digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at nypost.com

Food Prices Rising At Fastest Rate In 17 Years

nypost.com — The U.S. is wrestling with the worst food inflation in 17 years, and analysts expect new data due on Wednesday to show it's getting worse. That's putting the squeeze on poor families and forcing bakeries, bagel shops and delis to explain price increases to their customers.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • gravityboard, on 04/15/2008, -5/+38"watering down their milk, or giving their children soda because it's cheaper than milk"

    All these products of "food sciences" are making America obese. Soda is terrible.
    • bingobongony, on 04/15/2008, -19/+10blah blah blah...bitch bitch bitch. whine whine whine...let's stupidly demonzie a food or drink that is fine in moderation! That will make us appear intelligent.
      • Amadeus2490, on 04/15/2008, -3/+11RE: "Fine in moderation"

        Define "in moderation" for me, please; The average American defines that as about 3 sodas a day. Then, you have to consider that the average Joe started drinking soda when they were about 4 years old, so. . .that doesn't sound too moderate to me, especially when you consider that it's very rare for a person to get enough water a day, even when you're not factoring in dehydration.

        I'm not even going to bother getting into the fact that caffeine, sugar, and other food additives are addictive.
        • Alix7, on 04/15/2008, -9/+4IS THE NAZI FOOD COMPANY FORCING THE SODA DOWN YOUR THROAT? OH NOEZ
          • Amadeus2490, on 04/15/2008, -2/+3No, but Amadeus2490 is going to force something down your throat if you don't start drinking more water. WHAT WHAT IN THE BUTT!

            . . .was I dugg up?
        • bingobongony, on 04/16/2008, -4/+1So..the fact that some people are idiots and drink too much is to DRINK'S FAULT? What the ***** do you even THINK you are trying to say with that?

          Soda is fine in moedartion. 1 can a day. Even 2 is perfectly fine if you take care of yourself. I recently cut back, but before I did, I drank 3-4 cans a day..for like 20 years. (I still drink 1-2 cans a day.) And I am 6 foot 8 inches tall and weigh less than 180 pounds. Body fat percentage has always been around 10%. Haven't had a cavity in years. (Yes, I have a more fillings than I'd like from when I wasn't responsible enough to take care of them, but since I have matured, I haven't had any.) I will put my health, endurance, and athleticism up against ANY person here on Digg.

          If sode was "terrible" then I should be at least 280 pounds by now.

          And by the way, trying to refute the statement that soda is fine in moderation with a statement that some people don't drink it in moderation is pretty weak. "Bullets are fine as long as they are not fired out of a gun." "But some bullets ARE fired out of a gun."
          • bingobongony, on 04/16/2008, -4/+1LOVe the fact that I am getting buried once again for pointing out facts. Some stupid little bitch (Amadeus in this case) tries to refute my correct statement that soda in moderation is fine by pointing out that some people don't drink it in moderation. And I get buried.

            Clearly Amadeus knows he lost this debate, and therefore instead of trying to go on, will just bury.

            Bitch.
          • Amadeus2490, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2I have more to do with my time than to debate with a person; In fact, I find debates are useless, simply because neither side is willing to suddenly change their belief, so all I can do is present facts - scientific, or otherwise - and let everybody make their own decision; I think this is part of the old "Freedom of Speech" concept we had when this country was founded.

            And besides, you're using non-sequitors and name-calling, and this never has - or never will - be a good way to present your side of an argument; calling the other person a name doesn't make your point any more true. Maybe when you become a little older, you'll have more respect for strangers that've done absolutely nothing to offend you.
          • mllawso, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2I bury people who bitch about being buried. If you're post has merit, it will be dug up.
      • rebrad, on 04/15/2008, -0/+5Aren't biofuels great!!! They not only make the naive feel better about themselves they starve out those 3rd worlders that produce way too much carbon waste.
    • Alix7, on 04/15/2008, -10/+3Keep complaining about the food industry for your weight instead of taking responsibility for your own actions. If you have a computer and internet access there's no reason to complain about food. The amount of money you're spending on broadband and cable television is enough to buy enough vegetables to keep you going. Maybe not entirely for a month, but it's pretty ***** close.

      Grow up
      • gravityboard, on 04/15/2008, -0/+4I love how you implied there that the food industry is NOT in fact responsible for America's obesity problem. Of course it is, but that doesn't mean that individual responsibility is an irrelevant factor. The most important point here is that soda IS bad for you except for rare occasions (which is my definition of moderation) and the general populace is not properly informed of the risks. I'm quite sure that in the future, soda will be added to a list along side cigarettes as a widely used consumer product that - oops! turns out is really ***** terrible for everyone. There's also substantial (but largely unconfirmed) evidence linking soda to cancer, but that alone should be enough to make us think twice about it in the future.
        • Amadeus2490, on 04/15/2008, -0/+2No need to make it complicated. . .just remember this:

          Healthful foods are expensive, hard to transport and require specific growing conditions, while fast food is cheap, easy to produce, easy to transport and can be made anywhere in the world at any time.
    • IllBeBack, on 04/15/2008, -5/+10Soda is not the problem. Lack of exercise and drinking way way too much soda and other sugar is the problem.
    • innocentsinner, on 04/15/2008, -4/+5Soda is bad for you, I won't argue with that, but there's still a choice for consumers. Those low or zero-cal sodas cost the same as the normal versions.
      • youtellme8, on 04/15/2008, -0/+8...and they probably cause about twice as much cancer.
        • Amadeus2490, on 04/15/2008, -0/+3The artificial sweeteners in Diet Coke are actually worse for you; aspartame has been linked to the symptoms of MS and juvenile diabetes.
    • Metasquares, on 04/15/2008, -2/+9The real problem is that someone making $9/hour is probably not making enough to support children.
      • sodade, on 04/15/2008, -4/+7WHY THE ***** ARE THEY HAVING THEM THEN?
        • mcoplin, on 04/15/2008, -3/+3THANK YOU!!!
        • DontGiveADamn, on 04/15/2008, -0/+2Accidents happen, I'm one.
        • jessehadden, on 04/15/2008, -0/+3Maybe because it's a basic part of human life? If your solution to the problem is "well then don't act human, because you're not up to the system's snuff," then I think there is something wrong with your analysis of the problem. There is more than enough money in the economy for every man, woman, and child in America to be living well. There is more than enough food to go around. We live in an age of artificial scarcity -- artificial -- at the behest of the *very* powerful. You do their bidding with dehumanizing comments like that.
    • betasp, on 04/15/2008, -4/+1Someone needs to tell them how horrible milk is. Orange juice is much better for you and you can get it cheaper.
    • mikesbaker, on 04/15/2008, -1/+4water is still cheap
  • killbert24, on 04/15/2008, -3/+28McDonald's might change their "Dollar Menu" to the "2 Dollar Menu" things are getting so bad.
  • Wilsomatic, on 04/15/2008, -14/+4I wonder if it is related to the US obesity problem? There is only so much food around until it becomes rare...
  • godseyeview, on 04/15/2008, -29/+47Ron Paul 08 and stop the inflation.
    • gravityboard, on 04/15/2008, -7/+7woah. deja vu.
    • jmpeagle, on 04/15/2008, -12/+5he won't be on the ballot
      • jeffiek, on 04/15/2008, -2/+12You can't write? (as in write-in vote)
        • jmpeagle, on 04/15/2008, -4/+3you can write in mickey mouse if you want to...doesn't mean he's on the ballot. I can pretty much guarantee that no write-in candidate will win the presidential election.
        • juankovo, on 04/15/2008, -0/+4@jmpeagle

          I will be writing in Ron Paul. I don't care that he won't win on a write-in. I will be sending an ever-so-small message to McCain that I care enough to vote, and I specifically am not voting for him. I would rather vote for someone I like and have him lose than vote for someone I hate and have him win.
      • Stryder81, on 04/15/2008, -3/+6He's going to the convention, why wouldn't he be on the ballot?
        • jmpeagle, on 04/15/2008, -5/+4voters can't vote in the convention. McCain has already clinched the GOP nomination.
    • Picaroon, on 04/15/2008, -10/+3I've seen this three times now today. Is this like a joke or something?
    • Karna101, on 04/15/2008, -3/+19omg why did people thumbs down the original comment? inflation and a devalued dollar is the reason for rising food prices (along with oil prices). must be a lot of democratic-republican partisans on digg today who don't like to think
      • jmpeagle, on 04/15/2008, -5/+3no it isn't...inflation is much much lower than the rate of increase in the price of food stuffs and other commodities
        • matador3, on 04/15/2008, -2/+4The government's statistics are questionable.
          • jmpeagle, on 04/15/2008, -4/+3that's your defense? That isn't just government statistics, but the statistics of private businesses such as economic research firms such as the Economics Intelligence Unit etc....

            also, unless everything else is on average increasing at the same rate as commodities then by definition commodities have to be increasing at a faster rate.
      • p0s3r, on 04/15/2008, -3/+5Ethanol is the blame. Not inflation and not the dollar.
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080414/sc_afp/euunfa ...
        • bbardlbradd, on 04/15/2008, -0/+3Interesting. I wasn't aware that Ethanol has picked up so much as to effect anything at all.
    • Rustymetal, on 04/15/2008, -6/+21Stop digging him down, Ron was right now and he was right 10 years ago. Not OP's fault. Digg up!
    • bbardlbradd, on 04/15/2008, -6/+10While I doubt Ron Paul has any chance at all in getting even 2% votes, I am so /so/ happy that he's still active in our fed. gov.

      Ron Paul is the man. I don't care what anyone says.
      • cajungator2, on 04/15/2008, -9/+3Ron Paul is psycho. I don't care what anyone says.
        • juankovo, on 04/15/2008, -1/+4Please tell me which of Ron Paul's ideas you think is psycho, and *why* you think it's psycho.
        • jeffiek, on 04/15/2008, -1/+2I think YOU'RE psycho.

          No reason, nothing to substantiate it. But you read it on the internet.

