Does the US government have any planning in place to ensure there's no shortages of food, fuel, steel and...

The No-Straight Maze

Why is 'diphthong' pronounced the way it is?

Square Root Distance from Integers

Potential client has a problematic employee I can't work with

Why is it that Bernie Sanders is always called a "socialist"?

Calculate of total length of edges in Voronoi diagram

Why zero tolerance on nudity in space?

What's this assembly doing?

How would an AI self awareness kill switch work?

Why do neural networks need so many training examples to perform?

Not a Long-Winded Riddle

Eww, those bytes are gross

Boss asked me to sign a resignation paper without a date on it along with my new contract

Equivalent of "illegal" for violating civil law

What language shall they sing in?

What's the oldest plausible frozen specimen for a Jurassic Park style story-line?

How do you voice extended chords?

How do you funnel food off a cutting board?

Microtypography protrusion with Polish quotation marks

Why is the size of a directory either 0 or 4096?

How much mayhem could I cause as a fish?

What is the wife of a henpecked husband called?

What does an unprocessed RAW file look like?

Methods for writing a code review



Does the US government have any planning in place to ensure there's no shortages of food, fuel, steel and other commodities?


What is the purpose of food stamps, WIC, SNAP, and other related federal programs?Have any of the “We the People” petitions ever resulted in policy changes?Why don't we pay food stamps and unemployment benefits indefinitely to stimulate the economy?Do any countries have Country of Origin Food Labeling laws?What is “lobbying” and how does it get used in Canada to change government policy?Does the U.S. have any remaining economic or diplomatic ties with North Korea?Why does the USDA handle the food pyramid?What major flaws does this particular Universal Basic Income model have, if any?Does the DEA have authority to prohibit any substance?Does tax amnesty have any benefit except for potentially uncovering undeclared wealth?













18















Every time we go shopping store shelves are full of food, gas stations are stocked up on gas, car dealerships have no shortage of cars, etc. But who is ensuring that all of the complex processes required to maintain this state of affairs go smoothly? Is it just the free market doing its thing without any coordination? Or is there an office somewhere in DC where a big committee draws up a plan to ensure that no shortages take place in the foreseeable future?










share|improve this question




















  • 5





    The USA doesn't really have those aspects of a Planned Economy that would allow continued security of supply

    – Dave Gremlin
    22 hours ago






  • 10





    @Dave Gremlin The USA has continued security of supply precisely because it doesn't have a planned economy.

    – Joe
    21 hours ago






  • 7





    What?!? If planned economies worked the Soviet Union wouldn't have collapsed; and China wouldn't have abandoned it; and Venezuela would be working out just fine. Imagine the difficulties of having enough Turkeys available once a year throughout the country. Even with today's technology a central office couldn't coordinate that.

    – Mayo
    18 hours ago






  • 6





    "Is it just the free market doing its thing without any coordination?" Believe me, there is a whole lot of coordination going on in the free market. Just not the centrally-planned kind that does not work for all the reasons Hayek, von Mises and other free market theoreticians have expounded over decades. I personally am a tiny cog in that "coordination" process, forecasting retail demands so retailers know how much product to buy so the shelves are full (but not too full).

    – Stephan Kolassa
    18 hours ago








  • 5





    @DaveGremlin While we might like to think that, it really is not true. Agriculture is heavily regulated and subsidized to guarantee continuity of supply.

    – emory
    17 hours ago
















18















Every time we go shopping store shelves are full of food, gas stations are stocked up on gas, car dealerships have no shortage of cars, etc. But who is ensuring that all of the complex processes required to maintain this state of affairs go smoothly? Is it just the free market doing its thing without any coordination? Or is there an office somewhere in DC where a big committee draws up a plan to ensure that no shortages take place in the foreseeable future?










share|improve this question




















  • 5





    The USA doesn't really have those aspects of a Planned Economy that would allow continued security of supply

    – Dave Gremlin
    22 hours ago






  • 10





    @Dave Gremlin The USA has continued security of supply precisely because it doesn't have a planned economy.

    – Joe
    21 hours ago






  • 7





    What?!? If planned economies worked the Soviet Union wouldn't have collapsed; and China wouldn't have abandoned it; and Venezuela would be working out just fine. Imagine the difficulties of having enough Turkeys available once a year throughout the country. Even with today's technology a central office couldn't coordinate that.

    – Mayo
    18 hours ago






  • 6





    "Is it just the free market doing its thing without any coordination?" Believe me, there is a whole lot of coordination going on in the free market. Just not the centrally-planned kind that does not work for all the reasons Hayek, von Mises and other free market theoreticians have expounded over decades. I personally am a tiny cog in that "coordination" process, forecasting retail demands so retailers know how much product to buy so the shelves are full (but not too full).

    – Stephan Kolassa
    18 hours ago








  • 5





    @DaveGremlin While we might like to think that, it really is not true. Agriculture is heavily regulated and subsidized to guarantee continuity of supply.

    – emory
    17 hours ago














18












18








18








Every time we go shopping store shelves are full of food, gas stations are stocked up on gas, car dealerships have no shortage of cars, etc. But who is ensuring that all of the complex processes required to maintain this state of affairs go smoothly? Is it just the free market doing its thing without any coordination? Or is there an office somewhere in DC where a big committee draws up a plan to ensure that no shortages take place in the foreseeable future?










share|improve this question
















Every time we go shopping store shelves are full of food, gas stations are stocked up on gas, car dealerships have no shortage of cars, etc. But who is ensuring that all of the complex processes required to maintain this state of affairs go smoothly? Is it just the free market doing its thing without any coordination? Or is there an office somewhere in DC where a big committee draws up a plan to ensure that no shortages take place in the foreseeable future?







united-states economy policy






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited yesterday









JJJ

4,54022144




4,54022144










asked yesterday









JonathanReezJonathanReez

13.8k1579158




13.8k1579158








  • 5





    The USA doesn't really have those aspects of a Planned Economy that would allow continued security of supply

    – Dave Gremlin
    22 hours ago






  • 10





    @Dave Gremlin The USA has continued security of supply precisely because it doesn't have a planned economy.

    – Joe
    21 hours ago






  • 7





    What?!? If planned economies worked the Soviet Union wouldn't have collapsed; and China wouldn't have abandoned it; and Venezuela would be working out just fine. Imagine the difficulties of having enough Turkeys available once a year throughout the country. Even with today's technology a central office couldn't coordinate that.

    – Mayo
    18 hours ago






  • 6





    "Is it just the free market doing its thing without any coordination?" Believe me, there is a whole lot of coordination going on in the free market. Just not the centrally-planned kind that does not work for all the reasons Hayek, von Mises and other free market theoreticians have expounded over decades. I personally am a tiny cog in that "coordination" process, forecasting retail demands so retailers know how much product to buy so the shelves are full (but not too full).

