Food Shortage & Price Explosion Thread

Welcome to the Precious Metals Bug Forums

Welcome to the PMBug forums - a community supported watering hole for folks interested in gold, silver, precious metals, sound money, investing, market and economic news, central bank monetary policies, politics and more.

Register a free account to join the discussions. When you register an account and log in, you may enjoy additional benefits including access to market data/charts and additional members only rooms (including one for trade/barter with the community).

What policies? Moar WAR? Whatever either of us think of THAT splendid idea...I think we're gonna have all the war we ever wanted.

Another of his policies, one I fanatically support(ed), was, removal of the illegal invaders.

I didn't think slow-walking them out was part of that. At the rate we're going, he'll get them out in about 400 years.

What, he'd make Dumbos...UPSET? Good. They're gonna BLOCK him? Let them do it. Advertise which side of America those fake Bammy-judges are.

He'll be IMPEACHED?...AGAIN? Let THAT happen. Better to fail in trying to do the right thing, than to fail to try and allow the wrong to continue.

On to gubbermint spending. Musk played Trump like the senile old man that he, Trump...IS. It's obvious now - Musk used DOGE as a shiny object to get Trump's ear. Now Musk has all he wants, and anyway, he has like-minded colleagues in the system. Like Peter Thiel's pet. Like Scott Bessent and Howard Lutnik.

So we get no significant cuts. And USAID is just being renamed and ready for a relaunch in about five months, with the Dumbo takeover of CONgress.

Oh...how about the Epstein files? WHERE ARE THE ARRESTS?

Oh, its bigger than Epstein? He's just a CIA honeypot? THEN SHUT DOWN THE CIA AND START ARRESTING.

And if he's stopped...well, he did what he was supposed to do; was compelled to do by his office.

No...what we get out of this is an asinine Gulf War, which serves our interests NOT AT ALL (or any Western nation) but was exactly what PeePee Nuttin' Yahoo has wanted for 40 years.

Are you tired of all this Winning, yet? I sure am.

None of this, what's being done, is gonna do anything good for what's left of the economy.
 
Nothing special, just something to think about.

 
For the same GD reason CHICKEN prices took off.

Because the Deep State was hellbent on exterminating BOTH.

Chickens were quicker - a fake bird-flu finding and condeming whole colonies. Cattle take longer - more people involved; bigger spaces; longer life cycle. But we're seeing the result on the Left's War On Natural Food.
 
Bottom Feeder said:
and the freeze dried food I purchased for TEOTWAEKA raises its sleepy head…
Click to expand...
Yah.

That raises the question, though: How much worse is it gonna get?

Loss of availability of beef, is a real problem. But it's not the same as going hungry

Right now, we have multiple, multiple issues - Trump is going senile and has been co-opted by Mossad, by the Tech Bros, by the crypto-scammers, and is discrediting the entire anti-establishment MAGA movement.

Looming on the horizon, like a bad dream, the ugly mug of that barmaid from Queens...the next Deep-State-approved queen.

Can you imagine the mess, when we put Modern Monetary Theory on this, along with Billy Gates popping up with his slimy lab-grown "meat"?

Maybe it's time to eat moar chicken and fish for a few years. I don't like it, either...there's nothing about this time I like, but all I see tells me it's gonna get moar unlikeable.

Open your stores, and you start the clock...leading up to where your cupboard is bare...
 
Trump’s beef import plan backfires as ranchers warn of betrayal

The White House says temporarily expanding imports of lean beef trimmings can add supply for American consumers facing high ground-beef prices. The backlash centers on whether lower retail prices should come at the expense of cattle ranchers already dealing with a historically small herd.
Donald Trump’s beef import plan has backfired politically after ranchers criticized the administration’s decision to temporarily expand imports of lean beef trimmings from Argentina. The White House says the measure will add supply and help bring down high ground-beef prices, but the proclamation permits an additional 80,000 metric tons a year to enter the United States tariff-free.

Ranchers warned that the approach amounts to a betrayal of U.S. cattle producers, who are being asked to compete with more imported beef while consumers face higher grocery bills. The backlash points to the plan’s central flaw: increasing the supply of imported lean trimmings may ease pressure on retail prices, but it does not resolve the strain facing domestic ranchers.

The administration’s promise of cheaper ground beef therefore collides with producers’ concern that short-term imports could weaken the market for American cattle. That tension explains why Trump’s policy triggered such immediate criticism and why ranchers called it a betrayal.