          It must be true.
    • Civilizationist, on 04/15/2008, -9/+1http://ronpaul2012.com/

      Coming soon...
    • barfooz, on 04/15/2008, -3/+10Dugg down for being naive.
      a) Presidents don't create legislation, Congress does.
      b) Given our massively complex and globalized economy, a number of the factors creating this inflation are out of our control.
      c) Even if Ron Paul were president, the system of checks and balances would severely curtail his ability to influence legislation given that the House is controlled by the Democrats and the senate by the Republicans, and neither one is feeling particularly libertarian nowadays.
    • Brian48216, on 04/15/2008, -9/+5fail.
      Increases in food prices are not an issue in America only. It's world wide. Devaluation of the American Dollar or inflation has little cause.
      It's the price of oil.
      It takes oil to run the tractors. Oil to move the trucks and trains and boats to transport the food.

      Ron Paul would make the situation worse. Face it. He is not a cure for anything.
      • juankovo, on 04/15/2008, -1/+3Ron Paul doesn't presume to be the "cure". He wants the *market* to cure itself, free from government meddling which has upset things in the first place.
      • kingsaliva, on 04/15/2008, -0/+3"Devaluation of the American Dollar or inflation has little cause.
        It's the price of oil."

        The price of oil is tied to the dollar. A devaluation of the the dollar will cause oil prices to go higher.
    • Banangroda, on 04/15/2008, -0/+5This isn't just in USA... Here in Sweden they have increased 30% over the last year and our currency is rising in value compared to your dollar, and I've heard this is the case in other places as well...
  • hellathatguy, on 04/15/2008, -4/+21nom nom nom nom nom nom.....
  • spitsnaugle, on 04/15/2008, -9/+7time for the U.S. to diet
    • bbardlbradd, on 04/15/2008, -5/+3Digg him down!!!!

      As an American, I can haz my cheeseburgur and eat it 2!!!!!
      • bjoseppie, on 04/24/2008, -0/+1See you at the cardiologist moron. American's are the fattest people on the planet. It would do the entire population some good to eat 1/2.
  • FaithclubDotNet, on 04/15/2008, -3/+19As gas prices grow, food prices grow. Both of these things hit poor people hardest. Rich people don't tend to eat more than poor people. Rich people use a trivial amount of gas more than poor people.
    • jmpeagle, on 04/15/2008, -9/+5poor people don't own cars...rich people use a lot more gasoline than poor people.
      • gobbleplex, on 04/15/2008, -2/+5Wealthier people also travel by plane more often, and that is most certainly a larger drain on gas than your car.
        • jamesdew, on 04/15/2008, -1/+2im not wealthy and I fly to sweden all the time. I'm flying return from stansted with £6.50 both ways inclusding all taxes with ryan air at the end of the month DAMN YOU INFLATION..DAMN YOU!!!!!
      • juankovo, on 04/15/2008, -0/+3I don't care where you draw the line at poor, the lower your income is, the larger the percentage of it you are likely to spend on transportation and food.
    • gobbleplex, on 04/15/2008, -2/+8Gas prices are only part of the equation. There's also the fact that our largest subsidies are for corn, which is being turned into Ethanol to feed our cars instead of us and our livestock. Then there's the greater demand for food from countries that were once impoverished.
    • Karna101, on 04/15/2008, -1/+15inflation of the dollar causes gas prices to grow and food prices to grow. this is due to reckless gov spending by neocons and socialist dems
      • jmpeagle, on 04/15/2008, -6/+1way to confuse monetary and fiscal policy. You could have huge socialist increases in government spending and still have deflation....just look at the 1930s and all the welfare economics that went on during it
    • Nichevo, on 04/15/2008, -0/+3That is a ridiculous statement.

      1) Rich countries consume a lot more meat, it takes ~9 pounds of grain to grow one pound of meat. It is inherently inefficient. The amount of oil required for a calorie of meat vs a calorie of grain is even more lopsided.

      2) Rich countries import perishable food from thousands of miles away. Poor countries tend to rely on more locally grown food. It takes fuel to ship the stuff.

      3) Rich countries waste a lot more. When your food budget is 50+% of your income, you tend to be less wasteful.

      4) Rich countries package near everything in plastic. Plastic requires yet more oil.

      The level of comments, and moderation around here, is getting more and more disappointing.
      • zekezeke, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2Wealthy economies have LESS food wastage than poor economies. This is because of airtight packaging, use of preservatives, use of refrigeration, and speedy transport from producer to consumer.

        It requires less petroleum to manufacture a plastic jar than it does to manufacture an equivalent glass container. Ireland, I believe, has recently had to roll-back legislation imposing surcharges on plastic grocery bags when it was found that paper grocery bags require more energy to produce and recycle than plastic.

  • Charklii, on 04/15/2008, -1/+8Hey, it's not just the U.S! It's certainly noticeable in New Zealand, and I'm sure other parts of the world.

    I've heard though, that it's partly because labourers in developing countries are starting to be payed fairly, which to me is positive - although I haven't been able to fully verify this one, and had little luck when trying. Any one able to offer some clearer perspective for me here?
    • bdbr, on 04/15/2008, -0/+3The article did mention (on page 2) that part of the reason for the increase is better incomes in China and India, where more people now eat more meat.
    • yixiazi, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1Very good point. It makes sense. I mean, it does take a lot of poverty to boost up the rich and those who over-consume. As developing countries get more, it has to come from somewhere. So, what are those developing countries and is the price of food actually going down? Would it be China, or India, Mexico, or middle-eastern countries? Are food prices going down there, or is it some other dynamic?