    – Stephan Kolassa
    18 hours ago








  • 5





    @DaveGremlin While we might like to think that, it really is not true. Agriculture is heavily regulated and subsidized to guarantee continuity of supply.

    – emory
    17 hours ago














  • 5





    The USA doesn't really have those aspects of a Planned Economy that would allow continued security of supply

    – Dave Gremlin
    22 hours ago






  • 10





    @Dave Gremlin The USA has continued security of supply precisely because it doesn't have a planned economy.

    – Joe
    21 hours ago






  • 7





    What?!? If planned economies worked the Soviet Union wouldn't have collapsed; and China wouldn't have abandoned it; and Venezuela would be working out just fine. Imagine the difficulties of having enough Turkeys available once a year throughout the country. Even with today's technology a central office couldn't coordinate that.

    – Mayo
    18 hours ago






  • 6





    "Is it just the free market doing its thing without any coordination?" Believe me, there is a whole lot of coordination going on in the free market. Just not the centrally-planned kind that does not work for all the reasons Hayek, von Mises and other free market theoreticians have expounded over decades. I personally am a tiny cog in that "coordination" process, forecasting retail demands so retailers know how much product to buy so the shelves are full (but not too full).

    – Stephan Kolassa
    18 hours ago








  • 5





    @DaveGremlin While we might like to think that, it really is not true. Agriculture is heavily regulated and subsidized to guarantee continuity of supply.

    – emory
    17 hours ago








5




5





The USA doesn't really have those aspects of a Planned Economy that would allow continued security of supply

– Dave Gremlin
22 hours ago





The USA doesn't really have those aspects of a Planned Economy that would allow continued security of supply

– Dave Gremlin
22 hours ago




10




10





@Dave Gremlin The USA has continued security of supply precisely because it doesn't have a planned economy.

– Joe
21 hours ago





@Dave Gremlin The USA has continued security of supply precisely because it doesn't have a planned economy.

– Joe
21 hours ago




7




7





What?!? If planned economies worked the Soviet Union wouldn't have collapsed; and China wouldn't have abandoned it; and Venezuela would be working out just fine. Imagine the difficulties of having enough Turkeys available once a year throughout the country. Even with today's technology a central office couldn't coordinate that.

– Mayo
18 hours ago





What?!? If planned economies worked the Soviet Union wouldn't have collapsed; and China wouldn't have abandoned it; and Venezuela would be working out just fine. Imagine the difficulties of having enough Turkeys available once a year throughout the country. Even with today's technology a central office couldn't coordinate that.

– Mayo
18 hours ago




6




6





"Is it just the free market doing its thing without any coordination?" Believe me, there is a whole lot of coordination going on in the free market. Just not the centrally-planned kind that does not work for all the reasons Hayek, von Mises and other free market theoreticians have expounded over decades. I personally am a tiny cog in that "coordination" process, forecasting retail demands so retailers know how much product to buy so the shelves are full (but not too full).

– Stephan Kolassa
18 hours ago







"Is it just the free market doing its thing without any coordination?" Believe me, there is a whole lot of coordination going on in the free market. Just not the centrally-planned kind that does not work for all the reasons Hayek, von Mises and other free market theoreticians have expounded over decades. I personally am a tiny cog in that "coordination" process, forecasting retail demands so retailers know how much product to buy so the shelves are full (but not too full).

– Stephan Kolassa
18 hours ago






5




5





@DaveGremlin While we might like to think that, it really is not true. Agriculture is heavily regulated and subsidized to guarantee continuity of supply.

– emory
17 hours ago





@DaveGremlin While we might like to think that, it really is not true. Agriculture is heavily regulated and subsidized to guarantee continuity of supply.

– emory
17 hours ago










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















31














Although the United States generally avoids economic planning (and even industrial policy), this is not to say the government leaves everything to the market. I don't have much expertise on this topic so I'm sure the following list will be incomplete. But here are some examples of ways that the federal government intervenes to ensure the continued availability of basic consumer products.




  • Fuel and energy: 1) The Strategic Petroleum Reserve is an emergency supply of crude oil maintained by the federal government. This system was created as a response to shortages in the 1970s. It currently has about 30 days supply. 2) The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission oversees the development of energy transmission infrastructure like pipelines and the electrical grid.


  • Food: 1) The United States government has intermittently held strategic grain reserves. However since the 1970s at least, these seem to have been for foreign aid, not domestic consumption. 2) The USDA's National Agricultural Statistics Service closely monitors the national food supply month by month. 3) Other parts of the USDA provide subsidies, technical assistance, and other forms of support to farmers which help ensure an adequate food supply.


  • General: The Federal Reserve tracks things like price inflation for durable goods, which may influence monetary policy and other measures.



Finally I will note that during the Great Depression and especially during the two World Wars, federal intervention in the markets for basic commodities was far more active. See for example the War Production Board.






share|improve this answer





















  • 15





    Despite food reserves are "for foreign aid, not domestic consumption" I would bet that in case of a huge catastrophe, they will be used for domestic consumption.

    – vsz
    yesterday






  • 1





    It should be noted that most of these efforts are intended for crises, and that they don't typically affect what happens day to day. I can't actually remember when the last time the strategic oil reserve was used, but I do remember debates when it was reduced (it affected Al Gore's presidential campaign).

    – Joe
    21 hours ago






  • 3





    Nearly every country has strategic oil reserves. Germany actually used it last summer as the river Rhine had to little water to transport oil in the south of the country. This led to a cost increase of around 50%. To stop this trend and guarantee supply for the industry in the south, the government used the oil reserves.

    – miep
    21 hours ago






  • 3





    @Joe I think I remember that during $4 gallon gas, around the later half of President Bush's 2nd term, there was a symbolic release of fuel from the strategic reserves. There was fear in the news that the US was in danger and a tiny, temporary dip in gasoline prices, what really lowered prices was allowing fracking and drilling.

    – Frank Cedeno
    20 hours ago








  • 1





    You might add that the Energy Information Administration (of the Department of Energy) collects and publishes information so that the market gets info on where and when to increase supply and refineries know where they might want to adjust demand.

    – H2ONaCl
    9 hours ago



















8














To piggyback on the wonderful examples of US Reserves for crises in another answer, the short answer to your question is, roughly, no. More specifically, this question:




But who is ensuring that all of the complex processes required to maintain this state of affairs go smoothly?




