• elephantium@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    163
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    That chart is evil. First two ticks represent 5 years. Ticks 2-3 represent 2 years. The last two ticks represent 2 1/2-3 years!

    Also, what’s so magical about 2014 that it deserves to be the baseline? I’d love to see this extended back to, oh, 2006 or so. Sometime before the Great Recession.

    Finally, what about shrinkflation? I used to order from Panera on a regular basis, but during the pandemic, it seemed like their sandwiches shrank a little bit more between every order. At this point, I don’t think it’s even worth ordering from them.

    • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      The time line doesn’t matter since it is only comparing different brands to inflation, not against time. You could stretch the graph but the comparison will stay the same.

      2014 is just chosen as a starting point. Most probably because the info was readily available. You can make the same graph starting from any point in time and the conclusion of the graph wouldn’t change.

      • elephantium@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Hard disagree on both points. If the time line doesn’t matter, why include it? It would be simpler to just plot the endpoints.

        As for the conclusion, what if McDonalds kept prices the same from 2004-2014, but Popeyes doubled prices over the same time period? The final plots for 2024 would be in a different order. It would be a different conclusion. Unless nobody changed prices at all before 2014, you’ll have a different final result.

        • Habahnow@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          The timeline gives a general reference point. You’re right they could mostly just include 2014 and the final year as well. No big deal in my opinion since they don’t try to emphasize the price points at each year (as only a vague idea is given based on the line).

          In terms of your second point, what if from '99 to 2003, Mcdonald’s had doubled their prices? the graph would be the same? We can keep going back until each business’s complete history, but I feel this graph tells enough of a story: Both brands increased their product costs a certain amount from the dates indicated.

    • xfc@lemdro.id
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      I guess just because it’s 10 years difference?

      • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        There is no excuse for this kind of ungodly travesty of a lie made with data.

        They are awarded no points and may God have mercy on their soul.

    • Railing5132@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      And who is what at that mid-level grouping on the left vertical? I could guess at the colors, but I’ve come up with 9 different possibilities. It’d be nice to be able to tell which is leveling off and which is accelerating.

    • Nougat@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 month ago

      Not to mention that a huge number of these businesses are locally owned franchises, where the parent corporation has less control over menu prices.

        • Bizarroland@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 month ago

          And most franchises are required to purchase their raw ingredients from the parent corporation, which means that even if they choose to be flexible on their prices their baseline costs are still set by a global conglomerate.

    • MrVilliam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      133
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      I was talking with a coworker the other day and they were talking about how raising minimum wage causes inflation because businesses will raise prices to offset to rise in labor costs. I asked if he thought inflation had gotten bad in the past 5ish years in particular. He said of course. I said well federal minimum wage hasn’t risen since 2009, which was 15 years ago, so it sounds like inflation is gonna happen regardless of wages and is based on the capitalistic goal of infinite growth, so maybe we should raise minimum wage so lower income people have a shot at affording basic necessities.

      He just said no, then inflation just would’ve been worse. It’s maddening.

      • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        47
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        The response to this is that inflation is a market force working against the downward pressure of demand. There is a limit to the amount prices can go up before people stop buying altogether.

        Another inflationary force is greed, funneling additional profits into the pockets of the 0.1%.

        Let the inflation due to minimum wage be X, and the inflation due to greed be Y, and the maximum total inflation be Z. X+Y=Z

        Of course there are other variables, but in a general sense, if X goes up, Y must go down. If X does not go up, Y does.

        So yes there will be inflation, but increasing wages takes more money from the ownership and puts it into the pockets of the bottom 99.9% where it will do far more good.

        And in case it wasn’t clear, this is precisely why the oligarchy opposes increasing the minimum wage. It has nothing to do with inflation, and everything to do with they make less money.

        • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Except that they have studies that prove that they make more money when they increase wages. Tons of em since the '70s have shown that putting more money in the hands of the poor just means that the rich get to skim off even more money. They oppose thriving wages because they want suffering.

