Pop quiz: What mistaken belief about food is endorsed by both the libertarian right and the foodie left?

Answer: That farm subsidies make unhealthy foods artificially cheap.


This myth gained currency thanks to Michael Pollan’s runaway 2006 bestseller, The Omnivore’s Dilemma, which blamed America’s bad eating habits on corn and soy, made cheap and ubiquitous by farm subsidies. More recently, the Cato Institute, and even George Will, have made the same claim.

Any complaint that food prices are too low might seem bizarre today, since world grain prices hit their highest levels in 30 years in 2008 and are now back up again. Yet this did not stop columnist Mark Bittman from reminding his New York Times readers that the price we pay for corn, soy, chicken, pork, beef, and high-fructose corn syrup is “unjustifiably low” because of farm subsidies.

Nothing could be farther from the truth. Our federal farm programs are designed to supplement the income of farmers, not subsidize the production of food. Most federal farm support programs either give cash to farmers whether they grow more crops or not, or boost farm income by raising crop prices through import restrictions, market controls, or temporary land set-asides, all of which make food artificially expensive, not artificially cheap.

For example, the federal sugar program uses a “tariff rate quota” to restrict the entry of less expensive foreign sugar into the United States market, which drives up the consumer price of all sweeteners, including high-fructose corn syrup. If our sugar program were eliminated, the price for most sweeteners would fall by 15 percent. We also place tariff rate quotas on imports of less expensive beef from South America. Our dairy program, in addition to import tariffs, employs “marketing orders” to prevent low-cost Midwest milk from gaining market share in high-cost regions such as the Northeast, making dairy products artificially expensive, not artificially cheap. Our Conservation Reserve Program takes farmland out of production in Kansas, driving up the price of wheat.

As for the corn program, it does provide “loan deficiency payments” that encourage a small quantity of extra production when market prices are low (which they are not at present). How much extra production? In an average year, American farmers produce about 4 percent more corn due to these incentive payments, lowering the price of corn slightly. This small effect is more than offset, however, by the federal ethanol program, which now uses mandates, tax credits, and trade restrictions to shift nearly one third of all the corn we produce into “biofuel” use, to power automobiles. This ethanol program not only makes corn for food and feed much more expensive; it also diverts land away from soybean production, driving up the price of soy.

So federal farm subsidy programs are not the cause of our obesity crisis. There is no denying that obesity-inducing foods are now cheap relative to consumer income in the United States, but this is not due to farm subsidies.

The cause is higher personal income plus productivity growth in our food and farm industries. On the farm, new precision technologies such as GPS systems, satellite-controlled variable rate chemical applications, efficient drip irrigation, and improved crop genetics are continuously reducing production costs, and lowering consumer prices. Nor is it just the crops grown by subsidized farmers that have become cheap. One USDA study in 2008 found that over the previous 25 years the price of un-subsidized fruits and vegetables—controlling for season and quality—had fallen at almost exactly the same rate as the price of chocolate chip cookies, cola, ice cream, and potato chips. So that other popular claim—Americans are obese because unsubsidized healthy foods have become more expensive—is also bogus.

Studies that purport to show the retail price of fruits and vegetables actually rising in America over the long term make several different mistakes. One is to ignore the greater price volatility of fresh produce items, compared to snack or junk foods, and to compare across only a brief one or two-year interval (for example, “The Rising Cost of Low-Energy-Density Foods”). The other error is to ignore improvements over time in both quality and seasonal availability. The price of fresh peeled carrots today should not be compared to the price of unpeeled carrots 25 years ago, nor should the price of out-of-season blueberries today, flown in from Latin America, be compared to in-season blueberries 25 years ago. In fact, arguing that healthy fruits and vegetables are harder to get today is a stretch by any measure. The average American supermarket today carries roughly 400 different produce items, many year-round, compared to just 150 items in the 1970s, many only in season.

What motivates so many smart people to ignore this evidence and blame America’s over-eating on farm subsidies? For Cato, George Will, and the libertarian right, the careless thinking springs from an understandable urge to use any argument available against wasteful farm subsidies. On the anti-corporate left, Pollan and others (e.g., the film Food, Inc.) want to blame our nation’s obesity crisis on an imagined “cheap food” deal between food industries and their friends in Congress. When it comes to crop prices, however, farmers have more clout with Congress than food companies, so the farm bill and the ethanol program tend to increase rather than decrease food prices. This actually hurts food companies, an inconvenient truth the critics intentionally ignore.

