It is already super cheap. You can get a whole rotisserie chicken at Safeway for $5 or less. That's a whole damn chicken, and the labor of someone cooking it for you!
Unless you're eating a ridiculous amount of chicken at every meal, which you probably shouldn't, the cost of chicken could be higher if it means better working conditions and humane treatment of the animal.
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.
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.
It's an animal's whole damned life. It was born, raised to a large-enough size to eat, housed, fed, slaughtered, plucked, shipped, cooked, and served to the customer, plus profits at every step of the way. For $5.
[1] - https://www.wholefoodsmarket.com/mission-values/animal-welfa...
Staff ex:Nurses are generally treated as a commodity in many economic models.
Music/Books/Movies can also be treated like this. Sure, as a consumer I might pick A over B, but movie theaters don't individually price movies based on quality.
For example, 'a cow' is not a commodity... but a grade 3 live steer is.
Movie theatres do not price films based upon quality, but the distributors certainly do (I managed a movie theatre). You cannot commoditise a movie ticket, each theatre provides different facility and presentation quality.
However, animals are also sold in bulk without individual prices.
Another company pays workers $4 an hour and makes them wear diapers. Sells Chickens for $3.75.
Barring an outside force (regulation, feel good marketing campaign, ethics badge), which one gets 100% of the market, and which one gets 0%?
Sometimes, free market sucks.
Given only a small incremental competitive advantage, a company is able to capture the overwhelming majority of the market, essentially becoming a monopoly.
It doesn't seem like it if you like in a developed country, but for over 10% of the people in the world, the price of food actually is of extreme importance.