It is, in fact, the free market that makes sure all these complex processes go smoothly. There isn't any government body coordinating avocado farmers in Central America with distributors in Florida to purchase those avocados and get them to a Whole Foods near you.[1]



As described in another answer [linked above], there are reserves set aside in case of major crisis to ensure a shortage doesn't spiral out of control, but they're for just that - crises. With the exception of providing subsidies or tax breaks to incentivize production of some goods (corn subsidies, renewable energy tax breaks), the US government doesn't take an active role in controlling the market.



The government notably doesn't take action to help with general "shortages" - there's no backup of Romaine for when an E. Coli outbreak occurs, they don't manage the supply of your favorite cola to make sure there's no shortage, they don't direct the supply chain for the new iPhone to guarantee they don't run out. All of that supply chain management is done by the individual companies - sellers (due to sales numbers, population counts, research, etc) think they need [some amount] of the product(s) they're selling, they buy that much from a supplier (who is thus a seller themselves, and may need research on how many to buy/produce), and so on.





1: This is purely for example, I'm not sure if there's any distributor in Florida, or if the maybe-exists distributor sells to Whole Foods.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




Delioth is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 1





    To add another level to your last paragraph, one big reason you don't need central planning is that the market has competition and redundancies. Companies have a large incentive to keep their own supply chain flowing smoothly (supply problems mean you can lose a lot of business). Even if someone messes up and Cola Company A's supply chain completely collapses, you can still buy cola from Companies B and C. There's rarely a single point of failure any more, so you rarely see critical shortages outside of unforseeable crises.

    – bta
    8 hours ago



















1














U.S.-Iran Oil Consortium




In August 1953, the Iranian military, with the help of British and U.S. intelligence agencies, overthrows Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadeq—who nationalized the country's oil industry two years earlier. The U.S. government works with U.S. oil majors and the Iranian government—now run by the Shah—to bring Iranian oil back online following a British embargo of oil shipments. Iran's oil remains nationalized, but in October 1954 the government agrees to a consortium of mainly U.S. companies to manage Iran's oil industry.




Suez Canal Crisis




In a 1957 speech to Congress, Eisenhower says the Middle East would be a prize for international communism and asks Congress to provide economic and military support for any nation or groups of nations in the region with "governments manifestly dedicated to the preservation of independence and resistance to subversion."




Iran-Iraq War




The Reagan administration issues a national security directive in 1983 to increase the U.S. military presence in the Persian Gulf to help protect the oil facilities and shipments to allies. The war lasts eight years.




https://www.cfr.org/timeline/oil-dependence-and-us-foreign-policy



Carter Doctrine




The Carter Doctrine was a policy proclaimed by President of the United States Jimmy Carter in his State of the Union Address on January 23, 1980, which stated that the United States would use military force, if necessary, to defend its national interests in the Persian Gulf.




There are other examples at the first link, and that's just oil. The US has hundreds of military bases around the world to control strategic minerals and other commodities.






share|improve this answer



















  • 15





    This does not answer the question.

    – Stephen
    yesterday






  • 2





    Many other countries, e.g. Germany have no shortages whatsoever either, despite having no military bases around the world.

    – Scrontch
    23 hours ago






  • 3





    Oddly, enough, these military bases and foreign policies did nothing to change oil prices during several times where it would have been useful to do so, like during the Carter administration and the Iraq War.

    – Joe
    22 hours ago






  • 4





    To expand on what @Stephen says, if your intention is to say that US military presence is to ensure that "the spice must flow", then please explicitly state that in your answer rather than leaving it to implication.

    – Jared Smith
    19 hours ago



















0














"Any planning"? Then the short answer is Yes. Planning doesn't have to be a wholesale Soviet-style command planning.



Contrary to popular belief and some comments above, free market is remarkably good at alleviating short-to-medium term crises. The 'Soviet'-style response to anything unexpected is, well, you have a shortrage -- until the next five-year plan kicks in (at best). In free market, you may have exorbitant prices, but at least some way of getting the stuff. And then alternatives will spring up, the higher the prices, the quicker.



But like with many natural processes (e.g. evolution), strategic thinking doesn't happen automatically. If we have a goal and a forecast power, we can do better. I would divide the measures into three categories:




  • Stockpiling of the most critical resources. The US Strategic Petroleum Reserve has already been mentioned as an example. But despite the name, this is not so strategic in reality -- rather a patch to buy time.

  • Accumulating financial resources to be able to get the required resoruces even at the speculative crisis prices.

  • Fostering and diversifying industries that provide essential resources. (Such industries don't necessarily have to be local; on the international scale, this may involve diplomacy and, by extension, even war). Take the recent example with the updated list of critical minerals.






share|improve this answer























    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "475"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f39012%2fdoes-the-us-government-have-any-planning-in-place-to-ensure-theres-no-shortages%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes








    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    31














    Although the United States generally avoids economic planning (and even industrial policy), this is not to say the government leaves everything to the market. I don't have much expertise on this topic so I'm sure the following list will be incomplete. But here are some examples of ways that the federal government intervenes to ensure the continued availability of basic consumer products.




    • Fuel and energy: 1) The Strategic Petroleum Reserve is an emergency supply of crude oil maintained by the federal government. This system was created as a response to shortages in the 1970s. It currently has about 30 days supply. 2) The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission oversees the development of energy transmission infrastructure like pipelines and the electrical grid.


    • Food: 1) The United States government has intermittently held strategic grain reserves. However since the 1970s at least, these seem to have been for foreign aid, not domestic consumption. 2) The USDA's National Agricultural Statistics Service closely monitors the national food supply month by month. 3) Other parts of the USDA provide subsidies, technical assistance, and other forms of support to farmers which help ensure an adequate food supply.


    • General: The Federal Reserve tracks things like price inflation for durable goods, which may influence monetary policy and other measures.



    Finally I will note that during the Great Depression and especially during the two World Wars, federal intervention in the markets for basic commodities was far more active. See for example the War Production Board.






    share|improve this answer





















    • 15





      Despite food reserves are "for foreign aid, not domestic consumption" I would bet that in case of a huge catastrophe, they will be used for domestic consumption.

      – vsz
      yesterday






    • 1





      It should be noted that most of these efforts are intended for crises, and that they don't typically affect what happens day to day. I can't actually remember when the last time the strategic oil reserve was used, but I do remember debates when it was reduced (it affected Al Gore's presidential campaign).

      – Joe
      21 hours ago






    • 3





      Nearly every country has strategic oil reserves. Germany actually used it last summer as the river Rhine had to little water to transport oil in the south of the country. This led to a cost increase of around 50%. To stop this trend and guarantee supply for the industry in the south, the government used the oil reserves.

