Congress Democrats push to stop 'shrinkflation' and target major food companies for the practice
Source: The Independent
12 hours ago
Two Democratic congresswomen are demanding that Coca-Cola, General Mills, and PepsiCo stop "profiteering" by shrinking the size of their products without lowering prices.
Massachusetts senator Elizabeth Warren and Pennsylvania representative Madeline Dean wrote letters to the three food and drink giants on Sunday calling for them to pay their fair share of taxes and cease engaging in "shrinkflation.
They accused all three companies of reducing the size of their products, such as General Mills' Cocoa Puffs and PepsiCo's Gatorade, while charging the same price or higher a stealthy twin of inflation that Joe Biden has denounced as "a rip-off. Shrinkflation is one common alternative to raising costs for companies under pressure from or, if you believe their critics, hoping to exploit the general rise in costs during times of high inflation.
"People have noticed that their box of Cheerios and bag of Doritos are smaller, but prices are higher and at the same time these giant corporations are paying lower tax rates than the average American," Warren told NBC News, which first reported the letters. "We cant let them get away with this price gouging and tax dodging. Its just plain wrong, and were fighting back."
Read more: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/warren-dean-shrinkflation-companies-b2625411.html
Link to Warren/Dean PRESS RELEASE - Warren, Dean Press CocaCola, PepsiCo, and General Mills on Shrinkflation Price Gouging and Tax Dodging
Link to Warren/Dean LETTER (PDF) - https://www.warren.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/letters_to_coca_cola_pepsico_and_general_mills_re_shrinkflation_and_tax_dodging.pdf
bucolic_frolic
(48,281 posts)The old ones were 20% empty, so now we appear to get a full box.
cstanleytech
(27,301 posts)Thus we, as the consumers are the ones that need to be taking action and holding companies accountable for this.
BumRushDaShow
(146,381 posts)and when you continually call them out for doing the opposite - and do so from the "elected legislators" perspective (that can command more media attention than a consumer), then it can have a bit of a moderating effect that forces them to do a small pivot.
The companies have tried to cover it up by claiming "supply chain issues", which have been non-existent once the pandemic faded to the background, and that is something these legislators have also emphasized.
You'll notice that some of the fast food chains finally got off the ridiculous "what the market will bear" pricing once called out about it and the consumer is now more aware that the pricing is NOT due to some nebulous, government-manufactured "inflation", but is due to a corporate decision that ignores the fundamentals of the economy.
Response to cstanleytech (Reply #2)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
2naSalit
(94,734 posts)What about staple items? That's where it really matters, there is a large population of us who don't consume that shit but have found that it's a struggle to buy the things we live on and it goes beyond food.
Has anyone noticed that there is an extra 1+ inches less width to you toilet paper rolls? A lot of space on the spindle and, of course, since it's "squares" they decreased the length of each "square" meaning the decrease in the overall size of the "square" is about 30%. And the paper quality is declining too. Same with paper towels.
This shit is getting old.
10 Turtle Day
(584 posts)2naSalit
(94,734 posts)doesn't look too different in the package.
LiberalArkie
(17,129 posts)publicly owned corporations. Just give them their pay and bonuses but never allow any stock to be owned by the decision making executives. Let them earn their pay with decisions and not stock manipulation. They know that by raising the number in the profit column of their spreadsheet that THEIR personal stock will increase in price. That is the only thing they seem to care about.
RussellCattle
(1,828 posts).....contents posted in prominent, large type. As in "11 OUNCES OF COFFEE" in what we used to call a one pound can. Or, given the realities of today's marketplace, "500 sheets of single ply tissue - STANDARD WIDTH".
SCantiGOP
(14,341 posts)I dont see any way for legislators to dictate to companies the size or amount of packages, but fair labeling laws are already widely used.
Response to RussellCattle (Reply #6)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
DiverDave
(5,038 posts)Bags of sugar?
They are 4 pounds now...
BumRushDaShow
(146,381 posts)and I had asked the store workers where the 5lb bags were and they said something along the line of - "Well they are just doing this for the holiday baking season". Eventually the 5lbs returned but the following year, that was it. It was 4lb again and that's what it has been since.
Just like the 16oz cans of some product (soup, sauce, etc) are now 15.5oz or tuna comes in 5oz cans instead of 6oz, etc.
ck4829
(36,472 posts)and remember billionaires cause inflation.
Quanto Magnus
(1,056 posts)did this several years ago. They went from 1.75 Qt to 1.5 Qt. Prices didn't change (and have actually gone up pretty significantly)
Once those 2 ice cream brands did it, the other companies, such as Tillamook, followed suit.
DiverDave
(5,038 posts)eom.
Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.