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

[Zan15]

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".

[PACOX]

How is this shocking? America is notoriously overworked and underpaid. Where hard work is valued but seldom rewarded or appreciated. The pandemic only brought more attention to how many 'essential workers' don't receive essential pay.

Americans would lose their mind if half of those companies list ceased to exist tomorrow and yet those who make those companies run are often then butt end of jokes, viewed as drones who should be lucky they get the below living wage checks they receive. How dare that cashier not be smiling when your cart is full of stuff food they can't afford to buy!

The corporations are only a reflection the "fuck you at least I got mine" mentality.

[Easo]

This is a reminder about Trump's "But look at the low unemployment!" shtick. Yes, overworked, in two or more workplaces to keep up the bills. No wonder people need food stamps.

[Saltysquidoon]

ThE wEaLtH wIlL tRicKlE dOwN.

[Zan15]

How is this shocking?.

Its shocking you missed the sarcasm...

[PACOX]

Its shocking you missed the sarcasm...

You know what? That first rhetorical question wasn't directed at you but the story in general. I can see how it came off that way though, my bad.

[Howel]

70 %?! Fuck me, I knew it was a thing that there was people on welfare, that actually did have a job, but that's almost 3/4. That's bad, like real bad.

[arandomuser]

the last democrat to win the majority of white voters was LBJ who basically created the modern incarnation of the welfare state, which is why i dont get the whole class reductionist bernie wing " just focus on class and ignore racism and they will all come back" when lbj basically was kind of that, unless you buy the whole civil rights act caused the realigmnent thing, then you are kind of just clarifying my point that racism is more powerful than any class based politics.

[JohnBrown1917]

the last democrat to win the majority of white voters was LBJ who basically created the modern incarnation of the welfare state, which is why i dont get the whole class reductionist bernie wing " just focus on class and ignore racism and they will all come back" when lbj basically was kind of that, unless you buy the whole civil rights act caused the realigmnent thing, then you are kind of just clarifying my point that racism is more powerful than any class based politics.

The bernie wing is not doing that, but hey, whatever justifies your hate of any sort of left-wing policies.

[shimerra]

The bernie wing is not doing that, but hey, whatever justifies your hate of any sort of left-wing policies.

I mean honestly if someone doesn't fart progressively enough you lash out at them like they just murdered your parents. Glass houses and all that.

[nonameelf]

Maybe we should stop giving tax breaks to huge corporations and bailing them out when a disaster hits.

[JohnBrown1917]

I mean honestly if someone doesn't fart progressively enough you lash out at them like they just murdered your parents. Glass houses and all that.

yes, sorry. I forgot the better method is to just ignore it whenever people try to spread falsehoods about left-wing politics. What i'd really love to hear for once is how you all think centre-right policies will somehow fix the problems listed in the OP. Because if even Bernie is too far left, what is left?

[arandomuser]

one of the worst policies promoted by both sides
is breaking up big tech
imagine if you broke up amazon
millions out of a job, consumer prices going up, millions of small retailers which use amazon also gone, 2 day shipping which has been a lifesaver for people who want to stay home during the pandemic , we can agree on making amazon actually pay their taxes but breaking up amazon is a disaster, i would say amazon actually is the #1 job creator that got us out of the recession
google has competitors, their algorithm is superior to their competitors, nobody uses bing because its not as good, thats just a superior product

[Zan15]

70 %?! Fuck me, I knew it was a thing that there was people on welfare, that actually did have a job, but that's almost 3/4. That's bad, like real bad.

its not even new, its been like that since Reagan made the "welfare queen" a thing back in the 80's

- - - Updated - - -

one of the worst policies promoted by both sides
is breaking up big tech
imagine if you broke up amazon
millions out of a job, consumer prices going up, millions of small retailers which use amazon also gone, 2 day shipping which has been a lifesaver for people who want to stay home during the pandemic , we can agree on making amazon actually pay their taxes but breaking up amazon is a disaster, i would say amazon actually is the #1 job creator that got us out of the recession
google has competitors, their algorithm is superior to their competitors, nobody uses bing because its not as good, thats just a superior product

Breaking them up does not mean they will go out of business or even really be impacted.

I don't think they should be broken up since fucking walmart still outsells them by what 250% each year? freaking walmart did what 400 billion vs amazon 180 billion last year?

