this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2025
1131 points (99.3% liked)

Political Memes

9061 readers
2506 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TabbsTheBat@pawb.social 51 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I love picking up packages and seeing 90 grams, 450 grams etc. That's how you really know that the quarterly doubling prices and shrinkflation go hand in hand :3

[–] aksdb@lemmy.world 28 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I also like that they no longer align with typically required measurements for recipes. Nothing gets me off more than having to calculate fractions for amounts of ingredients.

[–] TabbsTheBat@pawb.social 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Thankfully it hasn't caused many issues to me personally :3

Usually the differences are small enough that they don't change the consistency or the taste to a significant level, at least in the shrinkflation I've seen where I live

[–] aksdb@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I am probably too pedantic for that. If the recipe says 500g of this with 250g of that, it's typically a good 2:1 mix and the packaging sizes often aligned. Now you have shit like 400g and 220g and you can't easily align them anymore. Realistically it probably won't matter even if it's not a nearly perfect 2:1 mix either. But .... I can't help myself :D

[–] memfree@piefed.social 8 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

That doesn't work for me because part of the issue is the number of servings I get at the end and the size of the cooking container. Example: random veggie casserole calls for 1 pound frozen broccoli, 1 pound frozen caulflower, 1 medium onion, 3 stalks celery, and a bunch of other stuff (rice, cheese, spices, breadcrumbs, etc.).

Frozen veg is now mostly bagged at 3/4 of a pound instead of a full pound (same with certain pasta). While I can theoretically use 1.5 bags or reduce other measures by 25%, I don't want a bunch of half-bags in the freezer -- and if I make a casserole that's 75% the size... well, I don't have a 75% sized casserole dish so it still has to bake in the dish I've used to decades, but now as a sad thin version of what it ought to be -- and it typically dries out while cooking (if I don't try to fix it).

[–] aksdb@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

That's the "pedantic" part that also gets me, but realistically it doesn't really work out anyway, because the "servings" are individual sizes. I can't really calculate exactly how much everyone is going to eat. So even if the recipe turns out the exact amount it intended, it could still be too much or not enough, simple because someone is more or less hungry than usual / expected.

I like having reproducible results, but practically with food it just doesn't happen perfectly, even if I actually measure everything perfectly (amounts, time, etc.)

[–] TabbsTheBat@pawb.social 2 points 3 weeks ago

Fair :3

I just can't be bothered to go dig out more ingredients if a recipe says 400g of butter and the packages are 180g each or smth lol

[–] jballs@sh.itjust.works 17 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

And it's not just package sizes! I used to drink those Naked Juice smoothies, because they were all thick and creamy, with the main ingredients being blended bananas and strawberries.

Then a little while ago I noticed they weren't thick and creamy anymore. They were super thin and watery. At first I thought maybe I just got a bad batch, but eventually realized that was the new normal. I checked the ingredients list, and sure enough, apple juice is now the primary ingredient.

[–] LePoisson@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I checked the ingredients list, and sure enough, apple juice is now the primary ingredient.

Bummer, I haven't had a Naked in awhile now but I used to love them.

[–] jballs@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 weeks ago

Yeah they're nothing like they used to be. I don't bother with them anymore.

[–] metaStatic@kbin.earth 34 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

luckily you also get less of them for the increased price

[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 6 points 3 weeks ago

“Waiter! This food is terrible! And the portions are so small.”

[–] jhoff90@lemmy.world 20 points 3 weeks ago

And hey, we're also way more likely to get sick from the products, and then we can pay even more at the hospital (if they're still open in rural American in a couple of years). Capitalism at work, folks.

[–] OCATMBBL@lemmy.world 19 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Housing, food, energy, education, and vehicles have all massively accelerated in cost while wages stay the same. We're plummeting toward a crash in the US.

[–] atticus88th@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Is it really a crash if 1% of the US feel absolutely no ill effects? After all they are the ones writing the headlines, not us plebs who are usually just bickering with each other over scraps.

[–] bobs_monkey@lemmy.zip 7 points 3 weeks ago

They're just hoping Elysium becomes a thing sooner than later.

[–] Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I was told im not spending more. So I guess im not?

Edit: 2.79 for a small fry btw

[–] DoubleDongle@lemmy.world 14 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

I've been getting ludicrously short shelf life on some produce in the past year or so. Get a bag of carrots Thursday after work, there's mold by Saturday. I don't think that was common three years ago.

