3 ms·
The relevant regulation (https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-7/subtitle-B/chapter-II/subchapter-C/part-278/section-278.2#p-278.2(b) https://www.ecfr.gov/current/
by SpicyLemonZest 1y ago
The relevant regulation (https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-7/subtitle-B/chapter-II/subchapter-C/part-278/section-278.2#p-278.2(b) 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.
- pseudalopex 1y ago> 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.
- datavirtue 1y agoThey can shop anywhere they like.
- FireBeyond 1y agoIf you're not actually using SNAP benefits for that particular purpose, I don't think this applies. But it won't matter, because the threat will have the desired chilling effect. > Imagine, for example, a retailer that offers SNAP discounts only on the worst cuts of meat they otherwise have trouble selling Oh, yes, we're just looking out for the vulnerable SNAP recipients...