top | item 20022186

Why is chicken so cheap? [video]

109 points| open-source-ux | 6 years ago |youtube.com

144 comments

order
[+] arendtio|6 years ago|reply
Maybe Farmers should be required to print a photo of the actual living bird and their habitat on the packaging. When consumers would see those scruffy chicken for $2 compared to the healthy $7 they might choose the organic ones more often.

Killed and unfeathered they all look the same.

[+] Epskampie|6 years ago|reply
While I agree with the sentiment, in the long run that would just lead to quick-growing chickens that look nice but are as unhealthy as they are now. See "purebreed" dogs.
[+] erikig|6 years ago|reply
This reminded me of the "Colin the Chicken" skit on Portlandia where a couple ordering chicken gets to see its birth certificate, diet, emotional profile, heritage and family...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G__PVLB8Nm4

[+] rmtech|6 years ago|reply
I would not pay 3.5× as much for chicken just to look at a nice photo.

Chicken breast in Europe costs about $7-10/kg. I'm not made of money, I can't afford $30/kg chicken.

[+] konart|6 years ago|reply
>Maybe Farmers should be required to print a photo of the actual living bird and their habitat on the packaging.

I didn't see anything that would've driven me from buying that $2 chicken though.

[+] agumonkey|6 years ago|reply
In Europe, people still buy cigarettes as much as before even though they're generic and covered with morbid pictures of various gruesome diseases.
[+] wortelefant|6 years ago|reply
the trend to "free-range" chicken reminds me of similar half-hearted efforts against the climate crisis; we can't decrease CO2 levels just by collecting plastic trash separately if it is shipped to the incinerator all the same. And despite the animal welfare theatre, the organic farm chicken will be killed just the same. But we feel a bit better about it.
[+] RandallBrown|6 years ago|reply
Wow, 39 is much shorter than I expected.

I guess it makes sense, because how else could you keep up with demand, but my view of animal lifecycles only has stuff like bugs fully maturing so quickly.

Interesting stuff.

Now my question is why are bananas so cheap? They come all the way from like Brazil, but they're still cheaper than the apple that is grown just a couple hours from me.

[+] anon5579|6 years ago|reply
Regarding bananas, I would recommend taking a look at the history of the United Fruit Company: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Fruit_Company

It's really a fascinating but tragic history of the exploitation of "banana republics" where banana exports become so profitable that a US-based company owned more land in some Central American countries than anyone else. They had (have?) huge fleets of ships solely for the purpose of bringing bananas into the US.

It is quite a long and complicated story, and there are more than a few books written about it.

[+] ymolodtsov|6 years ago|reply
Bananas are very easy & cheap to transport which led to them becoming a more popular fruit, accelerating demand and supply, etc, etc.

They can be delivered while they are green and sturdy and then they are kept in ethylene atmosphere which makes them ripe so they can be instantly sold to the consumers.

[+] rasengan0|6 years ago|reply
Breeding a "product" with a small gene pool, churning out monoculture: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gros_Michel_banana or a more imaginative corrective: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influenza_A_virus_subtype_H7N9 makes a plant based diet a very good hack indeed.
[+] evgen|6 years ago|reply
You don't know what the word monoculture means until you stand in the middle of a soybean field in the midwest and see nothing but more soybeans (from the same small handful of varieties provided by giant seed companies) as far as the eye can see. Please do not imagine for one second that a plant-based diet increases biodiversity.
[+] Reason077|6 years ago|reply
Chickens are one the most successful animals on earth! By evolving to become fatter, more succulent, and delicious, they have convinced humans to feed and house them, and in doing so have multiplied to vast numbers and spread their genes almost everywhere across the globe.
[+] mikeash|6 years ago|reply
A flying saucer lands in front of the UN. The aliens’ speech to the General Assembly is the most watched live broadcast in history.

The world listens to this speech and learns:

- The UFO craze of the mid 20th century was real. Aliens really were abducting and probing humans.

- Their evaluation established that we are not clever or strong enough to be useful, but we are delicious and cheap to feed.

- A fleet of transports will soon arrive to take humans throughout the galaxy to be raised as food.

- The technological gap between us is incomprehensibly vast, so there is no possibility of resistance.

This is the story of how humanity became successful.

[+] IanCal|6 years ago|reply
Depends how you define success.

> By evolving to

Being selected to by us

> they have convinced humans to feed and house them

No, humans have constructed chickens to meet our requirements, minimising the amount we need to house them (e.g. killing them at a few weeks old).

