4 ms·
That's on Walmart. Obviously we don't want to make things harder for already disadvantaged communities, but we simply can't let Walmart off the hook when they
by tallanvor 4y ago
That's on Walmart. Obviously we don't want to make things harder for already disadvantaged communities, but we simply can't let Walmart off the hook when they specifically tell their employees to complete transactions even when they suspect fraud. There are just too many stories from Walmart employees who KNEW a person was being scammed but they were required to complete the transaction.
- EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 4y agoThey are free to warn the person getting scammed, but it's not their job to decide for a grown adult person what they should do with their money. The elderly and the gullible should have their relatives and social workers looking out for their finances, not Walmart employees. What's next, fine Walmart for selling junk food because people are getting fat and dying (by the way much more costly problem than scam transfers).
- noptd 4y ago>Obviously we don't want to make things harder for already disadvantaged communities, but we simply can't let Walmart off the hook when they specifically tell their employees to complete transactions even when they suspect fraud. That's a nice thought. How do you propose we meet the former when the alternatives for preventing the latter would result in increased costs being passed to those consumers?