Well, there likely is ethanol used in potato chip production, especially in the flavoring agents.

Major, well, without even looking, I suggested it would be found in the additional flavoring. It sounds you're just telling me I guessed correctly?

Well, there likely is ethanol used in potato chip production, especially in the flavoring agents.

Major, well, without even looking, I suggested it would be found in the additional flavoring. It sounds you're just telling me I guessed correctly?

Well, yes. It hadn't even occurred to me in that previous post that there might have been ethanol used in the production of the chips. But, that is not what I was considering in my initial post about the $2.00 can of chips.

I was discussing the effects of the Government's policy of ethanol-from-corn subsidies on food prices (making them higher). An increase of the supply of ethanol might even have the opposite effect and lower the cost of making the chips by some very tiny fraction of 1 cent...

Major, a good economic analysis. In a 200 level econ class you would get a good grade for your explanation.

Been there, done that... Same with higher than 2nd year classes too...

All I remember from my econ class is some claptrap about the government should not pay back the people it borrows money from and should spend it elsewhere. Pure rubbish, obviously theft, sounded like some rob Peter to pay Paul junk or some Robin Hood fantasy. Can you imagine, not paying back the owners of Treasury Bonds. Why that would be bankruptcy of the USA. (oh, that is another thread)

---

Major, a good economic analysis. In a 200 level econ class you would get a good grade for your explanation.

Been there, done that... Same with higher than 2nd year classes too...

All I remember from my econ class is some claptrap about the government should not pay back the people it borrows money from and should spend it elsewhere. Pure rubbish, obviously theft, sounded like some rob Peter to pay Paul junk or some Robin Hood fantasy. Can you imagine, not paying back the owners of Treasury Bonds. Why that would be bankruptcy of the USA. (oh, that is another thread)

Sounds like your econ prof was a Keynesian....

Most of the econ profs I had were not...

---

https://youtu.be/iY57ErBkFFE

#Texit

Don't blame me, I voted for Johnson(L) in 2016.

Truth is dangerous... especially when it challenges those in power.

Sounds like your econ prof was a Keynesian....

IIRC he was the department head ...

---

1st wave effect:

To get in on the ethanol-from-corn gravy train, corn farmers sell increasing amounts of the corn crop to the ethanol producers. The corn supply available for other sectors of the economy drops causing a reduction in supply, relative to demand, in those other sectors with its consequent price increases. Anything other than ethanol that is produced from corn (such as beef cattle or corn meal) has rather significant increases in upwards pressure on prices.



2nd wave effect:

To further get in on the ethanol-from-corn gravy train, farmers increase the the amount of land they use for growing corn. There is a finite amount of land suitable for growing crops (including corn), so farmers must usually shift land from some other crop to corn to do this. This causes a drop in supply of the other crops (with the resulting upwards pressure on prices for those crops (and anything else that uses those other crops in their production)). Yes, the increased supply of corn *does* relieve some of the price increases on corn from the 1st wave, but the damage (in the form of higher food prices) from the 2nd wave is much more widespread.

Sorry but most crops are intentionally put into rotation, whereby duplicate crops are not grown year after year on the same soil. You may not know but that repeatedly growing the same crop on the sail soil actually reduces crop yields.

See there is a method to the madness. people whined about paying farmers for leaving their fields non productive. The real result is better production on the land when it is in production. So the argument that more corn will just have to be grown is false.

Beyond alochol corn is used to feed us in the form of cereal or other food products from cornbread to bread crumbs.

Lets not forget the additional cost of feeding cattle, pigs and chicken etc as they are bought and sold for food or breeding. All that added cost adds up and is pushed onto the end user. Who might that be? could that be you and me?

Lets also look at the alcohol itself. It costs more to make it that it is worth. Then you get to pay for it 2X because our tax dollars are spent towards the cost of production.

Then we pay again at the pump. Very few of us paid attention when they started adding alcohol to gasoline. I did. I noticed a specific drop about 10% a tank load. So do the math they added 10% ethanol to my gas then my gas mileage dropped 10%... Hmmm basically the ethanol does absolutely nothing. I still burn the same amount of gas but I get to waste my money on ethanol that would be much better served feed me or the animals I intend to eat.

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

Ethanol has around 70,000 BTU per gallon. Gasoline about 120,000. So 10% ethanol should give you about 4% less Miles per gallon. Most cars on the road today (average 11 years old) are not designed for ethanol.

I get 5 % less MPG and a check engine light caused by the CO sensor that causes the dealer to try to sell me a new catalyst for $1100. To pass inspection each year i find a station that has no ethanol and after three tanks or so I can pass inspection each year. Ethanol can de-combine with gasoline and it has great affinity for water which can gum up your injectors. Occasionally when your car runs very poorly you are probably passing some goo through your fuel system or clogging your fuel filter. The dealer will tell you that you need a new electronic ignition module or a sparking transformer and charge you $500.

First thing I will do when elected President is to ban ethanol as a motor fuel. I figure food prices will drop about 40%.

1st wave effect:

To get in on the ethanol-from-corn gravy train, corn farmers sell increasing amounts of the corn crop to the ethanol producers. The corn supply available for other sectors of the economy drops causing a reduction in supply, relative to demand, in those other sectors with its consequent price increases. Anything other than ethanol that is produced from corn (such as beef cattle or corn meal) has rather significant increases in upwards pressure on prices.



2nd wave effect:

To further get in on the ethanol-from-corn gravy train, farmers increase the the amount of land they use for growing corn. There is a finite amount of land suitable for growing crops (including corn), so farmers must usually shift land from some other crop to corn to do this. This causes a drop in supply of the other crops (with the resulting upwards pressure on prices for those crops (and anything else that uses those other crops in their production)). Yes, the increased supply of corn *does* relieve some of the price increases on corn from the 1st wave, but the damage (in the form of higher food prices) from the 2nd wave is much more widespread.