      I don't think it is really going down that much elsewhere. Can't say for sure though.
  • Professr, on 04/15/2008, -4/+55This inflation's so bad, yo momma ain't fat no more...
    • AbsurdParadox, on 04/15/2008, -2/+4*Fist to Mouth* OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!
  • jmpeagle, on 04/15/2008, -0/+19I'll just copy and paste my comment from an article covering the same topic in the upcoming section:
    ----

    this is the result of bad governance and horrible agricultural policies such as export restrictions. There is more than enough food grown in the world to comfortably feed everyone, yet it things such as export restrictions prevent food from reaching the global marketplace. Just earlier this year, Ukraine had to dumb 100 MILLION dollars worth of grain into the black sea because it had been allowed to rot due to their huge surplus and restrictions on exporting. A similar things is happening in Argentina with Farmers essentially rioting and blocking roads because of export restrictions.

    It's also being used as a foreign policy tool to curb exports. For example, t.ast month, when Kazakhstan threatened to limit wheat exports, some wheat prices soared by 25%.

    http://www.economist.com/finance/displaystory.cfm? ...
    • Futile, on 04/15/2008, -2/+4But I thought free trade was a BAD thing? What about NAFTA?

      I'm very confused about international economics.
      • jmpeagle, on 04/15/2008, -1/+7all FTAs have exception clauses with respect to agriculture. Despite the fact that the average income of a farmer in the U.S. is more than double the U.S. average, they are the most protected business group in the nation. For some reason, they believe they are special aqnd shouldn't have to fairly compete in the marketplace.
        • mtekk, on 04/15/2008, -1/+1And the people in Washington agree. Ever wonder what DFL stands for? Democratic Farmer Labor, the Democrats pander to the farmers, it's in their name (Not that the current crop of Republicans are any better).
    • nitrojunky24, on 04/15/2008, -2/+3I think free trade is good thing i just think we need to put a lock and key on our borders thats all. we want stuff not more people.
    • NonLeftistDiggr, on 04/15/2008, -2/+1Vote trade restrictions, vote obama
    • chewbie, on 04/15/2008, -1/+2tell them to not be stupid and stop growing grain. There's a list of goods every year that comes out of governments and it states specifically what the predictions for next year are. Romania is still growing grain like crazy because it's the cheapest to produce by farmers.

      If you do it right, you can even profit from it
  • MiamiRox, on 04/15/2008, -2/+13"Authentic" Key Lime Pies in Brooklyn??? I only consider it "authentic" if its made in The Keys. Its like eating an "authentic" Philly Cheesesteak in Atlanta.

    • sychodelix, on 04/15/2008, -1/+2Some foods are like that, but any moron can make a "authentic" Key Lime Pie. And as long as you know what a real philly cheesesteak tastes like, it's not that hard to replicate either.
      • Professr, on 04/15/2008, -0/+8Taste copyright infringement! Call the CIAA! (Culinary Industry Association of America)
  • AppleMacStud, on 04/15/2008, -15/+9Mac OS X is the answer. Don't ask me how but somehow I just know that if millions of Macs were distributed around the world, this would end the hunger situation. Most of mankind's problems are solved by simply owning a Mac. 
    • Alix7, on 04/15/2008, -4/+5***** off Mac shill
      • Professr, on 04/15/2008, -1/+7Don't worry, even mac fanboys hate AppleMacStud.
    • mojonandha, on 04/15/2008, -3/+1aww man. you just kissed my ass
    • bbardlbradd, on 04/15/2008, -2/+1Why did you say that? Why in the ***** would you use your individuality as a cheap and irrelevant advertisement for Apple? I love Apple too, and I'm typing this on an iBook G4 that has never done me wrong, but why the ***** would you say that????

      Please, do /NEVER/ post a comment again.
      • AppleMacStud, on 04/16/2008, -1/+0I couldn't quite understand it either but think about it LOGICALLY, Mac OS X is the cure to most of man's problems, including world wide hunger. It just makes perfect sense. 
    • ChromaVita, on 04/15/2008, -0/+7Wrong kind of apple.
    • NonLeftistDiggr, on 04/15/2008, -2/+2epic fail
      The PC guy in the add has obviously stored much more food on his body than the MAC kid
  • davidjkass, on 04/15/2008, -2/+13E85 anyone? This is simple economics... governments subsidize certain types of crops for alternative fuel growth, farmers change their crop mix to sell the higher priced goods less of their crop goes toward the global food supply thus increasing the price of food. I am all for alternative energy, but not at the cost of global stabilization [both Kenya and Egypt are experiencing food riots right now].
    Ps. E85 has a larger carbon footprint and is more expensive to produce than petro.
    • rkzda, on 04/15/2008, -1/+4This is not because of E85... have you filled your tank within the last week? It's 3.25 per gallon(gasoline) here in CO, nearly 4 or over $4 for diesel.
      • juankovo, on 04/15/2008, -0/+2Subsidized and mandated ethanol production creates an unnatural strain on the supply of corn products. This artificially created demand results in higher costs of anything and everything that contains corn and corn syrup. Worse yet, you get considerably less energy out of a gallon of ethanol than you have to put into creating it. This is what happens when politicians get their hands on something that the free market should be deciding instead.
    • bosssmiley, on 04/15/2008, -0/+730% of agricultural land in the US earmarked for biofuel production by 2010 is having no effect on food prices. Yuh right.
    • gossipninja, on 04/15/2008, -0/+4that and many vehicles get up to 1/3 less mpg using e85.
      "Using E-85 in a gasoline engine has the drawback of achieving lower fuel economy as more fuel is needed per unit air (stoichiometric fuel ratio) to run the engine in comparison with gasoline."- wiki
    • Metasquares, on 04/15/2008, -0/+2Fuel-based solutions are all going to have these sorts of problems.
    • bdbr, on 04/15/2008, -0/+2I knew someone would go off about ethanol. Yes, its one of the reasons, but the article listed several.
  • panacean, on 04/15/2008, -3/+6I bet this has something to do with the increase in farms producing corn (corn is used to create ethanol). With more farms dedicated to corn, there is less land for wheat, cattle (milk/meat), hops (remember that Sam Adams article?), and other crops.

