Why America now eats a crazy number of avocados(wsj.com)
wsj.com
Why America now eats a crazy number of avocados
https://www.wsj.com/business/avocado-prices-tariffs-mexico-imports-3a951021
113 comments
https://archive.ph/HK3bh
This reads like an ad from the Hass Avacado Board.[1]
Turns out that California is having a good avocado production year. Last year was bad, for usual farming problem reasons.[2] Not really much need for imports for the next few months.
[1] https://hassavocadoboard.com/
[2] https://www.freshfruitportal.com/news/2025/01/30/california-...
Turns out that California is having a good avocado production year. Last year was bad, for usual farming problem reasons.[2] Not really much need for imports for the next few months.
[1] https://hassavocadoboard.com/
[2] https://www.freshfruitportal.com/news/2025/01/30/california-...
All these superlatives ("voracious appetite", "devours", "conquering America", "dazzling", "crazy number") in the first few paragraphs alone make it sound like an Apple announcement or something.
Also, the "9 pounds of avocados a year" is about 27 avocados/year, or about one avocado every two weeks. Sounds a lot less spectacular. Of course, what we really need to know is many Olympic swimming pools all those avocados would fill.
Also, the "9 pounds of avocados a year" is about 27 avocados/year, or about one avocado every two weeks. Sounds a lot less spectacular. Of course, what we really need to know is many Olympic swimming pools all those avocados would fill.
> All these superlatives ("voracious appetite", "devours", "conquering America", "dazzling", "crazy number")
Yes, which is why this looks like an ad or planted story.
Yes, which is why this looks like an ad or planted story.
That first website is quite amusing to someone not in avacados...
"HAPRIO IMPACT The Hass Avocado Promotion, Research and Information Order (HAPRIO) created the Hass Avocado Board (HAB), an industry-funded national program that has been recognized for being key to growing U.S. avocado consumption and driving value for producers and importers since its inception in 2002."
sounds like an apache project.
"HAPRIO IMPACT The Hass Avocado Promotion, Research and Information Order (HAPRIO) created the Hass Avocado Board (HAB), an industry-funded national program that has been recognized for being key to growing U.S. avocado consumption and driving value for producers and importers since its inception in 2002."
sounds like an apache project.
Yep, for remote desktop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Guacamole
You hit on it. This is something that (small cohort of) American farmers can do domestically, but at a higher level, we ought to determine if it's better to do that or to have a trade arrangement. I really believe that Mexican avocados is a win/win. It frees up California farmers to produce more essential resources, and it gives Mexico a very viable export. I really like this as a study of healthy trade.
> I really like this as a study of healthy trade.
https://globalinitiative.net/analysis/mexicos-avocado-boom-a...
> While the European Union and Mexico are in the final rounds of negotiations towards the “modernization” of the EU-Mexico Trade Agreement (Global Agreement) our objective is to understand the dynamics of violence that accompanied the avocado boom, including organized crime activities, human rights violations, environmental crime and harm, and the potential impact of further liberalizing trade between Mexico and the EU.
> ...
> Increased international demand led to an expansion of land dedicated to avocado production, to the detriment of forest cover, resulting in deforestation and the subsequent degradation of soil, water, and biodiversity.
https://globalinitiative.net/analysis/mexicos-avocado-boom-a...
> While the European Union and Mexico are in the final rounds of negotiations towards the “modernization” of the EU-Mexico Trade Agreement (Global Agreement) our objective is to understand the dynamics of violence that accompanied the avocado boom, including organized crime activities, human rights violations, environmental crime and harm, and the potential impact of further liberalizing trade between Mexico and the EU.
> ...
> Increased international demand led to an expansion of land dedicated to avocado production, to the detriment of forest cover, resulting in deforestation and the subsequent degradation of soil, water, and biodiversity.
Violence cartels that have amassed more power than militaries (go to tiktok and see for yourself, they are literally flashing their attack helicopters, military grade weapons and armored vehicles) will use violence to control the flow of any commodity and asset.
Avocados are not the problem. The cartels will get their cut one way or the other.
Avocados are not the problem. The cartels will get their cut one way or the other.
The US currently have several spy planes over Mexico with cooperation from the Mexican government. Information is being relayed to the Mexican military and cartels are being neutralized as we speak. There just isn't much news about this at the moment. The US / Mexican military and law enforcement are all currently working together in both training exercises and cartel take-downs. The only thing missing is US military boots on the ground. My only known-unknown is how long this will take given the large numbers of cartel members that have splintered off from their original groups.
That has been the case for decades. And they also have boots on the ground. How else do they arrest the head of the cartels and fly them to the US all these years ?
I don’t see your point.
I don’t see your point.
That has been the case for decades.
False. The US just deployed spy planes to Mexico in the last couple of months after approval by Mexico. Doing so without their permission would have been an act of war.
False. The US just deployed spy planes to Mexico in the last couple of months after approval by Mexico. Doing so without their permission would have been an act of war.
In 1992 the CIA was flying planes over Medellin, and the intel (along with DEA boots on the ground) eventually helped with taking down Escobar.
