Proglodytes bemoan loss of tax dollars padding corporatist profits

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

rgbecker (2,440 posts)

Oh my Goodness! Sales down because of cut in SNAP.
   
Across the board, not just at Walmart.

Walmart is hardly the only retailer to be effected by a reduction in SNAP benefits, or to say so in financial documents. The dollar store segment is also vulnerable. Roughly $4 billion in SNAP benefits were vaporized, money that was once spent at U.S. stores, not just at Walmart. This was bad news for shoppers and retailers, across multiple channels.

As one grocery executive said in an online retail forum regarding the issue, “This cut hurts all of our sales, not just Walmart, let me make that clear. The struggle is universal for retailers, and sales are down around 8-10% since the first of the year.”


http://www.forbes.com/sites/lauraheller/2014/03/28/walmart-just-revealed-how-poor-u-s-shoppers-are/?partner=yahootix

liberal N proud (46,309 posts)

1. The effect most of the critics of welfare fail to see
 
What the **** did the republicans think was going to happen?

Enthusiast (27,508 posts)

9. They have been intentionally trying to harm the economy since the election of 2008.

The quality of our lives mean nothing to Fascists.

You idiots are such idiots you don't know the definition of fascism.

Fascism is when the government uses taxes to pays corporation to do its policy bidding.

CJCRANE (14,501 posts)

2. That's the thing about a freemarket capitalist economy...
 
you need people with spare cash in their pockets to buy all the stuff.

That's the thing that social democrats get that RW capitalists don't.

More LW policies actually lead to a more dynamic capitalist economy.

They only have that money because it was stolen at gunpoint from somebody else who now has less.

Myrina (11,014 posts)

3. But I bet "luxury purchases" like Yachts and Porsches are up ...
 
... wait, what? They're not? Money's all sitting in offshore accounts, getting moldy?

Oh you don't ****ing SAY. Seems that all Republi-asshat-idiots need an Econ 101 class..

What? Nothing in that post -- whether true or not -- has anything to do with the subject at hand. It's just a trained reflex bleating.

Seems this idiot needs a Coherent-Thought 101 class.

jwirr (22,263 posts)

16. The thing about luxury items such as yachts is that even the rich only buy so many of them and

then they don't need another one. America has set itself on a course to real trouble when no one has the money to buy most things and the rich have all they want. Then were are the businesses going to get their customers?

djean111 (2,727 posts)

4. And that is why increasing Social Security payments almost pays for itself -

seniors don't consume because they have no extra money. Give them extra money, it goes right into the economy, sales go up, people get hired, and THOSE people are now paying into Social Security.

If I had extra money - I would be spending it at Lowes, Home Depot, Tile Outlets, paying people to work on my house. Win-win.

How come the defense industry is the ONLY sector of government immune from this argument?

Oh, that's right.

A strong defense inhibits their ability to realize the end of America.

Enthusiast (27,508 posts)

12. +1! It is also why cutting social security would have a negative effect on the economy.
 
Disposable income. Without it the economy would grind to a halt—just what the Republicans want leading up to the mid-term election.

Republicans had no problem extending unemployment benefits under Boosh. But now.......

Social Security is disposable income?

Not to mention the fact they hate when anybody else has disposable income.

Johonny (11,509 posts)

14. 4 billion in food that someone was counting on eating
 
It makes you wonder what they are doing to survive...

I remember stepping over the desiccated husks of the famished orphans on my way to the country club.

Good times.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024741683

[Carl]

Only a DUmbass thinks taxing/printing/borrowing money grows an economy.

[USA4ME]

Their solution to everything is to heavily tax those who work and for the Fed to fire up the printing press. John Maynard Keynes is embarrassed these idiots regard themselves as his followers.

.

[JohnnyReb]

I bet illegal cash drug sales aren't down.

[Rebel]

Their solution to everything is to heavily tax those who work and for the Fed to fire up the printing press. John Maynard Keynes is embarrassed these idiots regard themselves as his followers.

.

Most of those idiots don't know what the hell Keynesian economics is. They just think the fed has some magical tree that grows money.


[youtube=425,350]gBrHkxqNT7s[/youtube]

[dane]

I remember stepping over the desiccated husks of the famished orphans on my way to the country club.

Good times.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024741683

This generated a real life LOL.  Thanks, and H5

[Dori]

rgbecker (2,440 posts)

Oh my Goodness! Sales down because of cut in SNAP.

 

The poor working stiff has lost $4000 a year income under Obama.

Since Obama took office,  13 million more people have signed up for food stamps, including military families. 

Why does the government pay for food stamps anyway?  This should be a state and local issue, not federal. 

Here is Calif if the damned enviro-terrorists weren't protecting some damned bait fish, our farmers could produce tons more food to feed the poor. 

[Ralph Wiggum]

Enthusiast (27,508 posts)

9. They have been intentionally trying to harm the economy since the election of 2008.

The quality of our lives mean nothing to Fascists.

Come on DUmmy, stick with the proper meme.  "We" have been trying to harm the economy since the election of 2000.  If not dating back to Abraham Lincoln.

[DumbAss Tanker]

rgbecker (2,440 posts)

Oh my Goodness! Sales down because of cut in SNAP.