    Farmers are abandoning other crops to produce corn, but the market should eventually equalize itself once corn production becomes less profitable for farmers. That, or the government needs to step in.
    • p0s3r, on 04/15/2008, -1/+7It's the government stepping in that has caused this mess. They're the ones mandating ethanol.
    • rkzda, on 04/15/2008, -0/+6The government can stay the ***** out, thankyou.
    • Gemfinder, on 04/15/2008, -0/+3Search on "cellulosic ethanol."
      Meaning, ethanol made from not just corn but agricultural waste...grass clippings...old Christmas trees...bamboo...
  • gigamugged, on 04/15/2008, -0/+24Anybody else notice the new 12oz boxes of pasta (helpfully packaged in the same old 16oz-size box so you don't notice till you get home and realize there isn't enough pasta to go around)? How about the 6oz yogurt selling at the same price that the old 8oz portion used to sell for? I guess those ploys to hide inflation have finally run their course and the real impact of $100/bbl oil is showing up in food prices.
  • fisherx, on 04/15/2008, -3/+20Do you still believe corn-based ethonol is a good thing? Grow food. Burn oil.
    • FaithclubDotNet, on 04/15/2008, -1/+7Iowa thinks its a good idea. It costs 1.1 gallons of gasoline to make 1 gallon of ethanol, and ethanol holds less energy than gasoline. Ethanol is nothing but a gift of money to corn growers at the expense of everyone else. In fact if we were to just give corn growers money and they let their fields go fallow, we'd be better off.
    • pintomp3, on 04/15/2008, -0/+4sugar-based ethonol is better, but that won't happen thanks to our sugar tariffs.
  • Striff, on 04/15/2008, -1/+9Grow your own?
    • getontop, on 04/15/2008, -3/+6Good thing poor people live in apartments and have gardens.
      • Gemfinder, on 04/15/2008, -0/+5There are planters made specifically for small balconies and sunny windows. You can grow herbs, lettuce, tomatoes, peppers, eggplant, mushrooms, Meyer lemons, cherries, lotus, grapes and kumquats in them if you plan it right and keep them watered. I have an Earth Box out on my balcony and no longer pay for fresh herbs. Another friend grows tomatoes in hers. I'm going to start herbs in a Granny Sox and grow squash and peppers in the Earth Box this summer.
        Check out Gardeners.com, look under "Outdoor gardening, Vegetables." Also check out the coupon books in your Sunday paper, there's an offer where you buy a planter and stakes and grow a 100 pounds of tomatoes in a season, in a 2' square space. You need about 6' ceiling clearance, but I'll bet anyone here can stick away 100 pounds of tomatoes in a year.
        • chewbie, on 04/15/2008, -3/+2I grow my own too. It makes it harder for the cops to bust me that way
  • krusader3z, on 04/15/2008, -7/+7Glad I'm rich and don't have to worry about such things.
    • mojonandha, on 04/15/2008, -3/+3hahaha loser
    • Hypomanic, on 04/15/2008, -0/+8You know, in a revolution, you'll be the first they go after.
      • krusader3z, on 04/15/2008, -2/+2Despite the doom and gloom you hear on digg, I wouldn't count on that happening anytime soon.
      • kingsaliva, on 04/15/2008, -0/+2As long as fast food is cheap, the poor people of this country will not complain.
    • NonLeftistDiggr, on 04/15/2008, -0/+7By rich I assume by today's standards you make at least $50,000 a year
  • ch28kid, on 04/15/2008, -2/+7With the devalue of the US dollar and reliance on imported food, it is only going to get worst. No one wants US dollar in exchange for their food. Firms would have to to purchase them at a higher price. The burden then falls on the consumer which we can see today in our supermarket.
  • Stryder81, on 04/15/2008, -5/+8And the sad part is, the general public doesn't understand why this is ( or occurs )

    Nowhere in that article does it say " This is due to the decline of the dollar ", granted it says " Inflation " but people are still dumb to its details.

    If you compare food ( oil, etc ) to Gold, it remains steady, it's really pathetic to you popularity contest voting sons of bitches who pre-claimed for Obama or Hillary instead of the only logical person to win the presidency.

