• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Louisiana Food Stamp Abusers Will Lose Benefits Over Wal-Mart Free For All

Unfortunately, it was the retailer's fault for allowing it to happen. I think it would be a hard sell criminally since the retailers are the ones that overrode the protocols designed to protect them, and based upon what I have seen from some of it, there is no way you could convince me that the retailers did not know exactly what was going on.

The thought that the largest retailer in the world with over $1 trillion in sales each year was trying to generate additional food stamp sales is just ludicrous, in my view. Who had more to gain - the retailer - or the "customer" who probably was pissed they'd missed the Katrina looting and wanted in on this?
 
$99.99. OK? Unless you have a better suggestion....

What would be the penalty for shoplifting something worth $25 - is it less than shoplifting something worth $99?

What would be the penalty for using a fake credit card to purchase something worth $25 - is it less than using a fake credit card to purchase something worth $99?

What would be the penalty for kiting a check for $25 - is it less than kiting a check for $99?

The point being, the crime is not the value of the haul, the crime is simply the act of making the haul itself.
 
What would be the penalty for shoplifting something worth $25 - is it less than shoplifting something worth $99?

What would be the penalty for using a fake credit card to purchase something worth $25 - is it less than using a fake credit card to purchase something worth $99?

What would be the penalty for kiting a check for $25 - is it less than kiting a check for $99?

The point being, the crime is not the value of the haul, the crime is simply the act of making the haul itself.

What was the crime? According to Korimyr the taxpayers didn't pay anything for this.
 
What was the crime? According to Korimyr the taxpayers didn't pay anything for this.

Even when a bankrobber gets caught with the bag of bills, he still gets charged with bankrobbery.

Did all these people return the goods they knowingly fraudulently "bought"?
 
Even when a bankrobber gets caught with the bag of bills, he still gets charged with bankrobbery.

Did all these people return the goods they knowingly fraudulently "bought"?

Who got stolen from?
 
What would be the penalty for shoplifting something worth $25 - is it less than shoplifting something worth $99?

What would be the penalty for using a fake credit card to purchase something worth $25 - is it less than using a fake credit card to purchase something worth $99?

What would be the penalty for kiting a check for $25 - is it less than kiting a check for $99?

The point being, the crime is not the value of the haul, the crime is simply the act of making the haul itself.

No, there is a point where it can be assumed to be inadvertent. People may not know their exact balances. So, this is different than deliberate fraud and we're trying to find a viable number for when it would be obvious that the INTENT was to steal.

I gave a bank related example earlier. Lets say they accidentally put an extra thousand in your account. Your check comes in and would have been a small over-draft. You would be forgiven.

Better 100 guilty go free than one innocent be punished. That's something I believe with my heart.
 
The thought that the largest retailer in the world with over $1 trillion in sales each year was trying to generate additional food stamp sales is just ludicrous, in my view. Who had more to gain - the retailer - or the "customer" who probably was pissed they'd missed the Katrina looting and wanted in on this?

Then why did the largest food retailer in the world that oppresses the masses remove the safeguards that would have prevented this from happening?
 
No, there is a point where it can be assumed to be inadvertent. People may not know their exact balances. So, this is different than deliberate fraud and we're trying to find a viable number for when it would be obvious that the INTENT was to steal.

I gave a bank related example earlier. Lets say they accidentally put an extra thousand in your account. Your check comes in and would have been a small over-draft. You would be forgiven.

Better 100 guilty go free than one innocent be punished. That's something I believe with my heart.

I appreciate your view, but let me put it this way - how much does the average person get in food stamps monthly? I believe in another thread, it was indicated that $36 per person per month is about the average - assuming that, if you have a big family, let's go to the extreme and say 10 people, you'd have about $360. Now, this problem happened in the first week of the month, if I'm not mistaken, so most people on food stamps would not legitimately be spending their entire allotment in the first week of the month because lots of foods don't last and most people on food stamps don't have multiple refrigerators and deep freezers - at least I assume they don't. So, for me, I would presume that most people shopping responsibly would not go over their monthly limit in the first few days of the month - is that unreasonable to assume?