      – miep
      21 hours ago






    • 3





      @Joe I think I remember that during $4 gallon gas, around the later half of President Bush's 2nd term, there was a symbolic release of fuel from the strategic reserves. There was fear in the news that the US was in danger and a tiny, temporary dip in gasoline prices, what really lowered prices was allowing fracking and drilling.

      – Frank Cedeno
      20 hours ago








    • 1





      You might add that the Energy Information Administration (of the Department of Energy) collects and publishes information so that the market gets info on where and when to increase supply and refineries know where they might want to adjust demand.

      – H2ONaCl
      9 hours ago
















    31














    Although the United States generally avoids economic planning (and even industrial policy), this is not to say the government leaves everything to the market. I don't have much expertise on this topic so I'm sure the following list will be incomplete. But here are some examples of ways that the federal government intervenes to ensure the continued availability of basic consumer products.




    • Fuel and energy: 1) The Strategic Petroleum Reserve is an emergency supply of crude oil maintained by the federal government. This system was created as a response to shortages in the 1970s. It currently has about 30 days supply. 2) The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission oversees the development of energy transmission infrastructure like pipelines and the electrical grid.


    • Food: 1) The United States government has intermittently held strategic grain reserves. However since the 1970s at least, these seem to have been for foreign aid, not domestic consumption. 2) The USDA's National Agricultural Statistics Service closely monitors the national food supply month by month. 3) Other parts of the USDA provide subsidies, technical assistance, and other forms of support to farmers which help ensure an adequate food supply.


    • General: The Federal Reserve tracks things like price inflation for durable goods, which may influence monetary policy and other measures.



    Finally I will note that during the Great Depression and especially during the two World Wars, federal intervention in the markets for basic commodities was far more active. See for example the War Production Board.






    share|improve this answer





















    • 15





      Despite food reserves are "for foreign aid, not domestic consumption" I would bet that in case of a huge catastrophe, they will be used for domestic consumption.

      – vsz
      yesterday






    • 1





      It should be noted that most of these efforts are intended for crises, and that they don't typically affect what happens day to day. I can't actually remember when the last time the strategic oil reserve was used, but I do remember debates when it was reduced (it affected Al Gore's presidential campaign).

      – Joe
      21 hours ago






    • 3





      Nearly every country has strategic oil reserves. Germany actually used it last summer as the river Rhine had to little water to transport oil in the south of the country. This led to a cost increase of around 50%. To stop this trend and guarantee supply for the industry in the south, the government used the oil reserves.

      – miep
      21 hours ago






    • 3





      @Joe I think I remember that during $4 gallon gas, around the later half of President Bush's 2nd term, there was a symbolic release of fuel from the strategic reserves. There was fear in the news that the US was in danger and a tiny, temporary dip in gasoline prices, what really lowered prices was allowing fracking and drilling.

      – Frank Cedeno
      20 hours ago








    • 1





      You might add that the Energy Information Administration (of the Department of Energy) collects and publishes information so that the market gets info on where and when to increase supply and refineries know where they might want to adjust demand.

      – H2ONaCl
      9 hours ago














    31












    31








    31







    Although the United States generally avoids economic planning (and even industrial policy), this is not to say the government leaves everything to the market. I don't have much expertise on this topic so I'm sure the following list will be incomplete. But here are some examples of ways that the federal government intervenes to ensure the continued availability of basic consumer products.




    • Fuel and energy: 1) The Strategic Petroleum Reserve is an emergency supply of crude oil maintained by the federal government. This system was created as a response to shortages in the 1970s. It currently has about 30 days supply. 2) The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission oversees the development of energy transmission infrastructure like pipelines and the electrical grid.


    • Food: 1) The United States government has intermittently held strategic grain reserves. However since the 1970s at least, these seem to have been for foreign aid, not domestic consumption. 2) The USDA's National Agricultural Statistics Service closely monitors the national food supply month by month. 3) Other parts of the USDA provide subsidies, technical assistance, and other forms of support to farmers which help ensure an adequate food supply.


    • General: The Federal Reserve tracks things like price inflation for durable goods, which may influence monetary policy and other measures.



    Finally I will note that during the Great Depression and especially during the two World Wars, federal intervention in the markets for basic commodities was far more active. See for example the War Production Board.






    share|improve this answer















    Although the United States generally avoids economic planning (and even industrial policy), this is not to say the government leaves everything to the market. I don't have much expertise on this topic so I'm sure the following list will be incomplete. But here are some examples of ways that the federal government intervenes to ensure the continued availability of basic consumer products.




    • Fuel and energy: 1) The Strategic Petroleum Reserve is an emergency supply of crude oil maintained by the federal government. This system was created as a response to shortages in the 1970s. It currently has about 30 days supply. 2) The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission oversees the development of energy transmission infrastructure like pipelines and the electrical grid.


    • Food: 1) The United States government has intermittently held strategic grain reserves. However since the 1970s at least, these seem to have been for foreign aid, not domestic consumption. 2) The USDA's National Agricultural Statistics Service closely monitors the national food supply month by month. 3) Other parts of the USDA provide subsidies, technical assistance, and other forms of support to farmers which help ensure an adequate food supply.


    • General: The Federal Reserve tracks things like price inflation for durable goods, which may influence monetary policy and other measures.



    Finally I will note that during the Great Depression and especially during the two World Wars, federal intervention in the markets for basic commodities was far more active. See for example the War Production Board.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited yesterday









    Brythan

    68.4k8142233




    68.4k8142233










    answered yesterday









    Brian ZBrian Z

    2,598816




    2,598816








    • 15





      Despite food reserves are "for foreign aid, not domestic consumption" I would bet that in case of a huge catastrophe, they will be used for domestic consumption.

      – vsz
      yesterday






    • 1





      It should be noted that most of these efforts are intended for crises, and that they don't typically affect what happens day to day. I can't actually remember when the last time the strategic oil reserve was used, but I do remember debates when it was reduced (it affected Al Gore's presidential campaign).

      – Joe
      21 hours ago






    • 3





      Nearly every country has strategic oil reserves. Germany actually used it last summer as the river Rhine had to little water to transport oil in the south of the country. This led to a cost increase of around 50%. To stop this trend and guarantee supply for the industry in the south, the government used the oil reserves.

      – miep
      21 hours ago






    • 3





      @Joe I think I remember that during $4 gallon gas, around the later half of President Bush's 2nd term, there was a symbolic release of fuel from the strategic reserves. There was fear in the news that the US was in danger and a tiny, temporary dip in gasoline prices, what really lowered prices was allowing fracking and drilling.

      – Frank Cedeno
      20 hours ago








    • 1





      You might add that the Energy Information Administration (of the Department of Energy) collects and publishes information so that the market gets info on where and when to increase supply and refineries know where they might want to adjust demand.