More here:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/mar...warn-of-betrayal/ar-AA2aFMTh?ocid=socialshare
 
searcher said:
Trump’s beef import plan backfires as ranchers warn of betrayal

The White House says temporarily expanding imports of lean beef trimmings can add supply for American consumers facing high ground-beef prices. The backlash centers on whether lower retail prices should come at the expense of cattle ranchers already dealing with a historically small herd.
Donald Trump’s beef import plan has backfired politically after ranchers criticized the administration’s decision to temporarily expand imports of lean beef trimmings from Argentina. The White House says the measure will add supply and help bring down high ground-beef prices, but the proclamation permits an additional 80,000 metric tons a year to enter the United States tariff-free.

Ranchers warned that the approach amounts to a betrayal of U.S. cattle producers, who are being asked to compete with more imported beef while consumers face higher grocery bills. The backlash points to the plan’s central flaw: increasing the supply of imported lean trimmings may ease pressure on retail prices, but it does not resolve the strain facing domestic ranchers.

The administration’s promise of cheaper ground beef therefore collides with producers’ concern that short-term imports could weaken the market for American cattle. That tension explains why Trump’s policy triggered such immediate criticism and why ranchers called it a betrayal.

More here:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/mar...warn-of-betrayal/ar-AA2aFMTh?ocid=socialshare
Click to expand...
It would probably be better to import that beef on the hoof so ranchers can buy them to fatten up their herds.
 
Montana ranchers say Trump's beef import plan hits at worst time

Aug 27, 2026 #montana #montanamoment #nbcmontana
President Donald Trump is planning to import 300,000 metric tons of beef -- tariff free -- over the next 90 days in an effort to bring down beef prices.
The announcement has been met with backlash from Montana's congressional delegation, other Republican lawmakers, and leaders in the ranching community.
NBC Montana asked the second vice president of the Montana Stockgrowers Association what he would say to Trump if given the chance.


2:45
 

Idaho ranchers express concern over Trump's beef import plan​


Aug 26, 2026
Rancher Sean Cunningham expresses concerns as federal beef imports threaten U.S. cattle market stability amid low cattle population and rising meat prices.


4:03
 
searcher said:
Rancher Sean Cunningham expresses concerns as federal beef imports threaten U.S. cattle market stability amid low cattle population and rising meat prices.
Click to expand...
So what are we supposed to be concerned about?

Having tariffs?

Not having tariffs?

Either way you post negatively about it.


As for ranchers, they are getting top dollar for their beef, so of course they are liking it and don't want the prices to come down.

Is there any industry ever, that when getting record high prices for their goods or services wanted the prices going back to where they don't make as much?
 

In this red state, cattle ranchers are fuming. They blame Trump.​

POWER, MT — When Tim Brunner was at an auction barn earlier this week, he was surprised to see decent cows selling several hundred dollars cheaper than they were just a few weeks ago.

He largely blames President Donald Trump. And he’s not the only one.

The White House’s abrupt decision last week to ease tariffs on 300,000 metric tons — more than 660 million pounds — of foreign beef imports has infuriated American cattle ranchers and congressional Republicans alike.

More:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/othe...they-blame-trump/ar-AA2b2tee?ocid=socialshare
 
searcher said:

In this red state, cattle ranchers are fuming. They blame Trump.​

POWER, MT — When Tim Brunner was at an auction barn earlier this week, he was surprised to see decent cows selling several hundred dollars cheaper than they were just a few weeks ago.

He largely blames President Donald Trump. And he’s not the only one.

The White House’s abrupt decision last week to ease tariffs on 300,000 metric tons — more than 660 million pounds — of foreign beef imports has infuriated American cattle ranchers and congressional Republicans alike.

More:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/othe...they-blame-trump/ar-AA2b2tee?ocid=socialshare
Click to expand...
So now we're supposed to complain about something costing less?

When we have tariffs, we're told we should be mad.
.....but when there are no tariffs we are told that's bad too.

Which is it?

Are you in favor of tariffs, or not?
 

Food Prices Keep Rising, So What’s Driving Grocery Costs?​

Grocery prices in 2026 remain elevated and continue to climb, fueling widespread consumer concern. This persistent inflation is driven by a complex mix of factors, including tariffs, soaring energy costs from Middle East conflicts, and weather and disease dynamics impacting produce and livestock. Worker shortages, rising labor expenses, and even trade policy changes like the Mexican tomato agreement suspension also contribute. While policymakers attempt "quick fixes" such as waiving ground beef tariffs, these measures offer limited relief. Americans, particularly lower-income households, are shifting to more affordable options. Experts warn that given the multifaceted and enduring nature of these challenges, significant relief at the checkout line is not expected soon.

