Frugal eating
May 26, 2008 - 8:42am
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: Become a Podcaster | Find a Show
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2012 the authors
Syndicate
With rising food prices, there's a renewed interest in cutting back and eliminating waste in food preparation, but that's not always well reflected in the mainstream food media.
quote:...a happy hedonism still dominates the food media; turn to the food section of your city paper and you'll learn where to spend $120 a pound on jamуn ibйrico or where to taste a flight of pricy olive oils.
-
As an industry, we rhapsodize about la cucina povera—that is, "poor food" like polenta, beans, and braise-worthy cuts of meat like short-ribs and pigs trotters—but we rarely talk about cooking in terms of dollars and cents. When food writers and producers advocate economy, they're usually talking about time—churning out recipes for fast, easy, everyday weeknight meals that can be prepared in minutes. The dollar-savvy recipe is far less common. Why, even as the economic news turns grim, is it so unusual for the food media to take cost into account?
-
Cutting your food budget requires systemic organization: cooking foods from scratch (roasting your own chicken rather than buying it at the grocery store); shifting the focus of your meal away from animal protein; using your leftovers; and, perhaps most importantly, planning ahead to take advantage of economies of scale and grocery bargains. That's a hard sell for the food press of today, which tends to linger over fast and spontaneous rewards rather than strategic planning.
The Extravagent Gourmets: Why the food press rarely talks about dollars and cents
If "fine cuisine" has been indicative of social status it does appear that simply eating food is on the way to replace that !!
[ 26 May 2008: Message edited by: mahmud ]
A trip to the supermarket these days is very depressing and a bit scary.
The food crisis, aggravated by high gasoline prices, has started to have a real effect in Canada. And it's bound to get much worse before too long.
Bread and other baked goods are about 40% higher than they were a year ago. Pasta has doubled. Dairy products have become luxury items. Fresh produce, imported from thousands of km away, is in some cases double what it was last year. Orange and other fruit juices are up 25% or more.
As this and higher fuel prices work their way through the system, poor people are going to be hit hard, and wage demands will rise among those few sectors of the work force that are still unionized. There will be more pressure on food banks at both ends - greater demand, and lesser supply, as the rising price of staple foods reduces the amount donated by the public.
Frugal eating is not just a good idea any more. It's becoming an imperative.
What is tragic is that it is the cheaper staples - bread, pasta, rice etc - that seem to have gone up the most.
When I can afford it, I buy wholegrain organic pasta. Preferably locally-milled (or milled in Western Canada) because if not it means shipping Canadian durum - the highest-protein wheat - to Italy and back. But the kind I usually buy has gone up to 2,99$ lb.
Yes, lb, or rather 450 g, not 500g. Shopping around, I found a very good Italian kind 500g for $2. Should I stock up? Yet I hesitate to stock up on organics, as they go bad and attract insects - that is why they started using those nasty chemicals in the first place.
Weigh or measure your pasta. Unless you are a big fella (or big lass) working hard, 100g should be plenty.
But that said, this will become a life-and-death question for many, many people, and not only in the global South.
I've been eating frugally since retiring in 2002. My veggie and fruit scraps go into the composter, and the compost is spread on my gardens, which produce enough vegetables for myself for four months at least, and I give away to friends locally that which I can not consume myself - and last year it was a lot, mostly lettuce, carrots, beans, and beets. This year I'm growing far more than last year, and expect to give away a good 80% of my crop. I suspect the local grocers hate me. [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]
ETA: there's at least five other gardeners in this small community (pop 100) that give away almost half of their crops to friends and relatives.
[ 26 May 2008: Message edited by: Boom Boom ]
quote:Originally posted by lagatta:
Shopping around, I found a very good Italian kind 500g for $2. Should I stock up?I just exhausted my stock of 900g packages of ItalPasta linguini, for which I paid $.99 each on sale last year. Now the same stuff sells regularly for about $2.50.
I know that Toronto food prices seem to be lower than the R.O.C., so $4 a kilo may be a "reasonable" price to pay where you are. I think it's unconscionable, myself. I'd rather eat Haitian mud cookies. [img]frown.gif" border="0[/img]
quote:Originally posted by lagatta:
What is tragic is that it is the cheaper staples - bread, pasta, rice etc - that seem to have gone up the most.