    The only thing that will " Change " with these people is, the face in the history books in the line of former presidents, while you reach into your pocket of lint saying " Wtf Did I Do? "


    • jmpeagle, on 04/15/2008, -1/+2by your logic the dollar was gaining value in the late 1970s and early 1990s when nominal prices for food stuffs were falling even though we were experiencing stagflation in the late 1970s and general inflation in the 1990s.

      Commodity prices are rising much faster than the rate of inflation...so unless everything else is getting cheap extremely fast because their relative prices to these commodities are falling then it has nothing to do with the falling dollar.
    • bbardlbradd, on 04/15/2008, -1/+4Why is gold worth so much to logical people??? WTF can you do with gold that is so ***** useful? Why can't we switch to the diamond standard already???

      I'm being serious here. I do not understand the gold standard (maybe because I'm a utilitarian that has read up on a lot of popular ideas in metaphysics???). I don't get why everyone hails the gold standard. Gold is not useful.

      Scarcity is less than Utility.
      • smurfmaster, on 04/15/2008, -0/+4A diamond standard would be worse. Diamonds aren't actually rare and they can be produced artificially.
      • juankovo, on 04/15/2008, -0/+2It doesn't matter what the currency is backed by. What matters is that it is backed by *something*. Our dollar is currently backed by nothing, which allows the politicians to print more of it at will (although in reality very little is actually physically printed–most is electronically added to bank accounts of government agencies and contractors) and banks to lend 9 times more money out than they actually have on deposit. It's much easier for a politician to pay for a new program with newly-created money (which makes all of the existing money worth less) than it is by raising taxes, which is understandably unpopular. Either way you're being robbed–they prefer the invisible way. Google "inflation tax" for more info.

        Gold is very useful industrially for its many unique properties (malleable, easy to pull into a wire, highly conductive, doesn't rust, etc., etc.) and is one of the best ways to pack a lot of real value into a small space. Also, it's gold is of uniform quality ... it's either gold or it isn't. There's no such thing as high or low quality gold, only whether it's 24 karat or not.

        Industrial diamonds are only used for a few specific applications; jewelry diamonds are valuable largely because the diamond cartel creates artificially low supply to keep prices (and profits) as high as possible. Also, there is a wide range of quality which is difficult to determine by the general consumer.
  • 55mph, on 04/15/2008, -3/+22It's much worse than the statistics sighted in the article. 4.5% this year? *****. Milk is up 35% in the last 18 months. Take the government's statistics and triple them.
    • juankovo, on 04/15/2008, -0/+2Most things at my stores are up 10% or more. A box of crackers that was 99¢ a few months ago is now $1.19. Stagflation, here we come!
  • UltramegaOK, on 04/15/2008, -2/+4I knew ***** was bad when my Ranch Snack Wraps at McDonalds went up last month.
  • Mpwns, on 04/15/2008, -0/+6whole foods deli rasied there prices twice already this year. and we are planing the next price hike already. at the start of the year we sold brown rice for 1.99 a pound now its 3.99 a pound. it also jumped about 200% for what we pay.
    • UltramegaOK, on 04/15/2008, -2/+7It's Whole Foods. What the ***** did you expect?
    • NonLeftistDiggr, on 04/15/2008, -0/+2Whole foods raised their prices.... LOL.... if you shop at whole foods you don't give a ***** how much food costs in the first place.

      Their fish is killer, I also went to work for 3 hours to pay for 2 pounds of it.
  • h4mx0r, on 04/15/2008, -0/+6Probably related but my high school serves their lunches at an outrageous price. Every year the main menus all increase by 25 cents. It's $4.50 right now for a small plate of food, but it was only 4 years ago that it was $3.50, which was an acceptable price for lunch. Hell, even the little things cost more now. Bottled water is $1.25, two inch cookies are 50 cents, and the chips have gone up to a dollar. (The 50 cent kinds)
    • pahoehoe, on 04/15/2008, -0/+8When I was in high school, we got our water from the drinking fountain. Paying $1.25 for water in a bottle? What a waste. I guess that's the price one pays for thinking that bottled water is somehow better. It does have a fancy label, and you get to drink it from a free bottle that is promptly discarded. That's priceless.
      • h4mx0r, on 04/15/2008, -1/+5Yes, except I recall using the water fountain once only to have brown fluids spew out of the hole like a gruesome recreation of tubgirl. (and it wasn't only one water fountain)
        Yes, it was only one time, but it makes me doubt how clean our water really is. Plus all the fountains seem to always have litter in them.
      • bentrinh, on 04/15/2008, -0/+3You know, my 7th grade science class did an experiment to see how much bacteria could grow from samples. The toilet sample took up 1/4 of the petri dish, and the drinking fountain one started overgrowing the petri dish.
  • sloppychris, on 04/15/2008, -0/+11People talk about economics like it's some foreign concept that only applies to rich businessmen. The truth is, those who study economics do so in order to help people. Rising food prices are wonderful examples of the importance of understanding how economics work and their implications for you and me in the real world.