A simple google search can show articles from the era.
A simple google search can show articles from the era.
Medellin is Colombia, not Mexico.
Also, the Colombian Cartels are a different set of organizations that have different origins from the Mexican Cartels - the former being a side effect of the Colombian Civil War and the latter being a side effect of the 1990s Peso Crisis and the mass layoffs in the Mexican Army and Petrochemicals industry
Read or watch "100 Years of Solitude" by Gabriel García Márquez. The fissures of the 1899-1903 Colombian Civil War (4-10% of Colombians died) were never resolved and it morphed into "La Violencia" which then morphed into the ongoing Colombian conflict.
You need money to buy weapons, so Colombian insurgent groups (right and left leaning) entered the drug trade to arm themselves - especially after the USSR reduced funding in the 70s-80s to concentrate on Afghanistan.
You see the same dynamics in Afghanistan, Syria, and Myanmar.
Also, the Colombian Cartels are a different set of organizations that have different origins from the Mexican Cartels - the former being a side effect of the Colombian Civil War and the latter being a side effect of the 1990s Peso Crisis and the mass layoffs in the Mexican Army and Petrochemicals industry
Read or watch "100 Years of Solitude" by Gabriel García Márquez. The fissures of the 1899-1903 Colombian Civil War (4-10% of Colombians died) were never resolved and it morphed into "La Violencia" which then morphed into the ongoing Colombian conflict.
You need money to buy weapons, so Colombian insurgent groups (right and left leaning) entered the drug trade to arm themselves - especially after the USSR reduced funding in the 70s-80s to concentrate on Afghanistan.
You see the same dynamics in Afghanistan, Syria, and Myanmar.
The point I was replying to was that deployment of spy planes against cartels was something that happened first time in February of 2025. The parent claimed that this has never happened before because it would have been considered an act of war.
This is not the case. The US intelligence has been deploying forces in Latin America against cartels for long long time.
This is not the case. The US intelligence has been deploying forces in Latin America against cartels for long long time.
The US had the permission of Colombia's government at the time because the US was already there helping with the Colombian Conflict. It was part of SOUTHCOM [0].
Mexico withheld permission for American military and intelligence deployments from 1990 to 2025 (DEA and other law enforcement was allowed), but they changed recently.
> The parent claimed that this has never happened before because it would have been considered an act of war.
Because it has never happened before in Mexico. It has been political suicide to even consider allowing foreign troops in Mexico because of the memory of the French Occupation.
You cannot treat "Latin America" as a monolith. Each country has a different sociopolitical background and history.
[0] - https://www.southcom.mil/About/History/SOUTHCOMs-60th-Annive...
Mexico withheld permission for American military and intelligence deployments from 1990 to 2025 (DEA and other law enforcement was allowed), but they changed recently.
> The parent claimed that this has never happened before because it would have been considered an act of war.
Because it has never happened before in Mexico. It has been political suicide to even consider allowing foreign troops in Mexico because of the memory of the French Occupation.
You cannot treat "Latin America" as a monolith. Each country has a different sociopolitical background and history.
[0] - https://www.southcom.mil/About/History/SOUTHCOMs-60th-Annive...
Come on these are just semantics. There are literally photos of Americans in unmarked uniforms at the arrest of Guzman. You can slap the DEA logo to anyone and carry on your mil operation. I understand that no country wants the US military getting involved, so DEA is the best PR formula. Solves the problem and your people do not revolt.
But let's not fool ourselves. These are American operations taking place in Mexican soil (with the cooperation of the Mexican forces of course, it was not an attack against Mexico).
But let's not fool ourselves. These are American operations taking place in Mexican soil (with the cooperation of the Mexican forces of course, it was not an attack against Mexico).
I was referring to "all these years" as in happening all the time, not that it has never occurred. The US has always requested permission to enter the Mexican air space.
The CIA operated as a rogue organization for many decades and that has been curtailed in the last couple of decades. As a side note I am still of the opinion that is who actually created bitcoin and what replaced the drug money which I am in support of as there are less lives lost and they just get the desperate people. That should significantly reduce their dependency on South America as a source of income but now I am delving into whacky-ping-pong-ding-dong conspiracy theories.
The CIA operated as a rogue organization for many decades and that has been curtailed in the last couple of decades. As a side note I am still of the opinion that is who actually created bitcoin and what replaced the drug money which I am in support of as there are less lives lost and they just get the desperate people. That should significantly reduce their dependency on South America as a source of income but now I am delving into whacky-ping-pong-ding-dong conspiracy theories.
It seems you think the cartel and the government are separate. They are actually one, mexico is a narco state.
I love mexico btw
I love mexico btw
To be fair I think the exact same thing about my own government.
Watch the episode of Rotten that features the avocado trade. What country's govt acts the "exact same?" One example would be kidnapping to extort farmers, causing them to lose their farm and livelihood
If you mean the US, I don't agree. It has a long way yet to get there, but it's fighting really hard and making great progress at becoming more like a criminal gang.
Mexico's problem is and always will be America. Canada managed to dodge it because they were under the protection of the British empire.
Mexico’s problem is Mexico. It is a rich country but the distribution of the wealth is one of the worst on earth. If you go to a Mexican Porsche meetup you will understand.
Inequality has been an issue, but it was the Peso crisis and the outsourcing of Mexican manufacturing to China that caused the spiral that made the cartels as powerful as they are today.
Jalisco, Sinaloa, and Nayarit are major petrochemical hubs in Mexico, but when Mexico entered the Peso crisis in the 1990s and China ascended into the WTO in 2000, a major bout of deindustrialization happened in that region.
Turns out chemistry is chemistry, so you had plenty of unemployed chemical engineers and soldiers (the Mexican government did mass layoffs in the army during the peso crisis) which meant you had the brains and muscle needed to enter the drug manufacturing space.
Jalisco, Sinaloa, and Nayarit are major petrochemical hubs in Mexico, but when Mexico entered the Peso crisis in the 1990s and China ascended into the WTO in 2000, a major bout of deindustrialization happened in that region.
Turns out chemistry is chemistry, so you had plenty of unemployed chemical engineers and soldiers (the Mexican government did mass layoffs in the army during the peso crisis) which meant you had the brains and muscle needed to enter the drug manufacturing space.
Drugs and cartels were a problem in Mexico before the peso crisis of the 1990s.
Traffic, for example, came out in 2000 and was based on the ongoing drug war in Mexico. The primary antagonists are the Tijuana Cartel, was formed in the 1980s out of the remnants of the Gaudalara Cartel originally formed in the late 1970s, and the Juarez Cartel, originally formed in 1970. Both cartels have since been superseded by more violent cartels.
Traffic, for example, came out in 2000 and was based on the ongoing drug war in Mexico. The primary antagonists are the Tijuana Cartel, was formed in the 1980s out of the remnants of the Gaudalara Cartel originally formed in the late 1970s, and the Juarez Cartel, originally formed in 1970. Both cartels have since been superseded by more violent cartels.
I'm not saying they weren't a problem before, but the power of the Mexican cartels only really took hold after the Peso crisis. The pre-90s cartels, while significant, never had the same level of control that cartels had by the early 2000s.
Heck, Los Zetas is a notable example, where a bunch of pissed off special forces broke bad because a government salary during the peso devaluation just wouldn't cut it.
Same with the professionalization of synthetic drug manufacturing during the mass layoffs at Pemex during the 1990s.
> Traffic, for example, came out in 2000 and was based on the ongoing drug war in Mexico
Yep! After the Mexican economy straight up collapsed during the 1994 Peso Crisis and the Salinas administration began mass layoffs at Pemex in the early 1990s.
It's ridiculous to ignore the effects of the Peso Crisis and the offshoring of Mexican manufacturing when also talking about the rise of the Cartels during the 1990s-2000s.
Mexico's GDP collapsed by 6.5% in just 1 year (comparable to Lebanon's 2019 Liquidity Crisis), the inflation rate jumped to 35%, real wages fell by 35%, unemployment jumped from 3.9% to 7.9%, and infant mortality rates spiked from 5% to 12% all in just 1 year (1995).
This was a straight up economic collapse that made cartel employment (or hopping the border) enticing
Heck, Los Zetas is a notable example, where a bunch of pissed off special forces broke bad because a government salary during the peso devaluation just wouldn't cut it.
Same with the professionalization of synthetic drug manufacturing during the mass layoffs at Pemex during the 1990s.
> Traffic, for example, came out in 2000 and was based on the ongoing drug war in Mexico
Yep! After the Mexican economy straight up collapsed during the 1994 Peso Crisis and the Salinas administration began mass layoffs at Pemex in the early 1990s.
It's ridiculous to ignore the effects of the Peso Crisis and the offshoring of Mexican manufacturing when also talking about the rise of the Cartels during the 1990s-2000s.
Mexico's GDP collapsed by 6.5% in just 1 year (comparable to Lebanon's 2019 Liquidity Crisis), the inflation rate jumped to 35%, real wages fell by 35%, unemployment jumped from 3.9% to 7.9%, and infant mortality rates spiked from 5% to 12% all in just 1 year (1995).
This was a straight up economic collapse that made cartel employment (or hopping the border) enticing
>It is a rich country but the distribution of the wealth is one of the worst on earth
No? There are countries that are far more unequal. Even US is higher.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gini_Coefficient_of_Wealt...
No? There are countries that are far more unequal. Even US is higher.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gini_Coefficient_of_Wealt...
.png){kind=link}
On violence: sure, let's investigate it. I'm truly unsure if avocado production is a significant progenitor of violence, especially when compared to the prosperity it affords to the growers.
> Increased international demand led to an expansion of land dedicated to avocado production
I'm sensitive to that. That is my point on California.
> Increased international demand led to an expansion of land dedicated to avocado production
I'm sensitive to that. That is my point on California.
>to the detriment of forest cover, resulting in deforestation and the subsequent degradation of soil, water, and biodiversity.
