On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 12:07:10 +0200, Torsten Brinch
posted:

On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 04:51:04 GMT, "Moosh:}"
wrote:
On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 18:53:38 +0200, Torsten Brinch
posted:
On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 07:20:24 GMT, "Moosh:}"
wrote:
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 10:46:36 +0200, Torsten Brinch
posted:

On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 01:43:18 GMT, "Gordon Couger"
wrote:
We do pay a price for having the cheapest food on the planet.

.. if you look at prices in USA of, say,
bread and cereals, or meat, they .. are not the cheapest
on the planet.

But in what currency? US dollars is hardly informative.

I was thinking of World Bank data for international
price comparisons. They do it in PPP terms, with
100 indicating [item] in [country in question] is
priced equal to the price in USA, and less than 100,
that it is cheaper. See:
http://rrojasdatabank.net/wdi2000/tab5_6.pdf
..
Affordability is what we want to compare, when you
think of it.

No, look above. We are talking about how the price of
food in USA compares to the price of food elsewhere
on the planet.

Well, Gordon's original comment, in response to which you provided the
price list in US$, was "We do pay a price for having the cheapest food
on the planet"

To me, cheapest means most affordable. Comparing prices using
arbitrary exchange rates is far less relevant than comparing them as
minutes of average workers' wages. YMMV.