Its about time. We've been living off the bank accounts of farmers due to artificially low prices. Out here wheat farmers are finally, if the weather holds out, earn a good living this year.
quote:Originally posted by M. Spector:
Bread and other baked goods are about 40% higher than they were a year ago. Pasta has doubled. Dairy products have become luxury items. Fresh produce, imported from thousands of km away, is in some cases double what it was last year. Orange and other fruit juices are up 25% or more.
Overall food prices (in the USA, at least) increased by 4.0% in 2007. As of May 19, 2008, the USDA is projecting that overall food prices in 2008 will be between 4.5% and 5.5% higher than in 2007.
The USDA said (here) that as of April 2008:
FRESH FRUIT (up 5.9%) AND FRESH VEGETABLES (up 0.2%):
"The fresh fruit index is now up 5.9 percent overall from last year at this time, with apple prices up 7.4 percent and banana prices up 20.3 percent, while orange prices are down 17.2 percent. [snip] Since last year at this time, fresh vegetable prices are up 0.2 percent, with other fresh vegetable prices down 3.8 percent and lettuce prices down 2.2 percent. However, potato prices are up 5.6 percent and tomato prices are up 8.1 percent.
DAIRY (up 11.8%):
"Dairy prices...are up 11.8 percent from the April 2007 level. Within the dairy category, prices changed as follows in April: milk prices...are 13.5 percent above last April's prices; cheese prices were...12 percent above last April's level; ice cream and related product prices...are 6 percent above last April; and butter prices...are 9.1 percent above last April."
CEREALS AND BAKED GOODS (up 8.9%):
"Cereals and bakery product prices...are up 8.9 percent from last year at this time as higher wheat, corn, and energy prices have pushed production costs for these products up sharply over the past few months."
BEEF (up 0.1%):
"Beef prices...are now 0.1 percent above last April's level, as higher energy and feed costs have helped to increase short-term supplies causing some price deflation in the beef market."
PORK (up 2.1%):
"Pork prices...are up 2.1 percent from last April's level. Strong short-term pork supplies have been the main factor behind recent retail price declines, but pork prices may begin to rise over the next 2 years as current supplies are sold and future production slows due to higher production costs."
POULTRY (up 4.6%):
"Poultry prices...are up 4.6 percent from last year at this time. Higher feed and energy costs in 2007 and early 2008 have caused poultry prices to rise faster than normal over the past 6 months."
Of course, for the "less frugal", one can probably purchase 1kg of Kopi Luwak coffee beans for about $1,000.
quote:Originally posted by lagatta:
But that said, this will become a life-and-death question for many, many people, and not only in the global South.
In Bangladesh, a 2-kilogram bag of rice now consumes about half of the daily income of a poor family.
quote:Originally posted by Sven:
In Bangladesh, a 2-kilogram bag of rice now consumes about half of the daily income of a poor family.
Got the figures for Canada, probably not much better these days but people will be circling their nests.
I was thinking % increase for the poor.
I'm betting it's not all that much better for the poorest in Canada.
The monthly income of two adults and two children on disability allowance is $1770 according to DAWN Ontario.
That's a daily income of $59 for the family. A 5 lb bag of basmati rice isn't $30, but it's probably between $10 and $20. And I'm not sure about this, but I think in Canada, housing takes up a bigger percentage of a person's income than it does in Bangladesh, although I do realize that in Bangladesh, the poorest live in straw and mud huts or are homeless (although our poorest are homeless too - and when they try to put up makeshift housing like tent cities, they get torn down).
[ 29 May 2008: Message edited by: Michelle ]
quote:Originally posted by Michelle:
I'm betting it's not all that much better for the poorest in Canada.
The monthly income of two adults and two children on disability allowance is $1770 according to DAWN Ontario.
That's a daily income of $59 for the family. A 5 lb bag of basmati rice isn't $30, but it's probably between $10 and $20. And I'm not sure about this, but I think in Canada, housing takes up a bigger percentage of a person's income than it does in Bangladesh, although I do realize that in Bangladesh, the poorest live in straw and mud huts or are homeless (although our poorest are homeless too - and when they try to put up makeshift housing like tent cities, they get torn down).
A 20 pound bag of basmati rice at Sam's Club in my town is $18.88 (or less than five bucks for five pounds).
A 50 pound bag of enriched white rice at Sam's Club (again, in my town) is priced at a rate of $2.83 for five pounds.