You have 5 more over 100-120 billion right behind amazon

Here’s a list of the top 10 retailers for 2020 and top 100 grocery chains:
1. Walmart BB #:143789 $408.9 billion, 5,259 stores
2. Amazon BB #:283186 $155.5 billion, 533 stores
3. Kroger BB #:100073 $122.3 billion, 3,007 stores
4. Costco BB #:150902 $119.9 billion, 553 stores
5. Home Depot $105.5 billion, 1,973 stores
6. Walgreens Boots Alliance $104.6 billion, 8,910 stores
7. CVS $93.8 billion, 9,927 stores
8. Target BB #:166987 $81.5 billion, 1,886 stores
9. Lowe’s $67.4 billion, 1,723 stores
10. Albertsons Companies BB #:193326 $60.9 billion, 2,228 stores

Hell that is total.
If you were going to compare specialty stores like Lowes and grocery amazon is even farther behind

Amazon is not even in the top 5 for grocery or home improvement.



google is just another microsoft. Try to break them up and nothing will happen to the company even if you were to split parts of them out or put restrictions on them.

[PACOX]

The bernie wing is not doing that, but hey, whatever justifies your hate of any sort of left-wing policies.

Their premise was completely wrong in the first place. The reliance on social programs to supplement stagnant wages goes back to the father of the 'trickle down economy'. That would be Reagan

The guy who cut social safety nets while at the same time making them absolutely necessary for many people, full time workers, to get by without the US economy coming to a full stop.

- - - Updated - - -

one of the worst policies promoted by both sides
is breaking up big tech
imagine if you broke up amazon
millions out of a job, consumer prices going up, millions of small retailers which use amazon also gone, 2 day shipping which has been a lifesaver for people who want to stay home during the pandemic , we can agree on making amazon actually pay their taxes but breaking up amazon is a disaster, i would say amazon actually is the #1 job creator that got us out of the recession
google has competitors, their algorithm is superior to their competitors, nobody uses bing because its not as good, thats just a superior product

People made that exact argument right before ATT (1982) was forced to be broken up.

Turned out quite fine. You do know Amazon is more than just an internet warehouse right? Their IoT/telecom services make their storefront look like an afterthought...which was at first until it started turning profits.

[Draco-Onis]

one of the worst policies promoted by both sides
is breaking up big tech
imagine if you broke up amazon
millions out of a job, consumer prices going up, millions of small retailers which use amazon also gone, 2 day shipping which has been a lifesaver for people who want to stay home during the pandemic , we can agree on making amazon actually pay their taxes but breaking up amazon is a disaster, i would say amazon actually is the #1 job creator that got us out of the recession
google has competitors, their algorithm is superior to their competitors, nobody uses bing because its not as good, thats just a superior product

That's nonsense Amazon is already several independent businesses breaking them up just stops them from leveraging different parts of their business to have an unfair advantage. You don't seem to even know what monopoly breaking is.

You also don't seem to know that stock value is not the same as real value or employee size.

[Logwyn]

One of the reasons a good hard look should be taken into Universal Basic Income.

[Jonnusthegreat]

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

Really wish your title wasn't clickbait. You claimed that 70% of food stamps/medicare recipients work full time, yet in your second sentence you change this claim, stating that it's 70% of recipients that also earn wages - these are two very different statistics.

So which is it?

EDIT: It appears that less than 50% of these welfare recipients that earn wages are working full time. The ambiguity of the word 'both' lead the reader to believe it's higher than it is. Still - anything above 0% is unacceptable (for SNAP at least).

I wonder what percentage of these welfare recipients are working full time!

- - - Updated - - -

One of the reasons a good hard look should be taken into Universal Basic Income.

Imagine the millions of manhours of paperwork that wouldn't need to be wasted under such a system...

[PACOX]

Really wish your title wasn't clickbait. You claimed that 70% of food stamps/medicare recipients work full time, yet in your second sentence you change this claim, stating that it's 70% of recipients that also earn wages - these are two very different statistics.

So which is it?

EDIT: It appears that less than 50% of these welfare recipients that earn wages are working full time. The ambiguity of the word 'both' lead the reader to believe it's higher than it is. Still - anything above 0% is unacceptable (for SNAP at least).

I wonder what percentage of these welfare recipients are working full time!

- - - Updated - - -



Imagine the millions of manhours of paperwork that wouldn't need to be wasted under such a system...

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.

[Zan15]

Really wish your title wasn't clickbait. You claimed that 70% of food stamps/medicare recipients work full time, yet in your second sentence you change this claim, stating that it's 70% of recipients that also earn wages - these are two very different statistics.

So which is it?

EDIT: It appears that less than 50% of these welfare recipients that earn wages are working full time. The ambiguity of the word 'both' lead the reader to believe it's higher than it is. Still - anything above 0% is unacceptable (for SNAP at least).

I wonder what percentage of these welfare recipients are working full time!

.

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.