If the choice is to work for Walmart and earn some money, but not enough to support your yourself and your family entirely, or not work anywhere, then the exist

If the choice is to work for Walmart and earn some money, but not enough to support your yourself and your family entirely, or not work anywhere, then the existence of Walmart seems to save the government having to provide 100% of your support instead of just some of it? It seems your argument is that if you are homeless and starving, that you are less of a cost to the government than if you are working for part of your support? Another argument could be made that if Walmart did not exist, then another employer or group of employers would exist that would hire the same number of workers and give them more hours/benefits. However, such an argument would require significant analysis to demonstrate. From what I have seen, other, smaller businesses are as bad or worse than Walmart when it comes to those things.