this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2024
177 points (93.2% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2530 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Digital_Prophet@kbin.social 35 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

"Biden initiates performative finger waggling with no real consequences or expectations for anyone involved, on twitter."

[–] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 13 points 9 months ago

If we’re gonna have a feckless ineffective government it’s better that it makes nice sounds.

[–] candyman337@sh.itjust.works 25 points 9 months ago (1 children)
[–] Deceptichum@kbin.social 9 points 9 months ago (1 children)

He’s got his priorities.

They’re just not ours.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

how many rows of oreos do you think he slams in a sitting? I'm going to go with... all of them.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 9 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

It’s so disappointing to pick up a bag of Oreos these days and feel all the empty space. It was bad enough when I had to get the more expensive “family size” to get the same amount, but now I’m reminded of it every time I pick it up. My worst vice and I’ve resorted to leaving it in the shelf because feeling ripped off overrides my addiction

Thanks Nabisco? For helping me live longer?

[–] nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 9 months ago (2 children)

If your schedule and living arrangements permit, learning to bake is awesome (though maybe not healthier…)

You can adjust recipes and add new things just for you (compromises may be needed if loved ones are sharing, but you can still veto now and then).

We still buy chips at the store, but making bread and cookies is so much better.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Actually I have been. I started cooking a lot more things from scratch at covid and generally kept up with it, including most treats. I’ve been making so many different styles from so many different cultures over the last few years to satisfy my desire for new experiences and to give my kids a much more experienced palate than most of their peers.

Bread is tough: I intentionally gave it up because I found that making it was so much better that I was eating too much of it. My intended use of bread is for sandwiches, which manufactured bread is generally very good at whereas the bread I made was just effing delicious

But then you get something like Oreos that are just so addictive …

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

(compromises may be needed if loved ones are sharing, but you can still veto now and then)

So, I bake. one of the regular bakes is sourdough. (I do sourdough-something every week. keeping a starter is like that. But... popovers, waffles/pancakes, pizza crust also feature here.) Lemme tell you... there is no need to compromise. There is, however a need to keep your hands well clear of the loaf because the family will take a few fingers while they inhale it. the loaf of sour dough, soft butter. it's gone in seconds.

And don't even get me started about the brownies. I have no idea how my ex never got fat- she'd scarf a double batch on her own. My current GF is a bit more moderate until its snickerdoodles or peanutbutter cookies.

[–] moitoi@feddit.de 17 points 9 months ago

Stop calling to. Regulate them!

[–] cyd@lemmy.world 17 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Unless he's willing to do something about it, I don't think making this kind of statement is politically helpful. The snack makers will just ignore him, and then he ends up looking impotent and irrelevant, feeding the Republican narrative against his presidency.

Same thing with his administration publicly wringing its hands about the death toll in Gaza. Meanwhile the US continues funding Netanyahu's war machine, which publicly thumbs its nose at the president. It projects weakness.

[–] return2ozma@lemmy.world 9 points 9 months ago (1 children)

But he told them very sternly to stop doing it. Shrinkflation is over! /s

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It'll be on the next list of Biden's accomplishments.

Probably twice to pad the list.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago (2 children)

One wonders how he's going to force private enterprise to not reconsider their packaging size, etc.

there's literally nothing stopping them from selling a new "Fun-Lite" size. or soemthing.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Executive branch regulation can and should enforce honesty and transparency about changes, including shrinking package size. Then it’s up to consumers to vote with their wallets

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You mean… like printing content measurements on the package?

Not saying shrinkflation isn’t wrong, but interfering in private enterprise to that extent is both illegal and excessive.

You wouldn’t want to live in a country where the chief executive has that kind of power.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Shrinkflation may be a valid business choice: misleading the customer should not be. Yes the label was required, which is a great starting point, but if the box appears the same size, who looks at the label? If the old size is not present, what do you compare with? Are you holding the customer responsible for memorizing the net weight for every product over the time range they may use it?

You want to reduce the size, that’s your choice, but honesty means the customer will notice

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

If the old size is not present, what do you compare with?

the relevant regulations that mandate package weight in the US has been a thing longer than I've been alive. So you compare it to the weight of the old package.

There's also some justification for using the same size packaging- they'd have to retool some of the filling machines, for example. or at least, adjust them, which adds increased associated production costs. But again, you're talking about a government executive pushing extremely intrusive interference into a company's operations.

Is shrinkflation pretty scummy? absolutely. but there's really no workable way to stop it, that doesn't have a lot of much worse consequences.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

Oh, it'll be on the list regardless. Centrists can't tell the difference between a stated position and an accomplishment.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I don't think he has the power to do anything about it.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

And he shouldn’t be able to do much to directly interfere with the market.

However one thing he can do is regulate transparency. A big reason shrinkflation is so widespread is that you can hide the change pretty well, but consumer protection regulations already require clear pricing, including per unit, and at least some semblance of truth in advertising, so additional regulations to improve honesty and transparency are quite appropriate. Government needs to establish a fair market, then it’s up to the market

That may not prevent shrinkflation but at least we can keep products companies from lying about it. Then it’s up to us

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

However one thing he can do is regulate transparency.

What do you mean by transparency? Is it the sort of transparency companies can reveal without revealing things like trade secrets?

Also, with so many Trump-backed judges, I could see that getting struck down in a hot minute, especially if businesses take it to the Fifth Circuit, which they absolutely would.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

The classic case of shrinkflation is ever shrinking cans of tuna. However, to the glance, they looked exactly the same. They stacked the same way and difference in height was imperceptible.

While there was a required label for the net weight of contents, why would anyone look when the cans appear to be the same as they always were and how would you notice when there is no prior can to compare to.

This is lying. The companies are clearly misleading consumers to hide price increases even if the information is technically there for someone who looks closely enough.

Consumer transparency means that when you make a change, the difference is clearly visible. Consumer protection should be that companies cannot lie, hide or mislead about this change as they are doing now. A fundamental part of capitalism is that consumers have the information to participate in the market, which requires transparency of products. Capitalism is not just corps exploiting consumers, but an ecosystem of production and consumption where each participant can make choices in their own interest. Being able to lie, hide or mislead is a distortion or abuse of the market and governments role needs to be to stop that so markets can work effectively

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

So how do you get that through the Fifth Circuit?

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

We can have all the ideals in the world but dysfunctional is dysfunctional

[–] paraphrand@lemmy.world 16 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

That’s quite the photo…

Also, it’s weird that the president is still on Twitter.

[–] lagomorphlecture@lemm.ee 14 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Is this an ad? Because I sure do want an $8 thimble of ice cream right now.

Edit: is that Breyers in the picture? I should amend that to $8 dairy adjacent snack.

[–] Chickenstalker@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago (3 children)

I remember people online vehemently defending potato chips companies filling up their packaging with air. Where are they now?

[–] Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world 24 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Where are they now?

...here! Kinda at least - hear me out.

There's a ratio of air-to-chip that gives the optimal amount of chips to most protection provided by the 'pillow' of air. Exceed that and you've got a bag of chip sawdust or need to switch to hard packaging like Pringles tubes (which... Pringles don't really cost more, so maybe tubes are the way to go anyway).

IIRC that ratio is something like 30% chip to 70% air by volume. Which feels like you're getting ripped off, but is defensible for quality sake.

The 'kinda' kicks in when chip manufacturers know they've trained us to expect a low chip-to-air ratio, and crank it up to like 10-90, and keep the cost the same. That's just fucking the consumer, and the manufacturers can go to hell for that shit.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Thing is, I often find brands that have 50-70% crisp, and yet it's not broken up into little pieces.

[–] Evkob@lemmy.ca 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I sincerely don't understand how any of this is an issue for anyone.

They print the weight of the chips on the bags! You don't need to blindly guess based on bag size and apparent chip-to-air ratios!

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago (2 children)

the issue is they know our brains are stupid and emotional. 'oh BIG BAG!" excitement literally short circuits our brain into thinking it's a better deal; even if people do read the label and see the weight, its hard to not fall for.

