Remember that the global elite (people who control the vast majority of the capital) is highly mobile and from their perspective there's no difference between being robbed and having their wealth "redistributed".
It should also be taken into account that even if the wealth was redistributed, each poor person would only receive a minute amount, for example let's say 1 share of Google, Amazon and a few more shares.
They would almost immediately have to sell this wealth to transform it into income for current needs.
Luxury food isn't necessarily good food.
No matter the political climate, or income inequality. People need to eat. The idea of cheap food is to completely remove it from the spectrum of politics.
Your full dinner should never be subject to political whims. It should be a constant.
This is a privileged viewpoint.
When dealing with food policy you need to view the food system from the perspective of those impoverished.
Cheap food is a big deal, and often it's the only thing keeping millions of people in this country from starving. As such, keeping food cheap is an cornerstone of governmental policy because hunger=revolution.