• TheDubz87@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      53
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Which is ironic as fast food used to have 2 appeals - quick and cheap.

      I’m not sure how quick they are these days because I can no longer afford it.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        Which is ironic

        Is it tho?

        It’s capitalism, once you dominate the market share you raise prices.

        Fast food pushed out small local shops, but there’s a few major chains everywhere. So now they’re more expensive than sit down restaurants, because the “speed” which isn’t all that fast anymore is treated as a premium and not a side effect from being cheap/easy food.

        Like, everything is based off stock price, and stock price is about profit margin going up. And that’s exponential, it’s not mathematically possible to keep going up.

        The only way is to keep pushing up prices and making products shittier.

        It’s not irony, it’s working as intended.

        Capitalism only works when you break up monopolies regularly so there can be competition.

        Hell, this is way more evident in a franchise model. The actual owners can’t really do anything, they’re locked in long leases and are forced to buy from only one supplier.

        If McDonald’s says party prices go up 50%, the franchise owner has literally zero options. They have to pay it.

        The whole system is fucked and pretty much a pyramid scheme.

        • Peppycito@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          6 months ago

          It’s absolutely a pyramid scheme. And now we’re at the stage where we hollow out the inside of the pyramid to keep making it taller.

        • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          6 months ago

          Just to add, Reagan ‘deregulated’ the hell out of the economy. It gave America a phoney boom in the 1980s.

          In 1980, ‘middle class’ was still one Union job supporting a family of four, and $1 million was considered a vast fortune. By 1992, middle class was two incomes to keep the house going, and $1 million was what a rich guy paid for a party.

          • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Republicans break shit, moderate Dems neglect to fix it.

            For generations we’ve had a steady march to the right because of that system.

            And considering the same people/corporations donate to both parties, it doesn’t seem overly cynical to say ourmodern political system is working exactly as the wealthy designed it to work.

            • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Moderate Dems get elected because this country isn’t progressive. We collectively want these things to happen, which is why they do.

              • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                The ACA has worked exactly as it was supposed to, but people are still terrified of Obamacare.

              • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                Progressive policy is popular regardless of labels or even parties.

                Even in 2020 most Americans wanted single payer healthcare.

                But because trump ran as a Republican, that meant the Dem candidate couldn’t want to fix healthcare, for some reason is till don’t understand.

                We collectively want healthcare to be improved, but the people who donate to both parties don’t, which is why it doesn’t happen.

                • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Either our government is representative of its people and they don’t really want those things, or it’s not representative of its people and needs destroyed. See the Declaration of Independence for more information.

            • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              If voting didn’t work, the GOP wouldn’t be trying to prevent people from voting.

              If you don’t like the Dem candidates in your area, you can contribute to AOC or Omar.

              • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                you can contribute to AOC or Omar.

                Yep. Stopped giving to the DNC back in 2016 after Hillary’s swindle.

                I only give directly to individual candidat I support now.

                Doesn’t stop all the spam from Biden or the DNC tho, no matter how many times I text “stop” or “unsubscribe”, they just don’t care about anything a voter says.

  • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    When FDR created the minimum wage he explicitly stated that someone making it should be able to live in some comfort. That meant not just food and shelter, but some savings and a chance to have a few nice things.

    In 1960, minimum wage was $1.00/hour. The average house was $11,000.00. Two people could eat and go to a concert for $5.00. In those days, $1 million was an incredible fortune.

      • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        6 months ago

        That’s the other crazy thing. Look at all the millionaire actors and music stars. They have much bigger incomes than past artists, but is Tom Hanks or Taylor Swift really that much richer than John Wayne or Marilyn Monroe? A doctor today is giving his family the life a moderately successful plumber had 50 years ago.

        • NeptuneOrbit@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          These historical comparisons always get me. Yeah, as a middle class American in 2024 I have a microwave and health insurance which does mean in some ways my life is “better” than Andrew Carnegie’s life 130 years ago. But he could just hire a huge staff for his mansion. He could buy whole libraries and gift them to cities.

          Your comparisons of a modern doctor to Marilyn Monroe… Well a modern doctor is probably working 60 hours a week to get that $300,000 salary. Marilyn Monroe probably could have just… Retired while the doctor needs to work another couple decades to pay off student loans…

          There’s no apple to apple comparison. Standard of living and expectations change. But you can’t just erase the simple pleasures of being famously rich because now microwaves exist.

          • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            6 months ago

            Your comparisons of a modern doctor to Marilyn Monroe…

            I compared Monroe to Taylor Swift.

            I compared the doctor to a plumber.

            • NeptuneOrbit@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              6 months ago

              Yeah and they are still bad comparisons. A doctor will command respect and prestige in their community in a way unfortunately a plumber will generally not. Inflation and technological advancements don’t really change that.

              Your argument seems cousin to the Fox News type about microwaves and refrigerators. I don’t really think it makes sense to make these time traveling comparisons at all.

      • JIMMERZ@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        6 months ago

        According to a financial advisor I recently spoke with, it’s not. Guess I’ll be working all the way into my grave. 🤷‍♂️

    • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      The wages of fast food workers have been increasing over the past decade. Ten years ago, their median wage was $8.69/hr. Today, it’s over $14/hr. In California, the minimum is now $20/hr.

      Increased wages for low income workers are good, since they have outpaced inflation. But they will inevitably result in increased prices. It’s unrealistic to expect the employer to absorb all of the increased costs.