Author Paul Roberts ("The End Of Food") was just on CTV talking about how we have 1.1 billion overfed and over-nourished people in the west, while there's one billion people who are desperately underfed and under-nourished, and expects that huge adjustments have to be made to put things more in balance.
quote: Author Paul Roberts ("The End Of Food") was just on CTV talking about how we have 1.1 billion overfed and over-nourished people in the west, while there's one billion people who are desperately underfed and under-nourished, and expects that huge adjustments have to be made to put things more in balance.
Unless I’m missing a connection, it seems to me that Robert’s The End of Food is going to be easily mistaken for Thomas Pawlick's The End of Food. Their covers even have similar looks (subdued colours, similar font) and they seem to cover many of the same topics. The latter (Pawlick's End of Food) is an excellent read for anyone who is interested in food security.
There are a lot of overfed but undernourished people in both First World countries and the richer Third-World ones (such as Mexico and Brazil). I think Mexico will soon overtake the US for obesity rates (one of the reasons is the "thrifty gene" found among many Aboriginal people - we see the dire effects of that among First Nations here living on a poor, European diet).
quote:Originally posted by Boom Boom:
Author Paul Roberts ("The End Of Food") was just on CTV talking about how we have 1.1 billion overfed and over-nourished people in the west, while there's one billion people who are desperately underfed and under-nourished, and expects that huge adjustments have to be made to put things more in balance.
I'm actually surprised that it's "only" 1 billion people. It's my understanding that over 2 billion people live on $2 per day or less.
I haven't read Robert's book, but from the interview I gather that the one billion desperately underfed he speaks about are at risk of death from under-nourishment. I think the 'two billion' you refer to are another class of people altogether, not well off, certainly, but not at immediate risk of death from starvation. Maybe in the longer term if things do not improve. [img]frown.gif" border="0[/img]
Hmm, I must have been thinking about bigger bags. Apologies. I was half awake. [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]
Roberts was recently on WBUR, a public radio station in Boston, for a show about the imminent demise of industrial agriculture:
quote:In 2004, author Paul Roberts came out with his book "The End of Oil," and we've all seen oil's path since then.
Now Roberts is out with a kind of follow-up: "The End of Food." It could make a person want to hoard tuna.
Not that oil or food are literally vanishing anytime soon. But Roberts argues that when it comes to cheap, abundant food supplies -- to supermarket shelves piled high with affordable, attractive groceries -- we've been living in a golden age. And that age is about to end.
You can get stream the show or get a podcast here.
M.Gregus, will higher-priced food be principally due to the fact that farmers will have to rely on much more expensive renewable energy to operate farms once oil is largely gone?
Buried in the back pages of an ag weekly I read was an article about how an economist with the Bank of Nova Scotia is predicted alarming increases in food by the end of summer. If I wasn't on turtle slow dial-up, I'd try and find the article, or similar online. This was paired with an article about how little of the price increases are making their way into the hands of farmers. I know that corn and soybeans and wheat have increased dramatically over the past while, but that's been coupled with serious increases in inputs. The echo of this is that farmers are now planting corn and soys instead of things like potatoes in PEI (again, wish for high speed here... Spector??).
Boomster, you mentioned over-weight and over-nourished people. I believe that the phenomenon is more about being overweight and malnourished at the same time.
Sven, switching to renewables ain't going to be pretty in ag, and it won't happen anytime soon. Urbanites will be pedaling bicycles full time before tractors go without petrol. Renewables should, in fact, reduce the cost of food somewhat while at the same time bringing us healthier food, of which we'll end up eating less because we're more aware of the true cost of eating. But anything processed (pasta, bread) is going to cost more than "whole" foods, because of the handling and labour and processing costs. The problem will eventually become getting the food to people.
I also suspect there is a lot of profiteering going on with food prices. Vulture capitalism at it's finest. Food processors have enjoyed record profits for the past several years.
quote:Originally posted by Farmpunk:
I also suspect there is a lot of profiteering going on with food prices. Vulture capitalism at it's finest. Food processors have enjoyed record profits for the past several years.
Working in distribution (not in food) I have to agree. There is very little tolerance for taking a smaller margin so higher costs get passed on immediately. Any savings however are kept until the market forces require a correction.
The public has now been set up for a rash of price increases in food and I am sure the industry will come through whether they are justified or not.