So who would be the people who went over their allotment? To me, it would be pretty easy to identify those who visited the store twice, three times, four times, etc. during this "event" and who racked up sales well in excess of what they knew was their monthly limit. Common sense would tell me that someone who's on food stamps may not be the best mathemetician so going a couple of dollars over your allocation could happen and would be excusable if you only made one trip to the store. But common sense also tells me that this was not the case this day - this was a feeding frenzie of fraud and it's right for the Governor to make a lesson of this for those who may run into the situation again in the future.
 
Then why did the largest food retailer in the world that oppresses the masses remove the safeguards that would have prevented this from happening?

Perhaps because the largest food retailer in the world who you and others falsely accused of "oppressing the masses" and other atrocities made a corporate decision that it was better not to deny welfare and food stamp moms their grocery purchases because the false accusers would run right out and claim they were keeping food from the mouths of the poor. Sometimes, through no fault of their own, big business is between a rock and a hard place and they just suck it up and move on.
 
Perhaps because the largest food retailer in the world who you and others falsely accused of "oppressing the masses" and other atrocities made a corporate decision that it was better not to deny welfare and food stamp moms their grocery purchases because the false accusers would run right out and claim they were keeping food from the mouths of the poor. Sometimes, through no fault of their own, big business is between a rock and a hard place and they just suck it up and move on.

Well, I can tell you that Walmart has a zero tolerance policy for shoplifting so I doubt that was it.
 
I appreciate your view, but let me put it this way - how much does the average person get in food stamps monthly? I believe in another thread, it was indicated that $36 per person per month is about the average - assuming that, if you have a big family, let's go to the extreme and say 10 people, you'd have about $360. Now, this problem happened in the first week of the month, if I'm not mistaken, so most people on food stamps would not legitimately be spending their entire allotment in the first week of the month because lots of foods don't last and most people on food stamps don't have multiple refrigerators and deep freezers - at least I assume they don't. So, for me, I would presume that most people shopping responsibly would not go over their monthly limit in the first few days of the month - is that unreasonable to assume?

So who would be the people who went over their allotment? To me, it would be pretty easy to identify those who visited the store twice, three times, four times, etc. during this "event" and who racked up sales well in excess of what they knew was their monthly limit. Common sense would tell me that someone who's on food stamps may not be the best mathemetician so going a couple of dollars over your allocation could happen and would be excusable if you only made one trip to the store. But common sense also tells me that this was not the case this day - this was a feeding frenzie of fraud and it's right for the Governor to make a lesson of this for those who may run into the situation again in the future.

I've never seen a food stamp, let alone used one, in my life.

I actually have no idea how much food stamps are issued but if it's only $36 a month, then I think that's disgraceful and I can't understand why anybody bitches about it. I think the amount involved is higher - considerably higher - and I do feel there should be a margin of error allowance. Deuce backed me into a corner so I chose $99.99 but maybe it would be fairer to use a percentage, particularly if your $36 figure is correct.

When a beggar asks me for money, I don't throw them a penny. I give then at least $1. So, I hope someone can clear up this food stamp amount issue.
 
I've never seen a food stamp, let alone used one, in my life.

I actually have no idea how much food stamps are issued but if it's only $36 a month, then I think that's disgraceful and I can't understand why anybody bitches about it. I think the amount involved is higher - considerably higher - and I do feel there should be a margin of error allowance. Deuce backed me into a corner so I chose $99.99 but maybe it would be fairer to use a percentage, particularly if your $36 figure is correct.

When a beggar asks me for money, I don't throw them a penny. I give then at least $1. So, I hope someone can clear up this food stamp amount issue.

I'm with you on the reasonableness of the figure - I was only trying to indicate that for me it seems very easy to figure out who was trying to abuse the system.

As for beggars, we have quite an industry in that regard here - some actually drive in to their favorite "begging" spots and then drive home to their condo at the end of a hard day's work.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/678638/posts
 
Last edited:
Louisiana food stamp abusers will lose benefits over Wal-mart free for all - BizPac Review

As someone who collects food stamps-- and needs them to survive-- this absolutely sickens me and I think it's a goddamned shame that criminal charges are not being pursued.

I do hope it translates into strip until the balance is back to equal. Loss of food stamps until the account is back to zero would be fine. It's hard to consider criminal charges for stupidity, because there's no law against it.
 
