Food Stamp Nation? How Walmart is Paying Their Workers with Your Money

For years, Walmart has avoided paying their workers living wages and taking the difference out of your wallets.


Those under the impression that the United State's free market is actually free couldn't be more wrong. This so-called "free" market is actually costing American taxpayers money and lots of it. Unfortunately, slave labor and wages have come to a neighborhood near you via your most popular retailers. Many of our country's favorite corporations do not pay workers a living wage. How could the retailers we loyally shop at treat us so badly in return?

Instead of paying workers a living wage, these places opt to pay the government's bare minimum wage requirements. Paying employees the modern day equivalent of a slave wages not only adds another helping or two to these corporation's already obese profit margins, but does so on the taxpayer's dimes.

Last week marks the first ever successful strike for Walmart employees. It's no surprise the retailer has long gotten away with underpaying and exploiting their workers and then sending us the bill. Whether you shop at big corporations with bad reputations (like Walmart) or not, if you are a taxpayer, you are being short-changed by this very company and others of its caliber. How is that, you say? Slave wages have come to America and you are paying the price.

Don't let Walmart fool you. Just because they aren't paying their American employees $0.55 an hour (a rate of pay that exceeds the hourly wages of their sweat shop workers in China) doesn't mean Americans aren't receiving slave wages. The average Walmart worker makes $8.81 an hour, $15,576 per year which is below the poverty line for a family of two or more and low enough a wage for even a household of one to qualify for public assistance and food stamps. Walmart reaped over $400 billion in global profits last year and your hard-earned taxes helped foot a bill that Walmart could've easily took care of.

Walmart workers, as a group, are the largest food stamp recipients in the country totaling $2.66 billion annually. That's right, Walmart, a company that makes more than $400,000,000,000 a year is taking more than $2,660,000,000 out of tax payers pockets annually because they have refused to pay their workers a living wage. Not only has Walmart callously expected the taxpayers to pick up the slack, but the government has allowed them to get away with it! In fact, reports say Walmart has direct knowledge of this and directly assist employees in applications for both food stamps and Medicaid. And that is not all. Walmart also takes millions, perhaps billions in tax breaks, free land and other government subsidies.

There are slave laborers in America and they are right under our noses. We encounter these workers every day of the week. Some may argue that minimum wage is far from slave labor, but without government assistance and food stamps, these workers would be starving and homeless. How are these not slave wages? Additionally, "Walmart's intentionally low wages and lack of covered benefits cost taxpayers over $1.02 BILLION a year in healthcare costs."

Of course, many of our biggest retailers are guilty of paying intentionally low wages at the cost of the tax-payers (McDonald's, K-Mart, Target), but Walmart is the worst of this motley crew. Since Walmart began its move into a neighborhood near you, wages have decreased; small business have closed and been shipped over seas; the poverty level has sky-rocketed; and we lost a total of 196,000 jobs in the manufacturing sector because of the company's imports from China.

With Walmart employees accounting for 1% of the country's working population, it seems that proper government intervention is needed to redirect this burden back to the retail giant and away from the country's working class citizens. The six heirs to the Walmart fortune are worth the same as the bottom 40% of Americans: Sam Walton's six living family members are worth the same amount of money as approximately 1,250,000 Americans!

Many of these 40%ers happen to fall in the category Mitt Romney regards as the 47%, or as his constituent Daryl Metcalfe describes them "people that are living off the public dole, living off their neighbors' hard work, and we have a lot of people out there that are too lazy to get up and get out there." Au contraire. It appears to be the other way around, some type of Reverse Robin Hood, if you will...

Walmart could easily afford to pay their associates an extra $5,000 per year. Though this would cost them an extra $7 billion annually, they would still reap record profits and this time with a clear conscience. However, it seems that having a clear conscience is not all that important to them.

For years Governor Romney and his countless Republican pals have championed the free market system as a self-governing entity that has resulted in a fair chance for businesses to not only regulate themselves through supply and demand, but to fairly exercise business ethics and morals based on societal need. Of course, this is a joke; we all know what happens when you leave a young child alone with a big sack full of Halloween candy. The only difference here is that when a child's sibling or baby sitter enters the room and unexpectedly finds the child scarfing down candy in all his glory, the child might offer them some. But not Walmart and like-minded conglomerates.

