Inevitable. These are people who see a rising life expectancy and complain that it’s bad for the undertaker’s business.

One in seven Americans live in poverty, including nearly 21% of children. Walmart provides low-cost food that makes it cheaper to send them to bed with a meal every night. So let’s sue Walmart for being too affordable.

The United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, which has tried unsuccessfully to unionize Wal-Mart’s employees, is urging the White House to broaden its antitrust inquiry into meat, dairy, and seed businesses to include the retailer. Wal-Mart’s defenders say its policies benefit consumers, ensuring them low prices.

The viewpoint of the union is echoed by such groups as the National Farmers Union, a 190,000-member organization. Until recently, farmers and ranchers had mostly been directing their ire at meat producers such as Tyson Foods and Smithfield Foods. Now some are saying Wal-Mart, whose motto is “Save money. Live better,’’ is unfairly cutting food costs at their expense.

The unions have an obvious conflict of interest. As the article says, Walmart’s employees have thus far not been unionized. That’s good for business and those looking for a job, but it’s bad for union membership dues.

Is the federal government really going to intervene and force Walmart to raise its prices? Are we really going to harm low and middle-income Americans who rely on cheaper goods, just so we can appease unions? That’d be a hell of a move, though not at all surprising considering the current administration’s track record.