Buck is better spent on a meal than on cigarettes

At first blush the indignation directed at the Salvation Army for charging the homeless and needy for meals, regardless of how trivial the charge, seems justifiable.
There's something not quite right, one could argue, when a national charitable institution is bent on extracting cash for their main nourishment of the day from individuals with little or no disposable income.
Little or no disposable income? I have yet to hear of any tobacco manufacturer or merchant providing free cigarettes to the needy and homeless.
Perhaps the Sally Ann's token meal charge is better construed as an offer of healthy choice to their clientele. At a buck a meal one can eat well for the price of a single pack of cigarettes
Alternatively, think of it as a subsidy to the Salvation Army from Big Tobacco in exchange for sustaining the latter's customer base.