Page 43 of 45 FirstFirst ... 334142434445 LastLast
Results 421 to 430 of 447

Thread: Food stamp glitch leads to Wal-Mart stampede[W:236]

  1. #421
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,709

    Re: Food stamp glitch leads to Wal-Mart stampede

    Quote Originally Posted by Velvet Elvis View Post
    Behold the Moocher Class. Too bad they couldn't have retained who wrongfully benefited from this glitch, and denied every...single...welfare entitlement to them.

    Damn cockroaches.
    Yes, those terrible inhuman creatures hoarding all that.... food...

    Now they'll have more food than they're supposed to have.

    Yes, calling someone the sort of insect you exterminate is a reasonable reaction to this story. That certainly doesn't have any disturbing historical connotations...
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  2. #422
    King Conspiratard
    Dr. Chuckles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-14 @ 03:04 PM
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    12,895

    Re: Food stamp glitch leads to Wal-Mart stampede

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Yes, those terrible inhuman creatures hoarding all that.... food...

    Now they'll have more food than they're supposed to have.

    Yes, calling someone the sort of insect you exterminate is a reasonable reaction to this story. That certainly doesn't have any disturbing historical connotations...
    I doubt most even needed food in the sense you are using it here. Most likely what was bought was hustled off

  3. #423
    Sage
    Lord of Planar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Portlandia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,216

    Re: Food stamp glitch leads to Wal-Mart stampede

    Quote Originally Posted by Velvet Elvis View Post
    Behold the Moocher Class. Too bad they couldn't have retained who wrongfully benefited from this glitch, and denied every...single...welfare entitlement to them.

    Damn cockroaches.
    I believe it's within the law for these people to be denied SNAP for 3 years now. The question is, will anyone in the government attempt imposing the penalties for abuse?

  4. #424
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Food stamp glitch leads to Wal-Mart stampede

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    The "problem" with your explanation, from my perspective, is that most people who work for what they own know exactly what they have in the bank and what credit they have available on their credit cards or what's available for spending on their debit cards, etc. It is the people who are spending other people's money, people who are spending something given to them, who don't know how much they can spend and when they should stop, thus the need for the system to continuously remind them of their available balance.

    Now, before you start to scream about beating up the poor, I feel the same way about rich kids who have daddy's credit card and unlimited allowances and available cash. They practice the same undisciplined consumption that was witnessed at Walmart when the EBT system came up with unlimited available balances.

    While the "human nature" aspect of this is similar with the rich kid and the "welfare mom", the consequences and knowledge levels are different - the rich kid knows daddy is rich and until daddy cuts him/her off nobody is hurt except daddy - the "welfare mom" knows that she is either cheating the government or cheating Walmart or both. In one case, the funding source is okay with the abuse - in the other case, the funding source is not.
    And you are wrong. They started overdraft protection at banks simply because people didn't keep track of what they were spending and overspent their accounts. And there have been plenty of people who come to a checkout and find that their credit card(s) is(are) maxed out.

    And I am talking about people who work for their money, not those on assistance or even those who get money from their parents. Heck, the very fact that the average household is about $15000 in debt shows that plenty of people are spending money they don't really have right now.

    American Household Credit Card Debt Statistics: 2013

    Plus, your "perspective" on this has nothing to do with the legal aspect of what happened in this case. WalMart in this case was like the parent that allows the teenager to max out their credit card and accepts the responsibility for that or blames the store for allowing it (eventhough they had put the teen as an authorized user of the card).
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  5. #425
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,175

    Re: Food stamp glitch leads to Wal-Mart stampede

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    And you are wrong. They started overdraft protection at banks simply because people didn't keep track of what they were spending and overspent their accounts. And there have been plenty of people who come to a checkout and find that their credit card(s) is(are) maxed out.

    And I am talking about people who work for their money, not those on assistance or even those who get money from their parents. Heck, the very fact that the average household is about $15000 in debt shows that plenty of people are spending money they don't really have right now.

    American Household Credit Card Debt Statistics: 2013

    Plus, your "perspective" on this has nothing to do with the legal aspect of what happened in this case. WalMart in this case was like the parent that allows the teenager to max out their credit card and accepts the responsibility for that or blames the store for allowing it (eventhough they had put the teen as an authorized user of the card).
    Both your points are nonsense - in fact, your first point very well proves my point for me. People who consider credit as being other people's money often use it as if it's nothing and then realize the headache it causes after - people who use cash and/or debit do so much more cautiously because they see their assets dwindling.

    As for banks creating overdraft protection, that was and is a wonderful scheme for banks to make additional profits - both in charging a customer for the "service" and charging the customer interest and in addition, often charges customers penalties if they spend over their overdraft limit. And it is again those people who think that the card they flash out isn't using their money but someone else's.

    Personally, I have never, ever, gone over a credit limit on a credit card nor used a debit card to a greater extent than cash I had in that account. There have been times when I've needed something and have arranged an increase in my credit limit in order to purchase it, but I've never just gone into a store and bought and bought until someone tells me I can't buy anymore.

