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.
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.
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.
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.
Not to mention that a huge number of these businesses are locally owned franchises, where the parent corporation has less control over menu prices.
Many franchises are bound by a specific cost structure and predefined distribution.
Ooooh, now plot the avg wage across this period. Y=min wage.
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.
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.
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.
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.
To be fair states, and even cities have their own minimum wage too, and those have gone up. Federal minimum wage is just the base line.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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%.
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.
If anything this tells me that that inflation number is bullshit.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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???
Because I’m at work/on the road and don’t have a stocked kitchen available?
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!