[+] tyho|6 years ago|reply
> Wheat domesticated humans as humans domesticated wheat.
[+] perfmode|6 years ago|reply
black people, too! we were so strong and resilient and good at labor that humans paid for our travel across the seas and gave us the opportunity to help build America! we were fed and housed and everything, oh my! gosh

> Shadow with me while I'm steppin' on my own resentment

> Life scatter in all directions, I was overzealous

> Overcurious, Momma worry her days get better

> I know she heard me, a timid voice in her stormy weather

> And Poppa taught me our ancestors were tarred and feathered And brought across the sea, bodies swinging from poplar trees

> I wore a modernesque version, my burden haunted me I cautiously approach the rather daunting sea

> By nightfall I face the man I'm 'sposed to be All this grief, been eatin' away my stomach lining

> It's hard to eat when my poppa image stuck inside me

> I wore his death mask,

> smilin' through the trauma

> In his honor,

> I'm expounding

[+] hombre_fatal|6 years ago|reply
I always found it a bit tacky to call it an "achievement" for the animal/plant that humans farm it. Same with "evolutionary" changes due to selective breeding. Both said in the video.

Always feels like someone is trying to spin reality on me. "What? The birds love it! Instead of living in nature in a part of Africa, they are suffering worldwide to the tune of billions!" Their hard work paid off!

[+] avar|6 years ago|reply
What sort of lives do you think birds living "in nature" in Africa have?

Instead of being painlessly gassed to death like farmed chickens they'll be eaten alive by some predator, or instead of being provided with antibiotics as hatchlings perhaps worms will eat most of their siblings alive before they leave the nest.

Romanticizing factory farming is ridiculous, but so is romanticizing the lives of wild animals.

From a species interaction perspective the farming of animals could be described as mutualism, but humans tend to break all the rules in traditional species interaction models: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_interaction#Mutuali...

We're not unique though: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ant%E2%80%93fungus_mutualism

[+] Luc|6 years ago|reply
Conflating the individual and their genes. The genes thrive while the individuals lead miserable, short lives.
[+] UK-AL|6 years ago|reply
The idea being when wr farm, it becomes a very populus species.
[+] Buldak|6 years ago|reply
I would say it's tacky so much as a deliberate euphemism.
[+] _hardwaregeek|6 years ago|reply
Whenever I travel outside the US, I'm always struck by how different the chickens look. Chickens in the US have a pale appearance, with flabby, almost mushy meat. They look as if they were grown on a tree, never alive and running. While chickens in say, Italy or Mexico tend to look like they were alive at some point. There's color in the meat, often a yellow tint. Their skin and muscle look used and not atrophied.

I wonder how these differences extend to nutritional value?

[+] ska|6 years ago|reply
It certainly extends to taste, I wouldn't be surprised if nutrition also.

I don't think you can be as simplistic as "US chicken bad" though. The US has a very well established industrial food chain that reaches everywhere, but it's not the only thing going on. The US industry has some economies of scale that work for it too.

Quick-cheap-and-nasty chicken in the UK is just as flavorless as in the US. And you can find better stuff in the US, albeit at higher cost. But the same can be said of flavorless but cheap Holstein milk & butter, or basically anything that has been subjected to aggressive optimizing for cost per unit/volume whatever. Applies to factory bred chickens, but also tomatoes designed to ship well.

The end result is usually pretty cheap, and pretty bland at best.

[+] 13of40|6 years ago|reply
I've noticed the same thing with tomatoes and apricots. I've got a good friend whose family have an apricot farm in the Kurdish part of Turkey, and their apricots are amazing, but the same variety grown in Western Washington tastes like plastic. There's something seriously pathological with the "terrior" in the western part of north America. (Luckily it doesn't extend to wine.)
[+] deschutes|6 years ago|reply
The bulk of the video is a british chicken farmer explaining the economic realities. I don't think bad chicken is unique to the US; I suspect cheap meat is about the same everywhere.
[+] hhjjkkll|6 years ago|reply
Anecdotal, but from watching food/travel videos on YT, meat in general outside of the U.S. tend to taste better too apparently.
[+] jawarner|6 years ago|reply
Land usage per chicken, difference between free-range vs. intensively reared:

1/12 m^2 vs. 1/17 m^2

Consumer cost, difference between free range vs. intensively reared:

4 euros/lb vs. 2 euros/lb.

Does the difference in production costs explain the drastic consumer cost difference between these two methods? Why can't free-range farming be automated like it is in the intensive rearing model?