    Finally, you'll pardon me if I don't rely on your "legal" expertise to determine whether or not Walmart is responsible for any overspending - they may assume a loss, for PR purposes, but I don't believe for a minute that a court would find them liable if it got that far.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  6. #426
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Food stamp glitch leads to Wal-Mart stampede

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    Both your points are nonsense - in fact, your first point very well proves my point for me. People who consider credit as being other people's money often use it as if it's nothing and then realize the headache it causes after - people who use cash and/or debit do so much more cautiously because they see their assets dwindling.

    As for banks creating overdraft protection, that was and is a wonderful scheme for banks to make additional profits - both in charging a customer for the "service" and charging the customer interest and in addition, often charges customers penalties if they spend over their overdraft limit. And it is again those people who think that the card they flash out isn't using their money but someone else's.

    Personally, I have never, ever, gone over a credit limit on a credit card nor used a debit card to a greater extent than cash I had in that account. There have been times when I've needed something and have arranged an increase in my credit limit in order to purchase it, but I've never just gone into a store and bought and bought until someone tells me I can't buy anymore.

    Finally, you'll pardon me if I don't rely on your "legal" expertise to determine whether or not Walmart is responsible for any overspending - they may assume a loss, for PR purposes, but I don't believe for a minute that a court would find them liable if it got that far.
    Your contention was that people who work for their money don't overspend and would never take advantage of something like this, would not overcharge their bank account or credit cards. You are wrong. Just because a person works right now doesn't make them more responsible than people on welfare/assistance. Plenty of people on welfare/food stamps didn't go overspend just because they could. Plenty wouldn't.

    And I am going by who WalMart is trying to blame. It isn't the shoppers, those who overspent (not right now anyway), but Xerox. They would not win a case against the government or Xerox. Now, they do have complete legal recourse to go after those who overspent their cards. They can get their names and information and press charge, try to recoup those losses. However, from a PR position, this would be a bad idea because of what they have been saying since then about the situation. They have been saying that this was the right thing to do and that they were helping those people. So it places them in a catch 22, since going after the only ones they could legally pursue would also cause majorly bad PR for them.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  7. #427
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,175

    Re: Food stamp glitch leads to Wal-Mart stampede

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Your contention was that people who work for their money don't overspend and would never take advantage of something like this, would not overcharge their bank account or credit cards. You are wrong. Just because a person works right now doesn't make them more responsible than people on welfare/assistance. Plenty of people on welfare/food stamps didn't go overspend just because they could. Plenty wouldn't.

    And I am going by who WalMart is trying to blame. It isn't the shoppers, those who overspent (not right now anyway), but Xerox. They would not win a case against the government or Xerox. Now, they do have complete legal recourse to go after those who overspent their cards. They can get their names and information and press charge, try to recoup those losses. However, from a PR position, this would be a bad idea because of what they have been saying since then about the situation. They have been saying that this was the right thing to do and that they were helping those people. So it places them in a catch 22, since going after the only ones they could legally pursue would also cause majorly bad PR for them.
    Two points:

    1. It was not my contention at all that "people who work for their money don't overspend and would never take advantage of something like this" - you can have your own opinion, but in no way are you entitled to assign opinions to me simply because it moves your argument forward. What I did say is "most people who work for what they own know exactly what they have in the bank and what credit they have available on their credit cards or what's available for spending on their debit cards, etc. It is the people who are spending other people's money, people who are spending something given to them, who don't know how much they can spend and when they should stop, thus the need for the system to continuously remind them of their available balance". I never once contended that people who work for their money are all pure and honest - I'm not that stupid - I simply indicated that most people who work for their money know where they stand financially. I believe that's correct and your suggestion I'm wrong is based on your faulty, bastardization of the opinion I expressed.

    2. Again - I never claimed Walmart would be going after customers - I did indicate the government should go after the customers who absoluted defrauded the government by taking advantage of a glitch in the system that gave them access to purchasing power they didn't have and knew they didn't have. I fully believe that Walmart would blame XEROX, as the government's agent, managing the system, if the system was approving purchases that Walmart processed through the system. If Walmart didn't follow the contracted process, then Walmart is responsible for their own losses. If Walmart followed the contracted process and the system managed by XEROX approved the purchases whether in error or not, then Walmart clearly has a case against XEROX, as the government's agent, and the government itself, for not honoring the process they put in place. It's that simple.

    You seem to claim that the system was down and Walmart took advantage of that and processed sales with no approvals. I say that's nonsense. I claim that Walmart received authorization for the sales through the electronic system until such time as XEROX stopped the system from processing approvals, having recognized a glitch in the system. Once the system stopped authorizing purchases, Walmart also stopped processing purchases.

