The debate "Food should be free" was started by
June 1, 2015, 3:40 am.
75 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 110 people are on the disagree side.
That might be enough to see the common perception.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
amanofprogress posted 1 argument, R3dD0g posted 2 arguments, thatdebatingchick posted 1 argument, Muskan posted 1 argument to the agreers part.
PsychDave posted 2 arguments, bearunter posted 1 argument, Superr1fifty posted 1 argument, I_Voyager posted 2 arguments, ajay17 posted 1 argument, Girl101 posted 1 argument, KatieTalksBack posted 1 argument, AstroSpace posted 1 argument, danielfello posted 1 argument, Marvelgirl2002 posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
DanielleR123, Sosocratese, amanofprogress, KimUri, RosieRose, Eagle528, rishab, ombatra1997, R3dD0g, IlikeArguing, Alp4president, BernieSanders4pres, cmullins, The_lamp, ufufugh, denno27, ferida1237, thatdebatingchick, thisrisingtide, littlelovaticchick, toyunique, theQueenofdebate, mikeyjagar, Yuki_Amayane, Muskan, reganrefia, Bestforevr, ResIpsaLoquitor, dotdotdot, ariel22, Robert16, brenda773 and 43 visitors agree.
PsychDave, sinister, soullesschicken, toughgamerjerry, bearunter, Damn3d, Superr1fifty, vumtucks, Hanif_abdat, JMP9940, sabrina, TransPanTeen, gouthamabi, Georgi_ZKL24, historybuff, Shi, Mathew, I_Voyager, Turtle, ajay17, Vander, phattie83, Girl101, KatieTalksBack, gerami, desght, HowdyDoody03, jonatron5, TruthSeekerCivilSpeaker, Sarashouwne, luxuxx, skyfrancois_97, spellbeechamp, Adavion, AstroSpace, sloanstar1000, Prit, Bodaciouslady16, dylan21502, mohanraj, Psych_Code, jadesenia, rajarshimaiti, invincible_01, amtvj, danielfello, Moo1, Marvelgirl2002, countrybumpkin, ReedSchneider, keshav_garg, Hellrazor, xbulletwithbutterflywingsx, pajrc1234, steady_current, confident, char, Arixeo, AlenaMaisel and 51 visitors disagree.
I don't agree with this because if food was free then people would take more than they needed, taking everything would mean that others couldn't find food. Also, the world is getting more obese every year, making food free will only encourage more obesity.
There is a cost to produce food, therefore it needs to be sold at a certain price in order to produce a profit. That profit then creates an incentive to produce more. There is a reason why communist countries who have tried to create ' free' food, have all resulted in food shortages.
I agree bcz if food is free so its very good for poor people..
The barter system works on a small scale, the problem is if the things you have are not needed by the person you need something from, you are stuck. Money is just a placeholder that let's me trade my product or service to someone who does need it, then trade for the things that I need.
I feel like life would be so much less stressful if we developed a trading system in which everyone work and used their product as currency
I feel like if food was free there would be people who are greedy and still leave people hungry for food or people will take advantage of it and use it against people the wrong way. MAYBE TAX FREE on food but not FREE.
if we start giving people their needs for free, no one will want to work. There are soup kitchens and food stamps for poor people, and rich and middle class can get their own food perfectly fine, so I see no reason to make food free for everyone.
if food will be made free for the public
than what will be the reason left for the people to do hard work .
because at last the reason human being work like animals only for the food( certain exception )
That doesn't mean food is free though... The food is made at a cost, and the cost is paid for by the citizenry. Then the food is distributed between the people. But the distribution effort comes at a cost, which is paid for by the citizenry. Which necessarily means those who produce the food and distribute the food will want something to make up for the effort. Which means those who just receive the food will get less then those who made the food and distributed the food. Unless you have another agency which enforces that those who make the food and distribute the food get a fair share. But that service comes at a cost, both that those agencies need to be armed to be superior enforcers and that those agencies are trained to be superior enforcers. And if they are fitter than those preceding agencies, then they will have a higher metabolism. And since they are enforcers, they will be as corrupt as the original agencies.
Free food for all is starting to sound very expensive. I wonder if there's a better way to go about it...
If all food is free can I take it all? If I can't take all of it, but I can only take some of it, then some food is free and other food comes at a cost. Therefore food cannot be free...
I think there should be a minimum subsistence available to everyone. But "Food should be free" is so absolute a statement that it cannot be well reasoned.
Rain is free, and seeds are in everything that grows.
But it's not 100% free, you know.
You got to buy the seeds, and water and sun... Wait, not that.
You can grow your own food, you know?
if food was free the likely hood is that people will aver eat due to there easy access to food and thus increasing the amount of food needed leading to worse quality food and possibly extinction of over farmed foods eg tuna. food has a value a price because without it people have no reason to make it healthy in fact this in another scenario could lead to governments being forced to supply free food because shops and business won't sell things if they make a loss which could lead to mass under eating and starvation so two opposite possible scenarios created by free food. now think if its a good thing
It would not be pointless for farmers to work becauee, if the government sustained them, then they would producing food for the country. Agaon this would really only work if the government sustains them. So basically yes long as your fine with communism.
This would make it pointless for farmers to produce food, therefore none would be grown and everyone would starve. If you mean the government should pay for it, there should definitely be programs to provide food for those who cannot afford it. Food banks and food stamps help fill tie gaps, letting people feed themselves and their families.