{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.030012004801920768, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0012004801920768306, 'mean_word_length': 5.619047619047619, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Entitlement failure and deprivation: a critique of Sen's famine philosophy 1

Abstract This paper insinuates the conceptual foundation of Sen's entitlement approach by pinpointing its major weaknesses. First, Sen's critique of FAD is inadequate because speculative, not actual, supply and demand forces determine short-run commodity prices. Second, Sen's idea of ‘exchange entitlement’ is inconsistent with the principles of capitalism, since this economic system operates on the conceptual and legal framework of voluntary exchange. Third, if food is considered as an entitled commodity, other basic necessities of life, such as healthcare, education etc. could claim the same status. Finally, the approach is founded on a hidden hypothesis that income distributions in non-communist states are economically and politically optimal.