Jim Rogers calls a next bubble in food again

[c1ue]

Re: Jim Rodgers calls the next bubble - Food

You can imagine all you want.

Feel free to re-read the thread from its beginnings.

You've asserted time and time again any number of hypotheses to support your ag land thesis, but you continue to fail to demonstrate that any of these are either:

1) supply or demand is unusual in the context of either historical or present day operational fact

2) price increases are exclusive or exceptional for ag land or food, as opposed to every other commodity including gold, silver, oil, and so forth

3) spending on food is increasing in any way disproportionate to the recent past

Here is an example of what real food inflation looks like:



And note: this is due to printing, not due to meat demand or water supply or people eating out more or whatever.

Note that food spending in the US is going down as a percent of overall spending, not up.

[doom&gloom]

Re: Jim Rodgers calls the next bubble - Food

You can imagine all you want.

Feel free to re-read the thread from its beginnings.

You've asserted time and time again any number of hypotheses to support your ag land thesis, but you continue to fail to demonstrate that any of these are either:

1) supply or demand is unusual in the context of either historical or present day operational fact

2) price increases are exclusive or exceptional for ag land or food, as opposed to every other commodity including gold, silver, oil, and so forth

3) spending on food is increasing in any way disproportionate to the recent past

Here is an example of what real food inflation looks like:



And note: this is due to printing, not due to meat demand or water supply or people eating out more or whatever.

Note that food spending in the US is going down as a percent of overall spending, not up.

psst... the US is not an island unto itself anymore my friend... nice shot at another strawman arguement though...

[c1ue]

Re: Jim Rodgers calls the next bubble - Food

psst... the US is not an island unto itself anymore my friend... nice shot at another strawman arguement though...

psst, the US is the single largest supplier of corn in the world.

It is one of the top 10 food producing nations in the world, both in terms of volume and in terms of export: Wheat #3, Corn #1, Oats #3, Buckwheat #6

The only major carbohydrate staples which the US doesn't figure in the top 10 are: millet and rice.

See for yourself: http://www.fao.org/es/ess/top/commod...m=89&year=2005

[doom&gloom]

Re: Jim Rodgers calls the next bubble - Food

psst, the US is the single largest supplier of corn in the world.

It is one of the top 10 food producing nations in the world, both in terms of volume and in terms of export: Wheat #3, Corn #1, Oats #3, Buckwheat #6

The only major carbohydrate staples which the US doesn't figure in the top 10 are: millet and rice.

See for yourself: http://www.fao.org/es/ess/top/commod...m=89&year=2005

so the use is biggest in corn? and your point is? or in other words, WTF does it have to do with your "credit arguement" or pretty much anything else you have pulled out of your hat?

psst.. you left out soybeans, one of the most important crops in the world. if you're gonna cite production of crops, you really should have a c1ue which ones are most important.

http://faostat.fao.org/site/339/default.aspx

[Southernguy]

Re: Jim Rodgers calls the next bubble - Food

Food inflation is an essentialy irreversible process.
That´s what latest EJ work says.
And that´s because of a simple reason.
Energy (mainly oil) is a very important part of the cost structure of food production.
As energy becomes costlier (not just more expensive, it´s cost of production rises systematicaly) food=energy energy=food, the criminal peoples starving policy of burning food in car engines, food shall also become costlier.
In classical (particularly Marxist) terms: the labour socialy necessary to produce food is on a rising tendency.
Of course circumstancial oscillations shall happen.
But tendency is irreversible.
This tendency shall not only increase costs of production, buy rent seeking capabilities as well. Rent of the land and rent of natural resources (particularly energy) also.

[doom&gloom]

Re: Jim Rodgers calls the next bubble - Food

Food inflation is an essentialy irreversible process.
That´s what latest EJ work says.
And that´s because of a simple reason.
Energy (mainly oil) is a very important part of the cost structure of food production.
As energy becomes costlier (not just more expensive, it´s cost of production rises systematicaly) food=energy energy=food, the criminal peoples starving policy of burning food in car engines, food shall also become costlier.
In classical (particularly Marxist) terms: the labour socialy necessary to produce food is on a rising tendency.
Of course circumstancial oscillations shall happen.
But tendency is irreversible.
This tendency shall not only increase costs of production, buy rent seeking capabilities as well. Rent of the land and rent of natural resources (particularly energy) also.

Absolutely! It was a reason to become a farmer, along with what I believe will be liquid fuels priority if resource allocation occurs...

While I never got into farming for land value increases, I would expect over time land values should increase with inflation (though I have no idea if "real" returns will increase). and as input costs escalate, those costs force out marginal farmers, leaving the rest of us who are not marginal able to pass along those costs in outputs. In reality, I see farm output somewhat like peak oil eceonomic activity output. As prices rise for inputs, marginal farmers drop out, output drops, prices rise, marginal farmers drop in again, output increase, prices drop, marginal producers get squeezed again.

Most of my land is now near Libertad. I am sure you know the area and the quality fo that land. The rest is in Soriano.

[Southernguy]

Re: Jim Rodgers calls the next bubble - Food

Absolutely! It was a reason to become a farmer, along with what I believe will be liquid fuels priority if resource allocation occurs...

While I never got into farming for land value increases, I would expect over time land values should increase with inflation (though I have no idea if "real" returns will increase). and as input costs escalate, those costs force out marginal farmers, leaving the rest of us who are not marginal able to pass along those costs in outputs. In reality, I see farm output somewhat like peak oil eceonomic activity output. As prices rise for inputs, marginal farmers drop out, output drops, prices rise, marginal farmers drop in again, output increase, prices drop, marginal producers get squeezed again.

