Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Eggs are 60% more expensive than last year in the US

semafor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 389 posts

Re: Eggs are 60% more expensive than last year in the US

#251

Post by voisin »

wincy wrote: post #188
sequoia wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a huge proponent of backyard chickens and had them for years, but they are, generally speaking, not a "more cost effective" way to get eggs, at least in north america if you are feeding them mostly store-bought feed. Then again, this change in egg prices may change that. But they're great for redundancy (more & varied egg supply reduces the impact of supply chain shocks), to get the best quality eggs you can, and…

Couldn’t you just not mow your lawn and let the chickens eat all the bugs?

Yes. It is always a good idea to rotate them over different areas to give the land a chance to repopulate (and their excrement helps attract bugs in the meantime). A lot of people have a coop that has two doors on opposite sides to different runs for this purpose.

Re: Eggs are 60% more expensive than last year in the US

#252

Post by jwineinger »

gtk40 wrote: post #13

I'm curious how Costco is weathering the storm better than others. Typically Aldi is the cheapest place for me to buy eggs, but they're almost $5 a dozen for basic eggs. I've seen even more at other grocery stores (Publix was several dollars more a dozen). The cage free eggs were $7/2 dozen ($3.50/dozen) earlier this week at Costco. I'm in the Southeastern US in a suburb of a major city.

I got 5 dozen for about $3.10/doz on Monday in MN at Costco. Aldi has been around $3.75/doz for a while, and recently jumped to $5/doz.

Re: Eggs are 60% more expensive than last year in the US

#253

Post by dsfyu404ed »

sequoia wrote: post #37
voisin wrote: post #29

It would be nice to see more people allowed to keep backyard chickens (hens at least, since roosters can be noisy). Since getting some at our place I’ve been surprised how fun they are to have around and easy to care for. Our compost from the kitchen goes to them too, which could help people divert scraps from the landfill or from being picked up (big gas usage) for municipal composting. Their waste is also great fer…

I'm a huge proponent of backyard chickens and had them for years, but they are, generally speaking, not a "more cost effective" way to get eggs, at least in north america if you are feeding them mostly store-bought feed. Then again, this change in egg prices may change that. But they're great for redundancy (more & varied egg supply reduces the impact of supply chain shocks), to get the best quality eggs you can, and…

They're only cost effective if you raise them cheaply, like free rotten pop up camper with plywood tacked on as a coop and letting them get a proportion of their calories from your yard that you also don't mow. And that's why they're not allowed everywhere "upscale".

Re: Eggs are 60% more expensive than last year in the US

#254

Post by joncrocks »

wolfprogramming wrote: post #147
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There have been several studies that have shown eggs to be healthy. There are several studies that show they are unhealthy. Bias is a real problem in nutrition science. Mostly because "healthy" is a bit subjective. If some study finds a correlation between egg consumption and a +1% chance of developing a rare cancer - who really cares? When you look at how rare the cancer is, when you might develop it, and the smal…

It's just such a nuanced topic people have a really hard time reasoning about it. For example, Drinking Alcohol every day clearly increases your chances of developing disease. Drinking zero Alcohol actually decreases the likely hood of you living to a ripe old age. Is it that Alcohol is healthy in small doses? Probably not. Perhaps people who drink a glass of wine once or twice a month have a less stressful life than…

>Drinking zero Alcohol actually decreases the likely hood of you living to a ripe old age.

There could also be confounding factors here, which is that people who drink no alcohol may have other factors in play. i.e. There might be a health-related reason they don't drink anything.

e.g. They may be people who are alcoholics that have ceased drinking. They may have drunk heavily in the years before, but being asked "How many units of alcohol do you drink in a week" they would answer 0.

They may be on (serious) medications or have medical conditions for which they are strongly recommended to not drink.

Re: Eggs are 60% more expensive than last year in the US

#255

Post by mcculley »

fknorangesite wrote: post #224
lettergram wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait until you find out why bread and starch is at the bottom of the food pyramid… which is still, to this day, being taught in schools.

> bread and starch is at the bottom of the food pyramid This hasn't been true for 18 years.

This is a great example of a mesofact. It is one of those things where experience actually works against a better understanding of the world.

Re: Eggs are 60% more expensive than last year in the US

#258

Post by algoatecorn »

ar_lan wrote: post #232
scifibestfi wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Early in my career, I consulted for Coke to ensure sugar taxes failed and soda was included in food stamp funding. I say Coke's policies are evil because I saw inside the room. The first step in playbook was paying the NAACP + other civil rights groups to call opponents racist Coke gave millions to the NAACP and the Hispanic Federation - both directly and through front groups like the American Beverage Association. T…

> Coke's position was clear: soda is one of the cheapest ways to get calories - a flagrantly inaccurate statement when factoring in the health consequences. I'm always amazed at how many people flat out get angry with me when I say fast food is simply not cheaper than cooking yourself, provided you have a kitchen. I'm consistently told that that level of thinking is necessarily classist (and therefore racist), becaus…

You are correct. The argument of "people are forced to eat fast food because it's too expensive to eat healthy" is not intellectually honest at all.

I believe many people hold on to that sentiment because it's easier to blame a boogieman than to educate themselves on affordable, healthy diets and execute on learning to shop and cook for yourself.

I am, however, interested in bringing better educational resources and time-saving instruments to consumers. Many people grow up in an environment where they don't know how to properly shop in a grocery store. For example, you give someone a $50 gift card to the supermarket and they walk out with a cart full of crap, because it's all they knew growing up.

Then once you teach someone how to shop, they may not have experience cooking for themselves. For those of us who grew up cooking with our parents and continued to do so for ourselves, it's hard to imagine how overwhelming the learning process can be. If you grew up in a lower income environment with busy parent(s), chances are you never helped out in the kitchen with your mom or dad. They probably brought home a kid's meal from McDonalds on their way back from their second job.

Re: Eggs are 60% more expensive than last year in the US

#259

Post by mechanical_bear »

myrmidon wrote: post #227
HEmanZ wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but it’s a fuzzy term, what I meant was more in the “animal” realm of living. Just to give an example, I (and I think most humans) feel negatively about deforestation or destruction of plant life because it is destroying or profaning something beautiful. It’s like burning art. Same with the chickens. I’m not sure I consider factory farming immoral, and I definitely don’t consider killing animals for food immoral.…

> I definitely don’t consider killing animals for food immoral. This is a highly interesting standpoint-- would you consider it morally problematic to kill more intelligent animals for food, like dogs? What about human children (younger than a year? younger than 6?). Is there a line for you somewhere? Where approximately and why? This is drastically different from myself and most meateaters I know which concede moral…

For me at least: https://i.pinimg.com/originals/bc/c5/8c/bcc58ccca47e6e8faa9a...

Re: Eggs are 60% more expensive than last year in the US

#260

Post by mechanical_bear »

cies wrote: post #141
lettergram wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

12 weeks for most chickens we eat. It’s honestly crazy lol

> crazy horrific. they breed frankenstein bodied animals, that this is even allowed makes me sick.

Are you also horrified at humans eating a wild Turkey?
Post reply on HN