          • Asafum@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            17
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            It really is absurd… It’s like basic fucking logic… You have more money, so you have more money to SPEND. Who benefits from more spending? Those that own the things we’re buying!

            But no… I need more more more more and fuck you for wanting a normal life. Daddy needs another private island. Git Gud suckers, just be a CEO!

          • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 month ago

            You’re confusing a rising tide with a water hose. We absolutely know that increasing wages is good for the economy, but that helps everyone. Oligarchs benefit financially from poverty, even if the economy suffers. As you said, they want suffering, because it allows them to exploit people. Capitalism is the idea that one with means can leverage their position to capture disproportionate value from effort of others. Don’t confuse capitalism with the economy. Capitalists always make money, and they don’t necessarily make more money when the economy is thriving.

        • Adderbox76@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          There is a limit to the amount prices can go up before people stop buying altogether.

          Not when those items are necessities, like food. Damn us poor people and our need to…checks notes…eat.

          • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            1 month ago

            McDonald’s is not a necessity. The price went up for one reason only: people will pay it. Is it that hard to make a hamburger or go to a basic deli? You can get a better sandwich and drink at the supermarket.

              • Asafum@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 month ago

                A desert full of food and it’s growing? Doesn’t sound like a problem to me!

                (I understand what it really is) :P

            • Adderbox76@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              1 month ago

              I’m not talking specifically about McDonalds.

              Up here in Canada, One of our largest retail grocery chains has been under fire recently for those same practices. That’s more what I’m referring to.

              • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 month ago

                They will charge what people are willing to pay, and not a dollar more. That number changes based on a wide variety of factors, but you’re right that there is a baseline necessity to eat. The thing is, food and shelter are the last lines, and we’re already seeing the strain on those.

                People aren’t going to the movies, they’re not buying cars, they’re not going on vacations, and small businesses everywhere are suffering. So now, finally, the grocers and restaurants are coming under fire because they have hit the upper limit of what people will accept.

                Watch as they all “find ways” to cut costs and improve their value proposition. They will try to convince you that they are in this with us, but there will be a trade off. Buy in bulk, offering the same prices that you used to get buying normal quantities. Join our discount club, with recurring fees and personalized advertising using your spending habits. Get the store brand, which is expected to be of lower quality so you can’t complain when your breakfast cereal is mostly pulped cellulose.

                • Adderbox76@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  I am the laziest man on earth and even I gave serious thought to planting a garden this year…that’s where we’re at.

      • applepie@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Pathetic bootlicker won’t accept the facts when they hurt his master…

        Are we supposed treat these people as adults?

      • ironhydroxide@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Honestly, I think there’s 2 ways to think through this. Way 1: Magically the minimum wage is increased, and everything about the legislators stays the same.

        This would increase inflation, as what’s causing inflation is the lack of legislation and enforcement. Thus allowing companies to raise prices and profits unchecked.

        Way 2: The legislators change in such a way that it’s logical and possible to raise the minimum wage. Also logically other legislation would be passed to reduce the unchecked greed.

        This would not increase inflation on it’s own, and likely would keep it to a healthy minimum.

        I think most who complain about the minimum wage talks can only imagine the first way.

        • MrVilliam@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          I’m not entirely sure why minimum wage hasn’t been anchored to inflation, but I’m sure there must be a good reason because I’m not exactly an economist and there’s no way that smarter people than me haven’t thought of that.

        • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 month ago

          Not for citizens in 20 states, and 2 territories. The cities may have something, but since those places are all regressive overall, I doubt it.

        • MrVilliam@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          That’s true, but the baseline should be able to afford food and housing somewhere. Currently it affords that precisely nowhere. As a result, multigenerational homes are becoming more prevalent, children are working to help support households more, and single income families are nigh extinct. My wife and I are DINKs in a 2 bedroom apartment because the cost of houses is absolutely insane here. It’s hard find even a fucking townhouse for less than $500k lol. Most single family homes are at least $700k. At this rate, we’ll see polyamory and polygamy become more accepted because it’s gonna get to a point where only working throuples can afford shit anymore.

          • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            This is something that I actually interesting culturally. Here in the US multi generational family homes are essentially considered a bad thing, but down in Costa Rica where my family is Multi generational homes are maybe not a goal per se, but something expected as your parents age, or as your kids grow up. You’ll grow up, move out for school, to get a job, and as you get older you’ll try to stick next to your family, and eventually your parents move back in so you can take care of them.

            Obviously doing this out of necessity is bad, but a fun culture difference to observe.

    • Archelon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Actually, this graph does display the % average wage increase!

      It’s the line where the x axis is.

    • BezzelBob@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      This companies are able to generate billions in profit every quarter, let alone every year. They have also been reporting record breaking profits quarter after quarter for the past several years. I’m pretty sure the 17 y/o Burger flippers aren’t the problem here.

      https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/MCD/mcdonalds/gross-profit

      • McDonald’s gross profit for the quarter ending March 31, 2024 was $3.439B, a 3.77% increase year-over-year.
      • McDonald’s gross profit for the twelve months ending March 31, 2024 was $14.688B, a 9.03% increase year-over-year.
      • McDonald’s annual gross profit for 2023 was $14.563B, a 10.26% increase from 2022.
      • McDonald’s annual gross profit for 2022 was $13.207B, a 4.98% increase from 2021.
      • McDonald’s annual gross profit for 2021 was $12.58B, a 29% increase from 2020.

      [1]Average franchise profitability at Burger King rose nearly +50% last year (2023) compared to 2022

      https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/SBUX/starbucks/gross-profit

      • Starbucks gross profit for the quarter ending March 31, 2024 was $5.914B, a 0.06% decline year-over-year.
      • Starbucks gross profit for the twelve months ending March 31, 2024 was $25.104B, a 8.86% increase year-over-year.
      • Starbucks annual gross profit for 2023 was $24.567B, a 12.01% increase from 2022.
      • Starbucks annual gross profit for 2022 was $21.933B, a 7.93% increase from 2021.
      • Starbucks annual gross profit for 2021 was $20.322B, a 28.43% increase from 2020.
      • OpenStars@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        I wonder how da fuq did McDonalds think that this is okay?

        Setting aside all considerations of ethics or morality, from a pure greed standpoint even a very naive person could realize that if you squeeze the sheeple too much they may choose to go elsewhere rather than continue to rely on you for easy comfort food.

        Do they think they have a monopoly on the market? Even just from the fast-food burger places that were included in this graphic, there are multiple cheaper options - Burger King and Wendy’s - plus Arby’s & Taco Bell and Chick-fil-a are somewhat similar.

        Do they think that people will suddenly not care about where their money is going? That strategy tends to work when you squeeze (bleed) them slowly, but this kind of a sudden spike carries the risk of waking them up to how much eating there is costing them - and once they are gone, it would be very hard to attract them back.

        So this strategy even looks to be detrimental to the company of McDonalds, even if good for the short-term stockholders & CEO before they jump elsewhere.

        • BezzelBob@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          If I had to guess it would be for 2 reasons, humans don’t like change so people that frequently go to McD will still go, and that all humans need food and a bonus of less people know how to cook

          It’s a scary thing to think these companies can just get away with shit like this but at the end of the day until we as a society boycott them - and I mean a legit boycott, not some 3 day reddit boycott - they’ll find any excuse to fuck us for profit

          • OpenStars@discuss.online
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            People are resistant to change - like inertia - but if pushed enough, they will. Burger King & Wendy’s only went up 55% whereas McD went up twice that at +100%. McD could have kept their prices flat and gained business from them, remaining within their brand as the “cheap fast-food” option, but instead they seem poised to lose it? Well, I guess we will see.

            Yeah, it is scary to see just how evil they - b/c with profits like you showed, they did not have to increase them all, so the fact that they not only did but did by that much is somewhat shocking.

          • Asafum@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            We’re also in a society now where 2 people or 2+jobs are REQUIRED for a “normal life” unless you’re a tech or finance bro. People just don’t have the energy or time to cook, fast food is often “on the way home” and saves well over an hour and effort.

            I’m “lucky” that I’m single, in that I can cook a weeks worth of food in one day and there’s no one to complain about “this again?” In literally every other respect being single in this society for over a decade sucks.

          • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            so people that frequently go to McD will still go

            Right there.

            Double your prices, lose 49% of your customers - you’re winning. And restaurants are less busy? Fewer staff needed? Winnning ($$$$)

    • sparkle@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      Cymraeg
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      random images found online (couldn’t find one for individual/personal income & wage, only household). i could plug it into matplotlib but i’m lazy

  • BeautifulMind ♾️@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    It’s been maddening to watch people call price-gouging “inflation”, honestly.

    That’s not fucking inflation when someone in the supply chain made things more expensive and pocketed the difference as a wider profit margin; it’s the symptom of non-enforcement of antitrust laws.

    I mean, most foodstuffs markets (in the supply chain between farm and grocer or farm -> restaurant) are controlled by very few people or corporations; when the farmers get less for their products but the grocer must pay more for them, that’s not inflation. It’s price-gouging, the symptom of the kinds of market failures that follow regulatory failures to prevent corporate mergers that would reduce competition in those markets.

    When you look at food, fuel, housing, the enshittification of basically everything, the acquisition of yesterday’s hot-fresh-streaming services and re-packaging them to be just as predatory as the cable was when you cut the cord and went to streaming- it’s all what we get when private equity owns a piece of everything and they’re running it all to squeeze more out of everyone they can, and they also ensure regulators don’t do a damned thing about it.

    There was once a time when regulators had the will to block corporate mergers, and they had the will to tax windfall profits at 100%.

      • BeautifulMind ♾️@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        If inflation isn’t based on most prices increasing… What is it based on?

        It’s the devaluation of currency that happens when too much of it chases too few goods in the marketplace. It’s purely a monetary thing, you get that when the supply of money grows more quickly than the value of real goods in the economy does.

        Ideally, we print money (and take it out of circulation) at a pace that keeps the money supply more or less balanced to the value of available goods and services in the economy. If we were to print too much money, or not take enough out of circulation (note: paying taxes does this; when you pay taxes the money doesn’t go into some account somewhere, it’s used to zero out the bonds issued to create it), the amount of money in circulation would become greater than the amount of real valuable goods in the economy. When that happens, the resulting bidding contest to secure those goods (after all, money doesn’t have intrinsic value, it’s only good for buying things that do) drives up the price of those goods in monetary terms.

    • HAL_9_TRILLION@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      What’s bullshit are the cherry-picked numbers on the chart and the jumpy x-axis.

      Edit: Article here quotes McDonalds as stating the Big Mac is up 21% since 2019. Sources elsewhere say the sandwich price is actually down since both 2014 and 2019, so who knows. If anything, I would expect Subway to have a higher point on the graph than it does.

  • arglebargle@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 month ago

    The real dystopia is that people are talking about fast food at all. It’s garbage food. Realisticly it’s always been the worst and often most expensive choice.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      It’s garbage food.

      It’s quick, convenient, and explicitly designed to rub all the right parts of your palette. Besides, the worst part of the fast food menu is the soda and fries. The rest of the meal is marginal.

      Realisticly it’s always been the worst and often most expensive choice.

      Its consistently worse than home cooking. But not everyone has the luxury of a functional kitchen or a stocked fridge or the time to prepare the meal. And as to “most expensive”… hardly. I remember getting Chipotle on campus, when a burrito was $8 and came in at around 1000 calories. Very hard to name another restaurant that offered that kind of value, speed, and convenience.

      A lot of what fast food restaurants are banking on today is this over-reliance on their convenience making them an inelastic good. No more home economics classes, teaching young people how to cook. Lots of gig work means people are always on the road. Lots of people living alone. Lots of shitty apartments where major appliances simply don’t work.

      You’re stuck, dude. Now give me $15 for a sandwich.

      • BeautifulMind ♾️@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Its consistently worse than home cooking. But not everyone has the luxury of a functional kitchen or a stocked fridge or the time to prepare the meal.

        You’re not wrong here. It’s not good food, but it’s easy and touches the makes-me-crave-it neurons, it’s often available in food deserts (where it’s legitimately difficult to really stock a kitchen) and sometimes it’s only cheap in the context of whether or not you have that home infra and time to use it or not.

        I just use my privilege (I have a pretty functional kitchen and the ability to stock it mightily) to not fund a business model that looks to me like it’s hostile to labor (yeah you, McDonalds and most of the rest), tends to give money to politics I can’t abide (looking at you, chick-fil-a), and I really prefer to patronize businesses whose employees don’t have the energy of beaten animals. I get that it’s my privilege to do that, but being someone with that to work with, using it appropriately seems the right thing to do.

    • thorbot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      34
      ·
      1 month ago

      That’s what I don’t get. Do people actually eat this garbage still? It’s literally toxic trash that costs twice as much as a home cooked meal and tastes like shit. Why???

        • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          You can get a hot rotisserie chicken and a freshly made garden salad at most grocery stores and it’ll be cheaper than a McDonald’s combo meal. Way healthier too!

          • gmtom@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Yeah sure just let me eat an entire rotisserie chicken with my bare hands on the way to my meeting.

        • pantyhosewimp@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          17
          ·
          1 month ago

          I know what you’re saying but you gotta plan your stops more. 9 out of 10 exits have fast food. But 1 out of 10 exits have grocery stores. Grocery stores have prepared food that is healthier.

      • SmokyOrange@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Step outside your own circumstances and attempt to actually think of reasons why people would want/need to choose fast food. Don’t delude yourself with all the easy reasons to avoid fast food. Those reasons are immaterial in the lives of many.

  • ArxCyberwolf@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Taco Bell is fucking ridiculous now. A single grilled cheese burrito on its own is over $10. The other burritos are 3 to 4 bucks as well. The entire point of Taco Bell is that it’s supposed to be cheap garbage food you order at 1AM on a weekend after smoking a bowl, and that’s no longer feasible. Now it’s expensive garbage food. Nevermind that they also got rid of half the menu.

    • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’m lucky that I live in a town with about 2 billion taco trucks that are all insanely better and cheaper than Taco Bell. Plus, Taco Bell tastes like a Midwestern white lady’s version of Mexican food, which made it easy to avoid even when it wasn’t so expensive.

      • TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        I can’t imagine living in a town without real Mexican food. We have taco trucks and authentic fast food style Mexican spots where I’m at too.

        Nothing that Taco Bell has ever made comes close to the quality of a random shady looking taco truck.

        • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          We have a fantastic one nearby in a rundown parking lot that makes their own “crunch wrap supreme” with your choice of meat for $10. These things are probably 5x the volume and density of the Taco Bell version and you don’t have to get Taco Bells shitty Ortega taco seasoned ground beef.

    • Notyou@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      The only good deal for Taco Bell is taco Tuesday deal. 5 dollars for 3 tacos and a drink. They got a build your own box that’s a good deal too, but everything else is so expensive.

      Shit Wendy’s used to have good mobile deals and now they are mostly trash. That new CEO that wanted surge pricing on burgers is fucking up everything with Wendy’s for me.

      I’m at a place where the local Mexican restaurant has better dinner deals Mon-Thurs than any fast food around me. Depending on the day it’s like $7-$10. I just gotta watch my drinking there.

    • LordCrom@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Went there recently, plain bean burrito used to cost me 1.29…now it’s 2.85 AND they now charge extra .20 if you want extra onions.

      Crazy prices now.

      I miss Taco Viva

    • Boop2133@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      I just get the build your own meal for like $5 and get a crunch wrap supreme 4 layer burrito or whatever and nachos and a drink. Idk why someone would bother paying that much for fast food

  • RagingRobot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    1 month ago

    The quality at all of those places has gone down over that time too. I didn’t even think that was possible

  • Got_Bent@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 month ago

    When I was in college, I could fill up on three bean burritos at Taco Bell for $1.81 out the door. Del Taco was cheaper at $1.50.

