Corvette Forum : DigitalCorvettes.com Corvette Forums banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
31,366 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Warnings of higher food prices headed for American supermarkets and restaurants were swallowed easily across much of farm country Wednesday.

The big gulp came when the U.S. Department of Agriculture reported that global demand had pushed U.S. corn supplies to their lowest point in 15 years.

The price of corn, which has doubled over the past six months, affects most food products in supermarkets. It's used to feed the cattle, hogs and chickens that fill the meat aisles.

It is the main ingredient in Cap'n Crunch and Doritos. Turned into syrup, it sweetens most soft drinks and many foods.

Corn also is part of the agricultural blend that fuels the economies of Nebraska, Iowa and other farming states. Iowa is the nation's top corn-producing state; Nebraska is third.

Shoppers could see higher grocery bills as early as three months from now, though most of the impact won't be felt for another six months, said Scott Irwin, an agricultural economics professor at the University of Illinois.

Chicken prices are among the first to rise because the bird's life span is so short that higher feed costs get factored in quickly, he said. Price hikes for hogs take about a year and cattle two years. Prices on packaged foods take six or seven months to rise.

Tyson Foods, the nation's biggest meat company, said chicken, beef and pork prices are expect to rise this year, if only slightly, as producers seek to cover costs.

ConAgra Foods Inc. — the Omaha-based producer of brands including Healthy Choice, Banquet and Chef Boyardee — is raising prices on some of its products because of higher costs for corn and fuel, said Teresa Paulsen, a spokeswoman.

The price rally has bolstered the financial fitness of America's crop and livestock operators over the past eight months. Midwestern cropland is yielding record values. Rural banks and equipment makers report record profits.

“We're seeing record income levels for the ag community and ... wealth accumulation that cannot be denied,” said Bruce Johnson, an agricultural economist at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. “We've moved into a whole new level.”

Said Bruce Babcock, an agricultural economist at Iowa State University: “Farmers are going to be earning quite a bit more money.”

Jason Henderson, Omaha branch executive for the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, said farmers are buying more tractors, pickup trucks, grain bins and land.

“And they also come to Omaha to shop and go to events,” he said.

But it hasn't been simply a spending spree, Henderson said. Farmers are paying down debt and fewer are seeking loan renewals or extensions.

“It's a good time to be an ag banker,” said Brian Esch, president of McCook National Bank in southwest Nebraska. “But I have concerns over what this means for consumers. If one guy is selling at a record profit, someone is buying at a record level.”

Corn prices have risen over the past six months from $3.50 a bushel to nearly $7.

The U.S. will have a reserve of 675 million bushels left over in late August, when this year's harvest begins. That's roughly 5 percent of all corn that will be consumed, the lowest surplus level since 1996.

“There is going to be enough corn for food, for feed, for fuel and for export opportunities,” Tom Vilsack, the U.S. agriculture secretary, said at a Washington press conference.

Babcock, the Iowa State economist, said the U.S. mandate to increase the use of renewable fuels like ethanol is a major reason why the nation's corn supply is so low. About a quarter of the nation's corn crop is consumed by the production of ethanol. The ethanol industry's projected corn orders this year have risen . . . after record-high production in December and January, USDA said.

“We've created a hungry business that is dependent on corn, even high-priced corn,” Babcock said.

Johnson, the UNL economist, said global supply and demand are the root causes behind low U.S. corn stocks.

“Ethanol is a factor, but it's not the driver,” he said.

Johnson said the declining value of the dollar not only has fueled greater agricultural export demand, but also has driven up the price of oil. That, in turn, has propelled higher prices for corn-based ethanol.

The agricultural economies of Nebraska and Iowa will continue to grow into greater prominence as global food providers, economists said.

Johnson said rising population numbers globally and greater demand in major developing countries for higher-protein diets have strengthened the Midlands' agricultural market.

Farm cash receipts — led by corn and other crops — doubled in Nebraska from 2000 through 2010. Crop receipts alone ended the decade in the $9 billion range, up from a 2000 total of $3 billion.

Nebraska's net farm income hit a record $4.25 billion last year, according to preliminary estimates. The 2010 level would be nearly 65 percent above the 10-year historical average, Johnson said.

Although farm income represents only about 6 percent of Nebraska's $75 billion personal income total, it has a major impact on local and regional economies, Johnson said.

“There is no question that agriculture buffered the state from going into a deeper recession these last few years, and it has helped pull us out of the recession faster than other areas,” he said. “Agriculture has been our pack horse.”

http://www.omaha.com/article/20110210/NEWS01/702109884/0#get-ready-for-higher-food-prices
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,253 Posts
Sounds like a good time to start ratcheting back agriculture subsidies. If farmers can't make it when prices are high, there is big trouble in rural land.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,253 Posts
I looked up the farm susbsidies in the U.S. It seems it averages about $20B per year. There are about 100 million families in the U.S. That means if we did away with farm subsidies and let the market rise to incorporate that lost farm revenue, every family in America would add about $200 to their food bill each year or about $17 a month. Since the taxpayers foot this bill, it seems to me we could eliminate the subsidies completely, increase food stamp recipients $17/month and the rest of us pay $17/month more for our food. This would not be a big hit and we could get the government out of their role as middle man in the food chain.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,760 Posts
I looked up the farm susbsidies in the U.S. It seems it averages about $20B per year. There are about 100 million families in the U.S. That means if we did away with farm subsidies and let the market rise to incorporate that lost farm revenue, every family in America would add about $200 to their food bill each year or about $17 a month. Since the taxpayers foot this bill, it seems to me we could eliminate the subsidies completely, increase food stamp recipients $17/month and the rest of us pay $17/month more for our food. This would not be a big hit and we could get the government out of their role as middle man in the food chain.
Sounds like a great idea to me...corn subsidies are another of these hidden government welfare programs that must go.

PS: This could help pull Illinios ass out of the fire since they are the #2 producer in the nation.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,760 Posts
too late.


That should have been done in 1996
I don't understand why it is too late. While I agree that it should have been done in 1996, there is no better time than the present to fix past mistakes. Of course we will waste our time instead talking about states going bankrupt and ignor the actual possibilities that may work. :crazy:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
31,366 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
I don't understand why it is too late. While I agree that it should have been done in 1996, there is no better time than the present to fix past mistakes. Of course we will waste our time instead talking about states going bankrupt and ignor the actual possibilities that may work. :crazy:
He means, that when the car is 75ft from the bottom of the cliff, it's a little late to apply the brakes..
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,109 Posts
I don't understand why it is too late. While I agree that it should have been done in 1996, there is no better time than the present to fix past mistakes. Of course we will waste our time instead talking about states going bankrupt and ignor the actual possibilities that may work. :crazy:
Because it will hit families with 100 bucks or more increase per month, not 17 bucks.


Most middle income families were already hit with 50 to 100 dollar increases per month in food during 2007-08

It went down, but is marching back to that point now, if not almost there.

There are too many investors now, with their hands in agriculture and everything involved with it.

Your looking at the new monster the fed created, stepping right up to the plate along side high energy, utilities, health care, taxes, unemployment, and upsidedown savings and home values.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top