Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #12   Report Post  
Old March 20th 15, 12:33 AM posted to misc.consumers.frugal-living
Bob F Bob F is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BargainBanter: Sep 2006
Posts: 737
Default 1961 food prices vs. today (for a family with 18 kids)

wrote:
On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 at 1:38:50 PM UTC-4, Michael Black wrote:
On Mon, 16 Mar 2015,
wrote:

On Friday, March 13, 2015 at 11:43:29 PM UTC-4, Michael Black wrote:
On Fri, 13 Mar 2015,
wrote:

Depends on what you call food. I bet in 1961 a kale salad would
have cost a small fortune, while at the same time lobster was
poor people food for New Englanders. Beef used to be cheap, but
is no longer. Turkeys used to be a lot bonier than they are
today, heck today's turkeys can barely stand because of all the
breast meat. And an orange in the winter was a such a delicacy
they were given as gifts for Christmas.

I thought seafood was always poor people's food, if you lived by
the sea.

I guess you don't live by the sea. I'm at the NJ shore and most
seafood here has always been a more expensive food source and not
poor people's food, unless you catch it yourself. Prices for a
piece of fish aren't that much different than if you were in OH.
In fact, I've seen some places well inland, when traveling, where
fish prices were less than they are here at the coast.

I saw an article some time back about how the price of lobster at
the dock was way down (I can't remember the reason), making it quite
hard to be the ones catching them.


Making it quite hard to earn a decent profit catching lobsters
doesn't equate with them being cheap and the food poor people are
eating. At $2.50 a pound wholesale, the fishermen may be making
little or no profit, but that still puts them at $5+ retail. And
considering what meat there is on them versus waste, you can more
that double that price. How does that compare to other available
food sources? It sure isn't what poor people are eating. And I'd
note that those periods of low prices are the exception, you stated
that lobster has always been poor people's food by the sea. I'm
2 miles from the sea and you're wrong. I've never been poor and
still lobster is something we enjoy only occasionally.



Yet the prices didn't go down at the consumer end.


So then how are poor people eating lobsters at the seashore? Prices
don't just magically behave differently here.


OP's talking about 1961. Things have changed.

It used to be that local products in season were very cheap. Now, the best of
everything gets shipped across the nation/world to where better prices can be
had. So local prices don't get the big drops.


  #13   Report Post  
Old March 20th 15, 02:24 AM posted to misc.consumers.frugal-living
[email protected] trader4@optonline.net is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BargainBanter: Aug 2006
Posts: 93
Default 1961 food prices vs. today (for a family with 18 kids)

On Thursday, March 19, 2015 at 8:33:44 PM UTC-4, Bob F wrote:
wrote:
On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 at 1:38:50 PM UTC-4, Michael Black wrote:
On Mon, 16 Mar 2015,
wrote:

On Friday, March 13, 2015 at 11:43:29 PM UTC-4, Michael Black wrote:
On Fri, 13 Mar 2015,
wrote:

Depends on what you call food. I bet in 1961 a kale salad would
have cost a small fortune, while at the same time lobster was
poor people food for New Englanders. Beef used to be cheap, but
is no longer. Turkeys used to be a lot bonier than they are
today, heck today's turkeys can barely stand because of all the
breast meat. And an orange in the winter was a such a delicacy
they were given as gifts for Christmas.

I thought seafood was always poor people's food, if you lived by
the sea.

I guess you don't live by the sea. I'm at the NJ shore and most
seafood here has always been a more expensive food source and not
poor people's food, unless you catch it yourself. Prices for a
piece of fish aren't that much different than if you were in OH.
In fact, I've seen some places well inland, when traveling, where
fish prices were less than they are here at the coast.

I saw an article some time back about how the price of lobster at
the dock was way down (I can't remember the reason), making it quite
hard to be the ones catching them.


Making it quite hard to earn a decent profit catching lobsters
doesn't equate with them being cheap and the food poor people are
eating. At $2.50 a pound wholesale, the fishermen may be making
little or no profit, but that still puts them at $5+ retail. And
considering what meat there is on them versus waste, you can more
that double that price. How does that compare to other available
food sources? It sure isn't what poor people are eating. And I'd
note that those periods of low prices are the exception, you stated
that lobster has always been poor people's food by the sea. I'm
2 miles from the sea and you're wrong. I've never been poor and
still lobster is something we enjoy only occasionally.



Yet the prices didn't go down at the consumer end.


So then how are poor people eating lobsters at the seashore? Prices
don't just magically behave differently here.


OP's talking about 1961. Things have changed.


Wow, 1961, you really figured that out?



It used to be that local products in season were very cheap. Now, the best of
everything gets shipped across the nation/world to where better prices can be
had. So local prices don't get the big drops.


