Food prices to double

[Odsox]

we only spend 15% of our annual income on food now (well, 2008) and in 1957 the figure was 33% (according to the Telegraph).

I bet you will find that the reason the 1957 figure is so high is because that was before supermarkets started, also again that was probably a figure for London (or at least urban dwellers) as most rural dwellers grew their own to a much greater extent than today.

I saw on the BBC news site earlier in the week that the average European food bill is 10% as they were comparing it to the Swiss who only spend 5% on theirs ... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13546715
So if yours is 15% you must buy too much caviare and champagne.

[greenorelse]

We've spent about 20-25% of our income on food for around 25 years now, up to starting to grow our own a few years ago. This is because for all that time, at least 80% of what I've bought has been organic/veganic. In fact, usually, if it's not organic, we don't buy it.

Do the spending figures quoted include eating out? That in itself must constitute a huge part of a typical modern family's outlay. Does it include, say, coke and crisps and ice cream on a journey?

I think supermarkets are the dearest source of food, as the whole bill for the food is not paid at the till. Adverse pesticide and herbicide effects, the reliance upon chemical fertilisers, the huge pressure supermarkets can put on producers, your contribution to CAP, the massive subsidies given to the food industry, the packaging and all its related issues, the pollution caused by fossil fuels, the increase in dependence on the car, on fewer and fewer suppliers and the contraction in choice, the degradation and depredation of rainforests, the subsequent climatic effects, the conditioning placed upon your brain and the peculiarly pointless advertising 'industry' etc etc and so on and so forth. These and others are costings outside our perceived accounting system.

Yes, before anyone says it, I'm aware some of these apply to some organic foods too.

[niknik]

How do they work it out anyway?

The lower the income.the higher the % will be for basic feeding, whereas a real wealthy person, may spend a greater % but that would be for luxury items, eating out etc, rather thsan the basics!

Still gonna try and work mine out,.but that will take a while to quantify, but less than 10 % I´m pretty sure,
including the occasional treat !

[stevetc]

Supermarkets, innit. . . more and more of our ('our' as in da western world) food is grown on big factory farms and transported across the world . . . much of it is GM food designed to be processed and inedible for humans without additives. . . people have very little idea where it comes from, until something like the evil-spanish-cucumbers-not thing makes them think . . .

As communities, we have forgotten how to produce our own food . . . which is pretty scary, really . . . with fuel prices rising, global agri-business isn't so feasible. . .

Ho hum . . .

[Lilyfae]

Is the US still dumping ship loads of 'waste' wheat into the sea (bad for the sea and fish stocks), because it is 'uneconomic' to ship it to somewhere where people are starving?? They certainly were in the 80s.
!

Wouldn't be Surprised though more stuff to make ire over agriculture/trade corruption is that during the Ukrainian genocide in the early 30s (when Stalin deliberately starved the Ukraine) the USA bought the grain that was grown in the Ukraine and sold it to us as American aid during the Depression (UK for those over the Irish sea- but let's not get into potatoes) millions of Ukrainian people died or were forced to cannibalism to survive during Holodomor.

Seriously I think we'd all disown our countries if we knew what they were really up to

[wulf]

Is a doubling of food prices over the next twenty years meant to be scary? Wouldn't that be a decrease in the rate of price inflation? I'm just a little way shy of 40 and my parents describe how they used to fill the kitchen table with food - groceries for the week - for £5 when I was a baby. Now you would struggle to fill a chair. As another example, I remember the dismay when, twenty or so years ago and I was at university, beer was starting to pass the £1 / pint barrier. Pub prices are now well over £2 a pint (the Oxford standard seems to be £3+).

That probably makes it a good thing that I'm getting back into homebrewing (hic!) but also suggests to me that the economics of this report (or, at least, what makes it to the papers) has not been considered in historical context.

