> If there is shortage of wheat why cant wheat be imported from other countries to take care of the shortage?

What if there was a wheat recession and there was no more wheat anywhere? Or what if there was a trade war and they refuse to trade? At least I think it is a good thing that people no longer starve to death during recessions.

What is the point of talking about hypotheticals?

People in the US die because they cannot afford medical costs, the US is perfectly happy with that.

It's not a hypothetical at all. This is bound to happen sooner or later. You don't want it to happen even once. Food reserves only go so far - and if you use them for this very foreseeable problem (you just don't know when exactly) you leave yourself more open to the unforeseeable catastrophes.

And yes, there is a very good point talking about hypotheticals on such literally vitally important topics.

> People in the US die because they cannot afford medical costs, the US is perfectly happy with that.

Maybe the difference is that sick people don't riot? If I remember the already mentioned "The Omnivore's Dilemma" correctly the current agricultural policies among other factors mentioned there also were created because of civil unrest due to food shortages, to prevent it from happening again. I can find plenty of sources for food riots, I have not read about anything similar caused by medical costs.

> It's not a hypothetical at all. This is bound to happen sooner or later.

Based on your hypothesis?

> Maybe the difference is that sick people don't riot?

So people dying is ok its just that they should not riot?

Their family and friends do!

The subsidies were started because the free market encouraged farmers to destroy their crops to raise prices during a famine. We now have overproduction, which is far better than underproduction.

Because every country needs to be able to produce food. Importing all your food is a huge security risk.

We are not talking about importing all the food though.