Sorry but most crops are intentionally put into rotation, whereby duplicate crops are not grown year after year on the same soil. You may not know but that repeatedly growing the same crop on the sail soil actually reduces crop yields.

See there is a method to the madness. people whined about paying farmers for leaving their fields non productive. The real result is better production on the land when it is in production. So the argument that more corn will just have to be grown is false.

Yes, I know about crop rotation. I grew up farming. Did you? I know the three main reasons why it works. The one that most people know is nitrogen fixing from microorganisms in the root systems of most legume crops. Do you know the other two? And, my point about more land being put into corn production is valid, whether the farmer is a dufus and switches from something else to growing only corn on it, or if the farmer switches one of the non-legume crops in his rotation to corn on suitable land, when corn was not in his rotation initially. It is going to cause some supply issues with other crops.

Beyond alochol corn is used to feed us in the form of cereal or other food products from cornbread to bread crumbs.

Lets not forget the additional cost of feeding cattle, pigs and chicken etc as they are bought and sold for food or breeding. All that added cost adds up and is pushed onto the end user. Who might that be? could that be you and me?

Uhh... Thats what I said. And don't forget that HFCS crap that is in almost everything now...

Lets also look at the alcohol itself. It costs more to make it that it is worth. Then you get to pay for it 2X because our tax dollars are spent towards the cost of production.

Then we pay again at the pump. Very few of us paid attention when they started adding alcohol to gasoline. I did. I noticed a specific drop about 10% a tank load. So do the math they added 10% ethanol to my gas then my gas mileage dropped 10%... Hmmm basically the ethanol does absolutely nothing. I still burn the same amount of gas but I get to waste my money on ethanol that would be much better served feed me or the animals I intend to eat.

I wasn't talking about the uses of ethanol, after it was produced. But yeah... You are right about it being of very little (if any) benefit as a fuel. I was merely discussing the why behind the can of Pringles (along with about everything else at the grocery store at about the same time) getting more expensive.

A subsidy from the Government to encourage ethanol production from corn was a bad policy and its production from corn in most cases is a bad idea. Now then, Corn whiskey, certainly... But fuel for your automobile??? It is not economically viable. The subsidy has massively distorted the market.

I agree with that last statement

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

Do The Occupiers care About Pink Slime?

No?

Then there is No Worries.

DiningOnSlimeDullNando

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

---

Janice

WOWSA! That Info On MILLIONAIRES is from The Big WH? Sweet!

So there IS TRANSPARENCY in The Gov, just like His Slimeness Promised!

I think The CarneyVal Law Prof has Got My Vote!

Hope The Vote Lever ain't Too Slimey. I want to get A Good Grip when I Vote For Potus The Wonderful.

hehehe

SideShowDullNando

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

I occupied Dull's brain the other day.
There's actually stuff in their, folks.
He just doesn't want you to know he's a real person.

They're just following all the current rules and taking advantage of all the current exceptions to the rules.

This next question belongs in the "head scratchers" thread, but I'll go ahead and ask it here.

Why not simplify the tax code so that everbody can understand it and everybody pays a fair shair instead of adding *another* exception to the rules?

Because we have the congress of "no".

---

Janice

They're just following all the current rules and taking advantage of all the current exceptions to the rules.

This next question belongs in the "head scratchers" thread, but I'll go ahead and ask it here.

Why not simplify the tax code so that everbody can understand it and everybody pays a fair shair instead of adding *another* exception to the rules?

Because too many people get a free ride now.

---

Nearly every time I have come across a personal exposition by someone who did well in some field from small time garage to billion dollar corporation one theme has come through. They come to realize they are responsible for the income and thus family and life style of their employees. That becomes the driving factor in their lives. Sidebar: Jim Henson's son took over the Muppet company exactly for that reason rather than dissolving it or selling it off.

OTOH I know of exactly zero self-confessions of malevolent intent by successful folks. I only know of imputed evil intentions. Back in the day I looked into the occasional claim of evil intentions and in every case I found it to be a rational business decision with no signs of intent other than to make a buck.

I have also found predatory practices but most of them I found through Gov legal actions and indictments. The very few in between have been my opinion. On the top of my list of the few is Microsoft. Interestingly the things I find objectionable with MS have lead to indictments in Europe. Sidebar: One of the problems with relief work for hurricane Katrina was the website was created using an MS website creator that used non-compliant MSisms that could only be read with the version of IE that came with Windows ME. MS works to tie people to itself to the exclusion of all others. You want to help after Katrina? Buy Windows ME. And ME was an advertising gimmick with a different but not better release of 2000 -- better in the sense of worth a separate release.

Obviously I follow the software more than most things but because of that I know what to look for when I investigate other claims.

Your mileage will vary.

---

Unvarnished
Haaretz
Jerusalem Post
The origin of the Yahweh Cult

Do The Occupiers care About Pink Slime?

No?

Then there is No Worries.

DiningOnSlimeDullNando

At what point does sausage become pink slime? See Bismarck.

---

Unvarnished
Haaretz
Jerusalem Post
The origin of the Yahweh Cult

Do The Occupiers care About Pink Slime?

No?

Then there is No Worries.

DiningOnSlimeDullNando

At what point does sausage become pink slime? See Bismarck.

Since Pink Slime is the slang term for "Lean finely textured beef"
and sausage is made of pork, Never.

Now if you put lean finely textured pork in the sausage casings, I would say that is when you have slimed them. And if you put in what they are calling "trim".. you have done no better.

Sausage can be made with decent pieces of meat.

The rest.. I will be happy to make into a smoothy for ya.

---

Janice