Unfortunately, it was the retailer's fault for allowing it to happen. I think it would be a hard sell criminally since the retailers are the ones that overrode the protocols designed to protect them, and based upon what I have seen from some of it, there is no way you could convince me that the retailers did not know exactly what was going on.

I think both parties were clearly at fault. The store for allowing the purchases and the individuals for attempting to abuse the system. Seems a fine solution though, since the store had to eat the costs
 
So... you're thinking they were angling for the government to cover them on sales they knew were fraudulent, too? I can see it.

that was my interpretation
 
$27.50 over the limit?

$43.12?

$44.18?

$60.04?

$98.30?

$99.99?

$100.00?

:D

the example cited in the report was 699.50 dollars over the limit. Try harder
 
http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/11...ose-benefits-over-wal-mart-free-for-all-86692

As someone who collects food stamps-- and needs them to survive-- this absolutely sickens me and I think it's a goddamned shame that criminal charges are not being pursued.

I agree. A lot of my family and friends are on food stamps too.The last thing they need are degenerates basically screwing it up for everyone else. At first I thought what he did was in the right direction but what I see happen is that some rat lawyers are going to sue claiming you can't strip foodstamps from pieces of **** trying to scam the system and some retard on a bench will agree with those rat lawyers.
 
What was the crime? According to Korimyr the taxpayers didn't pay anything for this.

attempt to defraud a person, business or industry is still a crime, and people like you give much needed assistance programs and liberals a bad name.
 
Perhaps because the largest food retailer in the world who you and others falsely accused of "oppressing the masses" and other atrocities made a corporate decision that it was better not to deny welfare and food stamp moms their grocery purchases because the false accusers would run right out and claim they were keeping food from the mouths of the poor. Sometimes, through no fault of their own, big business is between a rock and a hard place and they just suck it up and move on.


Walmart has no issue with turning down purchases people can't afford in any other situation.
 
I appreciate your view, but let me put it this way - how much does the average person get in food stamps monthly? I believe in another thread, it was indicated that $36 per person per month is about the average - assuming that, if you have a big family, let's go to the extreme and say 10 people, you'd have about $360.

I don't know about averages. As a single man with no children and no income, I get $200 a month. It's adjusted by income; when I was earning $580 a month, I was receiving $84.

Now, this problem happened in the first week of the month, if I'm not mistaken, so most people on food stamps would not legitimately be spending their entire allotment in the first week of the month because lots of foods don't last and most people on food stamps don't have multiple refrigerators and deep freezers - at least I assume they don't. So, for me, I would presume that most people shopping responsibly would not go over their monthly limit in the first few days of the month - is that unreasonable to assume?

Well, with $200 I usually spend about $130 to $150 immediately, and then the rest here and there for the rest of the month. I don't buy much luxury food or frivolous food, so I eat very well and I don't normally run out of benefits. ($200 is too much for a single person, in my opinion.) With $84, it was routinely spent within the first week, and then I would buy the rest of my food out of my second paycheck each month, and I'd normally end up with bare cupboards by the end of the month.

So who would be the people who went over their allotment? To me, it would be pretty easy to identify those who visited the store twice, three times, four times, etc. during this "event" and who racked up sales well in excess of what they knew was their monthly limit.

Exactly. You know how much you receive in benefits. When you plan your food budget around your food stamp allotment, you learn real quick how much you can afford. It's really easy to go over if you're not keeping track... but there's a difference between 10-25% over and racking up more than your total monthly allotment on each of several trips.
 
No, there is a point where it can be assumed to be inadvertent. People may not know their exact balances. So, this is different than deliberate fraud and we're trying to find a viable number for when it would be obvious that the INTENT was to steal.

I gave a bank related example earlier. Lets say they accidentally put an extra thousand in your account. Your check comes in and would have been a small over-draft. You would be forgiven.

Better 100 guilty go free than one innocent be punished. That's something I believe with my heart.
I do not know about Louisiana but in Oklahoma they tell you what you what benefits you have and notify you of any changes.They send you letters or call you by phone.There is a number of the back of the card so you call to check when your food stamps come in. I imagine Louisiana has a similar system. Every one of these scumbags knew they didn't have the funds.
 
Back
Top Bottom