Hacker News Reader

While my sibling comment said it all, note that destroying them also costs money, hence if those can't be sold, it's a loss of profit already, lower the price and let people eat..

> higher costs.

Higher costs of what? Of those new fruits? Well, maybe wasting food should cost?

View on HN

Destroying food is pretty cheap. you put it in the dumpster. Picking through it, sending it to a shelter, and vetting the people at the shelter seems more expensive.

> Well, maybe wasting food should cost? Why? Wasting food should be be free. The owner paid for it.

> Destroying food is pretty cheap. you put it in the dumpster. Picking through it, sending it to a shelter, and vetting the people at the shelter seems more expensive.

But at least first lowering prices until they reach 0 seems cheaper?

> Why? Wasting food should be be free. The owner paid for it.

Because that's a vile thing to do when someone else wants to eat it, don't you think?

Giving away food is pretty cheap. You just put it on a shelf with a big "FREE" sign.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com