[presumably]

There is no need for such facetious argument.

Your post is strikingly similar to a modern “let them eat cake”.

What does your idea of economic theory suggest for the masses living paycheck to paycheck due to ever increasing wealth inequality as capital begets capital, facing loss of income due to the virus?

Should they be priced out of buying food so that the rich and privileged can continue to do as they please?

[ourlordcaffeine]

Some supermarkets in Scandinavia have come up with the perfect solution to this. They implemented "anti-sales" on their POS systems, where each additional item from the same line gets more expensive, disincentivizing hoarders.

[chatmasta]

Doesn’t this also mean people need to go to the grocery store more often? Surely this is not safe.

[ourlordcaffeine]

Not safe from what?

[Noumenon72]

You're talking about the system as though it hasn't been providing people with cake for 150 years. Living paycheck to paycheck is not new. Using markets to distribute food prevents those people from starving by making it worthwhile to create more food.

If people can't afford food, give them more money and let prices rise. This lets them eat and makes the hoarders pay the true cost of their hoarding.

[TrinaryWorksToo]

As long as people actually get more money, then I'm okay with prices rising.

[guenthert]

I'm living on my savings, so no, I'm not ok with prices rising.

[SamPatt]

Inflation is just theft from savers.