    That was thirty years ago, but still. I don’t know how to explain it, but it felt a whole lot easier to dig up that kind of pocket change back then than it does to dig up whatever it costs today.

  • slurpinderpin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 month ago

    I’m pretty sure the McDonald’s one is false, which makes me think all of the others are too. This is a bad faith argument. I’m assuming this is going around TikTok and that’s why so many braindead people keep repeating it

      • ironhydroxide@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 month ago

        Not saying it’s right, but the spacing makes the drastic changes in 19-21 less obvious by spreading them across a wider area. Same with 21-24, just less so.

        A consistently spaced graph would probably be more drastic looking.

        • witten@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Regardless of intent/effect, it’s sloppy and does not instill confidence in the data…

    • heyitsmikey128@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’m definitely weary of posts like this with no data backup. Also what is “actual inflation”? Wouldn’t that be like average inflation across all goods? Doesn’t inflation affect certain markets differently?

    • GluWu@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      False as in too low? In 2014 both the mcdouble and mcchicken were $1 each. I ate way too many, but I could get 2 sandwiches and a large drink for $3 plus tax. Today the mcdouble is $2.79, the mcchicken is $2.49, and a large drink is $1.69.

    • ares35@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      10 years, double the prices? ain’t that far off.

      at our mcd, at least that much for many, if not most, things on their menu. everything i (used to) buy there, anyway. and way more than that for the former ‘dollar menu’ items. beverages the least affected, although it’s now probably double, too (the large cup shrunk on top of the ~ 90% increase since then).

      • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Shrinking cups is actually a good thing. Nobody needs that much sugar, and the cost of the syrup is pennies compared to the cost of the cup itself. They are also mostly plastic now. Normalizing smaller beverages is good for humans.

  • henfredemars@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Could under reporting of real inflation that consumers feel be a factor here?

    I’m sure these companies are exploiting consumers, but I’ve also been suspicious of the reported inflation numbers. It feels a lot higher than that and actually it could be more in line with the companies in the graph.

    Maybe it’s not the fast food prices that are high but the inflation number that is too low.

    • BezzelBob@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      That’s a valid concern and I was wondering the same thing, but as of now, unless something leaks saying that they where lying, this is all we have to go on

      • henfredemars@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        My point exactly. I understand that some people feel the numbers are calculated very consistently, and I guess that’s fine, but does it really reflect what consumers are feeling? I don’t think so. Plus, inflation has been a hot button political issue. A healthy skepticism feels appropriate.

    • stinerman [Ohio]@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      MIT used to have the Billion Prices Project which tried to determine inflation numbers independently of the government, but it no longer exists. My recollection is that it was generally close to the official numbers.

      If you think the reported numbers are wrong, you have to give a reason why, backed with evidence. As much as it sucks when rent and food, etc. are more expensive, but those are only part of the number. Inflation encompasses everything and some goods/services are higher than the average number and some are lower. For instance, car insurance has gone up a ton, but apparently fuel oil has gone down (https://econofact.org/inflation-and-prices).

      I think what people are (rightly) concerned about is that the necessities of life are higher than the official numbers (because those are an average of lots of things). This makes them think the real numbers are “wrong” based their specific situation rather than the country at large.

  • SquishyPandaDev@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Oh wow, it’s almost as if allowing the 0.001 to try and accumulate infinite wealth is a bad idea. Who could’ve guessed?

    • OpenStars@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      I mean, I could name a few people… Bernie Sanders, AOC, Robert Reich, the list goes on:-).

        • Asafum@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          He is and he isn’t. I’m really turned off by his blind Biden support. I like him, I believe in most of what he says, I’m firmly on the left, but when he does this blind cheerleading and using examples of what Biden did that aren’t even bidens doing it sucks to see…

          Bernie is amazing though, I “knew” him before I even knew him in that any documentary I’d watch where there was some footage of Congress debating on the context of what the documentary was, he was always on the right side of the argument. He speaks truth to power and doesn’t seem to be a blind cheerleader.