Lobster and the other typical seafood was never cheap and poor
people's food in the 60's. I live at the shore, I know.
  #14   Report Post  
Old March 22nd 15, 09:52 PM posted to misc.consumers.frugal-living
[email protected] Wilma6116@gmail.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BargainBanter: Jul 2008
Posts: 121
Default 1961 food prices vs. today (for a family with 18 kids)

On Thursday, March 19, 2015 at 7:24:41 PM UTC-7, wrote:


Lobster and the other typical seafood was never cheap and poor
people's food in the 60's. I live at the shore, I know.


I don't know if you lived at the shore, nor do I know about your memory. But I do know that I have the internet.

To begin- the wholesale price of lobster is better than $8/lb (look it up).

In 1961 the wholesale price of lobster was $0.53/lb. That can be found on page 24 of this document:

http://digitalcommons.library.umaine...text=fisheries

Inflation figured in, $0.53 in 1961 is equal to about $4 today. Using:

http://www.dollartimes.com/inflation...=300&year=1961

Conclusion: Lobster was easily half the price in 1961 as it is today. And that is wholesale. Today there are many more middlemen and the people in N.E. are competing against a world market to put lobsters on the plates of starving children of Portland.
  #15   Report Post  
Old March 23rd 15, 02:08 PM posted to misc.consumers.frugal-living
[email protected] trader4@optonline.net is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BargainBanter: Aug 2006
Posts: 93
Default 1961 food prices vs. today (for a family with 18 kids)

On Sunday, March 22, 2015 at 5:52:29 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Thursday, March 19, 2015 at 7:24:41 PM UTC-7, wrote:


Lobster and the other typical seafood was never cheap and poor
people's food in the 60's. I live at the shore, I know.


I don't know if you lived at the shore, nor do I know about your memory. But I do know that I have the internet.

To begin- the wholesale price of lobster is better than $8/lb (look it up).


I don't think so:

http://www.undercurrentnews.com/2014...t-hits-market/

Looks more like $5.50. I can buy them in the supermarket for $8,
$6 when they are on sale.



In 1961 the wholesale price of lobster was $0.53/lb. That can be found on page 24 of this document:

http://digitalcommons.library.umaine...text=fisheries


That puts the retail price at ~ $1.06, ie 2X wholesale


Inflation figured in, $0.53 in 1961 is equal to about $4 today.


Don't have to adjust to today. The issue was whether poor people
were eating lobster in 1960. Just look at the link I posted early in
the thread that shows the actual prices of some other sources of food
in 1960:

http://www.clearpictureonline.com/19...ge-Income.html

Sirloin stake is $.79 a pound. Were poor people eating that?
And note that a pound of sirloin is almost all edible. A pound
of lobster, maybe half is edible, so double the cost delta. Even
if you somehow got that lobster at wholesale, at your $.53, the
effective cost of the meat is easily double that.

What were poor people eating:

fryers: .37 /lb
grnd beef .33
rice .15
bread .14
potatoes .05
bananas .10

And those are *retail* prices.



Using:

http://www.dollartimes.com/inflation...=300&year=1961

Conclusion: Lobster was easily half the price in 1961 as it is today. And that is wholesale. Today there are many more middlemen and the people in N.E. are competing against a world market to put lobsters on the plates of starving children of Portland.


Even if it was half the price it was today, that has nothing
to do with whether poor people could afford it or not. Diamonds
were probably half the price, did the poor have those too? The other
fundemental misconception you have is that somehow poor people
are able to buy lobster at wholesale prices. Wholesale, is, well
wholesale, ie large quantities to the trade. I've lived near
the shore my whole life and we never had some special track to buy
at wholesale prices or anywhere near wholesale price for seafood
or just about anything else. We paid retail, even at fish markets
near the shore. Some exceptional rare circumstances
excepted. And we were middle class and rarely had lobster because
it was expensive compared to other food choices. The above proves
it.


Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FS: MUST SEE Gemstone jewelry, art & kids shoes - LOW PRICES! Jewelry by Yael Frugal living 0 May 25th 08 03:46 PM
Biofuel hoax is the cause of recent food inflation and new biofuelbill will skyrocket food prices higher! [email protected] Frugal living 10 December 25th 07 02:23 PM
Need source for steak/roast at good prices for family reunion! slugbug Frugal living 10 October 18th 06 09:23 PM
Free Food & Family Magazine TheBestFreebies.com Frugal living 0 August 17th 06 08:46 PM
Better to buy Family Travelcard (even if no kids with you) tHatDudeUK UK discounts & bargains 13 January 18th 05 12:48 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:25 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 BargainBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Bargains and Discounts"

 

Copyright © 2017