SHOULD FOOD PRICES BE REGULATED TO FIGHT INFLATION?

[Bitco55]

Food, basic human necessity, must be affordable especially by the poorer citizens & have nots. When the prices of ood spiral, survival becomes difficult and the standard of living reduces. Price control can make the market prices of goods stable even during crisis, such as, drought or wars, preventing inflation and protecting citizens from hunger. Supporters say that government intervention is essential and not just for economic reasons, but for social stability & human dignity. But, critics argue that instead of distorting the market, government should tackle inflation through better farming policies, investment in food production, improved infrastructure and so on. They see regulating prices as treating the symptoms, and not the disease itself.

Needless to say that these arguments are based on the age old doctrines of the classical and Keynesian Economists. Which fo you think is better, should the government regulate food prices in order to fight inflation or raise economic growth factors?

[DYOR+BTC]

Inflation is a dangerous problem capable of causing all sort of issues in a country and a proper control measure should be introduced to avoid hardship and other related issues. And to archive this, price control system should be mitigated and practiced is such a way the poor masses could be able to gain access to the products as at when due because they are the ones responsible for high turn over and should be considered in all.
Considering price control as a strategic point for making life considerable and comfortable, I believe we be a good starting point for all nation.

[retaur]

I did think about that when some countries supported reducing inflation for the vulnerable/people in general on electricity. I don't know if the idea would be that it'd be too expensive but a staggered approach might've worked better than prices shooting up.

Say market prices shock an item to be up by 20%, why can't a government cover the 15% and charge you the extra 5% for now and then stagger it upwards. This then got me thinking down a rabbit hole of there only being instances like this maybe once every 8-10 years, so why not charge a 1-2% insurance normally on food purchases in supermarkets to cover it. And then I thought that'd be a logistical challenge that'd probably put food prices up 2% for the amount of extra processing however a similar system could work.snd might either:

• Help reduce inflation
• Make inflation impossible to measure
• Make inflation worse or it's effects last longer

[uneng]

Food production nowadays is too centralized on the hands of few landowners who own machinery, huge portions of lands and subsidy from the government to produce. In Brazil they are the called "Agro" and are idolized by many citizens, as they claim the Agro feeds the country, feeds the world.

In fact, they are a business like any other, which aims profit in exchange for a service or product they provide. It's not charity, neither a favour. It's actually a very expensive sector which is heavily financially sponsored by the government in order to exist.

And what does the population receive in courterpart? The worst portion of the farms' production (as the best portions are destined to exportion) and expensive goods at the supermarket. Quality of products is decreasing day by day and food doesn't taste like before.

Unfortunatelly, I guess the government can't help, because it's part of the problem... Besides sponsoring landowners, they also prejudice the economy through their weak fiat system and expensive public expenses, so citizens have to pay lots of taxes in order to sustain this ponzi scheme ran by the government. What you can do is to try maximizing your income as much as possible, so you can have access to quality food and products in general.

After all, the path to salvation and freedom is individual...

[7juju]

The government shouldn't just be concerned about food price control when their efforts are not been seen to make sure that farmers produce food at cheap cost. A farmer who spent so much on labour and other factors of food production will sale accordingly in order to recover their expenditures. The government has a major role to play if they want the prices of food to reduce. The must put the necessary facilities in place to ensure food are produced with minimum cost, which will in return reflect on the prices of commodities when it become available in the market.

[rdluffy]

In my experience, whenever the government implements regulations of this kind, the outcome is not favorable
Price controls on fuel, food, gas, utilities, etc., are theoretically acceptable and effective, but in practice, they only temporarily resolve the issue, creating a larger problem in the future

There have been times when there has been interference of this kind, and the following year food producers simply did not produce because the costs would not be offset by selling at the price stipulated by the government

Reducing taxes and the size of the state would greatly help to reduce food and production costs, etc.

[Odohu]

High cost of food is one of the biggest challenge in my country and it is because food is essential for all. When people spend as high as 30% to 40% of their income on food, then it becomes a major problem that need government intervention. Regulating food prices will definitely help in reducing inflation but it is not always easy to regulate the prices of food unless in a country where there is a functional price control mechanism for goods and services.