Wulf

[Odsox]

I may be missing your point here, but surely that £5 grocery spend does rather depend on what wages they were earning at that time ?
40 years ago I was also bringing up a young family and if my failing memory serves me right, I think I was earning about £35 a week.
So £5 would have been about 14% of my wages, rather more than the quoted 10% of today.
Pub prices are not really relevant as alcohol has tax/duty at a rate that is not really dependant on any factor other than government greed.
(Beer was 1/10d a pint when I started pubbing)
(About 9p )

[wulf]

I've no idea what their income was at the time. A figure like "percentage of average wage spent on food" would be more meaningful than a raw cost (although still vague because what food would you be talking about and would you be allowing for any waste?). I'm just suggesting that, unless wages freeze complete, the idea of food prices doubling in the next twenty years is not quite the scary, impossible thought that it seems at first.

If anything, it might be a good thing, as other figures suggest that average food expenditure in the UK (although probably not for the "average isher") contains a disgustingly high proportion of waste from leftovers chucked out and excess food being chucked out rather than more sensible buying habits; those kind of things would have to change for many if prices did go up as suggested.

Wulf

[Odsox]

It's things like this that's going to cause the food problems ... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-13688683

QUOTE > "This is creating insecurity in the global food system that could be a much bigger threat than terrorism,"

That didn't happen back in the 50's or 60's for those who think food price rises are a load of propaganda.

[grahamhobbs]

(Beer was 1/10d a pint when I started pubbing)
(About 9p )

It was 1/31/2d for a pint of mild and 1/8d for 'diesel' (Guiness) for me in SE London (12 pints and a Chinese meal for under £1.50 on a Saturday night, those were the days).

Returning to the subject, Odsox's article reminds me of the picture of 50, yes 50, combine harvesters proceeding in a line across a single field in South America. Globally multi-nationals are hell bent on exploiting the planet - when and how are we going to stop them?

[Odsox]

(Beer was 1/10d a pint when I started pubbing)
(About 9p )

It was 1/31/2d for a pint of mild and 1/8d for 'diesel' (Guiness) for me in SE London (12 pints and a Chinese meal for under £1.50 on a Saturday night, those were the days).

Actually I got it wrong then, mild was 11d a pint and bitter was 1/- a pint.
I thought my memory was playing tricks and the 11d I remembered MUST have been for 1/2 pint, but your memory Graham is better than mine, mind you just about everyone's memory is better than mine.
So that makes even more ludicrous at 4.5p a pint in today's money.
When I got my first car regular petrol was 4/6d a gallon and 4 star was 4/9d, I have no idea what that would be per litre today.
A full tank of petrol for under £1

[grahamhobbs]

Trouble was we was still broke in those days. I remember my mate having a rich American uncle, who allowed him to drive his brand new Jag before it was exported. So four 18 year old lads pulls into this garage, flash as anything, only to scrabble around to raise 2/- for half a gallon.

On petrol prices, when I got my van 8 years ago, it cost £50 to fill her up, a couple of weeks ago it topped £100.

[oldjerry]

Sorry to disagree with a good few of you,but in many ways food is FAR TOO CHEAP.I'm the last person to disregard the effect rising food prices have on the poor,but that's a question of wealth distribution.In a natural situation all animals especially humans will expend a great deal of time and energy feeding themselves and their family.Cheap food has led to a diminishing of reverence for food,mealtimes,cooking etc.(not to mention a servile dependance on retail conglomerates) and till people can regain their respect for food we'll all continue to travel paddleless up S--t Creek.

[happyhippy]

Well I am very lucky to be able to grow my own food,don't get angry,get even!

[grahamhobbs]

Sorry to disagree with a good few of you,but in many ways food is FAR TOO CHEAP.I'm the last person to disregard the effect rising food prices have on the poor,but that's a question of wealth distribution.

Very true

When I was in Bangladesh the price of rice rose, I can't remember about 25% I think. There was an article in the newspaper on how this affected the poor of that country (the overwhelming majority). It was written in these terms, rickshaw drivers (they use bicycle type rickshaws) normally ate 8oz of rice and they could do say 12 fares a day, but with 6oz then they could only physically take 8 fares with the subsequent loss of earnings, so even less money to feed themselves. The figures, for the amount of rice eaten to the amount of work you get out, were presented as cold well establish facts (probably computed 150 years ago by the British). The vast majority of the population operated at this level and everyone worked, it was all manual labour, no plant, no machinery.

This is how millions of people live. World prices dictated by currency and 'futures' speculators in the city may have an impact here, but remember those, who's lives are totally remote from this 'modern' world, who are far more affected.