[+] Someone|6 years ago|reply
Chickens do not eat in the dark. That’s why the light in stables for intensively reared chicken is on way longer than the sun is up (I’m not up to date on what’s considered optimal today, but I think 24 hours a day was abandoned because it caused too much stress (and stress harms growth, or even kills chicken) for weird things such as “40 minutes on, 20 minutes off”)

Some of the large factors that affect production costs are feeding the chicken and e.g. capital costs of the stable, but optimizing production per dollar more or less boils down to getting the “feed conversion ratio” down.

It is about 1,6 for intensively reared chicken in the USA, meaning they have to eat 1,6 kg of food to gain a kilogram of weight (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feed_conversion_ratio#Poultry)

For comparison, you need two kg of feed to get a kg of eggs, so eggs are about 20% more expensive per kg than chicken meat.

You can’t keep chicken that grow that fast to an age of 80 days, as they would break their legs from excessive weight.

Free range chicken are different breeds that have a higher FCR.

[+] iambateman|6 years ago|reply
If free range chicken makes up 4% of the market, perhaps it’s analogous to a Mercedes Benz...it’s not 4x more expensive to manufacture, but the people who buy it aren’t strictly cost-sensitive.

My guess is that free range chicken should be about 50% more expensive, but the market can handle some aspirational pricing.

[+] lostjohnny|6 years ago|reply
because chickens are cheap to feed and breed

you don't need automation to make it cheap

My family used to breed any sort of livestock, from chickens to lambs, from cows to pigs, from rabbits to pigeons

High quality meat, just for the family

chickens are by far the cheapest and easiest

(rabbits get sick easily, pigs eat a lot, cows need a lot of work to keep them clean etc. etc.)

[+] toasterlovin|6 years ago|reply
Right, but why are they the cheapest form of meat? There’s probably some biochemical or energy utilization reason. Perhaps it has to do with chickens being fairly lean meat. I don’t know, but have often wondered.
[+] feld|6 years ago|reply
I feed my dogs almost exclusively chicken leg quarters and can get them for as low as 39 cents per pound (USD).

Chicken is insanely cheap.

[+] hollerith|6 years ago|reply
I'm curious: do you remove the bones or are the dogs able to eat the bones with no ill effect?
[+] miguelrochefort|6 years ago|reply
When I went to America, I couldn't believe how cheap chicken was. I once found boneless chicken breast for $1.99/pound. Eggs were dirt cheap as well, sometimes less than $1.00/dozen.

I don't remember ever seeing prices like these in Canada.

[+] froindt|6 years ago|reply
My record for a dozen eggs was $0.37/dozen in summer of 2017 at an Aldi in a town go about it 30,000 in Iowa. It was roughly that price the whole summer.

From my understanding, that was below the price of production. 2017 was a very tough year for chicken farmers, with a huge oversupply. The chicken rendering (killing) operations were backlogged by many months. Farmers often had no choice but to raise the chickens they already bought, knowing full well they're going to be sold unprofitably.

[+] kevin_thibedeau|6 years ago|reply
We don't pay for the healthcare of anyone in the production chain.
[+] toasterlovin|6 years ago|reply
Life is incredibly expensive in Canada, across the board, with pretty much only a single exception: healthcare.
[+] asdf21|6 years ago|reply
Bonless chicken breast frequently goes on sale for $0.99 / lb.
[+] vbuwivbiu|6 years ago|reply
That man and his automatic shed. How depressing. I'd much rather pay 3x as much, eat chicken 1/3 as often and actually enjoy it instead of eating it every day and hardly noticing it.

All those cheap chickens may as well have stickers on saying "1/3 the enjoyment"

[+] hombre_fatal|6 years ago|reply
> eating it every day and hardly noticing it

Our distant relationship with where meat comes from is one of the most bizarre things about humans. Especially next to our psychopathic relationship with our own pets.

I've seen people freak out with disgust because there's a tiny feather or some dirt in their carton of eggs. Or disgusted by the hanging, swinging corpses behind the butcher when they go to order something that's sliced off the corpse.

[+] lostjohnny|6 years ago|reply
> I'd much rather pay 3x as much, eat chicken 1/3 as often

you wouldn't

You already could right now but you're not doing it

[+] jsilence|6 years ago|reply
Just find a local producer, pay 3fold and enjoy the real good taste of quality chicken. These quality over quantity producers DO exist.
[+] semi-extrinsic|6 years ago|reply
This is what free market capitalism ends up producing. Not just for chickens, but for any product really. And this man is open and honest about it. Why is this any more depressing than a person working two minimum-wage jobs and barely making due?

If you don't like this type of thing, the other option is to change the entire system, pay ordinary people enough for their ordinary jobs that they can afford to care about animal welfare and the environment and all the other things that get de-prioritized when the option is not putting food on the table for your family.