So your argument boils down to "kids shouldn't be told to eat vegetables," and "dogs eat peas, so humans shouldn't." Dogs also eat chicken, so I guess you should stop eating that too.

No, my argument is you should price people out of good quality food and force them to eating shit food. But that's the whole fucking point. I don't know how to run someone else's life yet the left-wing apparently does but no doubt it will be someone else's fault when the poor can't afford decent food.

Your supply and demand argument is pretty funny. You're shifting the goalposts because you can't find a cheaper food by your own garbage metric

Yes, I'm shifting the goalposts because you have no understanding of either statistics or economics yet want to drastically affect economics of countries worldwide. If I was shifting the goalposts I could always compare food prices with left-wing utopia of Venezuela for reasons not to interfere with markets.

It's almost an admission socialist policies like the ones you desire result in shit, undesirable food.

It's even more funny because if you really believed this, it would undo your argument about mycoprotein being too expensive.

I am talking about products in demand like mycoprotein not shit food that I wouldn't dare feed to my dogs let alone child.

Ideas about prohibition are usually proposed by the left because the right would rather blame pollution on China than change anything at home.

So politics is the reason to interfere and affect everybody's lives? Just wow.

If the right really cared about poor people, they'd stop fighting minimum wage laws.

Yes, and magically companies won't increase prices, reduce staff, haste automation or even close down. One of my first jobs was lost due to a minimum wage increase while at college (after growing up on one the worst council estates in the region). Better for me to earn nothing at all, increase prices with more taxes than to earn something, right? Thanks for amplifying my point about not understanding economics.