>>When we had small farms the cost of food for a normal family was more than 1/3 of their income. By 1960 the cost was 20% and is now 11%.

Do these numbers represent the real cost of food or the food prices at the supermarkets?  Your figures may not include the significant farm subsidies that artificially make the food look cheaper than it really is.  I may buy cheap food in supermarkets but a part of my income taxes goes to ag subsidies.  Since a part of my taxes is devoured by the federal buecracy, the real subsidy cost to taxpayers is much higher as well.

As these food production prices have gone down, the federal and trade deficits have gone from surpluses and discpline to the huge deficits of today.  (Since the 70's the greenback is no longer backed by gold but by 'the faith of the US government' [more responsive to the lobbyists than the people].)

If you also consider the huge personal debt Americans carry in the form of credit cards and equity loans, the good standard of living as indicated by, among others, the cheap food is a bubble.

My point is, if you include the deficts (to be paid by taxpayers) and personal debt (to be paid hopefully by the debtors, not taxpayers!), the real income will be much lower.  And if you add ag subsidies to the price tag, the cheap food will no longer appear so cheap.

And what is the value of the cheap, processed food based on GMO corn, HFCS?  Look at the obesity epidemic for instance in America and the related health care costs.  We spend the most on our healthcare but don't rank among the healthiest nations in the world.  Does our cheap food still appear so cheap?

I may not be thrilled with the Amish using pesticides etc. but I would gladly pay 25% of my income for good quality, healthy food produced in a sustainable way.

Waldemar

******************************************************
* Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at:          *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm  *
******************************************************