Walmart should change their symbol of a smiley face to a picture of a leech. But with all six of Walmart's heirs being a group of shamelessly obese hogs, such a sign might be an insult to leeches.

It's an insult to every American that most Walmarts have a huge American flag hanging proudly outside their premises. Until further notice, the flags should be taken down and replaced with a sign that reads, "Walmart: enemy of the state. Destroying the American dream one community at a time."

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Voice of Reason November 13, 2012 at 09:58 PM
Well it seems our host has left her own party. To the reader I leave the following thoughts. This article (and some comments following it), like countless others on the web, is filled with glaring inaccuracies and seem to be primarily meant to inflame the reader. Sadly we'll never know if this is actually done intentionally to mislead the reader, is due to parroting the inaccurate work of someone they feel is right and just or if the author simply has a lack of understanding in respect to how a business works. Large Corporations do indeed pay taxes. As I stated above WalMart paid over $7B in 2010, 31%+ rate. General Electric is often cited as paying very little in taxes, 3%+ rate in 2010. However, if one delves a little further on the issue they would find that in the case of GE they had losses. Business losses will reduce tax burden, sometimes to the point that they don't pay taxes. Further, in some cases, those losses can be carried forward into the Company's following fiscal year. This is how it works but rest assured a Company wants to generate profit. Tax policy is set by the Government, both Republicans and Democrats. Companies would be foolish and inept to not take advantage of increasing their profit and use tax policy to their advantage. After all profit is the primary reason someone enters into business or invests in a business. Cont.
Voice of Reason November 13, 2012 at 10:00 PM
Blaming one Party is ludicrous. In a Republic, such as we live, it is not the role of Government to be involved in setting profit margins and such for Companies, this is more a concept of Communism. Business subsidies are offered by Federal, State and/or Local Governments when the powers that be feel it would be prudent to have said business in their locale. It can be argued if these subsidies really do any good or not but their existence shouldn't be assigned to either Party and used to confuse the populace. Lets take a closer look at WalMart. They employ 2.4M people worldwide. The Company is worth around $200B with roughly 3.6B shares of stock outstanding, $50B in debt with $10B in cash on hand. The Company is huge and their profit needs to be huge as well. Sure, with $14.7B in profit WalMart could actually afford to pay an additional $5K to each employee. But, in doing so there would be roughly no profit. No profit for the investors, no reason to continue in business. Should WalMart decide to follow this suggestion we'd see a couple things happen, if they didn't simply close. First would be a massive drop in the value of WalMart and it's shares. To offset this drop in value the WalMart customer would see a significant increase in product cost, this would help to increase profit but only to the point that customers still shop there. Cont.
Voice of Reason November 13, 2012 at 10:00 PM
If costs go up too high they loose customers for good. It's a slippery slope, employing so many people while bringing low cost goods to market for the consumer that requires low cost, all while earning a profit and keeping shareholders happy. I would like to see the reference for the numbers quoted in regards to the number of Dollars in Food Stamps given to WalMart employees. Does the USDA issue reports breaking down Companies who have a large number of Food Stamp recipients on their payroll? I'm not familiar with such a document and understood the USDA as not being cooperative in disclosing details of the SNAP program. Are these numbers just another “fact” without any merit? With all that said you probably think I'm a fan of the store. Well I'm not, but primarily due to the fact that most items are imported. I stopped in a WalMart, just to look around and I do have to give kudos to them for one thing I noticed. There were a few employees that were quite elderly and a couple others that clearly had a diminished mental capacity. For these people to have jobs to go to, it must help to give them a sense of pride and purpose and I applaud WalMart for doing that. Cont.
Voice of Reason November 13, 2012 at 10:00 PM
When considering where to make purchases please at least stop in your local shops and check out their goods. It may not always be financially feasible to avoid the box stores but every dollar you spend at your neighbor's store is a dollar (well a portion anyway, after taxes) they have to spend supporting you and other locals. Note: The numbers I've quoted are the most recent releases that I've studied. Newer numbers may have been released. Finis.
Phucaugh November 13, 2012 at 10:09 PM
I sense this thread is soon to be deserted and filled with tumble weeds. I had intended to continue of few conversations I had begun, however, I have been very busy. Thank you VOR for the info on the oil subsidies. I now have a place to start looking. And thanks for being one of the few reasonable people online interested in doing more than just trolling and attacking. I might post a few more items if I have time in the next few days. (not likely)


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »