Err, no

\”Over the long run I think food prices and the proportion of income spent on food may well be going up,\” he said. \”Because of growing demand it is going to change. It is the basic law of supply and demand.\”

I don\’t doubt that the price of food is going to go up. I doubt very much that the portion of income spent on it is going to go up.

For one of the things that is driving up food prices is that incomes are rising…..

10 thoughts on “Err, no”

  1. Philip Scott Thomas

    What’s going on here?

    Last week it was the boss of Morrison’s embarrassing himself. This week it’s the head of Tesco.

    Have we had an outbreak of jackassery?

  2. Er, what?

    If your income rises, the prices don’t follow it. That means you haven’t got any economic growth.

    You’re talking pants Tim.

  3. I can only admire the sucker punch that has the Observer rolling on the floor asking for Tesco to tickle its tummy.

    Yes, I suppose if you decide to buy only organic British food from Islingtonian “farmers” markets, then your grocery bill will rise.

    The rest of us, meanwhile, will benefit from higher CO2 levels (= greater yields), lower worldwide birth rates and better delivery chains (= less waste) to enjoy produce from genetically or scientifically grown produce from places in Africa that never had an export business before.

    Hurrah! (And Tesco can go cater for Islington and leave the mass market for some other firm, for all I care.)

  4. “…incomes are rising” not for the people who shop at Tescos they’re not (see all over Observer low pay edition today incl. another stonking editorial to follow “We need Unions” on 7th).
    I forgot this is an outpost off middle-class Tesco fanatics. Cue the dance of the Tesco men heads jammed in those marvellous, very thin, bags .
    Also Ian B is right again.

  5. “those marvellous, very thin, bags”

    Ah, it’s not just me. I went to Tesco’s for the first time the other day to buy lemonade for my Pimm’s, and the bags all split loading them into the boot. Bloody useless.

  6. forty degrees south

    “…incomes are rising” not for the people who shop at Tescos they’re not

    The changes in world food consumption (and asssociated rising demand) is coming from people who have never head of Tescos. Chinese paranoia about locally-produced baby formula is doing wonders for Range-Rover sales in rural New Zealand.

  7. Even if the percentage spent on food goes up, that could mean simply that with all other needs taken care of people can afford (and are willing) to spend more money to get higher quality food.

  8. “Ian B says:
    July 21, 2013 at 4:39 pm
    Er, what?

    If your income rises, the prices don’t follow it. That means you haven’t got any economic growth.

    You’re talking pants Tim.”

    Really, then explain why 20oz of Coke costs a dollar from a vending machine but 30 years ago 12oz cost $.35.

    Prices have increased *and* my purchasing power has increased as my income has risen faster.

  9. Even if the percentage spent on food goes up, that could mean simply that with all other needs taken care of people can afford (and are willing) to spend more money to get higher quality food.

    Yes, this was the thing that irked me when Shelter (grinding their own axe) pointed out that if food costs had risen to the same extent as housing costs then a chicken would cost eleventy hundred pounds or similar.

    I assume that since a level of food and housing are fixed demands, if one gets cheaper in real terms (as food has) then ceteris paribus the other will rise in price. I’m not an economist (and maybe this is idiocy that will prove this) but if I don’t have to spend 40% (or whatever) of my income on eating, I will probably spend it on my house. Equally, if I didn’t have to spend x% on putting a roof over my head, I might buy fewer chicken nuggets and more fillet mignon.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *