I'm on mobile and I now realize there's about 3 different conversations all stemming from my original comment to this:

Why should taxpayers subsidize cheapskate businesses who wouldn't be able to hire people without the existence of poverty-alleviation programs?

My argument was on this point: "wouldn't be able to hire people without the existence of poverty-alleviation programs?"

I don't think this economic theory is true. There are many countries with a much lower minimum wage and much fewer social programs where people still go to work. I'm not arguing that we lower wages. I'm arguing that I don't think it's true that the only reason people work at walmart is because they also get govt assistance.