I think the best model for “why ban fresh bread” is something like what lexande said, but modified like this:
-People were buying fresh bread every day and (if wealthy) throwing out the bread from the day before (or throwing it out on some horizon). The idea was maybe that by preventing this use of flour (optimised for niceness) the economic forces would then optimise better for calories. -A solidarity thing? Upping the price would disproportionately hurt the poor. Pushing the market by lowering the quality is more egalitarian in some sense. It pushes the rich into buying something more expensive, and the poor into just having worse bread. -Bakers could optimise bread for deliciousness on the day of baking, or (somehow) make bread that was likely to last longer. Longer lasting bread would improve efficency by seeing less of it go bad. -It was just really dumb. eg. People were arriving at the bakers to find the bread sold out. And were furious and petitioned the government to do something. The government (for some bizare reason) believed that if the sales were delayed a day that the bakeries wouldn’t be out of bread when you visited (although they may be out of bread they were allowed to sell you).
(somehow) make bread that was likely to last longer
You could decrease the water content and not leaven it, making it into hardtack. This will last for years if kept dry. But it’s very unpleasant to eat, and I don’t think people would buy it or bakers would make it unless required to.
I think the best model for “why ban fresh bread” is something like what lexande said, but modified like this:
-People were buying fresh bread every day and (if wealthy) throwing out the bread from the day before (or throwing it out on some horizon). The idea was maybe that by preventing this use of flour (optimised for niceness) the economic forces would then optimise better for calories.
-A solidarity thing? Upping the price would disproportionately hurt the poor. Pushing the market by lowering the quality is more egalitarian in some sense. It pushes the rich into buying something more expensive, and the poor into just having worse bread.
-Bakers could optimise bread for deliciousness on the day of baking, or (somehow) make bread that was likely to last longer. Longer lasting bread would improve efficency by seeing less of it go bad.
-It was just really dumb. eg. People were arriving at the bakers to find the bread sold out. And were furious and petitioned the government to do something. The government (for some bizare reason) believed that if the sales were delayed a day that the bakeries wouldn’t be out of bread when you visited (although they may be out of bread they were allowed to sell you).
You could decrease the water content and not leaven it, making it into hardtack. This will last for years if kept dry. But it’s very unpleasant to eat, and I don’t think people would buy it or bakers would make it unless required to.