> Actually, it's different from what the Nazis and Soviets were doing (forcing farmers to make whatever they tell them to), and more like what Vietnam and China

> Actually, it's different from what the Nazis and Soviets were doing (forcing farmers to make whatever they tell them to), and more like what Vietnam and China do. Their governments deed tracts of land to farmers and say "have at it, you keep most of the profit, but you're contracted to this township or hamlet for x amount of produce. Whatever is leftover you charge whatever you want to whomever you want." The difference is that the Nazis and Soviets (supposedly)took it all and these folks take an absolute amount X. What happens when a farm produces less than its X? (To be fair, Nazis and Soviets may have minimum "all" as well.) > saving the middleman markups associated. And also forcing the farmer to do sales and distribution in addition to farming. That's time she can't spend farming, relaxing, etc. Note that other people are probably better at sales and distribution, so it's economically inefficient to force the farmer to do those things. Comparative advantage is a good thing.