      – H2ONaCl
      9 hours ago














    • 15





      Despite food reserves are "for foreign aid, not domestic consumption" I would bet that in case of a huge catastrophe, they will be used for domestic consumption.

      – vsz
      yesterday






    • 1





      It should be noted that most of these efforts are intended for crises, and that they don't typically affect what happens day to day. I can't actually remember when the last time the strategic oil reserve was used, but I do remember debates when it was reduced (it affected Al Gore's presidential campaign).

      – Joe
      21 hours ago






    • 3





      Nearly every country has strategic oil reserves. Germany actually used it last summer as the river Rhine had to little water to transport oil in the south of the country. This led to a cost increase of around 50%. To stop this trend and guarantee supply for the industry in the south, the government used the oil reserves.

      – miep
      21 hours ago






    • 3





      @Joe I think I remember that during $4 gallon gas, around the later half of President Bush's 2nd term, there was a symbolic release of fuel from the strategic reserves. There was fear in the news that the US was in danger and a tiny, temporary dip in gasoline prices, what really lowered prices was allowing fracking and drilling.

      – Frank Cedeno
      20 hours ago








    • 1





      You might add that the Energy Information Administration (of the Department of Energy) collects and publishes information so that the market gets info on where and when to increase supply and refineries know where they might want to adjust demand.

      – H2ONaCl
      9 hours ago








    15




    15





    Despite food reserves are "for foreign aid, not domestic consumption" I would bet that in case of a huge catastrophe, they will be used for domestic consumption.

    – vsz
    yesterday





    Despite food reserves are "for foreign aid, not domestic consumption" I would bet that in case of a huge catastrophe, they will be used for domestic consumption.

    – vsz
    yesterday




    1




    1





    It should be noted that most of these efforts are intended for crises, and that they don't typically affect what happens day to day. I can't actually remember when the last time the strategic oil reserve was used, but I do remember debates when it was reduced (it affected Al Gore's presidential campaign).

    – Joe
    21 hours ago





    It should be noted that most of these efforts are intended for crises, and that they don't typically affect what happens day to day. I can't actually remember when the last time the strategic oil reserve was used, but I do remember debates when it was reduced (it affected Al Gore's presidential campaign).

    – Joe
    21 hours ago




    3




    3





    Nearly every country has strategic oil reserves. Germany actually used it last summer as the river Rhine had to little water to transport oil in the south of the country. This led to a cost increase of around 50%. To stop this trend and guarantee supply for the industry in the south, the government used the oil reserves.

    – miep
    21 hours ago





    Nearly every country has strategic oil reserves. Germany actually used it last summer as the river Rhine had to little water to transport oil in the south of the country. This led to a cost increase of around 50%. To stop this trend and guarantee supply for the industry in the south, the government used the oil reserves.

    – miep
    21 hours ago




    3




    3





    @Joe I think I remember that during $4 gallon gas, around the later half of President Bush's 2nd term, there was a symbolic release of fuel from the strategic reserves. There was fear in the news that the US was in danger and a tiny, temporary dip in gasoline prices, what really lowered prices was allowing fracking and drilling.

    – Frank Cedeno
    20 hours ago







    @Joe I think I remember that during $4 gallon gas, around the later half of President Bush's 2nd term, there was a symbolic release of fuel from the strategic reserves. There was fear in the news that the US was in danger and a tiny, temporary dip in gasoline prices, what really lowered prices was allowing fracking and drilling.

    – Frank Cedeno
    20 hours ago






    1




    1





    You might add that the Energy Information Administration (of the Department of Energy) collects and publishes information so that the market gets info on where and when to increase supply and refineries know where they might want to adjust demand.

    – H2ONaCl
    9 hours ago





    You might add that the Energy Information Administration (of the Department of Energy) collects and publishes information so that the market gets info on where and when to increase supply and refineries know where they might want to adjust demand.

    – H2ONaCl
    9 hours ago











    8














    To piggyback on the wonderful examples of US Reserves for crises in another answer, the short answer to your question is, roughly, no. More specifically, this question:




    But who is ensuring that all of the complex processes required to maintain this state of affairs go smoothly?




    It is, in fact, the free market that makes sure all these complex processes go smoothly. There isn't any government body coordinating avocado farmers in Central America with distributors in Florida to purchase those avocados and get them to a Whole Foods near you.[1]



    As described in another answer [linked above], there are reserves set aside in case of major crisis to ensure a shortage doesn't spiral out of control, but they're for just that - crises. With the exception of providing subsidies or tax breaks to incentivize production of some goods (corn subsidies, renewable energy tax breaks), the US government doesn't take an active role in controlling the market.



    The government notably doesn't take action to help with general "shortages" - there's no backup of Romaine for when an E. Coli outbreak occurs, they don't manage the supply of your favorite cola to make sure there's no shortage, they don't direct the supply chain for the new iPhone to guarantee they don't run out. All of that supply chain management is done by the individual companies - sellers (due to sales numbers, population counts, research, etc) think they need [some amount] of the product(s) they're selling, they buy that much from a supplier (who is thus a seller themselves, and may need research on how many to buy/produce), and so on.





    1: This is purely for example, I'm not sure if there's any distributor in Florida, or if the maybe-exists distributor sells to Whole Foods.






    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    Delioth is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.
















    • 1





      To add another level to your last paragraph, one big reason you don't need central planning is that the market has competition and redundancies. Companies have a large incentive to keep their own supply chain flowing smoothly (supply problems mean you can lose a lot of business). Even if someone messes up and Cola Company A's supply chain completely collapses, you can still buy cola from Companies B and C. There's rarely a single point of failure any more, so you rarely see critical shortages outside of unforseeable crises.

      – bta
      8 hours ago
















    8














    To piggyback on the wonderful examples of US Reserves for crises in another answer, the short answer to your question is, roughly, no. More specifically, this question:




    But who is ensuring that all of the complex processes required to maintain this state of affairs go smoothly?




    It is, in fact, the free market that makes sure all these complex processes go smoothly. There isn't any government body coordinating avocado farmers in Central America with distributors in Florida to purchase those avocados and get them to a Whole Foods near you.[1]



    As described in another answer [linked above], there are reserves set aside in case of major crisis to ensure a shortage doesn't spiral out of control, but they're for just that - crises. With the exception of providing subsidies or tax breaks to incentivize production of some goods (corn subsidies, renewable energy tax breaks), the US government doesn't take an active role in controlling the market.



