Tu vois o le political comment ? <| sep |> It ' s not clear to me exactly what mechanism you are describing . Your title says access to but some of your comments make it sound like you want the government to produce and distribute the food . What I think is a far better option is to let markets do what they are good at and governments at what they are good at . Government serve two purposes in this context then can ensure that all people have the means to get all of the things you suggest , and they can ensure that markets operate on a level playing field i . e . , no predatory pricing , monopolistic behavior , crossmarket bundling , and so on . One way to do this is UniversalBasic Income . To some degree you can do that now by eliminating all of the programs that micromanage this goal , such as welfare , and redirecting both the flowthrough funds and the overhead costs to UniversalBasic Income . You can give it to everybody but tax it back slowly based on income . For example , you can give everybody $ 20 , 000 , and tax it back as 0 % tax below $ 40 , 000 income including the Basic Income , 100 % tax on it when your total income including Basic Income is above $ 120 , 000 , and percentage increases linearly between them . That way nobody has less than $ 20 , 000 . As automation comes in and kills more jobs , more wealth is created . Think of wealth as the number of hours per day you need to work to afford the cost of your needs . If everything is automated and costs next to nothing , you are becoming wealthier . If all your needs can be met , and all luxuries produce , but machines that can maintain themselves , you are extremely wealthy . When machines can do absolutely everything cheaper than humans including creative work , designing , building , improving technology and there is no reason anybody has to work , then the job of government in this respect is to make sure people have access to the machines that provide this . There is no value in anybody getting wealthier than anybody else at that point , or to deny other people access . Machines can reproduce machines at that point so no need to deprive people of them . Money might not even make sense at that point as there isn ' t much reason for exchange . What would the people receiving the money do with it if they can just access machines that can produce what they need . The real trouble is in transitioning from this economy to that one , especially across the world . After transition can make sense , where machines can produce machines indefinitely and so provide for needs of everybody everywhere . But there ' ll be a lot of differential wealth between now and then .