HFCS exists ONLY because of US government policy. The US sugar program drives up the price of sugar by limiting domestic supplies and imports. As as result it is profitable to mill corn into sweetener, and U.S. food makers use it as a substitute everywhere possible (mostly liquids) as it is slightly cheaper than sugar.
Soda outside the US,for example, still uses traditional sugar.
As a result, the corn growers are a vociferous lobby in support of the sugar program.
Soda here in Argentina‚ especially the cheap stuff (Suitty and Pritty), uses HFCS too, although it's called "JMAF" (jarabe de maíz de alta fructosa). Also, apparently HFCS is easier to handle in manufacturing equipment, maybe because it's liquid. Therefore I am downmodding your comment due to factual incorrectness.
Yes when I travel to the US I notice the taste immediately in soft drinks (and consequently stop drinking them all together, which is probably not a bad thing for me !). HFCS seems to have all the "sweet" hit without any flavour for it, quite horrible once you have had the alternative.
But the ubiquity of HFCS in bottled, jarred, canned, tubbed, and boxed foods in the US cannot be explained by the sugar policy, for so many varieties of groceries didn't contain sugar in the first place. (I'm pushing 50 and have been reading food labels since childhood.)
Actually, no, it does explain the ubiquity of it. The extremely low price of HFCS is a result of government subsidies, and food manufacturers find an easy way to increase the flavor impact of their product by just loading up on sweetness instead of using more expensive other flavoring agents.
We still have only ourselves to blame though. Feeding little babies french fries, coca cola, and hamburgers is a sure way to destroy their sense of taste.
Soda outside the US,for example, still uses traditional sugar.
As a result, the corn growers are a vociferous lobby in support of the sugar program.