Let's say you have some bruised bananas. You either have to keep them on the shelf till they rot (less space for sellable product) or donate them and then people won't buy as many bananas, so you need to raise the price.
This behavior does impact prices in the normal market at the margin, particularly if it becomes normalized.
Is throwing away water in a rainforest immoral when there are thristy people in a desert? The problem is connecting the two.
This is some truly bizarre logic. The perfectly good food being thrown away can be given to the hungry for free since the company is saying it has no value if they are willing to throw it away. You seem to be intentionally misunderstanding this basic logic.
This is incredibly disconnected from the problem. In the US most people in poverty receive food stamps and have preferences about what they like to eat. They want cosmic brownies with their breaded chicken, not your bruised banana.
Total of volume of edible material is a non-issue.
Alternatively, do you imagine anyone can walk into the store and get it, and decide if they feel like paying today at the register?
YES, BECAUSE THEY WERE GOING TO THROW IT AWAY! You would prefer to see edible food being wasted instead of eaten? That is very weird.
13.7 percent (18.3 million) of U.S. households were food insecure at some time during 2024.
8.3 percent (11.1 million) of U.S. households had low food security in 2024.
5.4 percent (7.2 million) of U.S. households had very low food security at some time during 2024.
I dont prefer to see food thrown away, but I also like having Markets and farmers with functional businesses.
A third of the world's food goes to waste, but France is attempting to do something about it. Since 2016, large grocery stores in the country have been banned from throwing away unsold food that could be given away.
> higher costs.
Higher costs of what? Of those new fruits? Well, maybe wasting food should cost?
> Well, maybe wasting food should cost? Why? Wasting food should be be free. The owner paid for it.
But at least first lowering prices until they reach 0 seems cheaper?
> Why? Wasting food should be be free. The owner paid for it.
Because that's a vile thing to do when someone else wants to eat it, don't you think?
I also dont think hunger is a real problem in the US. Death from gluttony is far more common. For those who are hungry, there are already oppurtinities to get food. Putting more free food there doesnt help if they dont have access, or if they are a crackhead.