[AmoreJaz]

In my experience, whenever the government implements regulations of this kind, the outcome is not favorable
Price controls on fuel, food, gas, utilities, etc., are theoretically acceptable and effective, but in practice, they only temporarily resolve the issue, creating a larger problem in the future

There have been times when there has been interference of this kind, and the following year food producers simply did not produce because the costs would not be offset by selling at the price stipulated by the government

Reducing taxes and the size of the state would greatly help to reduce food and production costs, etc.

On the other hand, I have seen that the government can help regulate the prices in the market. Because if it is not, these sellers will just have their own strategies to get as much as they can from the consumers. However, if the government will not be strictly implementing their regulation, these sellers will always find a way how to still get a very good margin over what has been asked of them.
There is also a different impact on producers. Because it will be like a domino effect on them. It may create lower income and so they may not produce the next season because they don't have enough money to cater their needs of production.

[Findingnemo]

If you control the food prices, then the farmers and manufacturers will go out of business, which results in less disruption of supply and demand of food prices that will increase the food prices this time not due to inflation but due to the high demand and less availability, do you think this is the solution?

Governments should not intervene in this matter or they should cover the loss made by the farmers that again goes from the tax money and economy will struggle.

[aioc]

Needless to say that these arguments are based on the age old doctrines of the classical and Keynesian Economists. Which fo you think is better, should the government regulate food prices in order to fight inflation or raise economic growth factors?

The government can do that if it can support the manufacturers and farmers; everything depends on the supply and demand chain. For example, if there is an increase in fertilizer, seeds, and farm-to-market transportation, manufacturers or farmers have no choice but to increase the price to motivate production.
The government should incentivize the industry to make the price manageable or regulate it; if it cannot, it will have to let the market dictate the price.

[Y3shot]

The process of commodities can be reviewed, but it doesn't mean it will stop inflation. Commodities are not the problem or cause of inflation. There are so many factors behind inflation, and when there is inflation, it affects the market. It is not as if those in the market are benefiting from what they sell. They buy high, and they do not have a choice but to sell high too. During inflation, the government can help adjust the prices of things in the market, but it is still not the end of inflation; there are things that need to be done. Inflation is a result of poor management, and if this can be addressed, people will comfortably get what they want.

[mvdheuvel1983]

The government shouldn't just be concerned about food price control when their efforts are not been seen to make sure that farmers produce food at cheap cost. A farmer who spent so much on labour and other factors of food production will sale accordingly in order to recover their expenditures. The government has a major role to play if they want the prices of food to reduce. The must put the necessary facilities in place to ensure food are produced with minimum cost, which will in return reflect on the prices of commodities when it become available in the market.

Before the government can establish a body for price control they should fight the areas that has made farmers to increase the price of the foods they produce, inflation has affected the price of manure which the farmers uses to plant their seeds and the cost of transportation too which is one of the major factors that adds to the increase in the price of goods if the government cdn regulate this things and make sure they return to normal they can decide to control the price of food items they farmers and the producers will not hesitate to adhere to the instructions of the government regarding the price of farm products. If the basic things are not done it will become difficult to force farmers to regulate their prices then they are spending more to get the farm products.

[DYING_S0UL]

Definitely it should be. But the government has failed to do so at my place. Day by day the prices of things, even the daily necessities, the basic thing have increased so much that it creates a heavy burden to the poor. Every thing is damn expensive. There are authorities working here to control the price of the things, the overall market but their numbers are so little while the dishonest merchants's numbers are too great! If you are living in a village area then you should be careful. Here at least you can grow your own foods, like we do. But if one is living in the city, sometimes the expenses are just too much, it's harder to survive there.

[X-ray]

I have the opinion that raising economic growth factor could overall solve all the problem relating to economic but we all know most of governments around the world are doing that and they failed.

So since they have failed anyway why not just regulate the food price as long as it doesn't burden the economic situation of a country.

It's not about choosing approach but just switching approach since they've failed in one which is raising economic growth factor.

[Alpen]

Food, basic human necessity, must be affordable especially by the poorer citizens & have nots. When the prices of ood spiral, survival becomes difficult and the standard of living reduces. Price control can make the market prices of goods stable even during crisis, such as, drought or wars, preventing inflation and protecting citizens from hunger. Supporters say that government intervention is essential and not just for economic reasons, but for social stability & human dignity. But, critics argue that instead of distorting the market, government should tackle inflation through better farming policies, investment in food production, improved infrastructure and so on. They see regulating prices as treating the symptoms, and not the disease itself.

Needless to say that these arguments are based on the age old doctrines of the classical and Keynesian Economists. Which fo you think is better, should the government regulate food prices in order to fight inflation or raise economic growth factors?