    The government notably doesn't take action to help with general "shortages" - there's no backup of Romaine for when an E. Coli outbreak occurs, they don't manage the supply of your favorite cola to make sure there's no shortage, they don't direct the supply chain for the new iPhone to guarantee they don't run out. All of that supply chain management is done by the individual companies - sellers (due to sales numbers, population counts, research, etc) think they need [some amount] of the product(s) they're selling, they buy that much from a supplier (who is thus a seller themselves, and may need research on how many to buy/produce), and so on.





    1: This is purely for example, I'm not sure if there's any distributor in Florida, or if the maybe-exists distributor sells to Whole Foods.






    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    Delioth is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.
















    • 1





      To add another level to your last paragraph, one big reason you don't need central planning is that the market has competition and redundancies. Companies have a large incentive to keep their own supply chain flowing smoothly (supply problems mean you can lose a lot of business). Even if someone messes up and Cola Company A's supply chain completely collapses, you can still buy cola from Companies B and C. There's rarely a single point of failure any more, so you rarely see critical shortages outside of unforseeable crises.

      – bta
      8 hours ago














    8












    8








    8







    To piggyback on the wonderful examples of US Reserves for crises in another answer, the short answer to your question is, roughly, no. More specifically, this question:




    But who is ensuring that all of the complex processes required to maintain this state of affairs go smoothly?




    It is, in fact, the free market that makes sure all these complex processes go smoothly. There isn't any government body coordinating avocado farmers in Central America with distributors in Florida to purchase those avocados and get them to a Whole Foods near you.[1]



    As described in another answer [linked above], there are reserves set aside in case of major crisis to ensure a shortage doesn't spiral out of control, but they're for just that - crises. With the exception of providing subsidies or tax breaks to incentivize production of some goods (corn subsidies, renewable energy tax breaks), the US government doesn't take an active role in controlling the market.



    The government notably doesn't take action to help with general "shortages" - there's no backup of Romaine for when an E. Coli outbreak occurs, they don't manage the supply of your favorite cola to make sure there's no shortage, they don't direct the supply chain for the new iPhone to guarantee they don't run out. All of that supply chain management is done by the individual companies - sellers (due to sales numbers, population counts, research, etc) think they need [some amount] of the product(s) they're selling, they buy that much from a supplier (who is thus a seller themselves, and may need research on how many to buy/produce), and so on.





    1: This is purely for example, I'm not sure if there's any distributor in Florida, or if the maybe-exists distributor sells to Whole Foods.






    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    Delioth is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.










    To piggyback on the wonderful examples of US Reserves for crises in another answer, the short answer to your question is, roughly, no. More specifically, this question:




    But who is ensuring that all of the complex processes required to maintain this state of affairs go smoothly?




    It is, in fact, the free market that makes sure all these complex processes go smoothly. There isn't any government body coordinating avocado farmers in Central America with distributors in Florida to purchase those avocados and get them to a Whole Foods near you.[1]



    As described in another answer [linked above], there are reserves set aside in case of major crisis to ensure a shortage doesn't spiral out of control, but they're for just that - crises. With the exception of providing subsidies or tax breaks to incentivize production of some goods (corn subsidies, renewable energy tax breaks), the US government doesn't take an active role in controlling the market.



    The government notably doesn't take action to help with general "shortages" - there's no backup of Romaine for when an E. Coli outbreak occurs, they don't manage the supply of your favorite cola to make sure there's no shortage, they don't direct the supply chain for the new iPhone to guarantee they don't run out. All of that supply chain management is done by the individual companies - sellers (due to sales numbers, population counts, research, etc) think they need [some amount] of the product(s) they're selling, they buy that much from a supplier (who is thus a seller themselves, and may need research on how many to buy/produce), and so on.





    1: This is purely for example, I'm not sure if there's any distributor in Florida, or if the maybe-exists distributor sells to Whole Foods.







    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    Delioth is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.









    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer






    New contributor




    Delioth is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.









    answered 18 hours ago









    DeliothDelioth

    1814




    1814




    New contributor




    Delioth is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.





    New contributor





    Delioth is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






    Delioth is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.








    • 1





      To add another level to your last paragraph, one big reason you don't need central planning is that the market has competition and redundancies. Companies have a large incentive to keep their own supply chain flowing smoothly (supply problems mean you can lose a lot of business). Even if someone messes up and Cola Company A's supply chain completely collapses, you can still buy cola from Companies B and C. There's rarely a single point of failure any more, so you rarely see critical shortages outside of unforseeable crises.

      – bta
      8 hours ago














    • 1





      To add another level to your last paragraph, one big reason you don't need central planning is that the market has competition and redundancies. Companies have a large incentive to keep their own supply chain flowing smoothly (supply problems mean you can lose a lot of business). Even if someone messes up and Cola Company A's supply chain completely collapses, you can still buy cola from Companies B and C. There's rarely a single point of failure any more, so you rarely see critical shortages outside of unforseeable crises.

      – bta
      8 hours ago








    1




    1





    To add another level to your last paragraph, one big reason you don't need central planning is that the market has competition and redundancies. Companies have a large incentive to keep their own supply chain flowing smoothly (supply problems mean you can lose a lot of business). Even if someone messes up and Cola Company A's supply chain completely collapses, you can still buy cola from Companies B and C. There's rarely a single point of failure any more, so you rarely see critical shortages outside of unforseeable crises.

    – bta
    8 hours ago





    To add another level to your last paragraph, one big reason you don't need central planning is that the market has competition and redundancies. Companies have a large incentive to keep their own supply chain flowing smoothly (supply problems mean you can lose a lot of business). Even if someone messes up and Cola Company A's supply chain completely collapses, you can still buy cola from Companies B and C. There's rarely a single point of failure any more, so you rarely see critical shortages outside of unforseeable crises.

    – bta
    8 hours ago











    1














    U.S.-Iran Oil Consortium




    In August 1953, the Iranian military, with the help of British and U.S. intelligence agencies, overthrows Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadeq—who nationalized the country's oil industry two years earlier. The U.S. government works with U.S. oil majors and the Iranian government—now run by the Shah—to bring Iranian oil back online following a British embargo of oil shipments. Iran's oil remains nationalized, but in October 1954 the government agrees to a consortium of mainly U.S. companies to manage Iran's oil industry.




    Suez Canal Crisis




    In a 1957 speech to Congress, Eisenhower says the Middle East would be a prize for international communism and asks Congress to provide economic and military support for any nation or groups of nations in the region with "governments manifestly dedicated to the preservation of independence and resistance to subversion."




    Iran-Iraq War




    The Reagan administration issues a national security directive in 1983 to increase the U.S. military presence in the Persian Gulf to help protect the oil facilities and shipments to allies. The war lasts eight years.




    https://www.cfr.org/timeline/oil-dependence-and-us-foreign-policy



    Carter Doctrine




    The Carter Doctrine was a policy proclaimed by President of the United States Jimmy Carter in his State of the Union Address on January 23, 1980, which stated that the United States would use military force, if necessary, to defend its national interests in the Persian Gulf.