Most of my land is now near Libertad. I am sure you know the area and the quality fo that land. The rest is in Soriano.

Congratulations DG, probably the best of the best.
In the medium-long term yor shall not be disapointed.
Of course, administration is work, buy if scales are adequate you can outsource most of it.
And Libertad is not more than 40 minutes from Montevideo Centre....good

[doom&gloom]

Re: Jim Rodgers calls the next bubble - Food

all outsourced, or "contract farmed" now.

someone else I know came down and picked up some land 15 kilcks out of Colonia. Nice stuff too!

[c1ue]

Re: Jim Rodgers calls the next bubble - Food

so the use is biggest in corn? and your point is? or in other words, WTF does it have to do with your "credit arguement" or pretty much anything else you have pulled out of your hat?

psst.. you left out soybeans, one of the most important crops in the world. if you're gonna cite production of crops, you really should have a c1ue which ones are most important.

http://faostat.fao.org/site/339/default.aspx

The US is the largest producer of soybeans as well.

So how again does this support your statement that

psst... the US is not an island unto itself anymore my friend... nice shot at another strawman arguement though...

This tendency shall not only increase costs of production, buy rent seeking capabilities as well. Rent of the land and rent of natural resources (particularly energy) also.

One problem here with this statement is that property tax rates have been dropping for decades, but the present situation is very likely to see this trend change.

If for no other reason than governments need to get revenue from anywhere they can.

[doom&gloom]

Re: Jim Rodgers calls the next bubble - Food

property taxes on ag land are basically nil, espcially in uruguay.

my comment on soybeans was the fact thet you cited corn, and a host of other items, but left out the biggie soy, showing your ignorance fo what is important in US and world crops.

finally my comment on the US not being an island was because you went off on some side road discussing the US (for what reason I do not know) when ag is a worldwide market.

[c1ue]

Re: Jim Rodgers calls the next bubble - Food

my comment on soybeans was the fact thet you cited corn, and a host of other items, but left out the biggie soy, showing your ignorance fo what is important in US and world crops.

The US as the top producer of corn puts out over 280 million metric tons a year.

The top producer for rice (China) puts out over 185 million metric tons a year.

Soybeans are an important crop with the US as #1 producer growing 82.8 million metric tons a year, but I fail to see what difference this makes in anything, especially since I noted specifically carbohydrates as a focus:

The only major carbohydrate staples which the US doesn't figure in the top 10 are: millet and rice.

As far as I know, soybeans aren't a major source for carbohydrates.

The original point: the US does matter.

And you still cannot seem to actually read what is written.

[doom&gloom]

Re: Jim Rodgers calls the next bubble - Food

when did we start discussing carbohydrates? what does carbohydrates have to do as a class with my thesis for owning farmland?

[c1ue]

Re: Jim Rodgers calls the next bubble - Food

when did we start discussing carbohydrates? what does carbohydrates have to do as a class with my thesis for owning farmland?

According to your thesis, the value of farm land is a function of food.

Within the category of food, carbohydrates are the single largest category.

From the first Google search result for 'dietary requirements for adults':

http://www.nutrition.com.sg/he/herda-adt.asp

Recommended Daily Dietary Allowances for Adults

For Normal Healthy Persons in Singapore

Age group	Energy * (kcal)	Protein (g)	Total Fat (g)	SFA (g)	Carbo- hydrates (g)	Dietary fibre (g)	Choles- terol (mg)	Ca (g)	Na (mg)	Fe (mg)	Vit A (mcg)	Folic Acid (mcg)	Vit C (mg)
Men
18- 29 yrs	2550	68	71	23.6	351	26	300	0.4-0.5	1700	6	750	200	30
30- 59 yrs	2500	68	69	23.0	344	25	300	0.4-0.5	1650	6	750	200	30
60 yrs and above	2100	68	58	19.3	289	21	300	0.4-0.5	1400	6	750	200	30
Women
18 - 29 yrs	2000	58	56	18.6	275	20	300	0.4-0.5	1350	19	750	200	30
30- 59 yrs	2000	58	57	19.0	275	20	300	0.4-0.5	1350	19	750	200	30
60 yrs and above	1800	58	50	16.7	248	18	300	0.4-0.5	1200	6	750	200	30
Pregnant women
- full activity	+285	+9	+8	+6	+39	+3	300	1.0-1.2	+200	19	750	400	50
- reduced activity	+200	+9	+6	+2	+28	+2	300	1.0-1.2	+150	19	750	400	50
Lactating women
- first 6 months	+500	+25	+14	+4.6	+69	+5	300	1.0-1.2	+350	19	1200	400	50
- after 6 months	+500	+19	+14	+4.6	+69	+5	300	1.0-1.2	+350	19	1200	400	50

Legend: SFA - saturated fat; Ca - calcium; Na - sodium; Fe - iron; Vit A - vitamin A; Vit C - vitamin C

Now I'm sure rogermexico would argue the relative ratios, but I don't think anyone can argue from this chart that the category of carbohydrates is the single largest food commodity required by humans.

As such, carbohydrate production is a very reasonable proxy for overall food demand/supply and is therefore a good proxy for the relative influence of a nation in terms of production of same.

[doom&gloom]

Re: Jim Rodgers calls the next bubble - Food

funny, I don't see pigs, cows, or ethanol plants anywhere on that chart. How do you account for their consumption?

[c1ue]

Re: Jim Rodgers calls the next bubble - Food

Whether it is a pig or a cow, or an ethanol plant, the input combinations are still the same: carbohydrates #1.

But of course it is abundantly clear now that you will never admit any of your numerous reading comprehension as well as other more important analysis failures.