zlacker

> We're just choosing between fraudster shop owners getting a cut, or the addict being able to buy twice as much malt liquor.

I don't agree with these zero friction in a vacuum takes. Difficulty in access does shape choices, a lot in fact.

If you make it easier for people to use handouts to gamble or do drugs or whatever then more people will do it and ones doing it will do more of it. This isn't even a take its the null hypothesis.

>>kingst+(OP)
The null hypothesis could just as easily be if they get a 1:1 dollar exchange rate versus a 1:2 rate on their food stamps, they can afford to buy drugs AND food instead of just drugs. Guess which one they buy if they can only buy one? Guess what they are incentivized to do if they have less cash than they need on hand to do both? I'll give you a hint, it rhymes with teal.