It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The size of food getting smaller and smaller

page: 4
15
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 06:26 AM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

the only thing Ive noticed this in foods in the UK was chocolate and potato chips

but I thought thats because I used to be small and candy bars were big , but its because they have actually reduced the portion sizes for confections

I havent noticed it in other foods because I rarely buy packaged meals or such !

and dont buy meat so couldnt say about that .

Less food for more cost !

Profit before people and planet




posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 07:41 AM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

I haven't noticed any changes at all in the last two months. What specific items have shrunk?

Pork was absurdly cheap for a while because of the Chinese not buying it but that seems to be over now.



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 07:43 AM
link   
Malt liquors have gotten bigger and cheaper.
2 25oz Earthquakes (10% alcohol) go for less than 4 bucks.
That leaves change from a fiver for some Ramen noodles and a cheap cigar.
Life is good.



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 07:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Atsbhct

What did you expect in the greatest nation on Earth?



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 07:58 AM
link   
a reply to: sapien82

how long will a corporation that does not make a profit last?



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 08:15 AM
link   
a reply to: funbobby

there is a difference between making a profit and making a profit honestly and within the confines of the law and also ethically

companies can still turn a profit but be green , have great employee rights and benefits and care about the workers etc and their customers , its nothing but uncontrolled greed that we have this scenario we are now presently in



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 08:26 AM
link   
a reply to: sapien82

In general corporations follow the laws because not doing so puts their profits at risk. Any company that doesn't try to maximize their profits is not doing its job.
Which scenario are we presently in exactly?



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 08:44 AM
link   
a reply to: smurfy

Nope, he is right:

In 2002, the Mars bar was reformulated and its logo was updated with a more cursive appearance except in Australia where it is still has the pre-2002 logo. Its price also increased.[5] The nougat was made lighter, the chocolate on top became thinner, and the overall weight of the bar was reduced slightly. The slogan "Pleasure you can't measure" was intended to appeal more to women and youths.[6]

Various sizes are made (sizes as of 2008): miniature bars called "Fun Size" (19.7 g) and "Snack Time" (36.5 g) (both sold in multiple packs); a larger multi-pack size of 54 g; the regular sized single 58 g bar and a "king-size" 84 g bar which has since been replaced by "Mars Duo" (85 g) – a pack that contains 2 smaller bars of 42.5 g each instead of 1 large one. The regular 58 g single bar contains 260 calories.[citation needed]

In the second half of 2008, Mars UK reduced the weight of regular bars from 62.5 g to 58 g. Although the reduction in size was not publicised at the time, Mars claimed the change was designed to help tackle the obesity crisis in the UK. The company later confirmed that the real reason for the change was rising costs.[7][8] In 2013, the "standard" Mars bar was further reduced to 51 g, bringing the change to around 20% in 5 years.[9]

Wiki

Of course here in America we don't really mess with Mars bars.



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 09:01 AM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

Does that guy know that each Oreo is 50 calories? A lot of people don't want a giant Oreo package so they have several size packages for people to choose from. That change to the Oreo packaging didn't happen in the last two months did it?



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 10:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: funbobby
a reply to: sapien82

In general corporations follow the laws because not doing so puts their profits at risk. Any company that doesn't try to maximize their profits is not doing its job.
Which scenario are we presently in exactly?


and even though they follow the law they still register ships and offices in countries where the employment laws are lax
allowing for cheaper labour, decreased employee rights, no unions, lower taxes etc

they do everything in their power to maximise profit at the expense of the worker and the customer.



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 10:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Lagomorphe

Aye well, that will work also.

Personally i just spectate where marathons are concerned these days.



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 11:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Lagomorphe

Aye well, that will work also.

Personally i just spectate where marathons are concerned these days.


Actually it was a lame attempt at word play mate :

Snickers... S’Knickers...

“Walks of all red faced”

Lags



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari




Sad thing is that over the last 50-70 years in America we've all had our taste buds retrained to where we don't like bitter anymore... we have to have sweet as an underlier of all our foods.


This is very true. My mom is Asian and her generation did not eat sugar. In fact the only time they ate sugar is if they had a bad stomach ache and it was used like a laxative.
Their "sweets" were actually salty.



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Lagomorphe

Suppose most people are red-faced after a marathon.

Snickers not so much.

Was never a big fan of Snickers, prefer Mars bars myself.



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: sapien82

"the expense of the customer" is never more than the customer wants to pay, consumers in America have many options. And in fact, unless you are talking about companies like Hershey who depend on child slave labor, anyone who is not a slave is not going to work someplace that does not pay them enough or treat them well enough. Workers have many options.



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 11:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Lagomorphe

Suppose most people are red-faced after a marathon.

Snickers not so much.

Was never a big fan of Snickers, prefer Mars bars myself.


Remember Curly Wurleys?

Crikey those things seemed huge when I was knee high to a grasshopper!

Nom...



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 12:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Lagomorphe

I'm even old enough to remember "Spangles" ffs. LoL

Still get Curly Wurleys here, i get them from ASDA for the weans, and the Mrs. LoL

I'm a bit partial to the odd Walnut Whip myself, snide now you have to supply you own Walnut all the same.



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 12:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Lagomorphe

I'm even old enough to remember "Spangles" ffs. LoL

Still get Curly Wurleys here, i get them from ASDA for the weans, and the Mrs. LoL

I'm a bit partial to the odd Walnut Whip myself, snide now you have to supply you own Walnut all the same.



Ok crikey... Spangles... Remember sherbet dips?

Im pretty chuffed actually as in the large town nearest to our village they opened up a traditional English sweet shop 4 years ago (I live in France).

Jars choc a block with cough candies, sherbet pips and get this... REAL midget gems and Cadbury’s chocolate oranges...

I go there just before Christmas each year and stock up before the missus drags me kicking and screaming out of the door...

“dribbles”



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 04:27 PM
link   
In the 1990's everything was being super sized. I remember going to McDonalds and getting a gallon pop with 5 potato's worth of fries for $0.40 extra.

Leading up to 2008 things got really bad. That's when this food shrinkage thing really started. When gas prices hit $5 a gallon in 2007 I saw packages of food sizes cut in half.

The 80's and 90's were a lot different then now. They're really putting the squeeze on us at the grocery store.



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 05:12 PM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

I noticed this recently when I bought some chicken stock. I buy it when it goes BOGO so I keep about 6 boxes at all times. The last set I bought were smaller and it was the same brand! I remember putting them away next to the others and was like hey you sneaky bastards! I also noticed it last year when I bought some Keebler cookies I use to love, the cookie itself was much smaller. How could I tell? The same cookie fit in my cup of milk where before it was too big! It was also slightly thinner. They’re the chocolate chip ones with walnuts. I haven’t bought them since, not a big cookie person unless it’s peanut butter then look out!







 
15
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join