    In the end, we'll see how it turns out.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  8. #428
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Food stamp glitch leads to Wal-Mart stampede

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    Two points:

    1. It was not my contention at all that "people who work for their money don't overspend and would never take advantage of something like this" - you can have your own opinion, but in no way are you entitled to assign opinions to me simply because it moves your argument forward. What I did say is "most people who work for what they own know exactly what they have in the bank and what credit they have available on their credit cards or what's available for spending on their debit cards, etc. It is the people who are spending other people's money, people who are spending something given to them, who don't know how much they can spend and when they should stop, thus the need for the system to continuously remind them of their available balance". I never once contended that people who work for their money are all pure and honest - I'm not that stupid - I simply indicated that most people who work for their money know where they stand financially. I believe that's correct and your suggestion I'm wrong is based on your faulty, bastardization of the opinion I expressed.

    2. Again - I never claimed Walmart would be going after customers - I did indicate the government should go after the customers who absoluted defrauded the government by taking advantage of a glitch in the system that gave them access to purchasing power they didn't have and knew they didn't have. I fully believe that Walmart would blame XEROX, as the government's agent, managing the system, if the system was approving purchases that Walmart processed through the system. If Walmart didn't follow the contracted process, then Walmart is responsible for their own losses. If Walmart followed the contracted process and the system managed by XEROX approved the purchases whether in error or not, then Walmart clearly has a case against XEROX, as the government's agent, and the government itself, for not honoring the process they put in place. It's that simple.

    You seem to claim that the system was down and Walmart took advantage of that and processed sales with no approvals. I say that's nonsense. I claim that Walmart received authorization for the sales through the electronic system until such time as XEROX stopped the system from processing approvals, having recognized a glitch in the system. Once the system stopped authorizing purchases, Walmart also stopped processing purchases.

    In the end, we'll see how it turns out.
    And I showed that "most" people who work for their money do not actually know how much they have in their accounts and can overdraft (my husband and I have done it, and just had to rearrange money from other accounts). Millions of working people have maxed out their credit cards or overdrafted their bank accounts, some knowingly, some not. It isn't just those on Welfare, as you suggested, that are irresponsible with money. Plenty of working people are just as or even more irresponsible with their money.

    And WalMart has no legal recourse but to go after those that charged more on their EBTs than they should have. That was the contract they signed with Xerox/the government for allowing people to use EBT cards at their store. I provided the link earlier in the thread.

    No matter how you see it, authorization of EBT transactions simply does not work how you believe it does. It operates much more like a combination of the old credit card system (with the slide thing) and our new system, where the money in the EBT account is put on hold to be reimbursed to the store when they file necessary receipts with the government showing that they authorized the transaction with restrictions they agreed to with the government.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  9. #429
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,175

    Re: Food stamp glitch leads to Wal-Mart stampede

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    No matter how you see it, authorization of EBT transactions simply does not work how you believe it does. It operates much more like a combination of the old credit card system (with the slide thing) and our new system, where the money in the EBT account is put on hold to be reimbursed to the store when they file necessary receipts with the government showing that they authorized the transaction with restrictions they agreed to with the government.
    I would contend that this is not possible and you're just making it up to fit your position.

    The system is electronic, otherwise XEROX would not be involved and cards would not now be used. The system requires, as per the contract information you and others provided, that the retailer at the completion of every sale provide the EBT card holder with a receipt that lists the items purchased, the cost of each item, the total charge for that sale and the balance remaining on the EBT account.

    If the system isn't electonic, as you contend, how is it possible for the retailer to provide this detailed receipt to the EBT card holder after each sale? Are you claiming that the cashier has to manually, by phone, or some other means contact XEROX for an updated figure? That's just asinine on its face. The whole problem was that the system was coming back with an electronic authorization but on the part that was to show a remaining available balance, no figure was being printed on the sales slip.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  10. #430
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Food stamp glitch leads to Wal-Mart stampede

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    I would contend that this is not possible and you're just making it up to fit your position.

    The system is electronic, otherwise XEROX would not be involved and cards would not now be used. The system requires, as per the contract information you and others provided, that the retailer at the completion of every sale provide the EBT card holder with a receipt that lists the items purchased, the cost of each item, the total charge for that sale and the balance remaining on the EBT account.

    If the system isn't electonic, as you contend, how is it possible for the retailer to provide this detailed receipt to the EBT card holder after each sale? Are you claiming that the cashier has to manually, by phone, or some other means contact XEROX for an updated figure? That's just asinine on its face. The whole problem was that the system was coming back with an electronic authorization but on the part that was to show a remaining available balance, no figure was being printed on the sales slip.
    I'm not saying it isn't electronic. I'm saying it works two ways. The electronic part is only to put a hold on the funds that the store authorized. It is the stores responsibility to ensure they are only allowing purchases authorized by ebt system if they want reimbursement. The electronic part normally shows how much a card has on it as well, but this was part of the issue here.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

Page 43 of 45 FirstFirst ... 334142434445 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •