Quote:
Originally Posted by glatt
Food dropped significantly because of improved transportation. And transportation costs went way up at the same time, erasing all those savings. Ironic.
|
I think more significant was the change from local, regional growing to massive centralized growing, gov't farm subsidies (especially the really big growers), and a change in our dietary practices which oddly saw an increase in consumption of typically more expensive foods that had become cheaper due to centralizing production and economy of scale.
And breeding practices as well. eg, in 1935 it took 112 days to raise a chicken to 2.85# slaughter weight and it req'd 4.4# of feed. By 2000 it took 47 days to raise a chicken to 5.5# and it only req'd 1.95# of grain.
At about the same time an acre of corn would produce about 20 bushels, now it is close to 180 bushels. On a creepy side note the amount of nutrition in a bushel of wheat is about 1/3 of what it was 100 years ago, meaning that you need to consume 3x as much food (and calories) to get the same nutrition as one did 100 years ago.
Obese kids are presenting with scurvy and rickets (probably more a chips and mountain dew issue, but still...)
It reminds me of that old chestnut (haha) Cheap, quick, or good. You can have any two. Obviously it applies to food.
Finally, the real question should be "What is the real cost of food?"