I just love when developed countries (mine included) that have already cut down most of their forest cover get all in arms when a developing country wants to improve it's economy at a cost of cutting down some of their forests.
I just love when developed countries (mine included) that have already cut down most of their forest cover get all in arms when a developing country wants to improve it's economy at a cost of cutting down some of their forests.
Who's up in arms? Certainly not me.
I'm just pointing out that this trade isn't really unusual, there's the typical tradeoffs involved.
I'm just pointing out that this trade isn't really unusual, there's the typical tradeoffs involved.
This is all used by the EU for protectionist reasons to try to extract an unfair advantage in the trade negotiations.
Let's see if the EU is as concerned about the environmental impact of all those tanks that they are building.
Let's see if the EU is as concerned about the environmental impact of all those tanks that they are building.
> Let's see if the EU is as concerned about the environmental impact of all those tanks that they are building.
The alternative is an Anglo-French nuclear strike. The tanks are a lot less environmentally damaging, relatively speaking.
The alternative is an Anglo-French nuclear strike. The tanks are a lot less environmentally damaging, relatively speaking.
Eating avocados is not a necessity. Protecting yourself against a mad dictator invading your neighbours is. Especially if the USA is ruled by an imbecile clown that cannot think further than his belly button.
Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good.
Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good.
EU does not have a choice when it comes to "building tanks". There is expanding Russia and America supporting them while being very hostile to EU.
EU did wanted and tried to cooperate in win-win setup with America, it is America who decided they want to attack former allies.
EU did wanted and tried to cooperate in win-win setup with America, it is America who decided they want to attack former allies.
The fact that EU uses it for protectionist reasons does not make it wrong or untrue, though. And frankly, if cost reduction is based on destruction of earth and slavery-like working conditions in cartel-controlled lands, it makes sense to disincentivise these at least, if not boycott completely. The problem with EU doing it for protectionist reasons is that it does not apply similar standards for what is happening inside the EU, eg re:working conditions in strawberry production.
For the military industry part, I completely agree. This applies already to certain war situations that were and keep being encouraged.
For the military industry part, I completely agree. This applies already to certain war situations that were and keep being encouraged.
Or just let California Avocado farmers determine for themselves if this is a business they would like to continue to be in. The old fashioned way.
What do you mean by "or"? A trade arrangement lets then decide just fine. It's not going to be a subsidy for mexican ones or anything like that.
Unless you mean let them decide on whether a tariff should hinder their competition, in which case hell no don't let any industry be in charge of their own protections.
Unless you mean let them decide on whether a tariff should hinder their competition, in which case hell no don't let any industry be in charge of their own protections.
We don’t need a trade arrangement to liberalize avocado production, nor should we encode within one our preference for domestic or imported avocados. Free trade agreements are a misnomer. If you want to free up trade and production, just zero out import tariffs and call it a day.
Removing tariffs or similar barriers is what I assume a trade agreement for avocados would do. Do you have something different in mind?
You don’t need an agreement. The POTUS has near unilateral authority to adjust tariffs thanks to Congress, so all you need to do is do is zero them out. Bilateral and multilateral trade agreements are nonsense.
If you’re optimizing for the free flow of goods: zero out the tariffs. You can do this unilaterally, even if the counterparty nation doesn’t reciprocate.
If you want to protect an industry, then adjust tariffs to such a degree that the counterparty nation is either not favored or disfavored in pricing.
If you want to punish the counterparty nation, zero out trade and/or blockade the nation, or otherwise prevent its most valuable resources from coming to market.
What you don’t need to do at any step or point of this process is to try and think at a “higher level” about what’s best for California farmers in terms of what they ought to be doing with their land instead. The California agricultural industry is already the largest, most valuable, most lucrative and most diverse in the nation. It’s got plenty of cash crops, of which avocados are just one. If you’re eyeballing agricultural reforms, start with the subsidies that encourage much of the other 49 States to continue their ways as corn and soybean republics.
If you’re optimizing for the free flow of goods: zero out the tariffs. You can do this unilaterally, even if the counterparty nation doesn’t reciprocate.
If you want to protect an industry, then adjust tariffs to such a degree that the counterparty nation is either not favored or disfavored in pricing.
If you want to punish the counterparty nation, zero out trade and/or blockade the nation, or otherwise prevent its most valuable resources from coming to market.
What you don’t need to do at any step or point of this process is to try and think at a “higher level” about what’s best for California farmers in terms of what they ought to be doing with their land instead. The California agricultural industry is already the largest, most valuable, most lucrative and most diverse in the nation. It’s got plenty of cash crops, of which avocados are just one. If you’re eyeballing agricultural reforms, start with the subsidies that encourage much of the other 49 States to continue their ways as corn and soybean republics.
A trade arrangement with a poorer country means they’ll be out of business which means they won’t get to decide.
If "get to decide" implies the government is actively forcing the business model to be viable, then it stops being an obvious answer of "of course let them decide!".
[deleted]
"And the reason avocados have exploded in the U.S. is that most of them are no longer grown in the U.S.
"We have developed such a voracious appetite for this versatile fruit that the U.S. now annually brings in nearly 3 billion pounds of avocados."
These consecutive sentences each state as fact an opposite causality.
How can the central thesis of the article be so confused?
"We have developed such a voracious appetite for this versatile fruit that the U.S. now annually brings in nearly 3 billion pounds of avocados."
These consecutive sentences each state as fact an opposite causality.
How can the central thesis of the article be so confused?
(Ironically, my dad won an award as a USDA bureaucrat for the economic analysis and rule set that allowed Mexican avocados into the US.)
When you remove a barrier to a market the intersection of supply and demand curves shifts to the right (more supply) and the equilibrium price drops and the equilibrium supply increases. “Why does this happen?” is more correctly explained by “the supply increased” because the supply curve is what changed, not the demand curve. Note that the article argues for a subsequent change in the demand curve, fueled by tax-funded advertising.
When you remove a barrier to a market the intersection of supply and demand curves shifts to the right (more supply) and the equilibrium price drops and the equilibrium supply increases. “Why does this happen?” is more correctly explained by “the supply increased” because the supply curve is what changed, not the demand curve. Note that the article argues for a subsequent change in the demand curve, fueled by tax-funded advertising.
They're not quite opposite.
High appetite -> lots of fruit imported -> consumption "explodes"
You can't consume what you don't have, so if they're not growing enough then they have to import them before they can be eaten.
Both importing and consumption are downstream of high demand, but consumption is downstream of high importing.
High appetite -> lots of fruit imported -> consumption "explodes"
You can't consume what you don't have, so if they're not growing enough then they have to import them before they can be eaten.
Both importing and consumption are downstream of high demand, but consumption is downstream of high importing.
But is that really the reason?
High appetite for avocados is the reason. Maybe combined with reasonable prices or some other factors. Importing them simply makes it possible for those purchase numbers to get that high. Means. If US would grow them in huge quantities on their own soil it would also allow for the same outcome. So how it is the reason?
My English ain't amazing, I know, but when I read "old school press" it makes me thing: am I so dumb, or are they deliberately using confusing phrasing to sound smarter than it's actually required?
High appetite for avocados is the reason. Maybe combined with reasonable prices or some other factors. Importing them simply makes it possible for those purchase numbers to get that high. Means. If US would grow them in huge quantities on their own soil it would also allow for the same outcome. So how it is the reason?
My English ain't amazing, I know, but when I read "old school press" it makes me thing: am I so dumb, or are they deliberately using confusing phrasing to sound smarter than it's actually required?
It's a would vs. could thing. To grow that many avocados in the US you would have to plow up whatever is growing there now, crops that are more profitable. That would require raising the price (to beat out the opportunity cost) and potentially accepting a lower quality (avocados aren't like polyethylene, and they'll come out differently depending on the location and the variety the local pest profile and climate require).
Importing them from Mexico lets consumers have a good quality avocado at a low price. Offering someone a good deal raises demand for that deal relative to offering them fewer, lower-quality eaches at a higher price.
Importing them from Mexico lets consumers have a good quality avocado at a low price. Offering someone a good deal raises demand for that deal relative to offering them fewer, lower-quality eaches at a higher price.
No, parent comment is absolutely correct. This article is crap.
> (Question in title:) Why America now eats a crazy number of avocados
> (Answer in article:) And the reason avocados have exploded in the U.S. is that most of them are no longer grown in the U.S.
How does that make any sort of sense? You could say "it's because they've become very cheap", sure. But if they were grown outside US, and at higher prices, would you accept that as a valid "reason why avocado consumption has exploded"? It would imply that americans must actively hate domestically-grown avocados, with passion.
> (Question in title:) Why America now eats a crazy number of avocados
> (Answer in article:) And the reason avocados have exploded in the U.S. is that most of them are no longer grown in the U.S.
How does that make any sort of sense? You could say "it's because they've become very cheap", sure. But if they were grown outside US, and at higher prices, would you accept that as a valid "reason why avocado consumption has exploded"? It would imply that americans must actively hate domestically-grown avocados, with passion.
If you had a village in the desert, and one day someone built a water pipeline, the average water use would go up "because" it was coming from someplace other than your village's small oasis.
There's no mention of "cheap" or "cheaper" in that article. None. I tend to agree that's what they meant, but I for one resent that it's not spelled out/ it's implied. The _cause_ is lower price, it's not source of the product. Is it lower price because it's imported? Sure, probably. But damn it, spell it out - you can even make something interesting out of it (chart consumption vs price, dunno). And let me tell you - I'm not even convinced they got the causality right, even _if_ that's what they meant. It's basically a meme that boomers were telling young people that they're poor because they eat avocado toast - which implies that it got popular (in a niche) before it got cheap. Sure, there's a positive feedback loop in there (more interest -> more import -> economies of scale -> lower prices -> even more interest), but I think they missed the "why".
> the average water use would go up "because" it was coming from someplace other than your village's small oasis
No, absolutely not. It would go up, in your example, because it was more readily available. The source has nothing to do with it except indirectly - the availability has everything to do with it.
