Inequality: Capitalism’s Inefficiency With Food

Robbing better food is enough to deprive a people of its life and intellect. The arrangement of inequality that capitalism imposes deprives the majority, the members of “low-status households”. They are not allowed, the arrangement is so made, to afford better food.

With this arrangement, capitalism, on the one hand, is depriving humanity of food and health, and, on the other, is increasing its profit. More than one aspect is there in the business of food and health inequality capitalism engages with.

Aspect 1: Capitalism increases its profit by marketing “attractive” food, which is harmful for health. Capital finds there are cheaper foods that are not helpful to the health of labor, but helpful to profit. Reports on marketing expenditures and profit from food and health industries support the assertion. “[T]here is strong marketing from certain food companies which encourage less nutritious food.” (The Guardian, Guardian Professional, “Public health dialogue on policy: food and inequality”, February 20, 2013)

Aspect 2: Capital compels labor to resort to cheaper food as labor’s first priority is payment of, already cited studies have found, rent, interest, utilities, etc. By marketing cheaper food capital ensures payment of interest, etc. by labor. By paying interest, rent, etc. labor gives away a part of money it was paid as necessary for reproduction of capital. “Why are people eating less healthily? Large portions of the country can’t afford to eat well. Income is not rising fast enough to keep up with other costs (e.g. rent, electric bills, etc). There is less time available to prepare food. Time constraints force people to go for ready meals.” (ibid.) Capital, thus, doesn’t turn a loser immediately.

Aspect 3: Capitalism can resort to food harmful for labor as there is a large reserve army of labor. Disease, disability and death are asked by capital to prefer the poor. Capital can hire one worker at cheaper rate if its one fat worker can’t move its muscles and brain with speed, if its one worker falls sick. It’s a show of capital’s brutal face. Capitalist crisis booms the business of increasing the reserve army of labor and exploiting the situation. With wide health inequalities the poor are more likely to develop serious illnesses, they increasingly encounter psychological problems, and die earlier than the rich. Suicide rate among the poor also increases as they face crisis. Reports from advanced capitalist countries present evidences.

Aspect 4: The capitalist food inequality and health crisis sends some money to the health industry. A portion of the poor has to resort, within capacity, and sometimes, reaching the last limit of capacity like selling away whatever the poor have, to the “mercifully” costly health industry: costly medicine, prescription made with manipulated/bribed hands, costly, and in a number of societies, more medical tests are conducted than required, costly hospital fees. It’s the poor that pay with their unfortunate life.
Capital thus, the aspects mentioned above show, weakens labor but doesn’t weaken itself immediately. But, there is an opposite aspect that shows in the long-term capital gets hurt.

Aspect 5: Labor’s consumption of food is essential for capital. “[T]he individual consumption of the working-class is,” Marx writes, “therefore, the reconversion of the means of subsistence given by capital in exchange for labour-power, into fresh labour-power at the disposal of capital for exploitation. It is the production and reproduction of that means of production so indispensable to the capitalist: the labourer himself. The individual consumption of the labourer, whether it proceed within the workshop or outside it, whether it be part of the process of production or not, forms therefore a factor of the production and reproduction of capital; just as cleaning machinery does, whether it be done while the machinery is working or while it is standing. The fact that the labourer consumes his means of subsistence for his own purposes, and not to please the capitalist, has no bearing on the matter. … The maintenance and reproduction of the working-class is, and must ever be, a necessary condition to the reproduction of capital.” (Capital, vol. I) Capitalism, thus, hurts its interest by hurting health of people as the system requires labor able to drive its machine. But the food it provides doesn’t help body to drive the system’s machines.

Moreover, there are sickness related to workplace that harm the working people, not the property-owning class as the property owners don’t have to stay daily in harmful working condition through a long period of time. In the US, there are estimates that “50,000 people die and another 400,000 are sickened each year because of illnesses contracted in the workplace.” (The US Department of Labor, (Work in Progress), the official blog of the US Department of Labor, “The Journey to Safety Excellence Starts With You”, Deborah Hersman, October 27, 2014)] Can an economy ignore the cited figure even if the following figure is ignored: In the US, “in recent years, nearly 11 workers died on the job each day, and 5 million were injured annually.” (ibid.) “Food” related death in societies/countries in the periphery mainly is unaccounted. Data on deaths from hunger are available. It’s impossible even to imagine hunger related death from the propertied class. Hunger related death puts its “loving” touch only on the poor. Isn’t it an evidence of inequality?

