Responding to
these failures, thoughtful souls would call for "supermarket choice"
fueled by vouchers or tax credits. Those calls would be vigorously opposed by
public-supermarket administrators and workers.
Opponents of
supermarket choice would accuse its proponents of demonizing supermarket
workers who, after all, have no control over their customers
poor eating
habits at home.Advocates of choice would also be accused of trying to deny
ordinary families the food needed for survival. Such choice, it would be
alleged, would drain precious resources from public supermarkets whose poor
performance testifies to their overwhelming need for more public funds.
As for the handful
of radicals who call for total separation of supermarket and state well, they
would be criticized by almost everyone as antisocial devils
indifferent to the
starvation that would haunt the land if the provision of groceries were
governed exclusively by private market forces.
In the face of
calls for supermarket choice, supermarket-workers unions would use their
significant resources for lobbying—in favor of public-supermarkets' monopoly
power and against any suggestion that market forces are appropriate for
delivering something as essential as groceries. Some indignant
public-supermarket defenders would even rail against the insensitivity of
referring to grocery shoppers as wholesale dresses on the grounds that the
relationship between the public servants who supply life-giving groceries and
the citizens who need those groceries is not so crass as to be discussed in
terms of commerce.
没有评论:
发表评论