[matthew fuller]

Thanks for posting this, my wife and myself are very interested in this HFCS discussion. However, I believe that statements such as the following, add to the lunacy element of the discussion. Ellis says he produced 10,000 pounds of corn with 2 (two) hours labor on one acre of land. I have a bridge in Brooklyn that I would like to speak to him about.

"Ellis: No. … Of course, you know that that abundance of cheap corn benefits the HFCS industry. The reason that industry is so successful is they’re able to sweeten things much less expensively than sugar. The reason they’re able to do that largely is because the raw material in HFCS is incredibly cheap. Our one acre of corn could have sweetened 57,000 cans of soda. We grew 10,000 pounds of corn and it took us about two hours of labor and a couple hundred dollars of input and that’s just incredible. That’s unbelievably cheap, and the reason it’s so cheap is that the subsidies system keeps everybody there growing corn. "

[neverdem]

"Ellis: No. … Of course, you know that that abundance of cheap corn benefits the HFCS industry. The reason that industry is so successful is they’re able to sweeten things much less expensively than sugar. The reason they’re able to do that largely is because the raw material in HFCS is incredibly cheap. Our one acre of corn could have sweetened 57,000 cans of soda. We grew 10,000 pounds of corn and it took us about two hours of labor and a couple hundred dollars of input and that’s just incredible. That’s unbelievably cheap, and the reason it’s so cheap is that the subsidies system keeps everybody there growing corn. "

If that was from the economics section of the original article, that's the one I didn't read.

[fightinJAG]

Corn no longer is cheap, as it’s being subsidized for ethanol production!

[Mr. Lucky]

10,000 lbs. of corn is 178 bushels, which is about the average yield per acre for the heart of the corn belt.