Yet, strangely, all the economic numbers were right on the projections or a hair better.  Imagine that...

[JohnnyReb]

From the Nancy Polucy school of economics, "We have to tax them before we can subsidize their profits."

...and from the John Carry school of economics, "I against profits before I was for profits.....which came after I married a rich woman."

[Wineslob]

Good Lord the stupid, MAKE IT STOP!!!!!!!! 

[thundley4]

But one segment of the economy has seen a rise in sales under Obama. GUNS!!

[MrsSmith]

Borrowing less money from China to pay for food stamps somehow hurts our country?   

[Carl]

djean111 (2,727 posts)

4. And that is why increasing Social Security payments almost pays for itself -

seniors don't consume because they have no extra money. Give them extra money, it goes right into the economy, sales go up, people get hired, and THOSE people are now paying into Social Security.

If I had extra money - I would be spending it at Lowes, Home Depot, Tile Outlets, paying people to work on my house. Win-win.

You just unknowingly proved what is wrong with your grand theory.
Economic activity is not economic growth.

What you just described is the exact reason a perpetual motion machine can never be built,there is always a parasitic loss of energy and at a point it winds down.
These idiots really believe that if you "give" someone $10.00 eventually the government will take back in $13.00.

[NHSparky]

Roughly $4 billion in SNAP benefits were vaporized, money that was once spent at U.S. stores, not just at Walmart. This was bad news for shoppers and retailers, across multiple channels.

As one grocery executive said in an online retail forum regarding the issue, “This cut hurts all of our sales, not just Walmart, let me make that clear. The struggle is universal for retailers, and sales are down around 8-10% since the first of the year.”

Newsflash, DUmbasses: $4 Billion is NOTHING in a $18T economy.  Exactly 0.022 percent, if you want to get nitpicky.

8-10 percent?  Not even ****ing close.  Walmart alone had sales of OVER $400 Billion in 2012...IOW, LESS than one percent, assuming they took the entire hit, which it didn't.

Now go crawl back under your ****ing rocks.

[JohnnyReb]

Newsflash, DUmbasses: $4 Billion is NOTHING in a $18T economy.  Exactly 0.022 percent, if you want to get nitpicky.

8-10 percent?  Not even ****ing close.  Walmart alone had sales of OVER $400 Billion in 2012...IOW, LESS than one percent, assuming they took the entire hit, which it didn't.

Now go crawl back under your ****ing rocks.

You give good flat rocks a bad reputation.

[dutch508]

You give good flat rocks a bad reputation.

Totally off topic. I wonder if I could market and sell ****Rocks. Organic Gia Earth sex toys made of stones?

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Totally off topic. I wonder if I could market and sell ****Rocks. Organic Gia Earth sex toys made of stones?

You don't have the stones.

[98ZJUSMC]

CJCRANE (14,501 posts)

2. That's the thing about a freemarket capitalist economy...you need people with spare cash in their pockets to buy all the stuff.

That's the thing that social democrats get that RW capitalists don't.  More LW policies actually lead to a more dynamic capitalist economy.

 o.O  It's very difficult to top that comedy.

[Bad Dog]

It doesn't cross their minds that companies cutting workers and hours might have some effect on the economy.  No, it's only that the govt. isn't handing money out fast enough.

[DumbAss Tanker]

CJCRANE (14,501 posts)

2. That's the thing about a freemarket capitalist economy...you need people with spare cash in their pockets to buy all the stuff.

That's the thing that social democrats get that RW capitalists don't.  More LW policies actually lead to a more dynamic capitalist economy.

If you have to take the money from other people to give it to them, it's at best a zero-sum game, you moron.  But in the real world it's actually worse, because a lot of the money is lost in the 'Friction' of the transaction (Administrative overhead to both collect the taxes and then to distribute the plunder through a plethora of other agencies) and because even when it gets to the end user, it gets spend on basic subsistence commodities whose additional incremental production adds virtually nothing to the economy, rather than on enduring capital goods or productive investments on which the original taxpayer could have spent the money.

CJ, what the RW Capitalists actually do get right is that the stuff idiots like you think you know is wrong on facts, logic, or both.

[Freeper]

The DUmmies think if they take $10 from you, give you back $5 you just made a $5 profit, and want 2 of those dollars for taxes.

[NHSparky]

If you have to take the money from other people to give it to them, it's at best a zero-sum game, you moron.  But in the real world it's actually worse, because a lot of the money is lost in the 'Friction' of the transaction (Administrative overhead to both collect the taxes and then to distribute the plunder through a plethora of other agencies) and because even when it gets to the end user, it gets spend on basic subsistence commodities whose additional incremental production adds virtually nothing to the economy, rather than on enduring capital goods or productive investments on which the original taxpayer could have spent the money.

CJ, what the RW Capitalists actually do get right is that the stuff idiots like you think you know is wrong on facts, logic, or both.

Precisely.

Several years ago, the state of New Mexico gave out $50 tax rebates (based on income--higher ones need not apply, thanks very much.)

Great idea, until someone figured it out and published figures that showed for every $50 the state of NM dished out to the taxpayer in the form of the "rebate", they had to take in $80 in taxes.

This is the part where we all facepalm.

[Wineslob]

You don't have the stones.

 

[JohnnyReb]

 

Stone age Viagra?