The state continues to spend large resources to keep prices for “social” bread. To do this, it forces the “Prodcorporation” to sell grain to small mills at a low price. The negative difference is the loss of the “Food Corporation”.
Of course, the government is the owner of the Food Corporation, and therefore has the right to force it to work at a loss. But why?!
The losses of the “Food Corporation” are underfunded agrarian projects, under-funded peasants.
It would be much more logical to spend public money on paying benefits (targeted social assistance) to those whose incomes are lower than the subsistence minimum, and which the high price of bread really can afford.
Under the current scheme of “social” cheap bread is bought by both the rich and the poor. It turns out that with every purchase of such bread by a well-off person, the state “gives” to him the difference in price, that is, exactly that money of the “Food Corporation” that she could give to the peasants on credit for sowing. However, the wealthy do not need such a gift. We provoke them to buy “social” bread with sacks and feed it to pigs and ducks at home.
I consider this whole idea with “social” bread a mistake.
COMMENTS