Blame China for Your Costly Lobster Roll
Looking for authentic, down-home Maine lobster? Head to China.
The upsurge in demand for lobster in China this year has caused the price of the succulent marine crustacean to shoot up to record highs in the U.S., according to Bloomberg News. Wholesale prices for lobsters have clawed 32 percent higher over the last year.
Lacking a lobster industry itself, China used to rely on Australian imports to meet the demand from an expanding middle class that views lobster as a status symbol. But in 2012, as catches off of Western Australia began dwindling and prices of lobster fell in the Gulf of Maine, China changed its main supplier to the U.S.
Related: McDonald’s Aims for a Classier Crowd with Lobster Rolls
Lobster exports from the East Coast are the main reason for the hike in fish and seafood exports to China in recent years, according to U.S. Department of Agriculture data. Over the past seven months, about 60,000 live North American lobsters a week make the 7,500-mile trek halfway across the world. The lobsters must still be alive by the time they arrive in China or else they lack appeal, so they’re packed in wet newspapers and Styrofoam coolers for a trip that must be made in 18 hours or less, according to Bloomberg.
Another reason for the surge in prices was the bitterly cold winter this year, which slowed the catch in Canada and delayed the summer harvest in Maine.
Holding off on your lobster roll until next summer in the hopes that prices will wane? Don’t count on it. The Chinese middle class is still growing rapidly, and the country already consumes 35 percent of the world’s seafood — a number likely to increase.
Top Reads from The Fiscal Times:
- Born in the USA: 24 Iconic American Foods
- America’s 10 Top Selling Medications
- You’re Richer Than You Think. Really.
Stat of the Day: 0.2%
The New York Times’ Jim Tankersley tweets: “In order to raise enough revenue to start paying down the debt, Trump would need tariffs to be ~4% of GDP. They're currently 0.2%.”
Read Tankersley’s full breakdown of why tariffs won’t come close to eliminating the deficit or paying down the national debt here.
Number of the Day: 44%
The “short-term” health plans the Trump administration is promoting as low-cost alternatives to Obamacare aren’t bound by the Affordable Care Act’s requirement to spend a substantial majority of their premium revenues on medical care. UnitedHealth is the largest seller of short-term plans, according to Axios, which provided this interesting detail on just how profitable this type of insurance can be: “United’s short-term plans paid out 44% of their premium revenues last year for medical care. ACA plans have to pay out at least 80%.”
Number of the Day: 4,229
The Washington Post’s Fact Checkers on Wednesday updated their database of false and misleading claims made by President Trump: “As of day 558, he’s made 4,229 Trumpian claims — an increase of 978 in just two months.”
The tally, which works out to an average of almost 7.6 false or misleading claims a day, includes 432 problematics statements on trade and 336 claims on taxes. “Eighty-eight times, he has made the false assertion that he passed the biggest tax cut in U.S. history,” the Post says.
Number of the Day: $3 Billion
A new analysis by the Department of Health and Human Services finds that Medicare’s prescription drug program could have saved almost $3 billion in 2016 if pharmacies dispensed generic drugs instead of their brand-name counterparts, Axios reports. “But the savings total is inflated a bit, which HHS admits, because it doesn’t include rebates that brand-name drug makers give to [pharmacy benefit managers] and health plans — and PBMs are known to play games with generic drugs to juice their profits.”
Chart of the Day: Public Spending on Job Programs
President Trump announced on Thursday the creation of a National Council for the American Worker, charged with developing “a national strategy for training and retraining workers for high-demand industries,” his daughter Ivanka wrote in The Wall Street Journal. A report from the president’s National Council on Economic Advisers earlier this week made it clear that the U.S. currently spends less public money on job programs than many other developed countries.
