←back to thread

USDA Threatens Stores Giving Discounts to People on Food Stamps

(newrepublic.com)
64 points mrtesthah | 1 comments | 04 Nov 25 16:30 UTC | HN request time: 0.206s | source
Show context
chasd00 ◴[04 Nov 25 17:22 UTC] No.45813489[source]▶
Read the article and then you'll put away your pitchforks. A basic rule is snap recipients can't be treated differently than non-program members which seems reasonable.

"At issue is SNAP’s “Equal Treatment Rule,” which bars stores from either discriminating against people in the program or offering them favorable treatment. "

replies(7): >>45813511 #>>45813542 #>>45813597 #>>45813721 #>>45813753 #>>45814104 #>>45815963 #
pseudalopex ◴[04 Nov 25 17:26 UTC] No.45813542[source]▶
Forbidding charging SNAP recipients more is reasonable. Why is it reasonable to forbid charging SNAP recipients less?
replies(7): >>45813637 #>>45813727 #>>45813842 #>>45813930 #>>45813946 #>>45814869 #>>45815301 #
SpicyLemonZest ◴[04 Nov 25 18:00 UTC] No.45813930[source]▶
The relevant regulation (https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-7/subtitle-B/chapter-II/s...) says "No retail food store may single out coupon users for special treatment in any way.". Imagine, for example, a retailer that offers SNAP discounts only on the worst cuts of meat they otherwise have trouble selling; you can imagine why a SNAP recipient might feel uncomfortable with that, even though in principle it's a Pareto improvement.
replies(3): >>45814176 #>>45814312 #>>45815837 #
1. pseudalopex ◴[04 Nov 25 18:21 UTC] No.45814176[source]▶
> Imagine, for example, a retailer that offers SNAP discounts only on the worst cuts of meat they otherwise have trouble selling; you can imagine why a SNAP recipient might feel uncomfortable with that, even though in principle it's a Pareto improvement.

People I knew who received food assistance would have welcomed the Pareto improvement. And this would not explain why a 10% discount for all eligible goods should be forbidden for example.