> the average water use would go up "because" it was coming from someplace other than your village's small oasis
No, absolutely not. It would go up, in your example, because it was more readily available. The source has nothing to do with it except indirectly - the availability has everything to do with it.
> It's basically a meme that boomers were telling young people that they're poor because they eat avocado toast - which implies that it got popular (in a niche) before it got cheap.
I do not think this follows. Some boomer oped writers blaming avocado toasts for young poverty does not imply there is causality between the two. Some boomers love to blame whatever is new for them and they do not bother to check prices or actual levels of consumption.
I do not think this follows. Some boomer oped writers blaming avocado toasts for young poverty does not imply there is causality between the two. Some boomers love to blame whatever is new for them and they do not bother to check prices or actual levels of consumption.
Oh, I'm not claiming that to be "evidence" - merely saying that there are hints that alternative explanations are worth exploring/investigating. "There's no smoke without fire" thing - sometimes there absolutely is smoke without any fire (especially when creating smoke was the intent), but it's still worth to consider the hypothesis that observed smoke might have been caused by a fire.
Sometimes, and I think here too, the claim is more of "the fire and the cow-eating-the-grass are unrelated".
As in, whatever avocados young people were eating and buying, the expense is unlikely to be comparable with the cost of housing, education, healthcare (if they have health issues already) etc.
As in, whatever avocados young people were eating and buying, the expense is unlikely to be comparable with the cost of housing, education, healthcare (if they have health issues already) etc.
In a sense, you're looking at ABC and saying that A cannot come before C because B comes before C.
That's not how things work when you talk about "cause". There's all sorts of examples even in scientific studies - lots of negative effects were assigned to coffee that were not really related. Until someone was about to publish a correlation between coffee consumption and lung diseases, and paused for a second to say "wait a goddamn minute, could there be a correlation between coffee consumption and smoking? Like, people also smoking a cigarette when they drink their coffee?" It's not A before B before C, coffee was never the cause for respiratory disease. Just like "import" is not the cause for avocado popularity.
Simplistic interpretation, demand increases, supply and price changes occur inline with the demand. More external supply at a lower price, more people buy avocados.
Imported = cheaper
I guess the first sentence could be restated as, “the reason avocados have exploded in the U.S. is that Mexican avocados are much more affordable”; although, the author goes on to state that the price isn’t a driver, and touches on the necessity of getting them from Mexico for year round availability.
Kinda feel like this is tariff bait, but, regardless...
The article seems to do a pretty good job of telling the story. It's not terribly interesting. The big consortium of Mexican avocado growers made a giant push probably around 2015-2016 and dumped a ton of money into American and Canadian markets to sell avocados. It makes sense. California can grow them just fine, but so can Mexico.
I think the more interesting aspect is that, considering how resource intensive they are, it might even be a legitimate good trade case, especially considering the size of the American/Canadian buying population versus the contention in viable domestic production area. This could be (or, really, has been) a very happy arrangement.
I worked on some agave projects around the same time, so I watched on the sidelines while this was going on and knew some people working on the Avocados from Mexico brand. That part was pretty interesting, too, because it was a state-level initiative.
The article seems to do a pretty good job of telling the story. It's not terribly interesting. The big consortium of Mexican avocado growers made a giant push probably around 2015-2016 and dumped a ton of money into American and Canadian markets to sell avocados. It makes sense. California can grow them just fine, but so can Mexico.
I think the more interesting aspect is that, considering how resource intensive they are, it might even be a legitimate good trade case, especially considering the size of the American/Canadian buying population versus the contention in viable domestic production area. This could be (or, really, has been) a very happy arrangement.
I worked on some agave projects around the same time, so I watched on the sidelines while this was going on and knew some people working on the Avocados from Mexico brand. That part was pretty interesting, too, because it was a state-level initiative.
assuming they start planting trees NOW. it takes approx 4-5 years for a grafted avocado tree to start bearing fruit.
of all the Tariff hit products this is probably the fastest of any of them to do what a Tariff is meant to do... Make the product attractive enough to produce locally unattractive to import.
if growers trust that Trump is consistent and reliable enough to stick to his guns around tariffs (and he hasnt been to date, so thats a real leap of faith), then Avocados will be one of the first products that we'll see the effect of his Tariffs paying dividends to america.
most the other industries and products take a lot longer than 4-5 years to "flip the switch" and start producing locally in numbers large enough to counter the imported numbers.
I haven't seen him do much to bolster that industry other than the tariff... so it may never kick off. What might happen is the "Fad" for avo products might just die off and by 4-5 years comes around it might not be a product in demand anymore.
Edit: oh also, 25% tariff might not BE ENOUGH of a price increase to affect the import numbers at all as well... its hard to know what the final straw is, in the consumer space. They can be fickle buggers.
of all the Tariff hit products this is probably the fastest of any of them to do what a Tariff is meant to do... Make the product attractive enough to produce locally unattractive to import.
if growers trust that Trump is consistent and reliable enough to stick to his guns around tariffs (and he hasnt been to date, so thats a real leap of faith), then Avocados will be one of the first products that we'll see the effect of his Tariffs paying dividends to america.
most the other industries and products take a lot longer than 4-5 years to "flip the switch" and start producing locally in numbers large enough to counter the imported numbers.
