70% of Food Stamps/Medicaid recipients work full time, new study GAO And more results

[Hinastorm]

Walmart did not make 129 billion in profit. Did you completely skip the operating expenses line item? Cost of goods sold is only the cost of buying the television they sell to you. That does not include rent, salaries, etc. maybe before you complain you should actually learn how to read financials?

I'll admit I get lost in the minutia of the terms of this shit, i'm no expert.

Could you reply to the person below me then? They seem to be more knowledgeable.

It would seem to me that they could still afford meaningful pay increases with that persons numbers.

And even if they can't, it's time to start taxing the rich and subsidizing paychecks. The status quo of slave wages at these big companies is not ok.

[GreenJesus]

Walmart is operating at a $6b net revenue at the end of last quarter based on a gross of $137b less sales costs of 102b and operating costs of $28b. Despite operating costs increasing (of which wages are a part) increasing by 8b over last year's costs, Walmart is still seeing an increase in profit of 8.5%.

Despite this walmart only invested $400m in raising the salary of its lowest-paid workers in September of this year which is especially egregious since trump gave them a predicted $2.2b tax cut. It's predicted that raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour would cost walmart $3b (i.e less than half of a single quarter's earnings)

I think the Waltons are doing just fine actually.

Sorry I didn't look at the most recent quarterly data. I was looking at T-12 annual from January 2020.

July 31
"Other gains and (losses): 3,222"

Their operating margin and revenue is nearly exactly the same as a year ago and yet they have more than 2-3 billion additional gain presumably from the federal government (the gains and losses fluctuates a little bit depending on the quarter so I'm not going to assume the whole 3,222 is solely from that). Lol... nearly the entire stimulus check went right to the bottom line for net income.

https://www.stock-analysis-on.net/NY...Quarterly-Data

I'm interested to see what they 3rd quarter looks like at least.
@Hinastorm

This is pretty much unexcusable corporate welfare.

Their net income in the second quarter of 2020 was basically 2.5 billion higher than any other previous quarter even though their revenue was about the same as the quarter a year ago.

[Zan15]

Walmart's net operating income was $20 billion. So nearly 5 billion increased costs would be about a 25% hit to their operating income which is actually pretty big. Again, their margins are very small. They had $520B in revenue, but only $20 billion in operating income (before interest, tax, depreciation, and amortization. That is a margin of about 3.8% which is very small. Add 5 billion in expenses and the margin shrinks to 2.8%.

Then, after paying interest and taxes etc they only made $14.8B which is still a large number, but it would have a signficant effect on their business.

https://www.stock-analysis-on.net/NY...come-Statement

Edit:

Forgot about you saying to increase revenue by 1%. $520B * 1.01 *3.8% margin (the margin they are currently earning) ~= $20B which is about what they are currently earning.

So yes actually. If they increase the price of goods by 1%, then the increased labor cost quoted by your study would effectively cancel out.

Also half of those expenses such as depreciation and amortization are fluff.

Looking at their EBITDA is really where you should be looking when comparing operating expense 33.56B 32.12B 31.73B 33.84B 32.46B

- - - Updated - - -

Remember also that walmart currently has :

Walmart cash on hand for the quarter ending October 31, 2020 was $16.906B

that is after all the stock buy backs


Oct. 31, 2020 463.00M
July 31, 2020 0.00
April 30, 2020 723.00M
Jan. 31, 2020 888.00M
Oct. 31, 2019 1.122B
July 31, 2019 1.572B
April 30, 2019 2.135B
Jan. 31, 2019 3.249B
Oct. 31, 2018 2.317B
July 31, 2018 1.305B
April 30, 2018 539.00M
Jan. 31, 2018 1.64B
Oct. 31, 2017 2.209B
July 31, 2017 2.262B
April 30, 2017 2.185B



on top of 2.16 x 2.849B shares = 6.2 billion a year in dividends



ya they have no room to give raises....lol... /s

[GreenJesus]

Also half of those expenses such as depreciation and amortization are fluff.

