Is it? The only source they cite for the claim of price-gouging is a group that's against large scale animal production and GMOs. They've got their own reasons to make the accusation. Honestly, it's probably true, but then they discuss meat production where there are definitely some illegal trust activities going on and say that that group has not seen the same increase in prices.
Do we not remember the last time avian flu hit the country's egg production hard? The price of eggs jumped massively. Once you identify avian flu in a flock the size that these facilities house, you're talking thousands or tens of thousands of chickens culled. A battery chicken lays an egg a day. That's thousands of eggs not being produced every day until those hens can be replaced. Add in inflation and I'm going to need to see some actual numbers if the author's going to claim that those factors aren't enough to explain the price jump.
They also somehow missed a valid argument against factory farms. All of those birds packed into terrible conditions in massive numbers basically guarantees a massive culling of livestock every time the risk of avian flu is high. More numerous, smaller facilities where the animals aren't stressed out and in incredibly close proximity would mean that a single housing facility becoming infected would lead to fewer animals culled if a facility is exposed. It would be a much, much smaller impact on the market. The price of eggs would be higher than our current supply during healthy years, but wouldn't spike by 100% during high risk years.
Something, something, don't put all your eggs in one basket. Or hens in a single, massive building.
Where in the article does it mention chicken meat? I see pork, beef, and prepared foods.
Excess profits can be caused by any number of things. If the price of the eggs increased exactly enough to match inflation and loss from avian influenza, but there was also increased efficiency from new processing techniques and equipment, that's profit. If they managed to pay their workers even less than they pay in a normal year by citing increased company costs, then they pocket that too. Again, you'd need to see actual numbers and not casual conjecture to make any real calls as to what's happening in this situation.
> If the price of the eggs increased exactly enough to match inflation and loss from avian influenza, but there was also increased efficiency from new processing techniques and equipment, that's profit
What-if speculation with zero evidence—what new technology?—-is what I would call low quality.
The article at least uses industry players and other related industries to underscore their point. Which is that an investigation may be coming and is warranted.
Do we not remember the last time avian flu hit the country's egg production hard? The price of eggs jumped massively. Once you identify avian flu in a flock the size that these facilities house, you're talking thousands or tens of thousands of chickens culled. A battery chicken lays an egg a day. That's thousands of eggs not being produced every day until those hens can be replaced. Add in inflation and I'm going to need to see some actual numbers if the author's going to claim that those factors aren't enough to explain the price jump.
They also somehow missed a valid argument against factory farms. All of those birds packed into terrible conditions in massive numbers basically guarantees a massive culling of livestock every time the risk of avian flu is high. More numerous, smaller facilities where the animals aren't stressed out and in incredibly close proximity would mean that a single housing facility becoming infected would lead to fewer animals culled if a facility is exposed. It would be a much, much smaller impact on the market. The price of eggs would be higher than our current supply during healthy years, but wouldn't spike by 100% during high risk years.
Something, something, don't put all your eggs in one basket. Or hens in a single, massive building.