4 ms·
It's not necessary that lower farm income results in lower prices at the supermarket. For instance, the price of a chicken at the chicken farm is completely dis
by jordanb 2y ago
It's not necessary that lower farm income results in lower prices at the supermarket. For instance, the price of a chicken at the chicken farm is completely disconnected from the price of a chicken at the supermarket by the Tyson/JBS monopoly.
Food distribution is currently consolidating and rolling-up rapidly (ex: the Albertsons/Kroger merger). The result will be low farm income and high supermarket prices.
- ajross 2y agoIt's clearly not "completely" disconnected, otherwise there would be zero volatility in supermarket prices. But again a price is a price not matter what layer of the market it sits at, and all prices are subject to market conditions. Freaking out about some subsampling of them as being "real" in/de/stag/whateverflation in an attempt to shoehorn whatever noisy data you have into a signal that confirms your priors just leads to the kind of nonsense logic that produced the analysis I quoted above.
- tuatoru 2y ago> It's clearly not "completely" disconnected, otherwise there would be zero volatility in supermarket prices. I understood that supermarkets are always changing prices semirandomly, so that consumers never really know what the price "should" be.
- indigo0086 2y ago> I *misunderstood