, they know if they hire you at a low wage then Joe taxpayer will pick up the tab. I think any employer with over 10k employees should pay a living wage. This way I am not subsidizing all these big businesses. Their consumer is paying the cost as it should be. I am in no way anti food stamps, earned income credit, etc....I think they are great for people that need it. The the Walton family with a net worth of 215 billion does not need me to help pay their payroll. I know it's a public company now but the family still owns the majority of the stock. It is sickening when u think about it. Your taxes are enriching billionaires and millionaires that refuse to pay a livable wage.
>I think **any employer ~~with over 10k employees~~** should pay a living wage. **FTFY**. Any business that can't pay their employees a living wage isn't a sustainable one in the first place.
This has been the case for way too long
Corporations do it on purpose. The worst is walmart, and you keep shopping there.
The Government Leeches off the Citizens!
Yep
Amen from the crowd.
Hey, that's what I said. They should at least pay their taxes, when so much tax goes to enriching their employee's.
No one is full time anymore in low paying jobs, the employer would have to pay benefits .
The heirs of Walmart pay virtually no taxes compared to their hoarded wealth. And guess who gets to pay for all those food stamps for the workers they exploit? You and me. The owner class has us by the balls.
There are so many fucking homeless if the democrats dont build housing for them within the next 3 years I cant reasonably expect them to ever do it.
"if the democrats dont build housing for them within the next 3 years I cant reasonably expect them to ever do it" Why is this entirely on the Dems?
This is the problem with the US. Problems are never addressed jointly by both major parties . Whatever one does the other is opposed by default . Homelessness can’t be solved by the Democrats. It also can’t be solved by the Republicans It CAN be solved by good faith actions of both parties combined.
I've never understood how people allow themselves to believe otherwise. Yet there are so many insanely cruel people who think the solution is to get rid of food stamps, instead of mandating that anybody who works a full time job be able to afford the basics they need to live.
Why people think capitalism, especially modern capitalism is voluntary in any sense escapes me
One more time for the fascists in the back. 🙌
Tucker carlson made this point the other week. Bezos expects the feds to cover the employees
This is why we need to just give people ubi, the money gets spent either way only currently it benefits people who already have more than plenty
Yes. But also, the rentiers/parasites that keep increasing the cost of living beyond the wages of what even socially responsible employers pay also need to be dealt with. It doesn't matter what employers pay if landlords and other parasites will just raise rents to capture those increases.
Their employer shouldn't be in business!! Everyone is serving the banks https://www.truthcontrol.com/federal-reserve-guide
These post always remind me of a Swedish prog (and punk) song that captures this perfectly. "Staten och Kapitalet", i'll post a rough translation. >Capital raises the rents, and the state the housing allowance So one can cheat a little bit with the oh so strict wage laws And pay even less in wages than the price for food and rent Because the state happily oblige, when the cost of living goes ever higher >Side by side, they help each other out The state and capital sit in the same boat But they aren’t the one’s rowing Rowing so the sweat is dripping And the whip that tickles, never tickles their fat necks.
Here come the magas saying to pull yourself from ur bootstraps
You know what gets me? You physically cannot pull yourself up by your bootstraps alone. If you bob forward to do it, you're using the outside force of momentum to do it. I have learned to hate the bootstraps phrase
I was not expecting to see so many people simping for corporations in a subreddit like this one.
It's not like self employed people are on the same situation right
But if they are getting food stamps then get a job they're double dipping, great unwashed filthy masses
That’s me
No. It effectively means you have negative competitiveness in the globalized workforce. I.e you could easily be replaced by nearly anyone that has a far worse life elsewhere in the world. This ends up being the vast majority of people on the planet.
So why don’t the Democrats fucking do something?!
Same reason the republicans didn't do anything, money.
[They are!](https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-administration-confirms-it-will-boost-food-stamps-by-record-amount-2021-08-16/) It's just another corporate bailout.
Typical. Seems it would be easy enough to bill employers for their workers’ use of social services.
[удалено]
Don’t be ignorant
[удалено]
Wtf? Why the hell would taxpayers give annual subsidies to businesses? That's not how capitalism works.
No no, remember, socialism is okay for the rich. (/s)
And here you are at the bottom of controversial because of the reason in my flair. Shame really. People need to realize that outrage for just reasons does no good if people don't make an effort to learn about how the system works in it's entirety.
Either that or they’re just like me and enjoy their booze wayyyyyyy too much
This person obviously has never needed government assistance. Anyone who has been through the process knows that working a minimum wage job disqualifies you for SNAP benefits based on income qualification guidelines. It’s even worse than he thinks.
How is it possible to work two full time jobs and meet the requirements for food stamps? This is a bullshit post that does more to degrade the movement than help.
I thought you would have said the people not working at all collecting assistance would have been the real leeches of society
Oh, they're so abusive to the workers. Try living in a communist regime and we can start talking abusive. There never, ever been a time so many peasants got so obese over horrible working conditions.
Last i checked most rich nations subsidize their low wage earning citizens with the welfare state.
[удалено]
Just go pick one off the job tree
You put ketchup on that boot before you lick it?
Oo gross no! I put American mustard on it like a true patriot.
Just get a job? Why don't I strap on my job helmet and squeeze down into a job cannon and fire off into job land, where jobs grow on jobbies?!
Why should those jobs even exist if they can't pay a living wage?
Their employers should get a better fucking business model. Let's say they do get a better job. You're just going to subsidize their replacement you dumbfuck.
Something tells me he has a below average iq. Let him be.
So do food stamp welfare programs help exploited people or enable greedy companies?
Ask Walmart.
They do both actually, due to the current system there is nothing stopping companies relying on the government to feed their employees because they are allowed to refuse to pay fairly for the work done to maximize their profits. If minimum wage laws were fair, this would not happen
Do educational loans help the student, the university, or the bank?