For corn, wheat, and rice farmers, the strong prices they saw in 2007 and 2008 are but a distant memory by now. As a consumer, you probably haven't noticed.

That's because when you pour a bowl of Rice Krispies, Corn Pops, or Wheaties, the price tag stuck to the box is still higher than usual.

Newspapers were filled with stories in 2008 and 2009 about exploding grocery bills, and many of those pieces included quotes from food companies that painted farmers as the villain because of higher-than-usual crop prices.

But the story about prices remaining higher, even as crop prices have retreated, hasn't gotten much traction. In fact, according to a recent announcement by the USDA, "In 2010, the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for all food is projected to increase 2.5 to 3.5 percent" with that same increase of 2.5 to 3.5 percent forecast for food purchased at grocery stores. However, this news got little more than a passing mention in the media.

This food bill phenomenon of what goes up doesn't come down is known in economic circles as "sticky prices."

The Associated Press explained the term this way in October 2008: "[W]hen companies slap higher prices on products and keep them there even though the rationale for the price hikes—such as soaring oil prices—is gone."

A 2006 study on sugar policy prepared by McKeany-Flavell, a California-based commodity research firm, reported:

"Once prices for a retail product rise, they seldom come down without a compelling reason. As noted in The Economist, 'Prices change only when the cost of leaving them unchanged exceeds the expense of adjusting them.' In the case of sugar-containing products at the consumer-level, prices are more a result of how competitive the market is rather than how expensive (or inexpensive) the input prices are."

And according to Tom Buis, the CEO of Growth Energy in Washington, DC, these sticky prices are adding up to big-time profits for food companies.

"Companies like General Mills, Kraft, and ConAgra are all bragging to investors about their earnings," he explained. "But these profits are not just happening by accident—it's happening because consumers are paying more and farmers are making less. And to think that this is happening during a recession is unbelievable."

Buis appears to be is right. Another well-known food giant, Hershey, has seen excellent returns as of late, noting in July a nearly 6 percent sales increase. That same July announcement mentioned that commodity prices being cheaper than initial estimates have helped fuel their ascension.

When confronted with the contradiction of higher food prices at a time of plummeting ingredient costs, the food manufacturers have responded with—you guessed it—contradiction.

Unilever told the Los Angeles Times that the situation is "complex," with pricing levels remaining "both volatile and unpredictable in the medium to long term." Meanwhile, Kraft CEO Irene Rosenfeld told USA Today last year that, "our prices will go up and down as the cost of our ingredients goes up and down."

Based on a recent report by the Government Accountability Office, Kraft's prediction seems to be a little off.

That 2009 report found that supermarket prices for food have climbed by 128 percent since 1982, four times the increase in crop prices for farmers—which is, according to Buis, a "clear refute" of the big food companies' erroneous claims that farmers are the culprit.

"Last year the Grocery Manufacturers Association developed a multimillion dollar misinformation campaign to blame American farmers and ethanol producers for higher food prices," Buis said when the GAO report was made public. "Here is yet another study that shines the light of truth on the whole food-versus-fuel fiction that [the food companies] are peddling."

That should give you plenty to think about as you're pouring that bowl of cereal tomorrow morning.