SNAP is based on income, so anyone that's properly employed should be making too much money to qualify.

So is this purely a communication problem, or is there a real a wage/hours problem?

If they're offering enough hours and the employee is choosing to be far under full time, then we should phrase things more specifically than "employed".

But if anyone that wants to be full time, or is full time, doesn't meet the income threshold, that sounds like Walmart taking advantage of insufficient worker protection.

SNAP eligibility is based on household net income. A father of 2, with an unemployed spouse, and medical bills could be earning vastly more than someone single and debt-free, while still qualifying for SNAP when the latter does not.

It's silly to put the oneness onto their employers when circumstances can vary so wildly.

Thank you for adding context to your stance after your initial remark.

I can't edit my remark, so I'll add to it here: Your comment history shows a pattern of sarcastic commentary and quips instead of good faith statements of opinion.