So, essential goods are the same as luxury items?
This is the argument you make when you have nothing better to say. When you have no real argument against something this false equivalency bullshit is what you have to resort to.
You see the world full of individuals who purely exist to exchange labor. What I see is that our society has been built collectively over millennia. Together we have built governments and architectural marvels, sustained our existence and built everything you see around you. There was no single person who labored to create anything, it has taken collective knowledge and skill.
Now we must ask a question why do we have people that do not have enough to eat?
If we are to believe capitalism, it is because food is scarce and that there is not enough to feed everyone. In this line of thinking, we produce not enough food and supply and demand requires that those that can afford our limited supply are able to secure food while those that don’t have the means cannot.
But we produce enough food to feed 10 Billion people, while there are only 7.5 billion people in the world.
So if we are producing enough food to feed all, why does everyone not have access to food? How does a system that is dependent on Supply and Demand create a system where there is a surplus of food while 1 in 9 people do not have enough food to lead a normal lifestyle?
Artifical Scarcity is why. We create a system where supply and demand do not actually apply, where companies regularly discard large amounts of perfectly good food in order to drive greater profits for their “perfect food.” This is why you don’t allow capitalist near anything that is a necessity to live. In order to turn a profit, they must create scarcity in something that is not scarce.
So, if we collectively produce more food than we need worldwide, why can we not feed the world?
We are calling for taking our existing system and saying, we produce more than enough food for all, everyone must be able to eat. This is not a difficult thing to pull off, and if we lived in a truly capitalistic system the price of food would be so low that everyone could afford it. Basic Supply and Demand would set pricing.
But to take it a step further, if food was available to all, the price of feeding oneself would be less. In the end, you are arguing that you should pay more for food and healthcare so that a small group of people can become wealthy beyond their wildest dreams while another larger group dies.
When you argue that a good that is not constrained by supply should be limited all you do is argue that you should pay more so that others cannot have access.