    Unfortunately, too many take an over simplified view of economics. Passing laws that affect the economy begin with good intentions, but often have the opposite effect. When economists speak out against these laws, it isn't because they're evil people stuck in an office somewhere out of touch with reality. It's because they have an understanding of the complexities of the market, and know that good intentions don't always create positive results. For instance-- food prices rise because of inflation (there are other reasons though). Many economists believe that the federal bank and it's monetary policy is responsible for much of the inflation we are seeing, which drives up the price of food.

    Think about this the next time an economist argues against things like price ceilings or socialization. They're helping people.
    • p0s3r, on 04/15/2008, -0/+2Price ceilings create artificial demand and reduce supply. Putting a price ceiling into effect would drastically increase the shortages.
      • jmpeagle, on 04/15/2008, -0/+4i think his post may be sarcastic as price ceiling are what often cause starvation in many middle income countries. I think he is mocking the fact that politicans have no idea how markets work and try to ov er simplify them.
    • sloppychris, on 04/15/2008, -0/+8The "they" in my last line refers to economists who help people, not price ceilings or socialization. My mistake.
  • LeZeb, on 04/15/2008, -2/+11 full tank of ethanol = 1 year of food for one person in a developping country.
    1 calory of meat needs 5 calories of vegetables ... Not saying that our rich countries need to be more generous by reducing their meat consumption. Just predicting that if you still want to eat some bread around your burger you will have to eat burgers less often, because the prices of cereals are not rising only in the third world.
    • jmpeagle, on 04/15/2008, -0/+1there isn't a food shortage....just a breakdown of agricultural markets thanks to many export restrictions
      • LeZeb, on 04/15/2008, -0/+1there are a few months of reserves worldwide right now which is the smallest amount we've experienced for more than 25 years. And the problem didn't start this week and the riots... :
        http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1 ...

        But I wasn't even speaking about shortage, just the fact that if you want the bun on a burger to be less expensive than the meat , eating meat less often could help due to the high consumption of vegetables needed to raise animals...
        • jmpeagle, on 04/15/2008, -0/+1no one denies that meat consumption is requires more food usage...I am just pointing out that there is a simpler solution than changing the dietary habits of 6.8 billion people. Eliminate export restrictions....this way countires such as Ukraine don't have to dump 100 million dollars worth of grain that they allowed to spoil thanks to a large surplus, into the black sea like they did earlier this year.
          http://www.economist.com/finance/displaystory.cfm? ...
    • sremick, on 04/15/2008, -0/+1So how many corncobs (the byproduct without kernels) and switchgrass do people in a developing country eat in a year?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellulosic_ethanol

      Just curious.
  • pintomp3, on 04/15/2008, -1/+6well it's a good thing we pay farmers to grow nothing.
  • buttspeak, on 04/15/2008, -6/+0Yup, converting food into gas for the SUV is another genius George W initiative..
    • shauncorleone, on 04/15/2008, -0/+1Blame pressure from environmentalists for all the alternative fuel initiatives and ethanol subsidies. Buttspeak truly is an appropriate username.
  • zoezack, on 04/15/2008, -0/+9It's time to turn lawns into vegetable gardens and plant fruit trees along the sunny side of the driveway, next to the garage that contains bicycles instead of an SUV.
  • p0s3r, on 04/15/2008, -7/+7Global warming hasn't done *****. Global warming hysteria, on the other hand, is causing world wide food shortages.
  • kingamoon, on 04/15/2008, -1/+9***** man! Aren't there any good news in the world nowadays?
    • saisumimen, on 04/15/2008, -0/+2Only if you happen to own stock in food conglomerates, oil, or gold.
    • Metasquares, on 04/15/2008, -0/+2Don't worry, X won American Idol even though everyone thought Y was going to win instead!
  • Nozferatu, on 04/15/2008, -8/+2Serves you ***** right...sucks to have a taste of your own medicine doesn't it. Hope it gets worse. It's time all that waste you idiots produce is shoveled straight back into your SUVs and McMansions. Hope you enjoy the next 10-15 miserable years.
    • p0s3r, on 04/15/2008, -1/+4They have McMansions and SUVs in Haiti? Because it's countries like that that are suffering from this.
    • AbsurdParadox, on 04/15/2008, -2/+6If you got a decent job, you could have nice stuff too. Don't be so jealous.
  • mverta, on 04/15/2008, -2/+5Man, if there's one thing this fatass country could use it's less food.
    • chewbie, on 04/15/2008, -0/+2while you comment is funny, take a good look around in the supermarket and you will see that unhealthy foods are a lot cheaper than healthy ones.
      So this is definitely not good for the health of the country
      • juankovo, on 04/15/2008, -0/+2Unhealthy foods are cheaper largely because of government subsidies. There is no reasonable excuse for a Twinkie being cheaper than a carrot.
  • vik16, on 04/15/2008, -1/+6It's sad when families need to jeopardize their health to save money for the next round of food.
    You gotta admit, Bush has done an awesome job. I`d like to give him a trophy for all the great work he`s done. At least the next president has no work ahead of him / her.
    • p0s3r, on 04/15/2008, -5/+3This isn't because of Bush. It's a direct result of global warming hysteria. So you can thank the UN and the Church of Global Warming for this mess.
  • jjive, on 04/15/2008, -3/+9Wow that is so weird, the oil company's profits are the highest they've been in 17 years.
    • and303, on 04/15/2008, -3/+3Wrong forum, unless of course...you eat motor oil.
      • jjive, on 04/15/2008, -0/+5How do think food gets moved around?
        The transportation of food is the biggest factor in its cost.
        • jordwest, on 04/15/2008, -0/+5Thus increasing oil prices = increasing food prices.
          I don't understand why its weird?
  • and303, on 04/15/2008, -0/+1Isn't obesity rising at the fastest rate as well?

