A Centrally Planned Food Supply

Do you think the central government should monopolize food and control its supply?

 

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyUu-8nbd58"]A Tribute to Communism - YouTube[/ame]

 

Only if we want to be just like the old Soviet Union. I'll pass.

 

I think the government should centrally control EVERYTHING. After all, central control has such a stellar record.

 

Absolutely not

 

If you could explain your choice, it would be appreciated.

 

Am I to assume the lack of participation in this thread is due to the absurdity of economic central planning as a viable means of allocating scarce resources?

 

I don't think there are very many people including Democrat's that want central planning of resources. The only caveat to this would be healthcare

 

That sounds about right.

 

Yes, a poll on that topic would be more lively.

 

Why would central planning be preferable for a given resource but not the other?

 

Nothing, including private enterprise, should monopolize food or control its supply. There's a logic to planning some of the food supply, but I don't know who should plan it. Someone who isn't necessarily out to make a profit and knows a lot about supplying food.

 

Don't you find that strange, though? If centrally planning our food supply is so absurd that it barely even registers, then why would central planning of healthcare elicit a lively discussion? Is there an intellectually consistent reason why a distinction is drawn between the two resources?

 

Some resources are more important to others. Some are luxuries, some are fundamental to our economy and some are fundamental to human existence.

 

Is food not fundamental to our economy and existence?

 

We assume if people have money they can get food, if they don't have money there are locations in every city where they can get food.

I can give a homeless person food, I can not give someone heart bypass surgery or fix someones broken leg.

 

Can you give them food for their entire lives? They need to eat everyday in order to stay healthy.

 

And there is a system set up by volunteers and the Govt that allow people who are hungry to get food. Not many people are starving in America regardless of how much money you have. Food is an abundant resource in America, there is no shortage of food.

 

And we were able to accomplish this without resorting to central planning. The market provided us with the most efficient and equitable means of allocation.

 

Debatable... with out Govt spending money a lot of people would not be able to afford food and the market would have to donate much more time and food to be able to provide for the poor.

It isn't central planning of a resource, but central planning of the monetary system that enhances the private market.

Healthcare is an example of a good that everyone needs but not everyone can afford and/or provide.

 

It is. That's why I think some aspects of our food supply should be centrally planned. I don't know if the government is necessarily the body that should be doing the planning, but like I said, I really don't know who should be doing that. I just think that it should be done -- someone should keep an eye on the food supply and determine what kind of gaps there are.

Think of it as a matter of national security. 'Cause it is one. So we deal with it the same way we deal with anything important -- some of it is centrally-planned and some of it is left to individual initiative.

 

Exactly my point. We did not require central planning in order to provide people with enough food to live. Markets did it with some help from government subsidies.

This is called "begging the question".

The average consumer spends twice as much on food as on healthcare, yet markets were able to allocate it just fine.

 

Yes, but the average person who "needs" healthcare can't afford it. I spend much more on food than healthcare because I don't need any healthcare right now.

I don't get where you are going with this. I know you have some kind of hidden agenda within this question. But what exactly are you implying.

 

Which aspects? Are you unhappy with the current state of our food supply?

Central planning necessarily entails government.

How would these planners determine what is the optimal amount of food? How would they determine the optimal price?

There is no middle-ground. Either a resource is allocated and priced through central planning or it's left up to the markets.

 

Either way, on average, people spend twice as much on food as on healthcare, yet nobody is starving.

My "agenda" is to discuss the respective merits of central planning and markets.