Regarding ABSute messages 385686, 385689, 385690, My purpose in responding is to dispute the falsehood of the information provided in the alleged subsidies "given" to WMT. I will counter lies she provided on a page to page, post to post basis as they are discovered. It appears to me she has cut and paste from another source without critically evaluating the accuracy or quality of the information. In another post, she claims to have provided links to the information. No links are available in three posts (385686, 385689 or 385690) to confirm, review source material, or conduct due diligence.
#385689 ABS states 84 of 91 DC received total subsidies at least $60 million with an average about $7million.
This is a lie. $60million divided by 84 is about $800,000, or 1/10 the amount claimed by ABSute. This means the so called researchers found $60million (at least) and fabricate the other 90% they claim is subsidized. 84 DC at $7mm each is about $600million. Quite a stretch from $60million to $600million as a claimed subsidy.
ABS states "low cost financing approximately $138 million through industrial revenue bonds". There is no evidence this is a gift to WMT. What it does is provide WMT with low cost financing. The interest savings on $138million would be less than $5million. This is about 1/25 the amount claimed by ABSute. Another lie. Without supporting information, it is impossible to identify the nature and scope of the financing and the savings gained by WMT. Typically, these type of bonds are covered by the industry, with a secondary obligation by the government entity in the event of default. Feel free to bitch and moan should WMT actually default on a bond underwritten by a governmental entity.
This would seem to invalidate the core information provided in post #385689.