Looking at their EBITDA is really where you should be looking when comparing operating expense 33.56B 32.12B 31.73B 33.84B 32.46B

- - - Updated - - -

Remember also that walmart currently has :

Walmart cash on hand for the quarter ending October 31, 2020 was $16.906B

that is after all the stock buy backs


Oct. 31, 2020 463.00M
July 31, 2020 0.00
April 30, 2020 723.00M
Jan. 31, 2020 888.00M
Oct. 31, 2019 1.122B
July 31, 2019 1.572B
April 30, 2019 2.135B
Jan. 31, 2019 3.249B
Oct. 31, 2018 2.317B
July 31, 2018 1.305B
April 30, 2018 539.00M
Jan. 31, 2018 1.64B
Oct. 31, 2017 2.209B
July 31, 2017 2.262B
April 30, 2017 2.185B



on top of 2.16 x 2.849B shares = 6.2 billion a year in dividends



ya they have no room to give raises....lol... /s

I'm not saying they don't have room to give raises and still be able to make income. I'm just saying that a relatively small perceived labor cost like a dollar or two per hour increase can actually have a very sizable impact on the business that people don't appreciate. However, I also don't think Walmart appreciates the impact of getting paid so little puts on their workers.

However, I wouldn't really say that Walmart's dividend is that big considering it's only a 1.44% yield ($2.16/share annually on a price of $150).

[TigTone]

I'm not saying they don't have room to give raises and still be able to make income. I'm just saying that a relatively small perceived labor cost like a dollar or two per hour increase can actually have a very sizable impact on the business that people don't appreciate.

Do me a favor and sit for a few minute.

Then really think about how much $1 billion dollars is.

I mean really think about it and comprehend how much money that is.

[GreenJesus]

Do me a favor and sit for a few minute.

Then really think about how much $1 billion dollars is.

I mean really think about it and comprehend how much money that is.

I don't understand what your post is supposed to be about? Walmart is a big company that employees 2.2 million people across the world so of course it will be dealing in billions. What do you want me to be thinking about?

If they have 2.2 million employees, a $1 increase to labor per hour (assuming full time) would equal an increase of about 6 billion dollars in expenses per year. That's a big billion number.

Companies want to grow and make profit. That's the way of the world. If the state and local governments want to raise minimum wage then all the power to them and Walmart will need to follow the law of the places they operate in or leave.

[kamuimac]

In a shocking (to no one but apparently republican's) study, most food stamp and Medicaid recipients are not lazy welfare queens!!!

https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-21-45#summary
https://www.gao.gov/assets/720/710203.pdf

Approximately 70 percent of adult wage earners in both programs worked full-time hours (i.e., 35 hours or more) on a weekly basis.


In a second shocking (again only to you know whom) result, the same companies top every state reviewed....




https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...gn=wp_business


In the nine states that responded about SNAP benefits — Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Nebraska, North Carolina, Tennessee and Washington — Walmart was found to have employed about 14,500 workers receiving the benefit, followed by McDonald’s with 8,780, according to Sanders’s team. In six states that reported Medicaid enrollees, Walmart again topped the list, with 10,350 employees, followed by McDonald’s with 4,600.


See if you guys notice a trend here? I'll just list a few of the results of the top companies

1.Walmart
2 McDonald’s
3 Publix
4 Waffle House
5 Kroger
6 Amazon
7 Dollar General
8 Home Depot
9 Wendy’s
10 Uber Technologies

1.Walmart
2 McDonald’s
3 Indiana University
4 Goodwill
5 Kroger
6 Amazon
7 Elwood Staffing
8 Dollar Tree, Inc.
9 Dollar General
10 Burger King

1 Hannaford’s
2 Walmart
3 Maine Medical Center
4 Dunkin’
5 McDonald’s
6 University of Maine
7 Circle K 181
8 Shaw’s Supermarkets, Inc.
9 L.L. Bean
10 Goodwill

1 The Commonwealth of Massachusetts
2 PCA Quality Home Care Workforce Council
3 Stop & Shop
4 Walmart
5 Market Basket
6 CVS Pharmacy
7 Amazon
8 Target
9 Home Depot

1 Walmart
2 McDonald’s
3 Dollar General
4 Express Employment Professionals
5 Sonic 489
6 Macy’s
7 Amazon
8 Braum’s Ice Cream
9 Choctaw Nation
10 Dollar Tree, Inc.



Trillion dollars + worth of companies making hundreds of billions in profit. Walmart family alone worth 180 billion dollars. Trillions in profits over the last few decades.
Taxpayers stuck with supporting full time workers meals and healthcare because these Billion dollar companies refuse to pay a fair wage and offer affordable benefits.