    There are other examples at the first link, and that's just oil. The US has hundreds of military bases around the world to control strategic minerals and other commodities.






    share|improve this answer



















    • 15





      This does not answer the question.

      – Stephen
      yesterday






    • 2





      Many other countries, e.g. Germany have no shortages whatsoever either, despite having no military bases around the world.

      – Scrontch
      23 hours ago






    • 3





      Oddly, enough, these military bases and foreign policies did nothing to change oil prices during several times where it would have been useful to do so, like during the Carter administration and the Iraq War.

      – Joe
      22 hours ago






    • 4





      To expand on what @Stephen says, if your intention is to say that US military presence is to ensure that "the spice must flow", then please explicitly state that in your answer rather than leaving it to implication.

      – Jared Smith
      19 hours ago
















    1














    U.S.-Iran Oil Consortium




    In August 1953, the Iranian military, with the help of British and U.S. intelligence agencies, overthrows Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadeq—who nationalized the country's oil industry two years earlier. The U.S. government works with U.S. oil majors and the Iranian government—now run by the Shah—to bring Iranian oil back online following a British embargo of oil shipments. Iran's oil remains nationalized, but in October 1954 the government agrees to a consortium of mainly U.S. companies to manage Iran's oil industry.




    Suez Canal Crisis




    In a 1957 speech to Congress, Eisenhower says the Middle East would be a prize for international communism and asks Congress to provide economic and military support for any nation or groups of nations in the region with "governments manifestly dedicated to the preservation of independence and resistance to subversion."




    Iran-Iraq War




    The Reagan administration issues a national security directive in 1983 to increase the U.S. military presence in the Persian Gulf to help protect the oil facilities and shipments to allies. The war lasts eight years.




    https://www.cfr.org/timeline/oil-dependence-and-us-foreign-policy



    Carter Doctrine




    The Carter Doctrine was a policy proclaimed by President of the United States Jimmy Carter in his State of the Union Address on January 23, 1980, which stated that the United States would use military force, if necessary, to defend its national interests in the Persian Gulf.




    There are other examples at the first link, and that's just oil. The US has hundreds of military bases around the world to control strategic minerals and other commodities.






    share|improve this answer



















    • 15





      This does not answer the question.

      – Stephen
      yesterday






    • 2





      Many other countries, e.g. Germany have no shortages whatsoever either, despite having no military bases around the world.

      – Scrontch
      23 hours ago






    • 3





      Oddly, enough, these military bases and foreign policies did nothing to change oil prices during several times where it would have been useful to do so, like during the Carter administration and the Iraq War.

      – Joe
      22 hours ago






    • 4





      To expand on what @Stephen says, if your intention is to say that US military presence is to ensure that "the spice must flow", then please explicitly state that in your answer rather than leaving it to implication.

      – Jared Smith
      19 hours ago














    1












    1








    1







    U.S.-Iran Oil Consortium




    In August 1953, the Iranian military, with the help of British and U.S. intelligence agencies, overthrows Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadeq—who nationalized the country's oil industry two years earlier. The U.S. government works with U.S. oil majors and the Iranian government—now run by the Shah—to bring Iranian oil back online following a British embargo of oil shipments. Iran's oil remains nationalized, but in October 1954 the government agrees to a consortium of mainly U.S. companies to manage Iran's oil industry.




    Suez Canal Crisis




    In a 1957 speech to Congress, Eisenhower says the Middle East would be a prize for international communism and asks Congress to provide economic and military support for any nation or groups of nations in the region with "governments manifestly dedicated to the preservation of independence and resistance to subversion."




    Iran-Iraq War




    The Reagan administration issues a national security directive in 1983 to increase the U.S. military presence in the Persian Gulf to help protect the oil facilities and shipments to allies. The war lasts eight years.




    https://www.cfr.org/timeline/oil-dependence-and-us-foreign-policy



    Carter Doctrine




    The Carter Doctrine was a policy proclaimed by President of the United States Jimmy Carter in his State of the Union Address on January 23, 1980, which stated that the United States would use military force, if necessary, to defend its national interests in the Persian Gulf.




    There are other examples at the first link, and that's just oil. The US has hundreds of military bases around the world to control strategic minerals and other commodities.






    share|improve this answer













    U.S.-Iran Oil Consortium




    In August 1953, the Iranian military, with the help of British and U.S. intelligence agencies, overthrows Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadeq—who nationalized the country's oil industry two years earlier. The U.S. government works with U.S. oil majors and the Iranian government—now run by the Shah—to bring Iranian oil back online following a British embargo of oil shipments. Iran's oil remains nationalized, but in October 1954 the government agrees to a consortium of mainly U.S. companies to manage Iran's oil industry.




    Suez Canal Crisis




    In a 1957 speech to Congress, Eisenhower says the Middle East would be a prize for international communism and asks Congress to provide economic and military support for any nation or groups of nations in the region with "governments manifestly dedicated to the preservation of independence and resistance to subversion."




    Iran-Iraq War




    The Reagan administration issues a national security directive in 1983 to increase the U.S. military presence in the Persian Gulf to help protect the oil facilities and shipments to allies. The war lasts eight years.




    https://www.cfr.org/timeline/oil-dependence-and-us-foreign-policy



    Carter Doctrine




    The Carter Doctrine was a policy proclaimed by President of the United States Jimmy Carter in his State of the Union Address on January 23, 1980, which stated that the United States would use military force, if necessary, to defend its national interests in the Persian Gulf.




    There are other examples at the first link, and that's just oil. The US has hundreds of military bases around the world to control strategic minerals and other commodities.







    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered yesterday









    Keith McClaryKeith McClary

    477210




    477210








    • 15





      This does not answer the question.

      – Stephen
      yesterday






    • 2





      Many other countries, e.g. Germany have no shortages whatsoever either, despite having no military bases around the world.

      – Scrontch
      23 hours ago






    • 3





      Oddly, enough, these military bases and foreign policies did nothing to change oil prices during several times where it would have been useful to do so, like during the Carter administration and the Iraq War.

      – Joe
      22 hours ago






    • 4





      To expand on what @Stephen says, if your intention is to say that US military presence is to ensure that "the spice must flow", then please explicitly state that in your answer rather than leaving it to implication.

      – Jared Smith
      19 hours ago














    • 15





      This does not answer the question.

      – Stephen
      yesterday






    • 2





      Many other countries, e.g. Germany have no shortages whatsoever either, despite having no military bases around the world.

