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 incentivization of ownership empowered the Chinese agrarian economy out from subsistence or "the starving farmer" to one where the farmer owned the means of production but were sharing profit and produce with the state.
I think similar principles apply here, but on the distribution and marketing side rather than the production side. The Belo gov't allots public space for private vending of produce direct from the farm, saving the middleman markups associated. They also have the ABC markets that the farmers bid on for selling their goods at prices set by the state. I'm also sure that the Belo gov't also gets a substantial deal on produce in order to run the "people's" restaurants.
Does it work? Well, agrarian-dominant economies don't stand a chance when every citizen wants to put down the shovel and pick up a laptop to do their work. But, eventually, there is a happy medium.
> 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.
The incentivization of ownership empowered the Chinese agrarian economy out from subsistence or "the starving farmer" to one where the farmer owned the means of production but were sharing profit and produce with the state.
I think similar principles apply here, but on the distribution and marketing side rather than the production side. The Belo gov't allots public space for private vending of produce direct from the farm, saving the middleman markups associated. They also have the ABC markets that the farmers bid on for selling their goods at prices set by the state. I'm also sure that the Belo gov't also gets a substantial deal on produce in order to run the "people's" restaurants.
Does it work? Well, agrarian-dominant economies don't stand a chance when every citizen wants to put down the shovel and pick up a laptop to do their work. But, eventually, there is a happy medium.