3 ms·

> why didn't the poor just eat potatoes then My guess is that potatoes was either too expensive (compared to wheat/rice) and is probably something that can't g

by qw 16y ago

> why didn't the poor just eat potatoes then My guess is that potatoes was either too expensive (compared to wheat/rice) and is probably something that can't grow in all climates. Your argument reminds me of the classical French quote where a woman suggested that the shortage of bread could be solved by eating cake instead. > if a country was short on food, they shouldn't sell it It's not the country that sells food, but individuals. And individuals (like corporations) are mostly interested in making profits. > Or if the prices for wheat are high, they should sell the wheat and buy potatoes for the money The people who sold the wheat would of course keep the money for themselves. You are expecting farmers to sell their crops and use the profits to feed the rest of the nation, but that doesn't happen. And it's also not easy to switch to a completely different crop (maybe even impossible depending on the climate)

Tichy 16y ago
" Your argument reminds me of the classical French quote where a woman suggested that the shortage of bread could be solved by eating cake instead." The article used potatoes to prove that prices didn't rise because of a food shortage. Thereby he implies that there were enough potatoes to go round. That is completely different from the french revolution when people had no bread and the king said they should eat cake instead. I have little hopes of a logical discussion here, though :-(
- qw 16y ago
  My point was that potatoes were probably too expensive for them in the first place. If millions of people are starving but can't afford potatoes, they have little impact on the price. They could only have an impact on the price if they could actually afford to buy it. Those who could afford potatoes could probably also adjust to the increased wheat prices. Potatoes and rice are probably in two different markets, similar to bread and cake.
  - Tichy 16y ago
    But then potatoes can not be used to prove that there was no real food shortage, hence the argument made in the article is refuted (not proving that there was indeed a shortage, but he would have to provide other data to support his theory). That was my point.
- demallien 16y ago
  My apologies in advance, but my inner pedantic is getting the better of me: It was reportedly Marie-Antoinette, Queen of France just before the French Revolution that allegedly said "Let them eat cake!" - this claim is actually disputed, which is a bit of a shame actually, because it's just about the only thing anyone actually "knows" about Marie-Antoinette. As for the quote itself, I've always disliked that translation - the French version of the quote is "qu'ils mangent de la brioche!" - and I really don't know why we don't use "brioche" in the English version of the quote - it's a recognised word in English: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brioche http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brioche Maybe it's just that when the quote was first translated at the end of the 18th Century, "brioche" wasn't used in English, and as a result "cake"was used, and it hasn't been changed since due to inertia... /pendantic

by qw 16y ago

Tichy 16y ago

" Your argument reminds me of the classical French quote where a woman suggested that the shortage of bread could be solved by eating cake instead." The article used potatoes to prove that prices didn't rise because of a food shortage. Thereby he implies that there were enough potatoes to go round. That is completely different from the french revolution when people had no bread and the king said they should eat cake instead. I have little hopes of a logical discussion here, though :-(

qw 16y ago
My point was that potatoes were probably too expensive for them in the first place. If millions of people are starving but can't afford potatoes, they have little impact on the price. They could only have an impact on the price if they could actually afford to buy it. Those who could afford potatoes could probably also adjust to the increased wheat prices. Potatoes and rice are probably in two different markets, similar to bread and cake.
- Tichy 16y ago
  But then potatoes can not be used to prove that there was no real food shortage, hence the argument made in the article is refuted (not proving that there was indeed a shortage, but he would have to provide other data to support his theory). That was my point.
demallien 16y ago
My apologies in advance, but my inner pedantic is getting the better of me: It was reportedly Marie-Antoinette, Queen of France just before the French Revolution that allegedly said "Let them eat cake!" - this claim is actually disputed, which is a bit of a shame actually, because it's just about the only thing anyone actually "knows" about Marie-Antoinette. As for the quote itself, I've always disliked that translation - the French version of the quote is "qu'ils mangent de la brioche!" - and I really don't know why we don't use "brioche" in the English version of the quote - it's a recognised word in English: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brioche http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brioche Maybe it's just that when the quote was first translated at the end of the 18th Century, "brioche" wasn't used in English, and as a result "cake"was used, and it hasn't been changed since due to inertia... /pendantic