I haven't seen him do much to bolster that industry other than the tariff... so it may never kick off. What might happen is the "Fad" for avo products might just die off and by 4-5 years comes around it might not be a product in demand anymore.
Edit: oh also, 25% tariff might not BE ENOUGH of a price increase to affect the import numbers at all as well... its hard to know what the final straw is, in the consumer space. They can be fickle buggers.
That's just the time to maturity for fruit bearing though. What about, say, the water requirements? But, yes, I think we agree. I think this is a case where we shouldn't provide an incentive to American growers, because it's probably more advantageous to import avocados and grow other things instead.
"Kinda feel like this is tariff bait"
Kinda looks like click bait generally. Per-capita US avocado consumption is about 9 lbs./y. That's a bit more than 1 per month of the large Mexican avacados. Somehow that's "crazy!!1"
You would think there would be some joy for all this: something Americans will happily eat that isn't "ultraprocessed" and/or meat, and a Mexican product that isn't narcotics or fossil fuel. But no. omg they're so "resource intensive!"
Luxury anxieties, safely ignored.
Kinda looks like click bait generally. Per-capita US avocado consumption is about 9 lbs./y. That's a bit more than 1 per month of the large Mexican avacados. Somehow that's "crazy!!1"
You would think there would be some joy for all this: something Americans will happily eat that isn't "ultraprocessed" and/or meat, and a Mexican product that isn't narcotics or fossil fuel. But no. omg they're so "resource intensive!"
Luxury anxieties, safely ignored.
By weight that would make them the 3rd most consumed fruit in the US after apples and bananas, that has to be worth something.
I think the revolution was more than just riping, it has to do with the variety. When I moved to Vietnam, I found they also had a large amount of avo's used in a lot of dishes, but they are shaped differently and taste like chalk compared with sweeter/creamier Mexico/California avo's.
Wow, just searching around, I found that I'm not the only one! It seems to be Haas vs. Booth...
https://www.reddit.com/r/VietNam/comments/uw10hw/in_the_west...
Wow, just searching around, I found that I'm not the only one! It seems to be Haas vs. Booth...
https://www.reddit.com/r/VietNam/comments/uw10hw/in_the_west...
Here in Guatemala they have regional avocados which also are terrible compared to Hass. What's cool though is that they grow all over the place and they're dirt cheap.
Once I went to a park and realized the tree at the park was a (regional) avocado tree. But the avocados were REALLY high up. Like, there was no way we were gonna climb that sucker. So I knocked on a door that was right by the park, and I asked the young girl who answered if she had a stick or something we could use.
She said "actually, we do" and she brought out this insanely long stick with a little forked part at the edge that was just for picking avocados. And we picked so, so many.
Once I went to a park and realized the tree at the park was a (regional) avocado tree. But the avocados were REALLY high up. Like, there was no way we were gonna climb that sucker. So I knocked on a door that was right by the park, and I asked the young girl who answered if she had a stick or something we could use.
She said "actually, we do" and she brought out this insanely long stick with a little forked part at the edge that was just for picking avocados. And we picked so, so many.
Here in Brazil there's like 10 different versions of avocados.
You have all type of versions. Some are better to be eaten as guacamole... others are not. Here we do sweet avocados (just eat with sugar, or just put on a blender with milk).
Some of them have more fat, others have less...
Search for "Abacate pescoço". This is probably the most interesting and different one.
:)
I believe Hass is just better to export, because it doesn't spoil so easily.
Another fun fact: I think majority of people don't really buy avocados in supermarket. They are grown all over the place. Streets, backyard, parks... In my street there's like, 5 avocados trees (with each being different type). Hass is the most rare here, you'll usually find it on supermarket only...
You have all type of versions. Some are better to be eaten as guacamole... others are not. Here we do sweet avocados (just eat with sugar, or just put on a blender with milk).
Some of them have more fat, others have less...
Search for "Abacate pescoço". This is probably the most interesting and different one.
:)
I believe Hass is just better to export, because it doesn't spoil so easily.
Another fun fact: I think majority of people don't really buy avocados in supermarket. They are grown all over the place. Streets, backyard, parks... In my street there's like, 5 avocados trees (with each being different type). Hass is the most rare here, you'll usually find it on supermarket only...
Ha, over here in Aus we get Hass most of the year but for a few weeks at the end of March/start of April we can only get Shepard and everyone moans about it!
Hass are definitely superior, but Shepard aren’t all that bad. Bit rubbery maybe :)
Hass are definitely superior, but Shepard aren’t all that bad. Bit rubbery maybe :)
Spread on toast with goats cheese, sauteed mushroom & fresh chilli; poached eggs on top of all that. Brew coffee and there's work-from-home breakfast sorted.
A lot of work for a week day! It’s weetbix or porridge for me, Vegemite on toast if I have bread
Is interesting that here in Europe there are lots of avocados, none of them are from the United States or Mexico. Many of them are very good though, I’m particularly fond of those that are grown in South America, usually Chile or Peru. I wonder if those are also haas avocados or not.
