←back to thread

64 points mrtesthah | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
chasd00 ◴[] 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 ◴[] 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 #
bitshiftfaced ◴[] No.45815301[source]
I think you have to ask why you'd want grocery stores to compete over SNAP customers in a way that doesn't already overlap with how they compete over non-SNAP customers.
replies(2): >>45815721 #>>45815957 #
1. Tadpole9181 ◴[] No.45815721[source]
Because they're decent human beings trying to help the less fortunate. Good God, is the concept of kindness this foreign to us now?