I snapped both attached images Tuesday night while at the local (Minnesota) Target. I knew packaging was getting smaller, but this was the first time I saw side-by-side the differences (excepting what recently happened to 12 oz. pop cans). One can only imagine the future where a Extra Large candy bar weighs in at 1 oz. and your $2.99 package of Oreos has 4 cookies.
Expect less. Pay more. The fruits of quantitative easing.
ReplyDeletewasn't there some chocolate bar that had been around since the 20s for about 10 cents that when it finally disappeared in the 70s (still 10 cents) was about the size of a stamp? might see those times again just in a condensed time frame.
ReplyDeleteThis has been going on for a long time. For instance, ice cream containers have been getting smaller.
ReplyDeleteAmericans might have to eat less? Heaven forbid that their health may improve!
ReplyDeleteYes, I'm sure the poor really appreciate the benefits of eating less.
DeleteOf course I expect somebody to respond that there is a terrible obesity problem with America's poor. In which case I have to wonder how poor somebody is if one of their other problems is being fat. And all of this is a bit silly, since are we really trying to make everybody healthier by making food more expensive?
To sum up: irrelevant (and not very funny).
Yay, better send Krugman that argument.
DeleteWatch out! It seems like "new and improved" packaging is often a way to disguise that a package has gotten smaller.
ReplyDeleteAnother example: I pulled out a ~ year old box of Ritz Crackers the other day and set it next to a box I bought yesterday. The new box was about two inches shorter.
DeleteNot to worry. This probably won't affect anyone. Besides, things are about to get better, so I hear.
ReplyDeleteHershey has a new chocolate bar that's filled with air bubbles. No kidding.
ReplyDeleteNEW PACKAGING, SAME GREAT PRODUCT!
ReplyDeleteJust much, much less of both with just a 20% price increase for the trouble.
I appreciate seeing evidence of the apparent inflation we are all experiencing. But has anyone taken notice that these photos do not show like things? Seeing differing package weights on dissimilar products is not a surprise. Or am I missing something? Now the anonymous reply about the varying box sizes of Ritz Crackers bought months apart could prove the point of the post, especially if anonymous paid the same or more for the newer smaller box.
ReplyDeleteIt's hard to say if the Ritz Crackers were less expensive, or not. They go on sale all the time, and we shop the sales, usually.
DeleteKnowing how things work, I think it'd be a safe bet to say the new box was the same price as the old box, at regular price,... if not more.
In another example, while not food, I did buy them at a grocery store today:
'New' Right Guard was, 'three for a buck'. I didn't pay enough attention as I grabbed three. When I got home I noticed one was about and inch or so shorter than the other two.
Two were the standard 2.6 oz.
The other one was 1.8 oz.
I remember reading about this kind of slight of hand that happened during Argentina's fairly recent devaluation. ...Now I'm seeing it live, and first hand.