Robert Paarlberg is professor of political science at Wellesley College and adjunct professor of public policy at the Harvard Kennedy School. He is author of Food Politics: What Everyone Needs to Know.

Illustration by Sarah Sara Saedi.

Chart comparing the dollars per pound cost of Red Delicious apples and chocolate chip cookies using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) average food price data between 1980-2006, via Fred Kuchler and Hayden Stewart’s Economic Research Report No. (ERR-55) “Price Trends Are Similar for Fruits, Vegetables, and Snack Foods,” March 2008.

  • Australia produces so much solar power that they’re giving three hours of it away each day for free
    Photo credit: CanvaSolar energy surpluses during the day offers Aussies free energy.

    In a time when energy costs are rising, Australia is taking a different approach. The country has acquired so much solar power that they’re giving it away. In fact, those who sign up for the program will get three free hours of energy each day.

    This comes from a government-run offer dubbed Solar Sharer. It offers a free three-hour period for those who sign up. This period runs from 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. in Queensland, Victoria and New South Wales. The period runs from noon to 3:00 p.m. in South Australia. 

    Free, but not unlimited, power

    While the power is free for those who are eligible and have a smart meter, there is a daily cap of 24 kilowatt-hours (kWh). Any amount above that will be charged. However, the energy cap is based on the Australian Energy Regulator’s assessment of what a five-person household uses each day. 

    While that free period each day provides a great window to use major appliances or charge electric cars, there are some catches. Solar Sharer isn’t yet available to residents outside those areas, but energy brokers are making similar offers. There is also no guarantee that electricity rates won’t get higher outside of those free periods either.

    Who benefits?

    The program is designed for those who are a part of a solar power grid. It also benefits people who work from home the most. If the people in the household are at their job or the office, they likely won’t be able to take advantage of the deal.  

    While Energy Consumers Australia supports this offer, they are concerned about how governments and retailers relay the information to customers. In short, they don’t want people to be surprised if their electricity rates are charged higher during the non-free periods. They’re also concerned that, by their measure, only three in 10 eligible people were aware of this offer.

    “We don’t want to have people signing up to these plans assuming it will decrease their bills, when in fact it could do the opposite,” the consumer advocacy group said to The Guardian.

    There is a chance that rates won’t get higher if more people are able to take advantage of Solar Sharer. Since most electricity use is during the evening when more people are home from work, changing up the usage towards daytime hours can benefit everyone. It would still be an uphill battle as electric light is mostly used in the evening and nighttime when it’s dark.

    Similar programs elsewhere

    While there are catches, this isn’t the first program of its type. There are similar successful free energy programs in other nations. Areas such as Germany and the Nordic countries create so much green energy through wind farms that they make similar free power offers. California has also offered government programs for low-income households and farmworkers housing cheap-to-free solar energy.

    While kinks definitely need to be sorted out, creating so much generated energy to the point that it can be given freely is a good problem to have.

  • Motorcyclist trapped under a 3,300 pound car saved by Australian car salesmen
    Photo credit: @ACurrentAffair9 on YouTubeA man was saved from being crushed under a car.

    Tyler Wiebe was on his way to work on his motorcycle in Brisbane, Australia. Then a car approached in the wrong way in traffic, colliding with another car that then hit Wiebe. The accident threw Wiebe off his bike and under a car. He was trapped under the 3,300-lb. vehicle, doomed until a group of salesmen and onlookers came to his rescue.

    “I was being dragged and when it stopped, my head and chest were under the car,” Wiebe said to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. The crash and being pinned down under the vehicle gave Wiebe several injuries. He suffered broken ribs, a broken collarbone, and a collapsed lung.

    But that would be diagnosed later. At the time, the car’s weight was crushing Wiebe to the point that he couldn’t breathe. His heart was also unable to beat, the pressure causing his eyes, mouth, and nose to bleed.

    “Initially it was ‘can I get out?’ and then it was ‘man I am dying, this is it,’” recalled Wiebe. “[My] wife and two kids are not here, and this is it.”

    Hope comes in the form of a car salesman

    After being stuck for two minutes under the car, help arrived from the nearby Auto Request Kedron, a used car dealership.

    “I was in the office at the time, so I heard the bang [and] came running to the doors,” Mick, one of the employees, said to A Current Affair.

    “I realized there was someone trapped under the car,” fellow employee Rob added.