There is claim: “People are an employer’s most important asset.” (ibid.) Moreover, none disagrees: Better food contributes to national economy.

But a large portion of population in countries can’t afford better food, and they suffer with ill health. These harm economy, which is not helpful to capital. Capitalism is carrying on its curse in the area of food and health although it requires healthy subjects to ensure running of its machine of profit. Capital requires health “to encourage workers to stay in the labor force and boost their skills, and to make them more attractive for companies to hire.” Measures to “stay in the workforce”, “boost skills” and making labor “attractive” to companies are required for reproduction of capital. But, it’s failing in its goal, which is an inefficiency of the system. Thus, it can be said by copying Marx, the depriver is deprived.

The entire capitalist food and health inequality business with contradictory aspects shows the system’s inefficiency in (1) allocation of resources; (2) use of labor; (3) balancing economic activity; (4) ensuring self-interest; (5) proper handling of contradictions within the system. It, thus, nullifies its logic for its existence although its proponents stand for it.

And, the inefficiency/failure is being found in the advanced, matured capitalist economies, which are overflowing with resources, and are equipped with knowledge and experience of management. Moreover, these countries have the so-called free press, an essential tool, as at least one renowned economist claimed, for fighting out hunger. Now, there is, once again being found, famine of thought in mainstream.

A single approach doesn’t lead to the entire story

A single approach of looking only at “who gets what food” limits and narrows down the inequality question in the area of food and health. The approach doesn’t present the full scene of inequality in the area as these are connected to distribution/allocation, market, profit, class interests that show ownership and control over food and health. The monster-like inequality-reality gets a better appearance with a look into market and profit.

Market is created for food and health industries. The grammar behind the market is loud: profit with people’s struggle for a good health. The struggle is waged everyday, in every sphere of life, at household, community, production place and market place levels, while accessing food and health related areas, and accessing other social and political facilities/arrangements/institutions related to food and health. The issue is not only limited with food, drug, and health care facilities. It, rather, is connected to related commodities with their connections, international trade regimes, politics and legislation in countries. In all the areas, related class interests define the related issues and people’s lives. These bear signs of inequality.

Worldwide power: In the present global system, societies/countries tied to the system can’t stay free from the curse of food and health inequality simply because of the system’s worldwide power.

The power is exerted with full force, with finance and trade, in markets and future markets of related commodities that includes raw materials produced in forests, mines, farms, and machines, and that are transported. In the markets, “all the necessary factors”, to quote Marx, “of the labour-process” are present. There are, again quoting Marx, “its objective factors, the means of production, as well as its subjective factor, labour-power.” (Capital, vol. I) So the factors can’t be ignored while looking into the issue.

Political actions: Legislations, political acts, in countries are framed to ensure the related interests, which are ultimately dominant class interests. Political programs that manifest economic interests of dominant strata of society are there. The political programs ensure maximization of profiteering with food and health. These get manifested in food and health inequality only in the life of commoners, people.

Neo-liberalism/austerity: Imposition of neo-liberal measures, and austerity measures increase food and health inequality and increases power and profit of capital. Countries that were/are being imposed with neo-liberal/austerity measures provide ample evidence. Europe, a continent rich with resources plundered from colonies and with appropriated surplus value, is a burning example. The banking/public debt crisis in Europe compelled all Europeans to pay. “However … it is Europe’s poorest that are bearing the greatest costs, in an echo of the structural adjustment programmes imposed on countries in Latin America, South-East Asia and sub-Saharan Africa in the 1980s and 1990s.” (Oxfam, A True Cautionary Tale, the true cost of austerity and inequality in Europe, briefing paper, September 2013) The cost is ultimately paid by cutting down food and health.

A few facts, cited below, from the rich continent help comprehend the reality.

The European Commission approved €4.5 trillion in aid to the financial sector (equivalent to 36.7 per cent of EU GDP) during 2008-2011. (EC, “Tackling the financial crisis – Banks”, 2012) In 2010, countries including Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Spain imposed austerity measures on the people. The measures included deep and wide spending cuts, regressive taxes that “entrench inequality – from the loss of decent public services to the erosion of social security and the weakening of collective bargaining through deregulation of the labour market. These measures … are having a severe impact upon European societies …. As the richest in many European countries affected by austerity have seen their share of income rise, the very poorest have seen their income share fall.” (ibid.)