On top of all this the republican party wants to cut benefits, make getting and staying on benefits harder and abolish Medicaid expansion that helped over 12 million more people get access to healthcare.

These corporations excuse "we pay the min wage, so tough".

Even though one would expect these companies to top the list because they are the largest employers in each state, the sheer size of their profits should make it so none of them are anywhere near the top of the list. That kind of wage pressure by just the top 10 would result in most of the private marketplace adjusting their wages and would result in a huge drop in people on "welfare".

so ? any of those low paid workers is free to start their own mega-corporation.

but lets be honest - most of those people have next to no working skills thats why they are there where they are.

[Zan15]

I'm not saying they don't have room to give raises and still be able to make income. I'm just saying that a relatively small perceived labor cost like a dollar or two per hour increase can actually have a very sizable impact on the business that people don't appreciate. However, I also don't think Walmart appreciates the impact of getting paid so little puts on their workers.

However, I wouldn't really say that Walmart's dividend is that big considering it's only a 1.44% yield ($2.16/share annually on a price of $150).

Nah its not big at all but to put it in perspective...

Walton family owns about 1 billion shares. They get 2.16 billion dollars a year just for ha-ha's on top of the 150 billion they already have.
they could convert those into special class A shares with no dividends at this point and have the company spend that on its employees as a return for their mass fortune at the hands of their hard workers.

[TigTone]

I don't understand what your post is supposed to be about? Walmart is a big company that employees 2.2 million people across the world so of course it will be dealing in billions. What do you want me to be thinking about?

They have 2.2 million employees. A $1 increase to labor per hour (assuming full time) would equal an increase of about 6 billion dollars in expenses per year. That's a big billion number.

Companies want to grow and make profit. That's the way of the world. If the state and local governments want to raise minimum wage then all the power to them and Walmart will need to follow the law of the places they operate in or leave.

Because in the end people living in poverty cost everyone.

https://source.wustl.edu/2018/04/chi...r-study-finds/

Childhood poverty costs U.S. $1.03 trillion in a year, study finds.

under paid workers has consequences.

[JohnBrown1917]

so ? any of those low paid workers is free to start their own mega-corporation.

but lets be honest - most of those people have next to no working skills thats why they are there where they are.

Turns out you need a lot of money to start a corporation. Should have learned the skill that lets you be born to well-off parents.

[Zan15]

Do me a favor and sit for a few minute.

Then really think about how much $1 billion dollars is.

I mean really think about it and comprehend how much money that is.

In relative size tiny compared to the overall size of the retail market and total labor cost

- - - Updated - - -

so ? any of those low paid workers is free to start their own mega-corporation.

but lets be honest - most of those people have next to no working skills thats why they are there where they are.

its "free" to start a corporation?
Hell the filing fees, registration fees and whatnot would eat up a sizable portion of their 25k salary


as far as "working skills", how many people started out in their garage as teens with little to no actual working skills/experience and are now billionares.

[kamuimac]

Do me a favor and sit for a few minute.

Then really think about how much $1 billion dollars is.

I mean really think about it and comprehend how much money that is.

its not really that much though if you are talking about a company of that callibre

it may shock you but ill give you example of how "easy' it is to be " net worth milionaire" in this times.

im for example technically surrounded by "milionaires" by that definition - not because they have milion in their account but because their apartments alone costs 600-800k - puting their "net worth" easily above milion if you add to that 2 cars that most of families have and other possesions and savings - just because they live in big city and own apartment there - many of them who inherited it in first place.

[TigTone]

Because in the end people living in poverty cost everyone.

https://source.wustl.edu/2018/04/chi...r-study-finds/

Childhood poverty costs U.S. $1.03 trillion in a year, study finds.

under paid workers has consequences.

Also, better paid workers buy more product. Omg shocking.

[GreenJesus]

Nah its not big at all but to put it in perspective...

Walton family owns about 1 billion shares. They get 2.16 billion dollars a year just for ha-ha's on top of the 150 billion they already have.
they could convert those into special class A shares with no dividends at this point and have the company spend that on its employees as a return for their mass fortune at the hands of their hard workers.

I can't disagree with that.

[kamuimac]

as far as "working skills", how many people started out in their garage as teens with little to no actual working skills/experience and are now billionares.

do you really have to be a bilionaire though ? all you see is either bilionaries or people living on food stamps ?

all it takes is to take first step.

i always give the same advice - if you really dont have any skills learn how to paint walls - here in my city people who literaly only paint walls but do that with skills with ease earn 6-8k a month . and they are booked 2-3 months in advance.

you really have other choices then to work in mcdonalds and wallmart - or their equivalent in other countries.

yes sure you wont be instantly a milionaire - but for sure you wont need food stamps.

[Jonnusthegreat]

It may sound nuts and you might not even care but to draw the line simply at 'full time workers" doesn't tell the full story.

For one it's common to make sure as few possible of your workers actually hit the 35-40 hour mark to keep from having provide expected full time benefits and to meet/evade regulations. There's people whose responsibility it is to keep the number of 'full time' workers as low as possible while still having enough employees. When the reporter comes and asks why so many of the companies employees still rely on social programs to get by the employer can say "well a lot of our full time employees are doing fine, it's mostly those under 40 hours who aren't", leaving out that the bulk of their employees are scheduled just below full time.

Another reason to say earners instead of straight up full time employees is that's its financial and mentally better for them to take a cut in hours receive benefits than to work 40 hours a week. The $50 extra on their check still wouldn't be enough for a living wage (no one isn't just $50 shy of poverty vs a decent living) but if they work those 5 extra hours the risk losing benefits they need worth a lot more. That those 5 hours aren't worth losing $100 in food stamps.

People are forced to work two jobs or realize it's not worth busting your ass in a job that doesn't net you a livable wage. If you have to put in 60 hours a week so your paycheck is 'good enough' there's a lot of things wrong with that picture ie why are the wages so low? Why are we okay with people being overworked and underpaid? At what point does 'working to live' become 'living to work'?
Those people have the same exact problems at 30 hours and 50 hours, difference is that the 30 hour person might be a little happier because they arent working themselves to death for the same dead end wage.

Earners are people part of the the working class in general. And it doesn't just apply to retail/food/service workers with. You can easily be someone working a white color job in area not making enough for a living wage in the area or be forced to become a slave to your wage to do so.

I think you missed the point I was making - this study completely ignored people that are not earners. I definitely understand the archaic laws we have that incentivize not giving employees full time status.

- - - Updated - - -

you could, i don't know read the study and findings.
i even linked it for you.

I did not claim it, the GAO did.
Don't like the way they worded it, sorry but that is how they tracked the time. Its more than one measurement.

YOU claimed that 70% of food stamps/medicaid recipients work full time, which is not what the study was about. The study was NOT about food stamp/medicaid recipients. It was about food stamp/medicaid recipients that are also earners.

I did read the study, and that's how I found out that YOUR claim was false (hence the edit).

[Saltysquidoon]

do you really have to be a bilionaire though ? all you see is either bilionaries or people living on food stamps ?

When my parents die I will likely be a multimillionaire (through no talent of my own I might add). As you correctly pointed out before liabilities my wife and I have assets in excess of a million aus bucks (thanks 50 years of artificial housing market growth propped up by my government).

Here's a question for you, what the fuck does that have to do with megacorps not paying employees enough to fucking eat?

[JohnBrown1917]

do you really have to be a bilionaire though ? all you see is either bilionaries or people living on food stamps ?

all it takes is to take first step.

i always give the same advice - if you really dont have any skills learn how to paint walls - here in my city people who literaly only paint walls but do that with skills with ease earn 6-8k a month . and they are booked 2-3 months in advance.

you really have other choices then to work in mcdonalds and wallmart - or their equivalent in other countries.

yes sure you wont be instantly a milionaire - but for sure you wont need food stamps.

Nobody is going to hire a random nobody of the street, these examples you put up are worthless. But I suppose its easy to judge the poor from a position of privilege

[Twdft]

as far as "working skills", how many people started out in their garage as teens with little to no actual working skills/experience and are now billionares.

Anyone can make it, just by far not everyone. A point these types don't want to see.

Also I don't understand how they have no problem with the taxpayer subsidising Walmarts poverty wages instead of demanding Walmart pays itself.

[JohnBrown1917]

as far as "working skills", how many people started out in their garage as teens with little to no actual working skills/experience and are now billionares.

If you get a "small loan" from your parents, a lot of things become easier.