Europe has TERRIBLE avocados.
What a rather hyperbolic comment to make. It’s simply not true. Just like in the states you can buy avocados grown in Florida which are terrible, and Europe you can buy avocados that are not so great. But many of Europe’s avocado sources are also the same sources that serve American stores. I bought the same great excellent Chilean haas avocados in the United States as I get in Europe.
You cannot get a good avocado in Denmark, period. Last attempt I got eight that looked good. All but two was basically rotten inside, the remaining two just meeh. Trying avocado and guacamole in the US is just something completely different. The avocados are huge and absolutely perfect.
I've just given up on avocados, I'll have to wait for a trip to Mexico or the US.
I've just given up on avocados, I'll have to wait for a trip to Mexico or the US.
Denmark, imho, has the worst grocery stores of all Western European countries. I'm comparing an average supermarket not some organic high-end. I find grocery shopping usually pleasurable, Netto makes get out asap.
Even the high-end supermarkets in Denmark suck, but it makes sense, it's all the same three chains, COOP, Salling Group or Dagrofa.
I read somewhere that Denmark is the country with the highest food prices in Europe, but we also spend the least on food. That's just a winning combination right there.
I read somewhere that Denmark is the country with the highest food prices in Europe, but we also spend the least on food. That's just a winning combination right there.
I struggle to understand why. Is it tariffs or some sort of farmer protectionism lobbying like Switzerland? Switzerland, one of the most expensive countries, has pretty decent grocery price.
Neighbour Sweden has pretty great prices for that latitude.
Neighbour Sweden has pretty great prices for that latitude.
Costco in the US offers single-serve sealed just avocado, about 1/2 of a large fruit, that last for weeks. Absolutely perfect every time with more consistency than the real thing™.
It's always hit or miss in Ireland too, but its usually a miss. It's the only place I've ever eaten avocados that look and feel ripe, but taste like unripened bananas, it's a weird flavor that I don't know how to fix.
Buy the 'ripen at home' ones in Lidl as opposed to the 'ready to eat' ones which are definitely hit or miss and probably undergo some accelerated ripening.
Yes most avocado sold in Europe are Hass. You can see by the shape and the skin type (others typically sold are longer and smoother outside usually).
My quick survey of California, Chile, Peru, Israel and Spain production suggests that Hass is the the most widely produced (maybe 80% of production) but other varieties are produced in lesser quantities.
Just like how Finland lured Japanese into raw salmon.
Thanks for sharing the link. Had no clue. Funny how things came about to be; who would've known that salmon wasn't part of the foundational sushi dishes until this occurred.
Or nazis and fondue.
You mean Norway. (See the link the sibling comment)
By providing parasite free salmon?
You make it sound nefarious, and maybe it is with farmed salmon.
Are there similar concerns with Hass avocados?
You make it sound nefarious, and maybe it is with farmed salmon.
Are there similar concerns with Hass avocados?
"Congress established a federal program in the early 2000s that collects a few pennies for every pound of fresh Hass avocados sold in the U.S., whether they were grown domestically or imported."
I'm not OK with this. I know the amount is tiny, but it's the principle of the thing, the US government should not be in the business of promoting stuff like this. That an inappropriate use of government.
I'm not OK with this. I know the amount is tiny, but it's the principle of the thing, the US government should not be in the business of promoting stuff like this. That an inappropriate use of government.
I had no idea we have NAFTA to thank for avocados (in the USA). Seems like neoliberals and free-trade advocates should be trumpeting that one from the rooftops. Sounds like that was a win-win; Americans are rich so they can afford to buy avocados, which tasty and healthy; sweet American dollars improve the quality of life for Mexican avocado-growers. Fittingly, with the new tarrifs, we all lose.
> Fittingly, with the new tarrifs, we all lose.
I live in a former Avocado farm that was subdivided into homes after NAFTA made US production less viable after Mexico undercut our labor. It was a 50 year old industry and local jobs that was wiped out with free trade. It wasn't a win win.
I live in a former Avocado farm that was subdivided into homes after NAFTA made US production less viable after Mexico undercut our labor. It was a 50 year old industry and local jobs that was wiped out with free trade. It wasn't a win win.
This is true of most of the SF Bay Area on a 100 year timescale too. I grew up in a house on land that was formerly a cherry orchard. Some of the most ideal farm land in world has been converted to residential neighborhoods and is far too expensive to use as farmland, well, except for Walter Cottle Lester.
[deleted]
You have a place to live and avocados now, that could be considered a win win. "Win" is such a subjective term as used here. The equation is not as simple as jobs lost equals bad, jobs gained equals good. I too have the gut reaction that a farm subdivided is a bad thing, but logically I can't really convince myself it's really as simple as that.
Every innovation causes some people to lose (locally). Curing Alzheimer's will be bad for palliative care workers. What are we to do with that information? Should we stop investing in Alzheimer's research, or should we provide some social security as a temporary stop gap?