More:

www.forbes.com

Food Prices Keep Rising, So What’s Driving Grocery Costs?

Food price inflation is complex and linked to political dynamics. Finding quick solutions to inflation is challenging
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com
 
searcher said:
Montana ranchers say Trump's beef import plan hits at worst time
Click to expand...
The AIM is to put them out of business.

That they then lose their land, and no longer pay for access to Federal grasslands. Ending the traditional deals - which will not be legally able to be re-opened in the future.

Make the private land available for "private equity" and Globalist playboys. Cut the Federal land off and take it out of reach.

Midwit control-freaks run apeschitt.
 
Did they just start ranching since beef prices got so high?

I'm thinking they were in the business before that.

If so, how did they survive then when prices for beef were a lot lower?

Over the past 6 years, beef prices have risen considerably more than the overall rate of inflation has risen.

20% in just the past year alone.

Anyone selling cattle and beef should be rollin' in the dough.
....and if I were in a business experiencing all time record high prices for my product, I'd also bitch and complain about anyone trying to lower those prices.
 
Joe King said:
Are you in favor of tariffs, or not?
Click to expand...
Me? I'm not in favor of anything the government does that costs me money.

Fun with Grok

Q
I'm curious about tariffs. How has Donald Trump's tariffs affected the global supply chain? Have they actually helped or hurt the average American? As time goes on will they help or damage the world's economy?

A
Trump’s tariffs (from both terms, with major expansions in 2025) have accelerated the reshuffling of global supply chains away from China, raised costs for U.S. importers and consumers, generated substantial federal revenue, and produced modest negative effects on U.S. and global GDP according to most economic analyses—while delivering mixed or limited gains for domestic manufacturing overall.

Effects on the Global Supply Chain​

The first-term tariffs (primarily Section 232 on steel/aluminum and Section 301 on China) already prompted diversification. The much broader 2025 measures—including a baseline ~10% on most countries (“Liberation Day” and successors), higher rates on China (peaking far higher before settling in the 20–50% range depending on product), and sector-specific hikes—intensified this.

Key observed shifts:

  • U.S. imports from China fell sharply (roughly 25% in parts of 2025; China’s share of U.S. goods imports dropped toward ~9%, near early-2000s levels when China joined the WTO).
  • Gains went to Mexico, Vietnam, Taiwan, India, Thailand, Indonesia, and others. Some nearshoring/friend-shoring to North America and diversification within Asia occurred.
  • Firms responded with dual-sourcing, higher inventories, supplier switches, and (to a lesser extent) onshoring or regionalization. Multinationals adjusted more readily by reallocating across affiliates than purely domestic firms.
  • Uncertainty itself drove costs: even before full implementation, firms shifted toward lower-uncertainty sources, raising import prices. Total U.S. import volumes often held up via reallocation rather than collapsing.
The result is a less China-centric but more fragmented and costly network of supply chains. Efficiency gains from hyper-specialization have been partly reversed in favor of resilience and geopolitical considerations. Downstream industries that rely on imported inputs faced higher costs and occasional bottlenecks.

Impact on the Average American​

Tariffs function as a tax on imports. Empirical evidence consistently shows that the incidence falls heavily on U.S. entities:

  • U.S. importers, firms, and consumers bore nearly 90% of the economic burden in 2025 analyses (New York Fed and others); foreign exporters absorbed little by cutting prices.
  • Household cost estimates vary by the exact tariff package and time frame but commonly range from roughly $700–$1,500+ annually on average (Yale Budget Lab, Tax Foundation, and similar). Lower-income households face a larger burden as a share of income because they spend more on goods.
  • Prices of tariffed goods and their domestic substitutes rose. Some categories (apparel, metals-intensive products, certain consumer goods) saw clearer effects; overall CPI impacts were present but moderated by substitution, inventories, and other factors.
  • Revenue has been substantial—tens of billions monthly at peaks, contributing hundreds of billions annually in recent periods—providing a fiscal offset that can fund other priorities or reduce other taxes.
  • Manufacturing: Protected sectors such as steel and aluminum saw higher domestic production and prices. Downstream users (autos, construction, appliances, etc.) faced higher input costs, which can reduce competitiveness and employment there. Broad claims of a manufacturing renaissance have not fully materialized in the data; gains are concentrated rather than economy-wide.
  • Trade deficit: It narrowed in some periods as imports from high-tariff sources dropped, though front-loading before tariff hikes temporarily widened it.
Net short-to-medium-term effect on the typical American has been higher prices and some disruption, partially offset by revenue and any protected-sector wage/employment gains. Long-run GDP estimates from models (Tax Foundation, Budget Lab, academic work) show the U.S. economy persistently smaller by roughly 0.1–0.4% under sustained higher tariffs, reflecting efficiency losses.