I've noticed that too

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 weeks ago

The last scraps of the warehouses are being empyied out.

Also with labor shortages even the product that gets harvested ends up languishing in poor storage at various stages before it reaches the store. Instead of a quick pickup with a refigerated semi, you're getting vans a few hours late. The boxes sit in the field for longer, etc. (Anecdote from a berry farm in my area.)

[–] peetabix@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 weeks ago

Put some paper towel in with them. It'll help reduce the moisture and give you an extra few days.

[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 12 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Grocery value didn't go up. Real wages went down. We should measure inflation based on cost-of-living.

Groceries don't really get more expensive, because the methods for producing food don't really get less efficient over time; if anything, it's more efficient. So there's no real reason for them to become more expensive.

Instead, wages declined. I've already commented many times that the labor market is a free market, that means it's regulated by Supply and Demand. I.e., if prices for labor go down, as we can observe, then that can be interpreted such that supply of labor went up (women go to work too, offshoring labor to other countries, immigrants, ...) or that demand for labor went down (automation, end of growth, ...).

I honestly think that both cases are difficult, where the supply of labor could be a bit reduced by kicking out immigrants and home-shoring labor (and also, to a lesser extent, making it more difficult for women to work), which btw some advisers to trump are seemingly trying to do, but my honest opinion is that it won't bring wages up to how they were in the 1960s. Demand for labor is shrinking too, due to the end of growth and now AI and other automation techniques. I guess we'll have to face that.


edit: just to offer an optimistic outlook, i think that consumerism and therefore demand for consumer products could be stimulated by simply giving handouts to people. most people will spend most of the handouts immediately, and that stimulates consumerism. and that in turn stimulates the economy.

[–] bobs_monkey@lemmy.zip 10 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Groceries don't really get more expensive, because the methods for producing food don't really get less efficient over time; if anything, it's more efficient. So there's no real reason for them to become more expensive.

While I'm with you on the economic theory, the past 5 years proved that theory out the window. Yes, there were shortages and logistical issues that caused price spikes, but many grocery items never came back down, or have been held at artificially higher prices since. S&D postulates that when there are a higher number of units on the market, prices will drop. But when you have the corporate consolidation that we've seen in America where there are fewer producers (especially in name brand goods, aka one producer) as well as fewer retailers, the models don't work as they would if we were in a pure free market where producers and retailers can enter the market at any time. As such, those fewer producers and retailers can hold prices artificially higher as their businesses are scaled out (nevermind that the likes of Kroger, the largest grocer in the country, has posted record profits in recent years, as have many entities that make up the core components of the CPI), and they can leverage market position to make entering the market untenable for an upstart.

And the problem with handouts is that they come from the govt, where the treasury prints money, thereby reducing the value of the existing money supply and increasing costs on goods as suppliers and retailers raise prices because of the increased money supply, aka modern inflation.

And the problem with handouts is that they come from the govt, where the treasury prints money, thereby reducing the value of the existing money supply and increasing costs on goods as suppliers and retailers raise prices because of the increased money supply, aka modern inflation.

Yep that's why we need a wealth tax sothat the government doesn't go into more debt.

[–] yarr@feddit.nl 12 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Don't forget the shrinkflation. Many, many, many products are now smaller or lesser in quantity than they used to be.

[–] moonbunny@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 3 weeks ago

Don’t worry, they have BRAND NEW PACKAGING to try and distract you while a few (or dozen) grams get shaved off the total weight posted

[–] Omgboom@lemmy.zip 10 points 3 weeks ago

Sam's club has sold me rotten meat twice so far this year

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Y'all remember how big rice crispy treats used to be?

[–] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago

And they aren't gooey anymore

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 10 points 3 weeks ago

Akchually according to this chart you're better off now, so stop complaining, you're fine. /s

[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago

And they asked for a tip at the self-checkout station!

[–] aceshigh@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

I’m glad that I picked up cooking during Covid. I don’t really eat out anymore or buy junk food. So I just have to deal with higher grocery prices… to supplement the rich.

[–] Ileftreddit@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

God forbid you want to eat beef

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Soon all we will be able to afford is long pork.

[–] FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

I think the orcas have been telling us who to butcher for that first

load more comments
view more: next ›