    Maybe 2 problems can create a solution,
    • StyngerSmash, on 04/15/2008, -0/+1No, I think that'll take too long.
    • Gemfinder, on 04/15/2008, -0/+5Nope. The proliferation and widespread consumption of soda is a direct cause of obesity, because it's cheaper than the good stuff (milk and juice). Poor people = fat people.
      • juankovo, on 04/15/2008, -0/+2And the *reason* it's cheaper than milk is because of government subsidies on corn syrup. Every government solution creates two new problems down the road.
  • Gemfinder, on 04/15/2008, -0/+1No scheisse, Sherlock. A pound of butter is standing at $5 today. I said, "I'll make the cookies for the party with raisin paste. At least the lactose-intolerants won't have reason to complain..."
  • nastronomical, on 04/15/2008, -3/+4E85 anyone? This is simple economics... governments subsidize certain types of crops for alternative fuel growth, farmers change their crop mix to sell the higher priced goods less of their crop goes toward the global food supply thus increasing the price of food. I am all for alternative energy, but not at the cost of global stabilization [both Kenya and Egypt are experiencing food riots right now].
    Ps. E85 has a larger carbon footprint and is more expensive to produce than petro.





    • Gemfinder, on 04/15/2008, -0/+1Explain why E-85's price is standing at about $1/gallon below Regular Unleaded gas, if you would?
      • 3ugene, on 04/15/2008, -1/+1Good thing it isn't skyrocketing in price either.
        /sarcasm
        Imagine when corn costs more (see the article)... their goes your great discount.
    • 3ugene, on 04/15/2008, -1/+1This has absolutely nothing to do with the mistake that is E85.
  • josabz2, on 04/15/2008, -0/+2oh my. the crisis is GLOBAL!!
    i thought its on select countries in asia, its wrecking other continents too.
    someone somehow messed up.
    sorry but i think those 'world leaders' should know better.
  • skyz, on 04/15/2008, -0/+8i feed just me - i am a girl and i am thin - but eating healthy costs a lot more than it used to - another thing i have noticed is that often the big supermarket in the major city i live in is often out of things where before there were never empty spaces on the shelves - i used to have more money left over after bills and food than i do now - being a vegetarian used to mean my grocery bills were cheaper but not any more - fruits and vegetables cost a lot more - it is not subtle it is obvious - i feel sorry for families trying to feed growing kids well -
  • Gemfinder, on 04/15/2008, -0/+325 pounds of flour is $15 at Costco. That's a little less than $1 a pound, whereas if you buy a 5-pound sack of flour it'll set you back almost $4. The 25-pounder will make about a year's worth of bread, including enough to feed a sourdough barm.
    Look at that! By making your own bread, you can realize a double-digit percentage reduction in your grocery bill. Mix it up and ferment it overnight in the fridge, take it out first thing and bake it off while you shower and dress for work.
    • psykiv, on 04/15/2008, -1/+2Never mind the cost of eggs and the cost of running the oven for an hour, right?
    • smurfmaster, on 04/15/2008, -0/+3Yes, buying larger amounts is cheaper, but you also risk that the stuff goes bad.
  • NonLeftistDiggr, on 04/15/2008, -4/+1We need to cancel more trade aggreements, and fast! Vote Obama
    • SpaceMonkeyZero, on 04/15/2008, -0/+1Hey, you're one of those Ron Paulies turned Obamamas... Figures you would have no clue.
      • NonLeftistDiggr, on 04/15/2008, -0/+1sorry, usually I don't bother with the /sarcastic

        I'm one of those "Oh ***** these people blow, I guess I'll have to write somebody in when I vote"
  • kelmaster1, on 04/15/2008, -0/+2The Boom Bust cycle continues...
  • joeanon, on 04/15/2008, -0/+4It's not inflation. It's FOOD SPECULATION based on future projection of prices.

    Just like OIL... GRAIN isn't actually worth 120% more, but investors are PUSHING the price up buying quantity and SITTING ON IT TO MAKE MONEY LATER>

    That;s what's going on... not a world wide grain shortage.
  • RhodesSkolar, on 04/15/2008, -0/+1I've decided to read about this after lunch.
  • SpaceMonkeyZero, on 04/15/2008, -2/+1Finally, expensive food will cut down on the number of fatties in the world!
  • momsshizzle, on 04/15/2008, -2/+1Who cares. I just went to Sabarro's for pizza. I ate it across from a homeless guy. It sure was good!
  • quaffapint, on 04/15/2008, -0/+1A Big F U to all those that pushed for Ethanol - Now, I'm off to go shoot and eat that caribou that you love so much...
  • electrifried, on 04/15/2008, -0/+2blame the us/south america and their hype over biofuel.
  • Sizzor, on 04/15/2008, -1/+1Even hookers now cost $5000 an hour.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 59 of 59 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.