Referring to “Introduction: Crisis, policy responses and widening inequalities in the EU” by J Leschke and M Jespen (International Labour Review, 151, 2012) the briefing paper cited total public spending cuts in countries in 2010-2014: 40 per cent of GDP in Ireland, approximately 20 per cent in the Baltic States, 12 per cent in Spain, and 11.5 per cent in the UK. The immediate affects of the cuts include loss of millions of public sector jobs. In the UK, 1.1 million public sector jobs are planned to be cut during the period 2010-2018. There are public sector wage cuts/frozen in Italy, Ireland, Portugal and Spain, the UK. Countries have made social security budget cuts. In 2011 budgets, Greece, Latvia, Portugal, Romania made decreases of over five per cent. In 2010, health-spending recorded its first drop in decades. Ireland and Greece made more than six per cent cut. “In Lisbon, about 20 per cent of clients of pharmacies, mainly women, unemployed and elderly people, did not complete their whole prescriptions due to rising costs.” (ibid.) Countries privatized health care institutions. “[T]he gains are not being equitably distributed, as the poorest continue to suffer, while the richest remain comparatively unaffected.” (ibid.)

The rich continent found the bitter fact from Lorna, a 33 years old citizen: “It’s such a struggle. The wages don’t go up but yet all the prices for food, fares, they all do. By the time I’ve paid out all of my gas and electric, child-minding fees, shopping, fares to work, I’m maybe, if I’m lucky, left with about 10 pounds. Sometimes I will go without a dinner, or anything to eat that day, so that there’s money there for other stuff.” (N Cooper & S Dumbleton Walking The Breadline: The Scandal Of Food Poverty In 21st Century Britain, Church Action on Poverty & Oxfam, 2013, in Oxfam, September 2013, op. cit.) State of people comprising millions of Lorna is not confusing after the statement Lorna made.

No evidence from any country showing the rich die or suffer from lack of food and health care can be found. But Lorna in millions are there in countries irrespective of rich and poor to provide evidence of food and health inequality in the world system. “The long-term social cost of the economic crisis has been underestimated. More people are being evicted from their homes. More people are trapped in over indebtedness, as they face increased living costs with reduced income. Child poverty is growing and young people are being deprived from the possibility to imagine a future.” (European Anti-Poverty Network, August 2013)

A reality with contradictions: A reality with contradictions emerges: “[W]hen taxes and social security payments are taken into account, the richest have seen their share of total income grow, whilst the poorest have seen theirs fall. Other stark indications of continuing prosperity for the richest include the growth of Europe’s luxury goods market.” (Bain and Company, Bain projects global luxury goods market will grow overall by 10% in 2012, though major structural shifts in market emerge, 2012, in Oxfam, September 2013, op. cit.) Food and health care for the poor are not available in the luxury goods market for the rich, a contradiction with limits of the market.

Environment-ecology: With the destruction of environment and ecology that goes with seemingly mindless, but actually only with profit motive the poor people’s access to food decreases, even, at times, it completely gets out of their reach. The global capital’s transfer of environment-hostile technology to the poor part of the world negatively impact people’s food and health that increases inequality in the area.

Energy thirst: Similarly, capital’s endless energy thirst decreases people’s access to food, negatively impacts their income, and thus increases food and health-inequality.

Famine: Famines, capitalist system-made, increase inequality in food and health care. The Bangladesh 1974 famine, made as part of imperialist intervention, and countries in Africa are evidences. The rich don’t starve during famines, and iterate deprivation of the poor.

Imperialism: Imperialist intervention and war, multinational corporations fomenting civil disturbance, sectarian strife and civil war not only increase food and health inequality; a large part of population, often an entire population, is denied minimum food and health. Sometimes, the denial is total. Agriculture, industries, trade, infrastructure, institutions, market places are demolished, minimum conditions for carrying on production are destroyed, a large part of population is dislodged, it is displaced internally or turns refugees crossing national border. Vietnam, and countries in west Asia and Africa are stark examples.

Inequality in the area of food and health are with connections related capital and commodities make that turn the issue into political and class question, are part of the over all deprivation capital makes, and, thus, the issue is part of political struggle, and is an area for waging and intensifying class struggle.