    They rushed into action, recruiting other coworkers to help.

    “[I] saw Rob running and he was just whistling out saying, ‘Hey, boys, hurry up,’ ” Corbin recalled. “I remember seeing him, just like two legs. They weren’t moving at that time.”

    The salesmen tried to lift the vehicle up to get Wiebe to safety, but the car wouldn’t budge.

    “We tried to lift it off. We couldn’t, and then on the second attempt, we had a couple of other good Samaritans come and help us,” said Brian, another employee of Auto Request Kedron.

    Reportedly 15 people were finally able to lift the car and free Wiebe underneath. He was rushed to the hospital where he went under emergency operations. Under hospital care, Wiebe’s condition stabilized and he survived. Had he been under that car any longer, the worst would have happened.

    Wiebe was humbled and grateful to the salesmen and others who stepped up to save him.

    “I get more time with my daughters, I get more time with my family and a second lease on life, so just thank you, thank you,” Wiebe said in his hospital bed.

    Certified legends

    When he was discharged from the hospital, Wiebe set up a reunion with the employees of the used car dealership. He was able to introduce his family to his rescuers and thank them face-to-face. Wiebe presented them with matching t-shirts, each one with a logo reading “Certified Legend” on the front and an illustration of a person lifting a car over their head on the back.

    “You guys are legends, but now you’re certified legends,” Wiebe said to his heroes.

    A father and husband was saved thanks to the alertness and quick action of the nearby community.

  • Texas engineers develop a jacket that pulls fresh drinking water out of thin air
    Photo credit: @fascinatingonX/CanvaWearing this jacket could help keep people hydrated.

    For too many, access to clean drinking water is incredibly difficult. According to the World Health Organization, over two billion people live in water-stressed areas due to pollution, climate change, or population growth. However, engineering experts in Texas have developed a possible solution: just put on a jacket.

    The engineers and researchers gathered at the University of Texas at Austin developed a prototype jacket that can pull drinking water out of thin air. The jacket could help anyone frequently in areas where drinkable water is scarce. This could be used recreationally by campers, hikers, and runners—but it could also save lives. Emergency responders, soldiers, and agricultural workers could also collect water for themselves and others simply by wearing it.

    The technology behind the jacket is similar to the materials used in netting for water harvesting of air and fog. This time, however, the idea is to collect water while also being mobile.

    “Water harvesting from air is usually imagined as a stationary device such as a box, a panel or a large sorbent bed,” said Guihua Yu, chair professor of the Cockrell School of Engineering’s Walker Department of Mechanical Engineering and Texas Materials Institute. “Here, we wanted to rethink the form of the technology. If the fabric itself can collect water from air, it opens a new direction for personal and portable water access.”

    How does this jacket collect water?

    The textile used to create the jacket was derived from a device the same team created. That device was a specially engineered hydrogel fabric made from biomass-derived materials. This hydrogel fabric takes moisture from the air and then releases it as water via condensation when it’s heated by sunlight. The water can easily be collected.

    The jacket’s textile collects moisture from the air and funnels it into detachable harvesting units. The units can be placed into a foldable collector piece where they are heated to produce water. The material and system doesn’t just absorb water like other materials. Instead, it actively converts vapor into water while functioning as a piece of protective clothing.

    The jacket is able to produce between 400 to 900 milliliters of drinkable water daily. This is a vast improvement upon other similar inventions that yielded less water and were significantly bulkier to wear. The jacket’s material could collect and produce more water over time and testing, depending on the humidity of the terrain.

    Aside from creating clothing out of the material, the researchers hope to make backpacks, tents, emergency shelters, and other outdoor gear from it. The hope is that this could create more clean water access for disaster response units and everyday people living in water-stressed areas alike.

    How much hydration do you need in the heat?

    Until water-collecting jackets are commercially available, it’s important to have drinkable water nearby at all times, especially during the summer. When out in the heat, the Center for Disease Control recommends having a drink of water before working outdoors. Then drink a cup of water every 15 to 20 minutes. This can help keep your body cool and hydrated to prevent heat stroke. That said, stay alert and stay indoors if there is a heat warning in your area.

Explore More Stories

Local

Ohio local news viewers spring into action after seeing an elderly woman threatened with jail time

Culture

In America’s sandwiches, the story of a nation

Health

Every dog has its day, but it’s not the Fourth of July

Society

Who owns the beach? It depends on state law and tide lines