Should soup be free?

[purplepoppy]

A supermarket is offering all over 60s a bowl of free soup and a bread roll in it's cafés. Some are praising their generosity but others say it's demeaning. Some are criticising the store which makes billions in profit for not doing more while others say if old people can afford to drive to the shop they can afford soup.

Where do you stand?

It's just a marketing ploy to get them in the shop

Soup is socialism, let them starve

Well since they don't need free tampons why not

No. My shopping bills going to rise 0.00000002p a year to pay for this

It's a nice idea

I went to a brothel but it didn't serve broth.

[bzcxx]

I personally don’t think that they’re offering soup to all over 60s because they cannot afford to pay for soup and bread. It’s a nice gesture on their part and it could be a show of appreciation for the (potential) years of patronage. If it were marketed as a soup kitchen, it would be vastly different because homelessness and poverty does not only affect those over 60. My local supermarket has a program in place where those over 65 get 10% off their purchase every Tuesday. It was advertised as such: “Thank you for patronising us over the years. It’s now our turn to take care of you”.

[letuswaltzforthedead]

I think things should be like that, matters of social welfare and issues of that sort should be taken up by corporations and Individuals rather than by the state. Unfortunately, it is usually the case that the government topples those who do.

In LA, there was a guy who attempted to bulid homes for the homeless of the city but government officials ended up tearing the houses down.

I think people are better at regulating themselves at varies scales than the government often is at dealing with the whole nation. Especially when it comes to dealing with a company protected by the government (Like Coca Cola, Apple, and Nabisco).

[MCheetah]

"In LA, there was a guy who attempted to bulid homes for the homeless of the city but government officials ended up tearing the houses down."

Seriously?
www.npr.org/.../la-officials-bring-the-hammer-down-on-tiny-houses-for-homeless

This is an "Only in California (especially Los Angeles)" type of story. They didn't want them helping the homeless because it made the city look bad/incompetent and would've cost them funding for scam departments like the city's welfare offices, so they came up with some BS excuse to get rid of the homeless' homes and re-homeless them.

How TF is that even legal? You can't stop someone from living in a closed space and say it "violates zoning permits and safety laws" or some BS. It's just proof that LA and Commiefornia, is SLIMY to the f*cking core. They literally took homes from homeless people in order to continue being scummy.

[letuswaltzforthedead]

@MCheetah No politician actively tries to be bad at their job, most of the time they're narcissistic people who think themselves good. In cases like these, they can either improve or sweep corruption under the rug. California does the latter in most cases but most governments do the same. Especially liberal /blue states since they're the ones most focus on welfare and equality.

[hafinjun]

When was that

[SaoirseS]

It's just marketing, no different than offering veterans free meals on Veterans Day, veterans or senior discounts, etc. It gets them into the stores where they'll likely buy other things. It's also (usually) good publicity. For a large businesses that make millions or billions in profits, it's just overhead and part of the cost of doing business.

[MCheetah]

They can do that, if they want, but soup shouldn't be mandated to be free. They do have a point that if old people can afford to drive, they can afford their own soup. But it's a nice gesture that the store chose to do.

Also, food is required to live, tampons are not. Women can make their own tampons if they need to, and they didn't even exist a thousand years ago. They don't need to be free. But few tangible objects do.

[MrOracle]

If a business wants to give away a perk by its own choice, they are welcome to do so. Of course, they count on the fact that these people coming in for soup are going to do some shopping while they're in the store - and most of them will. It's really just a marketing scheme, but one that actually benefits the target audience.

[Kaneki05]

I mean there are way's to get beans and soup for super cheap ass prices. Even homeless people can afford them. So they might as well be free. And if they were it wouldn't change much people with money would still buy other food.
It would only be a very few people or homeless people in the intended target who would take them.

[Kaneki05]

Would also help sick days and parents actually.

[nawtee_me]

Helping out anyone who is hungry and can't afford a meal is always a good thing. Even if you can afford it free samples are good for everybody...

[Staximus]

If anything, it's good to get the old folks out of the house and socialize

[DeeDeeDeVour]

There is a hidden tax break in there somewhere.

[exitseven]

Why not. Old people need a place to go and hang out and meet people and have a bowl of soup.

[douride2]

It's just a ploy to get people into the store.

[NYCQuestions1976]

As someone famous once said:

"No soup for you!"

[Pudsmucker]

Gives them the opportunity to place a soup Nazi in the kitchen to control who gets the soup.

[SpaceGalaxy]

What kind of soup? That should be the main question

[legalboxers]

seems fishy..

[purplepoppy]

That's the clam chowder

[legalboxers]

@purplepoppy figured as much lol

[Iron_Man]

Sure why not

[jimmy2]

Wow that not much

[Anonymous]

yes.. love it