These companies have spent millions on learning all the neuroscience to do just that.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I’ve always gotten my favorite breakfast cereal since I was a kid. The rest of my family doesn’t eat it so it’s always been just me.

Most of my life, I just got the regular size. Then I had to get the family size to get the same amount for just me. Then the “new larger family size” to get the same amount. Then the “large” size. Now I buy the “mega” size box to get the same amount , for just me. I suppose it sounds exciting but I just want to have my bowl of cereal in the morning and have the box last the week

[–] Evkob@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I agree that numbers can be tough for our easily-deceived little monkey brains, but you could also just pick up two bags of chips at once and feel which is heavier. I bet even literal monkeys could figure it out.

The fact that multi-national corporations are trying this hard to trick us is all the more reason to take the time to figure out what is and isn't a good deal.

[–] Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Guessing there are a lot factors that play into the actual optimal chip to air ratio. Like tortilla chips are more durable than potato chips, so they could probably slide the ratio a bit to the chip side.

The bag pressure is likely also a factor, but more pressure would warrant a more durable bag.

[–] Xanis@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Old Food Theorists video on the chip to air ratio in bags:

https://youtu.be/ycNSY3d1WLc?si=jzzu_qx-xIB3yOEM

[–] Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

I was a fan of Game Theory back in the day, but god DAMN has that channel (and its branches) gotten click-baity / gimmicky.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago

for the record, the air does serve a purpose in the packaging, keeping chips from getting crushed.

that said... there seems to be a lot more air in there than there used to be.

[–] andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I've heard it's not air but some non-acidic inert gas for longer periods of preservation. These chips and snacks go bad in a day after contacting the air. It doesn't explain it's volume and a choice of soft package tho.

[–] BruceTwarzen@kbin.social 8 points 9 months ago (2 children)
[–] dodgy_bagel@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I would say that companies artificially raising prices because their competitors are doing it too is actually a big problem which accounts for a ton of needless economic hardship.

Presidents have previously implemented anti trust policies; it's not like this is anything new.

And goddamn it my oreo had regular sized cookies with a tiny little nickle sized speck of filling in the middle. It looked ridiculous.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Nixon froze prices or something. As far as repubs go, he was the most reasonable that I've heard about (also stuff about the environment or national parks? I'm not an expert). And he was a monster, so think about what that means about everyone that followed him.

[–] Smeagol666@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago

Every president since and including Nixon has been a fucking war criminal. And the Hague can't do shit, because if they tried we can attack them! I was surprised when I found out.

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Rising food cost is absolutely real issue I don't know why you even pretend otherwise.

[–] crusa187@lemmy.ml 7 points 9 months ago

Snacks?! How about housing costs, costs for higher education, or medical care?! Maybe do something about internet provider monopolies coupled with data caps in large swaths of the country??

But no, you want to make sure Americans can stuff their faces with 10% more dorito dust per bag. Jesus man.

[–] LightDelaBlue@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago

Real priority i see .

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 3 points 9 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


“There is no denying that shrinkflation is real and that it is having a measurable impact on family budgets,” concluded a December report published by Democratic Sen. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania.

The report found common household and grocery items noticeably decreased in size between January 2019 and October 2023, while unit prices rose more than 20%.

For example, a pack of Double-Stuffed Oreos now weigh 6% less, Gatorade bottles hold 12% less liquid, and a Walmart’s Great Value Ultra Strong paper towel roll has 28% fewer sheets, according to the report.

Biden also didn’t address the companies by name, although the video panned over snacks like Doritos, Wheat Thins and Gatorade, which were mentioned in Casey’s report.

A CNN poll conducted by SSRS last month found just 26% of Americans say they feel the economy is starting to recover from the problems it faced in the past few years, up 9 points from December 2022.

Most Americans who said the economy is still in a downturn cited inflation and the cost of living generally (50%) or the price of specific items like food (9%) or housing (7%), with many pointing to their own financial situations.


The original article contains 502 words, the summary contains 195 words. Saved 61%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

load more comments
view more: next ›