      – Scrontch
      23 hours ago






    • 3





      Oddly, enough, these military bases and foreign policies did nothing to change oil prices during several times where it would have been useful to do so, like during the Carter administration and the Iraq War.

      – Joe
      22 hours ago






    • 4





      To expand on what @Stephen says, if your intention is to say that US military presence is to ensure that "the spice must flow", then please explicitly state that in your answer rather than leaving it to implication.

      – Jared Smith
      19 hours ago








    15




    15





    This does not answer the question.

    – Stephen
    yesterday





    This does not answer the question.

    – Stephen
    yesterday




    2




    2





    Many other countries, e.g. Germany have no shortages whatsoever either, despite having no military bases around the world.

    – Scrontch
    23 hours ago





    Many other countries, e.g. Germany have no shortages whatsoever either, despite having no military bases around the world.

    – Scrontch
    23 hours ago




    3




    3





    Oddly, enough, these military bases and foreign policies did nothing to change oil prices during several times where it would have been useful to do so, like during the Carter administration and the Iraq War.

    – Joe
    22 hours ago





    Oddly, enough, these military bases and foreign policies did nothing to change oil prices during several times where it would have been useful to do so, like during the Carter administration and the Iraq War.

    – Joe
    22 hours ago




    4




    4





    To expand on what @Stephen says, if your intention is to say that US military presence is to ensure that "the spice must flow", then please explicitly state that in your answer rather than leaving it to implication.

    – Jared Smith
    19 hours ago





    To expand on what @Stephen says, if your intention is to say that US military presence is to ensure that "the spice must flow", then please explicitly state that in your answer rather than leaving it to implication.

    – Jared Smith
    19 hours ago











    0














    "Any planning"? Then the short answer is Yes. Planning doesn't have to be a wholesale Soviet-style command planning.



    Contrary to popular belief and some comments above, free market is remarkably good at alleviating short-to-medium term crises. The 'Soviet'-style response to anything unexpected is, well, you have a shortrage -- until the next five-year plan kicks in (at best). In free market, you may have exorbitant prices, but at least some way of getting the stuff. And then alternatives will spring up, the higher the prices, the quicker.



    But like with many natural processes (e.g. evolution), strategic thinking doesn't happen automatically. If we have a goal and a forecast power, we can do better. I would divide the measures into three categories:




    • Stockpiling of the most critical resources. The US Strategic Petroleum Reserve has already been mentioned as an example. But despite the name, this is not so strategic in reality -- rather a patch to buy time.

    • Accumulating financial resources to be able to get the required resoruces even at the speculative crisis prices.

    • Fostering and diversifying industries that provide essential resources. (Such industries don't necessarily have to be local; on the international scale, this may involve diplomacy and, by extension, even war). Take the recent example with the updated list of critical minerals.






    share|improve this answer




























      0














      "Any planning"? Then the short answer is Yes. Planning doesn't have to be a wholesale Soviet-style command planning.



      Contrary to popular belief and some comments above, free market is remarkably good at alleviating short-to-medium term crises. The 'Soviet'-style response to anything unexpected is, well, you have a shortrage -- until the next five-year plan kicks in (at best). In free market, you may have exorbitant prices, but at least some way of getting the stuff. And then alternatives will spring up, the higher the prices, the quicker.



      But like with many natural processes (e.g. evolution), strategic thinking doesn't happen automatically. If we have a goal and a forecast power, we can do better. I would divide the measures into three categories:




      • Stockpiling of the most critical resources. The US Strategic Petroleum Reserve has already been mentioned as an example. But despite the name, this is not so strategic in reality -- rather a patch to buy time.

      • Accumulating financial resources to be able to get the required resoruces even at the speculative crisis prices.

      • Fostering and diversifying industries that provide essential resources. (Such industries don't necessarily have to be local; on the international scale, this may involve diplomacy and, by extension, even war). Take the recent example with the updated list of critical minerals.






      share|improve this answer


























        0












        0








        0







        "Any planning"? Then the short answer is Yes. Planning doesn't have to be a wholesale Soviet-style command planning.



        Contrary to popular belief and some comments above, free market is remarkably good at alleviating short-to-medium term crises. The 'Soviet'-style response to anything unexpected is, well, you have a shortrage -- until the next five-year plan kicks in (at best). In free market, you may have exorbitant prices, but at least some way of getting the stuff. And then alternatives will spring up, the higher the prices, the quicker.



        But like with many natural processes (e.g. evolution), strategic thinking doesn't happen automatically. If we have a goal and a forecast power, we can do better. I would divide the measures into three categories:




        • Stockpiling of the most critical resources. The US Strategic Petroleum Reserve has already been mentioned as an example. But despite the name, this is not so strategic in reality -- rather a patch to buy time.

        • Accumulating financial resources to be able to get the required resoruces even at the speculative crisis prices.

        • Fostering and diversifying industries that provide essential resources. (Such industries don't necessarily have to be local; on the international scale, this may involve diplomacy and, by extension, even war). Take the recent example with the updated list of critical minerals.






        share|improve this answer













        "Any planning"? Then the short answer is Yes. Planning doesn't have to be a wholesale Soviet-style command planning.



        Contrary to popular belief and some comments above, free market is remarkably good at alleviating short-to-medium term crises. The 'Soviet'-style response to anything unexpected is, well, you have a shortrage -- until the next five-year plan kicks in (at best). In free market, you may have exorbitant prices, but at least some way of getting the stuff. And then alternatives will spring up, the higher the prices, the quicker.



        But like with many natural processes (e.g. evolution), strategic thinking doesn't happen automatically. If we have a goal and a forecast power, we can do better. I would divide the measures into three categories:




        • Stockpiling of the most critical resources. The US Strategic Petroleum Reserve has already been mentioned as an example. But despite the name, this is not so strategic in reality -- rather a patch to buy time.

        • Accumulating financial resources to be able to get the required resoruces even at the speculative crisis prices.

        • Fostering and diversifying industries that provide essential resources. (Such industries don't necessarily have to be local; on the international scale, this may involve diplomacy and, by extension, even war). Take the recent example with the updated list of critical minerals.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 3 hours ago









        ZeusZeus

        1313




        1313






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Politics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f39012%2fdoes-the-us-government-have-any-planning-in-place-to-ensure-theres-no-shortages%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            “%fieldName is a required field.”, in Magento2 REST API Call for GET Method Type The Next...

            How to change City field to a dropdown in Checkout step Magento 2Magento 2 : How to change UI field(s)...

            變成蝙蝠會怎樣? 參考資料 外部連結 导航菜单Thomas Nagel, "What is it like to be a...