I actually think it's time to switch over to AI-driven economic regulation. As for expensive vs. cheap products, history actually proves that making food too easily available can make a nation duller. 🧐

Just look at the US: they hand out free food through various aid programs, and now 18% of their population can't read or write. 🤔

[mindrust]

No. When the governments start doing that, they won’t stop with food prices only. They will be regulating every commodity and that will kill free markets. Companies will get harmed by this because their profits will be as big as the government lets them. In the end those companies will be laying off workers and unemployment rates go higher. As you see the government didn’t help with anything, it only made it worse. What we need is less government intervention and smaller governments. Most of the time are better without a government anyway. Every time we can’t fix a problem and ask help from the government, we are giving them a reason to exist ane they are abusing this. Let’s not give them a reason.

[kotajikikox]

But, critics argue that instead of distorting the market, government should tackle inflation through better farming policies, investment in food production, improved infrastructure and so on. They see regulating prices as treating the symptoms, and not the disease itself.

And they would be right, mate. It would be unfair to farmers and sellers to lower their profit basically when the capital they used to produce those that they sell is a lot more expensive. The government has to satisfy both the consumers and the producers of goods. In short, the economy has to be good so that all goods are cheap for people to buy. If the government only regulate prices, the profit that the farmers will get will not be enough to cover the money they used for buying the crops, fertilizers, transportations and etc.

[fruktik]

Food, basic human necessity, must be affordable especially by the poorer citizens & have nots. When the prices of ood spiral, survival becomes difficult and the standard of living reduces. Price control can make the market prices of goods stable even during crisis, such as, drought or wars, preventing inflation and protecting citizens from hunger. Supporters say that government intervention is essential and not just for economic reasons, but for social stability & human dignity. But, critics argue that instead of distorting the market, government should tackle inflation through better farming policies, investment in food production, improved infrastructure and so on. They see regulating prices as treating the symptoms, and not the disease itself.

Needless to say that these arguments are based on the age old doctrines of the classical and Keynesian Economists. Which fo you think is better, should the government regulate food prices in order to fight inflation or raise economic growth factors?

When it comes to regulating food prices, shortages eventually occur. Therefore, this isn't the best option. As you wrote, the government should invest in production and agriculture. This is the optimal way to maintain appropriate price levels and avoid inflation risks.

If the government is mafia-like, it clearly has no interest in developing these areas. In my country, gangsters seized power. All they did for decades was steal money. Therefore, the country is facing a catastrophe in the near future. Economists are even predicting famine.

[₿itcoin]

Needless to say that these arguments are based on the age old doctrines of the classical and Keynesian Economists. Which fo you think is better, should the government regulate food prices in order to fight inflation or raise economic growth factors?

You are absolutely right, food prices can be controlled for understanding, because food is a basic human need, and when prices increase, the poor suffer the most. However, when this control (setting a price ceiling or upper limit) is implemented, it is necessary to keep in mind the disadvantages,,,
If the price is set too low, producers will produce less & then there may be a shortage in the market. Black market or hand-to-hand sales may increase, because not everyone will get it at the government controlled price. When price control ends, prices increase again, sometimes even more than before. Farmers or producers are less motivated to invest, they do not want to take risks, as a result, food supplies may decrease in the future.

So, in my opinion, it is better to fix the problem at the root level, increase investment in agriculture, develop infrastructure, reduce food waste, fix the market system, provide targeted subsidies or money for the poor, etc. Price control may be in an emergency mood, but it should not be the main tool, it should be a one stop solution only in times of crisis.

[pooya87]

It depends on the reason for the inflation.

Sometimes there are events that are out of our control like a natural disaster such as flood that destroys the crops and creates shortage which leads to food price inflation. In these cases the government must intervene and by helping the producers and maybe even covering part of the cost, keep the prices from skyrocketing.

But sometimes the prices are just going up due to inflation itself which is the result of government actions such as printing money due to their budget deficit. In these cases the intervention is bad because it would create more inflation in the long run since the government facing a deficit will have to print even more money to keep food prices low which leads to higher inflation.
In these cases the solution should be fixing the root cause of the problem which was the initial government budget deficit and money printing to cover it up.

As you see the answer to your question is not a simple yes or no. That also means both critics and supporters of it are wrong because as I said it depends on the situation and it has to only be analyzed on a case by case basis.