| | |||||||
| Health & Fitness Health issues, diet, exercise, sleep, fitness, endurance, flexibility, strength, physical skills, sports, health habits, healing |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| | #1 (permalink) |
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: ON, Canada
Posts: 153
|
One of the arguments people have for not eating meat is that it uses something like 16 lbs of corn, soy or grains to produce 1 lb of beef. Why then can beef be sold for so cheap? Other meats like pork and turkey are sold for even cheaper, $2-4 lb! |
| | |
| | #4 (permalink) |
| Banned Join Date: May 2007 Location: Philadelphia, PA, USA
Posts: 3,747
|
That is awful to hear since that money has to come from somewhere. I went to a meeting of animal rights groups. They had literature of a study by the United Nations showing that giving up eating meat did more to protect from global warming than anything else that you can do including switching to a hybrid car. In a groundbreaking 2006 report, the United Nations (U.N.) said that raising animals for food generates more greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide) than all the cars and trucks in the world combined. |
| | |
| | #5 (permalink) | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: NJ
Posts: 338
| Quote:
| |
| | |
| | #6 (permalink) | |
| Family Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 8,749
| Quote:
The aim of agricultural subsidizes is to raise the income of farmers. If the price of some agricultural product goes beyond a certain mark the goverment buys something from it to raise the price. When you add up those subsidizes and treat them like they would keep the price low you could probably get to that 50$ sum. | |
| | |
| | #7 (permalink) |
| Family Member Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,184
|
I am not a farmer, but I believe that the only way grain fed beef is affordable is when you apply economics of scale. IOW, the grain needs to be purchased in large lots at wholesale prices. Only the large operators (which are usually the most subsidised, and the worst environmental and 'cruelty' offenders) can afford to do this. Unfortunately, diet and nutrition has a tendancy to become a politically and emotionally charged issue, with 'true believers' on all sides making wild claims which may or may not be based on reality. There is money to be made selling diet books and 'healthy-convenience' foods, so of course everybody claims to be an expert and objective information is often hard to come by. I buy organic, humanely raised, pastured beef, so while I am paying a premium (6.00/lb for ground chuck, upwards of $10.00/lb for roasts/steaks), I believe it is worth it. |
| | |
| | #8 (permalink) |
| Family Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: France -> Germany -> France -> Brazil
Posts: 3,430
|
Other reasons why meat is so cheap is that for example - the animals europeans and north americans eat are to a huge extent fed with soy or corn produced in so called Third World countries, where it is cheaper than here. (while people there have not enough land to grow their own stuff) - a huge amount of meat is "produced" in mass industry meat factories where the animals are forced to live in horrible, torture-like conditions to economize space and energy. They are fed with crap because it's cheaper (like slaughter waste: feathers, bones, ...). In order to prevent diseases that are likely to appear because of those poor hygiene conditions, unhealthy diet and shortage of space, they are systematically given antibiotics - that's cheaper than to lose a part of the "production" because of some diseases or to cure the sick animals. And cheaper than letting them live in decent conditions. They are given hormones too so that they grow much faster than they normally would and get fatter than they naturally would. That makes it more profitable too. (You eat those antibiotics and hormones with the meat btw) Sometimes they are fattened in a country/region where it is cheaper and then transported in barbarous conditions over huge distances to another place to be slaughtered. It's cheaper this way, even though you'll lose a part of the merchandise because some of them die or are severely injured during the transport. Because of all this, meat is produced to the lowest possible costs. It would be much more expensive if the animals were treated decently. Look at organic meat, it is much more expensive indeed. my 2 cts. enjoy your cheap meal! |
| | |
| | #9 (permalink) |
| Banned Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 728
|
Beef is probably even cheaper right now thanks to the beef recall. Companies are probably trying to get consumers back, though I imagine more people will be inspired to give up eating beef after the e coli scare. beef recall - Google News Some groceries and restaurants say that beef purchases aren't affected - but I don't think they're exactly a neutral source for news. |
| | |
| | #11 (permalink) | ||||||
| Family Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: San Rafael, CA
Posts: 4,896
| Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
| ||||||
| | |
| | #12 (permalink) |
| Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: New York City
Posts: 44
|
beef is cheap because most of it is processed and filled with dangerous "shelf-life sustaining" chemicals. Unprocessed, organic meat is much more expensive...and I highly recommend eating better quality ESPECIALLY when it comes to meat. So many people in the US complain about food prices....but what people don't realize is that the US pays less per capita for food than every other country in the world (less than 10% of our incomes go to food). In Europe...its closer to 30%. WE have the means to eat better in this country....but we choose not to because we are marketed cheap, synthetic and unhealthy foods by large corporations whose sole mission is to increase stock prices and not our health!
|
| | |
| | #13 (permalink) | ||
| Family Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: San Rafael, CA
Posts: 4,896
| Quote:
Quote:
| ||
| | |
| | #15 (permalink) | |
| Family Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: San Rafael, CA
Posts: 4,896
|
Also, Amazon.com: Brain Trust: The Hidden Connection Between Mad Cow and Misdiagnosed Alzheimer's Disease Amazon.com: Mad Cow U.S.A.: Could the Nightmare Happen Here?: Books: Sheldon Rampton,John Stauber I wouldn't bring it up except that we all pay into the health system. Quote:
| |
| | |
| | #16 (permalink) |
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: brooklyn, new york
Posts: 193
|
i don't think beef is directly subsidized. it's more the crops that are fed to the cattle -- corn and soy. for a hugely fascinating discussion of this, and how the food industry in america has altered to use up all the subsidzied corn and soy, read "the omnivore's dilemma" by michael pollan. if you look at an american's tissues in a high density spectrometer, you can see that we are mostly made out of corn. pollan's exact phrase, i think, is "we look like corn chips on legs." fully 1/2 of the items in the average grocery store contain corn or corn products. there's also the huge amount of environmental cost in factory beef farming, which is "externalized," ie., pushed off onto society at large in the form of filthy groundwater, methane-soaked air from the cows' poo and farts (methane is a much more potent greenhouse grass than CO2), and human and animal suffering -- the rate of injury for a slaughterhouse worker is roughly 20 times that of any other profession. if beef's true cost were reflected in its price, it would be much more expensive. the costs of raising grass-fed beef are not externalized, and it is at a much smaller, artisanal scale, and that's why it's more expensive than feedlot beef. |
| | |
| | #17 (permalink) | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: NJ
Posts: 338
| Quote:
($200-$3)*4*60*300,000,000=14 184 000 000 000 (14 trillion dollars/year) or I'll use the $50 estimate as well ($50-$3)*4*60*300,000,000=3 384 000 000 000 (3 trillion dollars/year) The US federal budget last year was $2.6 trillion (highest ever of course). So what you're saying is that the federal government spent more subsidizing beef than it actually had in its entire budget? My calculations are a bit simplified, but I think the point is clear. Sorry, but I'm going to have to call bull ****. | |
| | |
| | #19 (permalink) | ||
| Family Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: San Rafael, CA
Posts: 4,896
| Quote:
Quote:
The cost here comes from the value of the land being used by cattle as well and the value of the old growth trees that are cleared. | ||
| | |
| | #20 (permalink) | |||
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: NJ
Posts: 338
| Quote:
Quote:
In any case, I already did the calculation for the $50 estimate, which still ends up exceeding the federal budget. Quote:
Last edited by Addict; 10-04-2007 at 06:13 PM. | |||
| | |
| | #21 (permalink) |
| Family Member Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,184
| The problem is that grass fed beef is 'popular' among certain segments of the population. That would drive up the price as all of the sudden, the grass fed hamburger is being marketed in trendy resteraunts as 'health food' for $15.99.
|
| | |
| | #22 (permalink) | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: NJ
Posts: 338
| Quote:
| |
| | |
| | #23 (permalink) | |
| Family Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: San Rafael, CA
Posts: 4,896
|
The general consensus used for "the real price" of subsidized domestic beef, from The Food Revolution is this, Quote:
Freshwater is really important, water conservation is why you don't leave the faucet going when you brush your teeth, why we have low flow shower heads, etc. You would conserve more water by simply not eating two pounds of beef than you would if you stopped showering for an entire year. And yes, the government can subsidize more than their annual budget in freshwater.. | |
| | |
| | #24 (permalink) | ||
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: NJ
Posts: 338
| Quote:
Quote:
So using your high end estimate of 5,000 gallons, we get $10 in water costs. Mind you, that value would be much lower for a large system and it probably is much lower because it doesn't need to be treated as well as tap water. Assuming all the absolute most conservative estimates that work in your favor, the math is still coming up $20 short. And yes, I am curious about your statement about the government being able to subsidize more than it can spend on fresh water. It doesn't matter too much though if the statistic is wrong. Last edited by Addict; 10-04-2007 at 06:25 PM. | ||
| | |
| | #25 (permalink) |
| Family Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: San Rafael, CA
Posts: 4,896
|
Well, $35 was a few years ago - I'd guess that $50 is pretty reasonable by now. I'll have to go home to grab my copy of The Food Revolution to source the $35 / calculation. Here are some more statistical realities along those lines, hosted at MIT.. http://web.mit.edu/vsg/www/vsg/INFO/...nment/realites |
| | |
| | #26 (permalink) | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: NJ
Posts: 338
| Quote:
| |
| | |
| | #27 (permalink) | ||
| Family Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: San Rafael, CA
Posts: 4,896
| Quote:
I personally think that stats like these have A LOT to do with global warming: Quote:
I'm off to have some Red Curry Pak for lunch... have a good one Addict, thanks for the debate. | ||
| | |
| | #29 (permalink) | ||
| Family Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 8,749
| Quote:
Quote:
http://asae.frymulti.com/request.asp...ID=tfl2005&T=2 Says that a cow needs 35 gallons of water per day. Does someone has number of how long a cow lives and how much pounds of beaf it produces? | ||
| | |
| Bookmarks |
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 06:05 AM.




