aem wrote:
>
> On Sep 6, 3:05 pm, "jmcquown" > wrote:
> > In the past week I've seen an ad a couple of times geared towards warding
> > off the anti-HFCS (high fructose corn syrup) sentiment in foods. I finally
> > made note of the URL: http://www.sweetsurprise.com/ From that site there's
> > a link towww.HFCSfacts.com
> >
> > They're obviously starting to feel a pinch in consumer rejection of HFCS
> > since they're running ads to tell us IT'S MADE FROM CORN!
> >
> Fight back? Against what? They have never ever before made as much
> as they're making right now. Who should be fighting back are those
> who want them to grow corn to eat, not to be made into HFCS and not to
> be made into ethanol. -aem

It's sugar price supports which make U.S. sugar
2X to 4X the world price. We would not have a domestic
beet sugar industry without these price supports,
and only a small cane sugar industry (mostly in P.R.).

Sugar price supports have decimated the U.S. candy
industry, with most of it moving to Canada and Mexico.

You can't use HFCS to make most forms of candy, because
it doesn't easily set up into a solid, unlike sucrose.
However, HFCS is perfectly adaptable to liquid products
like soda, so we have this weird situation in which
sucrose is price-controlled at very high prices, but
a new product (HFCS) makes an end-run around the price
controls for the big cola companies. You have major
interests supporting the continuation of price supports,
and then other interests which support the loophole.

Who gets screwed is the U.S. small- to mid-size candy
manufacturers, and all U.S. candy manufacturers are
small- to mid-size manufacturers compared to the cola
companies.