It was kind of a dead giveaway when he wouldn’t even eat his own food on video
Terrible products, over priced, paid to install a moron as president who fucks up the economy. Yeah, no pity for these fucks, go under.
You, our good Lemmy dweller, took the words right out of our mouth 🙇🏻♀️
Ha, this is funny since all of those companies have lost the plot lately on pricing/value. Some (like Kraft) have also made mistakes like moving production state side and then damaged their ability to operate world wide, others (like McDonald’s) have cut every corner on quality while upping their prices and spending like drunk sailors on app and ads. And they all have made choices (like Whirlpool) to make their products last less time thinking we are made of appliance every 3 years money.
This is the one silver lining on the economic collapse, there is a chance that these badly ran companies might just face consequences. Like there is still demand for product, but with wages being what they are no one is jumping on $20 big mac meals, $3 boxes of kraft dinner or $1800 fridges (that will break just after the warranty).
In a working economy these actors would find themselves out of business, instead they have lived off our credit for years selling things we can’t afford. It was always going to come crashing down, but we are finally at the point that they are not denying it and now working to move blame.
I don’t think it’s that simple. Whether one likes it or not, the economy will always recover, particularly because crashes, like trump’s, are engineered. Crashes kill all competition, deeply consolidating the market as only the biggest can survive (or recieve bailouts)
These companies are the result of the consolidation you describe already, and unlike before they are failing before the crash. Think about Kraft for example, who are their big competitor? Who would Kraft merge with to create a bigger Kraft? Would anyone notice a difference? The chances of a bailout are also slim this time, outside of a few select small sycophants. We are not looking at the old cycle of bullshit, but the point where the ability of consumers to spend is crippled.
You are right that an economy will always “recover”. The issue here is (as shown in the article above) across all industries and based in the result of a long long process of devaluing wage rates. So I do think there will be a recovery but I don’t think that it will be bailouts and mergers this time. I think the “winners” here will be the cheaper providers and smaller companies as the world transitions into poorer times.
Accountability will not follow unless we organize for the day after the collapse.
Guess you guys shouldn’t have funded Trump’s campaign, huh?
Remember when McDonalds let a felon rapist use one of their locations for a photo op?
The one that paralleled Mussolini’s “working class man” propaganda photo? Yup!
That’s an insult to Mussolini.
Good.
“According to the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis (9), $100 in 2026 had the same purchasing power as just $11.74 did in 1970.”
Now I’m no economist, but it seems like there’s a way to fix this problem.
“We’ve tried bleeding them dry for more and more and it isn’t working we’re just completely out of ideas!”
Also gotta love how the article says these companies are “lowering prices” and then in the same sentence talks about them selling smaller package sizes for less money.
THAT IS NOT LOWERING PRICES THAT IS GIVING YOU LESS AT A TIME FOR LESS MONEY AT A TIME TO LOWER PRICES THE PRICE PER OUNCE HAS TO DECREASE
Note: CPI was changed in the 90s with the not so subtle goal of changing the metrics to level out and reduce annually reported inflation, in part to reduce COLA (https://www.ssa.gov/history/reports/boskinrpt.html). It sure made politicians look smart and all the charts to go up! This sounds somewhat reasonable until someone who knows about exponential growth enters the chat, points to the Rule of 69/70/72, and notes that the ~2% under reporting of inflation for the past ~30 years means we’ve silently lost almost half our wealth. This will get exponentially worse yet few are talking about it.
Point being, $100 in 2026 is closer to $6 in 1970.
Median family income in 1970 was $9,870. Median family income in 2026 is NOT $164,500. Not even close.
If minimum wage kept up with those figures we would have $23.50 minimum wage today.
Eh the federal (in the us) min wage in 76 was $2 so by that logic yeah. But if we look at the average wage (less income disparity then, still there but not crazy yet) in 1970 being $8,510 then doing the math (assuming a 40 hour work week) that is more like $4 an hour so the average person would need to make $47 an hour in 2026.
And the average wage earned in the us of a in 2024 is… $63,293. Doing the same math gets us $30.43 an hour. And that is with massive shifts in the gap between wages that are now prevalent.
Everyone focuses on the min wage part (as they think that is the easiest way to address this issue) but not the over all issues of labor not being valued at an amount that makes an economy work long term. The underlying issue is that companies see cutting costs as the best way to increase profits and payroll is the largest line item on almost every balance sheet. So upping the min wage helps but ultimately these places will still cut where they can (less staff, more work per staff, replacing staff with LLMs, etc.) and the issue will continue. In times past the min wage was there as a safety net, but most could expect more for their work, now min wage is more commonly what people expect to earn. Mix in under employment, unemployment that lasts long enough people don’t count as unemployed anymore, and people having multiple part time jobs vs full time and you have a massive long term issue.
The question the companies that rely in any way on selling things to people should be asking is; “Who can buy their products?” not “we expect to sell more every quarter then last quarter at ever increasing prices, why are you all looking at us like that?”
This is the important part to anchor the statement.
Its meaningless to say $11.74 then and $100 now without some reference to what it takes to earn that same $11.74 and $100.
edit: unless you’ve just been hoarding all your wealth as cash since 1970, in which case you got fucked.
Hmm, better cut their taxes some more.
Yeah, we need the government to step in and hold companies accountable
And tax the shit out of assets to decrease the relative value of investments to actually generating value through work. Rebalance the economic incentives away from maximizing margins towards maximizing volume.
