Eggs were selling for 79.1 cents apiece Sunday, or $9.49 a dozen with $1 taken off using a digital coupon, at the Manteca Safeway.

Across town at Food-4-Less, the price was 66.5 cents an egg.

Two weeks ago, that same dozen eggs at Food-4-Less was selling for $4.44 a dozen or 37 cents an egg.

None of this should shock anybody, given the bird flu and the surge in demand for eggs during the holidays.

However, there was a time when people in Northern California paid $3 an egg.

It was back in 1851.

Eggs in Wisconsin were selling for 2 cents apiece at the time.

But in Sacramento and throughout the California Gold Country they topped out at $3 each.

That is not a misprint. One egg cost $3, based on California state archives.

Compare $36 a dozen in 1851 to $9.49 a dozen in 2024.

Yes, the rush was on.

But the average miner came up with daily gold dust yields ranging from $10 to $15 a day

Factoring in inflation, that’s the equivalent today of $340 to $510.

Compare that to $160 at $20 per hour for an eight-hour shift at McDonalds.

The real inflation stunner is in terms of the actual buying power from 1851 to 2024.

If you weren’t in California in 1851, an egg cost 2 cents. Apply inflation to the non-California egg and it comes to 69 cents apiece.

That means those buying eggs at Food-4-Less were paying 2.5 cents less per egg than the typical consumer in the United States some 173 years ago. Go back to just two weeks ago, and consumers were paying 31 cents less per egg than back in 1851 providing they were part of the civilized world east of the Mississippi River.

Do not misunderstand.

This isn’t an attempt to appease any frustration or anger you might harbor over what you’re forking over today for eggs.

But it does illustrate households pay a lot less today for basic food than 173 years ago, 100 years ago and even 25 years ago in terms of the percentage of an average household income that is eaten up to put food on the table.

Keep in mind basic food data compiled by the United States Department of Agriculture excludes delivery charges et al.

The USDA noted in 2022 the percent of household dollars spent on food was 11 percent — the equivalent of what it was in 1991. The percentage had been on a downward decline and then stagnant until the pandemic hit.

The percentage was at 17 percent in 1960 and 27 percent in 1930, per USDA data.

Meanwhile, the percentage of the population growing or raising food is down below 1 percent in the United States compared to nearly 40 percent before the dawn of the 20th century.

The big reason is larger agriculture operations relying on technology, pesticides and, yes, even processes that help prevent fruit and such from spoiling rapidly.

It is why it is almost laughable on some talk shows and podcasts to hear people argue now is the time for people to buy chickens to generate their own eggs.

Go for it, assuming it is OK to do so where you live.

Keep in mind, though, chickens in your backyard can catch the bird flu too. The biggest difference is you don’t have the means — nor does the government require you — to monitor your flock for the ire flu.

Knock government food safety protocols and regulations all you want. 

Without them everything would be catastrophically worse from E.coli illnesses and death to chickens dying off from disease and drastically reducing the supply needed to meet the demand.

And that is a real issue — supply and demand.

But it can’t be looked at in a vacuum.

Basic costs need to be covered as does a quirky thing called a reasonable profit.

If an individual or a company can’t make a reasonable “profit” meaning net revenue after expenses, they won’t be in business for very long.

The question is whether egg prices today — or even those $3 eggs back in 1851 — are the result of price gouging.

There is a Manteca area connection to the $3 egg in 1851.

Sam Brannan, who helped lead the Church of Latter-Day Saints in an ill-fated attempt to establish a farming colony dubbed New Hope some 10 miles south of Manteca in 1847 at the confluence of the San Joaquin and Stanislaus River, at one point had the only supply store between San Francisco and the Gold Country.

It was outside Sutter’s Fort in Sacramento.

An example of his markup were pans used for gold mining.

He bought them for 20 cents and sold them for $15 piece. 

Brannan, in a matter of months, netted $36,000 selling supplies to the miners headed to the Sierra.

In today’s dollars that’s just over $1.2 million.

It is why the biggest fortunes in California during the Gold Rush were not made in the mines or on claims but supplying miners.

Brannan has the distinction of being California’s first millionaire.

Clearly, Brannan found a price point that worked.

He saw a need and filled it.

The miners could have stayed back in Wisconsin where the price of eggs were 2 cents and labor — depending upon the occupation — wages between 8 cents and 20 cents day.

That’s a far cry from $10 to $15 a day a typical prospector collected a day in gold dust in California.

Demand exceeding supply typically means there are too many dollars chasing too few goods.

A prime example was Greenwater, a short-lived copper mining boom district in Death Valley’s Funeral Mountains near Dante’s View back in 1905.

Four towns sprung up overnight with 2,000 plus inhabitants and not a drop of water for miles.

Barrels of water trucked in sold for $15 each or 46 cents a gallon that in 2024 dollars comes to $15.70 a gallon.

Gasoline was also outrageous based on California circa 2024 pricing.

It was $1 a gallon in Greenwater in 1905. Based in today’s dollars that is $34 a gallon.

The 1905 Greenwater prices are based on research by the National Park Service.

Gas, by the way, on Friday was $8.94 a gallon for unleaded at the Furnace Creek Fuel and Auto Service, one of only two fueling options in Death Valley National Park.

Back to egg prices and how valuable they have become.

If you still have some last minute gifts to buy a dozen eggs might be as good as a gold coin by Christmas morning. 

This column is the opinion of editor, Dennis Wyatt, and does not necessarily represent the opinions of The Bulletin or 209 Multimedia. He can be reached at dwyatt@mantecabulletin.com