  • Blackout@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    My wife is charging me 140% more for dinner now, prices are getting insane!

      • arglebargle@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        1 month ago

        Yikes. I couldn’t imagine feeling alright with feeding a family Taco Bell.

        2 AM drunk and “i just dont give a shit anymore” is where Taco Bell food resides.

        • TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 month ago

          Believe it or not, some people make less money than others.

          If you were in a position with only 20 dollars in your pocket and had to feed a family of 4 you would be eternally grateful for cheap food. Consider yourself lucky that you have never faced hardship like that in your life.

          I think your comment is pretty ignorant and/or disrespectful.

          • arglebargle@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            12
            ·
            1 month ago

            I think your comment is pretty ignorant and/or disrespectful.

            I think your is. You made a lot of assumptions in this comment.

            I will not back down from this. I have done better with less money; Taco Bell is not a great option. The person commenting didn’t say they were in a food desert, or their only option. If I absolutely had to, I would, but I could not feel good about it.

            • TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              I will admit that assuming you have never faced hardship like that is not fair. Maybe you have, and maybe you handled it differently.

              Still, its disrespectful to make someone feel bad for feeding their family Taco Bell. Maybe they didn’t have time or the knowledge to cook food for that cheap.

              Taco Bell is as good an option as any other cheap fast food place. None of them are healthy or anything, and that’s not the point. The point is that they are cheap and quick, and sometimes that’s what people need. Nobody should feel bad about it, including yourself.

              • arglebargle@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 month ago

                Lets face the reality: Most people just don’t care. They are not going to feel bad or good, they just know that they did something they consider fast and cheap. Very few people are going to feel bad.

                I would, mostly because I have an idea what goes into their food, and I know you are getting what you pay for: there are better options.

                But I also have an idea of what the effect of a global race to the bottom from a company like Yum! Brands results in. They own 58,000 restaurants, a training company, a marketing insights company, and a delivery company. Supporting a global conglomerate to supply “cheap” non healthy addictive food should make anyone take pause. They also drive out other options, and feed into the system where we do not have time or energy to make our own food. Fast food at this scale is a pretty nasty with consequences beyond the price at the till.

            • Tom_Hanx_Hail_Satan@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              It’s the hidden cost of being poor. If time is an asset, the working poor don’t have that either. Even outside of a food desert. It requires that much more planning/mental energy to think about meal planning when both parents are working and the rest of life is happening.

              Your communication on this issue comes off as a form of victim blaming.

  • radiohead37@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 month ago

    I’m surprised the two lowest ones are Subway and Starbucks. Where’s the $5 foot long? And I guess Starbucks has always been expensive so $6 for a coffee isn’t much of an increase from what it was.

    • InquisitiveApathy@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      The $5 footlong hasn’t existed for years (honestly maybe a decade) at this point. It’s like a $10 footlong now.

        • InquisitiveApathy@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          Yup, me too. I used to be able to get lunch for a week with $20 back in high school in the mid-late 2000’s. Almost everywhere had a dollar menu where you could get a pretty decent meal for a few bucks. Over time the portions got smaller and more expensive though to the point where you can’t really do that anymore.

    • Num10ck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      i remember when starbucks first opened, dunkin donuts was selling plain black coffee for 10 cents a cup.

    • BezzelBob@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      I was surprised too, but then I found this vvv. This people are making 25 billion profit which now makes sense for the comparatively low percentage

      https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/SBUX/starbucks/gross-profit

      • Starbucks gross profit for the quarter ending March 31, 2024 was $5.914B, a 0.06% decline year-over-year.
      • Starbucks gross profit for the twelve months ending March 31, 2024 was $25.104B, a 8.86% increase year-over-year.
      • Starbucks annual gross profit for 2023 was $24.567B, a 12.01% increase from 2022.
      • Starbucks annual gross profit for 2022 was $21.933B, a 7.93% increase from 2021.
      • Starbucks annual gross profit for 2021 was $20.322B, a 28.43% increase from 2020.