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

An investigation into egg prices

thebignewsletter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 182 posts

Re: An investigation into egg prices

#161

Post by AftHurrahWinch »

ccorcos wrote: post #157
AftHurrahWinch wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the linked evidence that the "animal welfare" program was fake? What part of it did you interpret as fake? What evidence supports your conclusion that this is an example of "propaganda for nefarious purposes"? I agree with the description in the linked document - defendants presented "substantial evidence that grocery stores and other customers demanded animal-welfare standards", companies like McDonald'…

I’m sure there is real demand for animal welfare. But presumably that would have hurt profits which is why they weren’t doing it in the first place. But once they discovered that it’s a convenient excuse to raise their profit margins, they hopped onboard.

I think that's a more defensible position than "fake 'animal welfare'" and "propaganda for nefarious purposes". I suppose one could see giving hens room to move as "a convenient excuse to raise profit margins", but perhaps it's more like using sustainable packaging to reduce shipping costs.

Re: An investigation into egg prices

#162

Post by Izkata »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #147
wakawaka28 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sir, Harris did nothing about high egg prices when she was in office. Neither did Biden. They presided over some of the highest inflation in American history. Whether it was their fault or not they didn't do a damn thing to fix it. What is Trump doing? Promoting imports of cheaper eggs from abroad, if nothing else. He is the first politician this century to make a big deal out of balancing the budget and our imports/…

Some of the highest inflation in American history? Easy to see you weren't around in 1979. Try 14% inflation. This? This was very little.

9.1% is not far off.

Re: An investigation into egg prices

#163

Post by ccorcos »

AftHurrahWinch wrote: post #161
ccorcos wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m sure there is real demand for animal welfare. But presumably that would have hurt profits which is why they weren’t doing it in the first place. But once they discovered that it’s a convenient excuse to raise their profit margins, they hopped onboard.

I think that's a more defensible position than "fake 'animal welfare'" and "propaganda for nefarious purposes". I suppose one could see giving hens room to move as "a convenient excuse to raise profit margins", but perhaps it's more like using sustainable packaging to reduce shipping costs.

I’m just quoting the article… I don’t think they’re saying that animal welfare didn’t improve, but that the purpose of the program was an excuse to raise profit margins.

It’s not exactly greenwashing but it is used as a political tool nevertheless.

Re: An investigation into egg prices

#164

Post by oliwarner »

genewitch wrote: post #158
oliwarner wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a very different supply chain. You don't just chuck a rooster in with your layers because then you have to inspect all your eggs. New layers are bred away from the main flocks in relatively tiny volumes, under 1% of layers' eggs. Culls may drive a need for more layers to be raised, increasing that percentage but the cycle rate for these hens in intensive farms is pretty regular already (<18 months) so I doubt th…

> increasing that percentage but the cycle rate for these hens in intensive farms is pretty regular already ( this actually speaks to my point more than the other replies you (and other) gave. A temporary shed for layers to nest isn't insurmountable. Especially if you know that the end result is more money for you because of supply issues. What i am not sure about, is why that didn't happen, since you say it did not.…

Because it's not just nesting space.

Chicks are processed at enormous speed and volume. Males are killed and the females are boxed up and sent to farms. This is factory level work and involves expensive automation. The size of flocks makes doing this without automation unfeasibly slow.

So egg farmers who lose a flock just buy another. They might have to wait for their scheduled order to come in. They don't spend $20m on a temporary hatchery facility.

Re: An investigation into egg prices

#165

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

absolutelastone wrote: post #159
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Common sense is a very poor guide to many aspects of the world. It's not true of physics, or biology, or astrophysics, and even areas of math are very, very far from common sense. Human cognitive biases make "common sense" as both a predictor how people will behave and as a basis for understanding the world a remarkably poor choice. And yes, economics is far from a hard science and most macro is driven by some combin…

I said common sense "based on logic" specifically to sidestep this popular argument about the evils of common sense. Such common sense includes statements like "if something can't go on forever it won't". I guess you disagree with this statement? But no I don't agree with your claim. Common sense is an excellent guide and a major reason why evolution gave us large brains. And that includes the hard sciences, only fai…

Common sense is only an excellent guide if you want to predict specific kinds of things about the world. It breaks down once you leave the realm at which our senses operate (which includes national economies).

Morever, equating logic and common sense is to deny the recency of "logic". Humans reasoning like this, even if you want to take it back to the Sumerians, is a very recent development in human experience (probably).

> Biology is not a hard science.

OK. I wonder what all that lab time and experimentation was for that I saw when I was doing my PhD in computational molecular biology (never finished). I guess it was all just ... soft.

> centuries to find after almost everything else was well-explained by intuitive theories

Darwin would like a word. As would Mendel.

Re: An investigation into egg prices

#166

Post by wakawaka28 »

sanktanglia wrote: post #105
wakawaka28 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sir, Harris did nothing about high egg prices when she was in office. Neither did Biden. They presided over some of the highest inflation in American history. Whether it was their fault or not they didn't do a damn thing to fix it. What is Trump doing? Promoting imports of cheaper eggs from abroad, if nothing else. He is the first politician this century to make a big deal out of balancing the budget and our imports/…

Biden and harris didn't do anything to stop inflation? They passed multiple bills explicitly targeting it.You do know we are handling inflation better than others specifically because Biden focused on it right?

Lol no, the Democrats did the classic Congress custom of passing a bill that is named exactly the opposite of what it is. The Inflation Reduction Act was a massive spending bill that contributed to higher inflation. I didn't see a single thing that the previous administration did to lower inflation in a noticeable way. They did drain the strategic petroleum reserve to record lows which did approximately fuck all for gas prices, and put the country in a strategically bad spot.

Re: An investigation into egg prices

#167

Post by 42772827 »

dm03514 wrote: post #20

First of all I think this article was put together quite well, it was succinct had a great flow and was very easy to follow. The data was laid out to support the case; overall it was great to read. Understanding a problem requires a holistic view of the larger system. An egg producer may say prices are higher Because supply is lower due to culling. Part of that statement is true. The author then zooms out to better u…

> Understanding a problem requires a holistic view of the larger system.

In my experience, people don’t care about systems, they care about outcomes. The world is driven by people who care about outcomes and held together by people who understand systems.

Re: An investigation into egg prices

#168

Post by absolutelastone »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #165
absolutelastone wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I said common sense "based on logic" specifically to sidestep this popular argument about the evils of common sense. Such common sense includes statements like "if something can't go on forever it won't". I guess you disagree with this statement? But no I don't agree with your claim. Common sense is an excellent guide and a major reason why evolution gave us large brains. And that includes the hard sciences, only fai…

Common sense is only an excellent guide if you want to predict specific kinds of things about the world. It breaks down once you leave the realm at which our senses operate (which includes national economies). Morever, equating logic and common sense is to deny the recency of "logic". Humans reasoning like this, even if you want to take it back to the Sumerians, is a very recent development in human experience (proba…

No by "common sense based on logic" I mean common ground between both. To exclude gut feelings or emotion or whatever. And I'm sure logical thinking ability is also hardwired by evolution.

Realms where our senses do not operate would be microscopic or relativistic and the like where which we have never been able to observe before. National economies are completely observable and accessible to our logic and common sense. They are akin to thermodynamics which is not counterintuitive at all.

You are arguing by example and I am countering with larger classes of examples. For someone who gives up so quick on picking winners in macroeconomics theories you sure are sure of your answer here despite any quantitative basis for your claims.

Re: An investigation into egg prices

#169

Post by mschoch »

gerdesj wrote: post #43
bsder wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Understanding a problem requires a holistic view of the larger system. It does, but the result is extremely uncomfortable. And the solving it will require actions that are even more uncomfortable. You have to come to grips with the fact that there are monopolies at every single level. There is no inventory anywhere except bottom. There is no over capacity at any level. Consequently, supply and demand simply do not…

"The big suppliers can ratchet up prices with zero consequences. What are you gonna do about it?" If I was that bothered about eggs, I'd simply grow my own. Americans on average have way more space to mess around in than say most Europeans - the place is fucking huge. Chickens are very easy to "grow your own". I'm not an American and clearly you have managed to get your collective knickers in a twist over a non issue…

[dead]

Re: An investigation into egg prices

#170

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

absolutelastone wrote: post #168
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Common sense is only an excellent guide if you want to predict specific kinds of things about the world. It breaks down once you leave the realm at which our senses operate (which includes national economies). Morever, equating logic and common sense is to deny the recency of "logic". Humans reasoning like this, even if you want to take it back to the Sumerians, is a very recent development in human experience (proba…

No by "common sense based on logic" I mean common ground between both. To exclude gut feelings or emotion or whatever. And I'm sure logical thinking ability is also hardwired by evolution. Realms where our senses do not operate would be microscopic or relativistic and the like where which we have never been able to observe before. National economies are completely observable and accessible to our logic and common sen…

> They are akin to thermodynamics which is not counterintuitive at all.

You can only say this thanks to the work of generations of previous scientists (and teachers) who managed to render the very unintuitive as intuitive.

> Realms where our senses do not operate would be microscopic or relativistic and the like

There are (a) dozens of known cognitive biases, the majority of which we cannot avoid even when we know about them (b) visual and auditory illusions. Both of these are not in the microscopic or relativistic realms, but nevertheless show clear examples of our senses (and upstream sensory processing) failing to properly inform us about the state of the world.

> National economies are completely observable and accessible to our logic and common sense.

A national economy is only "completely observable" when reduced to statistics. No individual can possibly "observe" all of a national economy, partly because it is too big and partly because parts of it are too small. A statistical summary is not without value, but is not equivalent to it being "completely observable". As for the notion that we can bring our "logic and common sense" to bear on a national economy: well, that's precisely what the arguments between orthodox and heterodox economists is all about. They are bringing their logic and common sense to bear on it, and they do not arrive at the same conclusions.

> gives up so quick on picking winners in macroeconomics theories

On the contrary, I am very much for picking winners. While the answer may not be forever (subject to new theories), I pick MMT for a winner over orthodox/mainstream theories. This is not because I am certain that MMT is correct, but more because orthodox/mainstream theories have all the hallmarks of having been invented by the winners in an economy, for the winners.

Post reply on HN