I agree! We need to bring back the new deal
What exactly is the boundary between the United States Government and the companies?
They’re the same entity.
And as long as this government exists, those companies will exist and those companies will continue what they are doing.
Then we need a new government that doesn’t work for mega corporations
Yes. Just like they did in 2008 to the big banks… oh wait.
Ready? How? It is like telling someone locked in a prison cell to get ready for a fire.
Whirlpool CEO can fuck the fuck off after this douchecanoe pushed for washing machine tariffs and then proceeded to raise their own prices raised to match the competitors resulting in all washers AND dryers by over a hundred dollars on average. And then they also proceed to layoff factory workers while complaining that people weren’t buying US made goods.
Have they tried 100 year loans on a Big Mac?
Congratulations America, the 1% is nearly done taking all your money. I’m excited to see what comes next.
A suggestion . . .
Ah yes, American here. Me too. Probably my death. Stay tuned!
I wasn’t able to start saving for retirement until my 30s, so I’ve joked for a while that my retirement plan is to die early. It’s not so much of a joke anymore.
late 40’s here, there are no savings. i hope i will be able to work until i die like my mother did.
yeah, I’m with you-- I’m coming up on retirement age. The choice is to go along with our abysmal system or topple it and topple my life savings/social security and a lifetime of being thrifty.
Try to take out an oligarch on the way out with friends.
There’s still plenty of money left to take. First they will take all the money people have saved in social security, basically zeroing everyone’s retirement funds. Then they will transfer public infrastructure to private companies basically giving out things bought with everyone’s taxes. And finally they will force everyone to work themselves to death for slave wage basically taking away your freedom.
Turns out when a bunch of bigots and corporations throw their weight in behind a low IQ felon rapist to make a profit or simply to hurt others, things go off the rails for everyone.
The company behind brands like Heinz, Kraft and Philadelphia is now cutting prices (2) on some products that had grown too expensive, increasing promotions…
Yay! Prices are actually going to drop a little?!
…and rolling out smaller package sizes at lower price points.
Fucking jackals.
This is the second time I’ve seen a company claim that shrinkflation is the solution to this problem.
At this rate, they’ll soon be selling individual packets of ketchup in grocery stores.
Probably for eight bucks a packet.
When a Kraft Dinner box becomes a Kraft Snack, and a new Kraft Dinner Family box appears that’s smaller than the original Kraft Dinner box and costs more.
You don’t want to spend $2 on macarono and “cheese”
Still won’t buy them, the fact they shouldn’t of done it in the first place, they can fuck themselves.
“It’s what the customers want”.
The children yearn for the mines.
Shrinkflation!
They’ll say the same thing in the 2030s after replacing all of their workers with AI once they realize that those workers are also consumers 🤯.
If you had to choose between
-
infinite money, or
-
money being worthless, and you having an army of robots that would do whatever you want and no one else having anything,
which would you choose?
Because I think that a lot of people are thinking that it’s a question of JUST infinite money versus worthless money, and no, there’s another part to this.
It involves breaking the system and worldwide universal slavery for literally everyone except the people at the top.
-
“We have priced a good portion of the population out of being our customers. If there was only something we could do. I know! Let’s ask the shareholders. They seem like a reasonable bunch who would not expect continued yearly profits for all eternity.” /s
“We’ve tried nothing and we’re all out of ideas.”
More like “We’ve tried extinguishing a fire with gasoline and wondering why it didn’t work” lol
Oh the money is there. But its all tied up with billionaires
The 1% accounts for 60% of spending. But they are all over leveraged or waiting for the inevitable crash so they can buy everything cheap and increase their hoard.
Compared to the ruling class, the 1%s are practically destitute
I’d love to see a source for that claim, that’s some very intetesting piece of information (if true)
Rough numbers so take with a grain of salt.
https://dqydj.com/net-worth-percentiles/
When you look at the ultra wealthy 60 million is pocket change
Absolutely, but how many ultra wealthy are politicians or top bureaucrats? I’d think they would not stoop so low as to actually BE politicians instead of just… buying some.
Yes, exactly the ruling class. They buy people who enact laws that benefit them
The difference between a millionaire and a billionaire is roughly a billion dollars.
That’s true, I’m more unsure about if the ruling class are bilionaires. I mean okay… it’s an oligarchy where billionairs simply buy politicians or both parties at once… but “the ruling class” would usually mean politicians and top bureaucrats, wouldn’t it?
It would mean it, if the politicians are the ones ruling, but since the politicians aren’t the ones ruling they would not be the ruling class is what I meant
Ah, thanks, with that definition the factoid becomes way less interesting (as in not new to me)
I think I might go with your definition from now on, seems closer to official definitions than what I thought it would be.
Interesting that it translates to “political class” in german where the definition is very different, because “political class” there is basically defined as “career politicians” and excludes the capitalists ruling through financial instead of representative power. I think that’s where my misconception stems from.
But won’t that new ballroom be something?
/s
But billionaires aren’t the main consumer base for these brands. They buy boutique appliances and health foods more than they buy sodium laced chipped meat products and mom-and-pop’s favorite dishwasher.
For sure, I was just saying that the people who buy this stuff’s money is tied up with the billionaires
Absolutely - you’re right. I just mean that these brands are complaining that they don’t benefit from their own CEOs having all the money, which is kind of amusing
who’d have thunk people drowning in debt wouldn’t have any money for luxuries. WHO COULD HAVE SEEN THIS COMING?!