Longer-Term Effects on the World Economy​

Most quantitative models project modest global GDP reductions (on the order of 0.2–1% in various scenarios) from sustained higher barriers and fragmentation, driven by less efficient resource allocation, reduced trade volumes in some corridors, and investment dampened by policy uncertainty.

Positive or mitigating factors that have limited damage so far include:

  • Limited full-scale retaliation by many partners.
  • Rapid private-sector reallocation that preserved much trade volume.
  • Possible resilience benefits from diversified chains (less single-point vulnerability).
  • Negotiated deals or exemptions that lowered effective rates from peak announcements.
Risks that grow over time include further tit-for-tat barriers, regionalization that raises costs, reduced innovation from less competition and scale, and geopolitical strain. Global merchandise trade has held up better than many 2025 forecasts feared, but the efficiency loss from moving away from lowest-cost production is real. Broader protectionism elsewhere would amplify the damage.

In summary, the tariffs have demonstrably reshaped supply chains (reducing China dependence at a cost), imposed measurable costs on American households and businesses via higher prices (with limited foreign absorption), raised government revenue, and produced small negative GDP effects in standard models. Claims of large net benefits for the average American or the world economy rest more on national-security, negotiating-leverage, or long-horizon reshoring arguments than on the short-to-medium-term price, output, and efficiency data. Outcomes continue to evolve with policy changes, court rulings, and firm adjustments.
 
Joe King said:
Did they just start ranching since beef prices got so high?

I'm thinking they were in the business before that.

If so, how did they survive then when prices for beef were a lot lower?

Over the past 6 years, beef prices have risen considerably more than the overall rate of inflation has risen.

20% in just the past year alone.

Anyone selling cattle and beef should be rollin' in the dough.
....and if I were in a business experiencing all time record high prices for my product, I'd also bitch and complain about anyone trying to lower those prices.
Click to expand...
Prices are high for scarcity.

Because the costs of ranching have exploded. And herd losses...drought, range-lands that don't have sustainable growth...plus various fake diseases that have led to large-scale condemnation of herds. WHICH the lying political mediuh won't tell the normies about.

AND the COST of access to federal grasslands. They have to PAY, and not all of it is available.

Then the fuel costs, which are considerable. Cowboys don't just ride horses - trucks, four-wheelers, AND WATER PUMPS for cattle, all have to be fueled.

It adds up; ranchers are put out of business. Shrinking supply facing hitherto-static demand -> price increases; which are free markets' way of destroying demand, bringing demand in line with supply.
 
searcher said:
Me? I'm not in favor of anything the government does that costs me money.
Click to expand...
Yes, you.

First you post anything you can find about how terrible if we impose tariffs on anything, then post stuff complaining about when something isn't tarrifed .

Which is it? Or is just because of who is doing it?


Are you ok with virtually every other nation putting big tariffs on our exports?

That hurts our producers.

If it's ok for other nations to tariff our stuff, why isn't it ok for us to do that he same?
 
Joe King said:
First you post anything you can find about how terrible if we impose tariffs on anything, then post stuff complaining about when something isn't tarrifed
Click to expand...

I post news about different subject matter. How you perceive my posts is your problem, not mine.

Joe King said:
Are you ok with virtually every other nation putting big tariffs on our exports?
Click to expand...

Can you produce any verification of this? Particularly commodity to commodity via the US and other countries. Looking forward to reading them.

Joe King said:
Or is just because of who is doing it?
Click to expand...

How you perceive my posts is your problem, not mine.

When I read someone's post I don't look to pick it apart. If I like it, I generally give the member a thumbs up. I'm pretty generous with those. If don't care for the post, or disagree with it, I usually just blow by it and move on to something that interests me.

Always take things for what they're worth, dyodd and make of a post what you will. Remember, how you perceive someone's post is on you, not the poster.
 
searcher said:
Always take things for what they're worth, dyodd and make of a post what you will. Remember, how you perceive someone's post is on you, not the poster.
Click to expand...
I'm trying understand where your own position on it is.

This is a discussion forum after all, so let's discuss?
 
Joe King said:
Only thing different he (Trump) could do, would be to import cattle tariff free so the ranchers could rebuild herd counts quicker.
Click to expand...
Which brings me back to a pillar of understanding, that I'm now working under:

Trump is not, repeat NOT, acting in the interests of the general public.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom