By John Q. Hosedrinker 
On November 21st, Tyson Foods abruptly terminated all workers at its Lexington, Nebraska beef processing plant, leaving hundreds jobless. This closure occurred despite Tyson’s recent profit increases and soaring consumer beef prices, fueling accusations of market manipulation by the “Big Four” beef producers. Critics, including political candidate Dan Osborn, argue that the plant’s closure aligns with a pattern of restricting production to drive down cattle prices while inflating beef costs for consumers, a strategy purportedly outlined in numerous lawsuits against these corporations. The broader economic impact on communities like Lexington, where the plant was a major employer, is substantial, raising concerns about future viability and the livelihoods of long-time workers.
Read the original article here
The “Big Four” meatpacking companies are facing intense scrutiny as beef prices skyrocket, leaving consumers stunned and frustrated. It’s gotten to a point where even basic cuts of ground beef are fetching prices that were once reserved for premium steaks, with some shoppers reporting seeing skirt steak priced at an astonishing $33 per pound. This surge in consumer prices stands in stark contrast to the soaring profit margins of these dominant companies. Collectively known as the “Big Four,” these entities control a staggering 85% of the industry, and their financial reports reflect this market dominance. Tyson, for instance, recently announced a 6.5% increase in profits over the previous year, a testament to their robust financial health while everyday consumers struggle to afford their products.
This widening gap between corporate profits and consumer affordability is a recurring theme. When a few powerful companies dictate the market, it’s inevitably the consumers who bear the brunt of higher prices. The sentiment is that the wealthy continue to prosper while the rest of the population is squeezed by escalating costs. The situation is so dire for many that buying beef is no longer a regular option. For those earning minimum wage, an hour of work is insufficient to purchase a single pound of beef. Even at discount retailers like Walmart, the more affordable ground beef options are hovering around $8 to $10 per pound, and premium cuts like steaks can cost triple that amount, rendering them completely inaccessible for many.
The disconnect between official statements and the reality on the ground is also a point of contention. Some recall political figures claiming meat prices are at an all-time low or are expected to decrease, statements that directly contradict the observable price hikes at grocery stores. These pronouncements are often met with disbelief and accusations of dishonesty, particularly when juxtaposed with the visible struggle of consumers to afford basic necessities. The increasing cost of consumer goods is impacting even those who believe they are earning a decent income, making one wonder how individuals in lower-paying jobs can possibly manage to survive.
Adding to the complexity, the U.S. cattle herd is currently at its smallest size since the 1950s, largely attributed to persistent drought conditions and elevated feed prices. While these factors undoubtedly contribute to supply-side pressures, the simultaneous record profits of the meatpackers fuel suspicions of market manipulation and collusion. Instead of purchasing beef, many are choosing to vote with their wallets by switching to more affordable proteins like pork chops, in hopes of signaling a demand for change.
Interestingly, some observations suggest that beef consumption has significantly declined since the 1970s, with the primary demographic of beef eaters aging out. This trend logically points to a scaling back of production, yet it doesn’t fully explain the extreme price surges experienced by consumers while the industry itself reports record profits. This discrepancy raises questions about whether companies are deliberately manipulating supply to artificially inflate prices.
The concept of “artificial shortages” has become a stark lesson learned from recent global events. When supply chain disruptions occur, meatpackers appear to have discovered they can increase prices dramatically and still maintain or even exceed their profitability with reduced investment. This realization leads to the chilling possibility that companies might intentionally create shortages to maximize their gains.
In response to these soaring prices and the perceived lack of action, some individuals are seeking alternatives to the dominant meatpacking industry. The idea of supporting local processors and farmers who operate outside the influence of the “Big Four” is gaining traction. There’s a growing desire for transparency and a movement to “wean off” the massive corporations that control the meat supply.
Furthermore, the ethical and environmental implications of industrial meat production are also coming under increased scrutiny. Concerns about animal welfare, the environmental impact of large-scale farming, and the industry’s footprint on public lands are contributing to a broader reevaluation of meat consumption. For some, the combination of exorbitant prices and these ethical considerations has led to a complete withdrawal from purchasing beef. The embrace of plant-based diets or a return to more traditional, cost-effective staples like rice and beans is becoming a practical necessity for many.
The current situation has undeniably put a spotlight on the intricacies of our capitalist system, particularly within the food supply chain. The sheer cost of basic food items is pushing people towards more extreme measures, such as returning to hunting to ensure they have a sufficient supply of meat. The narrative that prices are plummeting is often directly contradicted by the experiences of shoppers, leading to a deep distrust in both political pronouncements and corporate practices. The consolidation of power within the “Big Four” meatpackers, combined with potential market rigging and the impact of trade policies, has created a perfect storm for consumer exploitation. The call for stronger antitrust enforcement and even fundamental critiques of capitalism are becoming more vocal as people grapple with the reality of unaffordable food.