      And fast food employers often couldn’t absorb the wage increases even if they wanted to. Remember, a McDonald’s employee isn’t paid by McDonald’s HQ, they are paid by the person who runs the individual location, who is also paying McDonald’s HQ for ingredients. Some of the franchise owners are doing well, some of them aren’t, but all of them are going to raise prices.

      In other words, if you don’t want to pay more for fast food, then you don’t actually want to see fast food workers earn a better wage.

      • legofreak@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        In other words, if you don’t want to pay more for fast food, then you don’t actually want to see fast food workers earn a better wage.

        If a business relies on exploitation, it shouldn’t exist. If paying the workers a living wage means raising the prices beyond a sustainable level for the business, this business shouldn’t exist. If a business pays out millions in bonuses to it’s executives while the workers are relying on government subsidies, the business shouldn’t exist.

        • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          That’s true. But restaurant owners aren’t paying millions to anyone.

          And hiking prices to pay fast food employees more isn’t unsustainable. It just means customers won’t eat fast food as often as they used to.

      • TheLadyAugust@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        6 months ago

        I’m happy to say that I emphatically want better wages for service industry workers. IDC how much food goes up, or how many mega franchises have to close for it. Either better wages, or cause these these super franchises to close so mom and pops and open instead.

        I also don’t think it’s unrealistic to expect businesses to give up a small portion of their infinite growth targets to actually cover their employees needs. Maybe a large departure from the past 50 years, but it’s absolutely something most of them can afford.

        If a business genuinely can’t afford it, then I’d also be okay with my tax money going towards a business analysis for that owner to find a way to make it work. If they still can’t, then how long were they really going to be open anyway and what were they really adding to their community?

        • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          unrealistic to expect businesses to give up a small portion of their infinite growth targets

          Almost no restaurants, including fast food restaurants, have infinite growth targets. A lot of them are struggling to survive.

          From a business perspective, most fast food franchises are mom-and-pop locations. They are not owned by a giant corporation. The giant corporation simply sells them ingredients and sets their menu.

        • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          That’s out of date.

          Median fast food wage in US is now $14/hr. A Big Mac in Denmark is now 49 krone, which is $7.10

          Of course, it’s still true that unions provide better pay and benefits to employees. But the price of a Big Mac is roughly a third of the hourly wage in both the US and Denmark.

  • Kekzkrieger@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    6 months ago

    Fast food used to be shit quality for little money.

    Now its shit quality for a fuckton of money.

    Cook at home folks, more nutricious, tastes better, is cheaper and if you pick the right recipes its also fast.

    • Ajen@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 months ago

      And if you don’t want to cook for yourself, at least go to a local take-out restaurant that probably costs less than the shitty fast food, even if you have to wait a few more minutes for it.

  • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    6 months ago

    This does bring the question up in my mind of what a restaurant that wasn’t a luxury would look like, ie, something that sells ready to eat food at prices that make it competitive with cooking at home, and which is healthy enough to eat on a daily basis without ill effect. My guess is that it would be largely a matter of having to carefully choose recipes that both use ingredients that are cheap in bulk, and able to be at least partially automated to keep staff costs low, but which are still nutritious and rely on minimal processed ingredients. Probably soups and chili and the like I’d imagine.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    It is since people decided that you should order through a unified app and have it delivered.

    Fast food can be cheap if you start away from the sucker options, but not when you’re sending half your food money to a silicon valley billionaire.

  • an_onanist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    6 months ago

    From the article - they believe eating fast food should be cheaper than eating at home, but isn’t. What kind of fucked up belief is this? No wonder they view fast food as a luxury.

    • Kanzar@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Used to be able to get $1 cheeseburgers. The loose change menu was a huge thing here, you could actually wander in with some coins and walk out with some food.

      At $1 a burger, in less than 3 minutes, that’s way cheaper, “tastier” (subjective), faster, and no cleaning up, than having a pot of lentil curry.

      • Floey@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        6 months ago

        The cheapest fastfood cheeseburgers usually aren’t many calories, and they are even worse when it comes to overall nutrition and satiety. You may be getting something for a $1 but it could hardly be called a meal.

    • bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Fucked up? It’s not a matter of what “should be.” It was reality for decades. When were you born?

      When I was growing up dominos did the “5-5-5” deal. $15+tax for 3 medium 1-topping pizzas. You can feed like 6-10 people with that depending on their age. You’re talking like $2 a person.

      $1 menus included 1-2 sandwich options. Usually a chicken sandwich (obviously fried not grilled).

      Meals with fries and drinks were $4-6 all in.

      This was the 90’s and 2000’s. You could feed a family of 4 with $10 or less without much thought.

      • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        6 months ago

        It was possible to feed people for less than $1/serving then. Fast food has always been more expensive than home cooking on a per serving basis.

      • iopq@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        6 months ago

        No it wasn’t, a frozen pizza was always cheaper than dominos. And I don’t know what kind of little only eat one third of a medium pizza.

        I usually finished one myself. Well okay, I’m a big man, but still.

              • Lets_Eat_Grandma@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                An adult would be content on half a medium pizza

                A medium cheese pizza from dominos is 1660 calories. A slice is 210 calories.

                630 calories (3 slices) for a meal seems about right.

                A pan pizza from dominos is 2320 calories. a slice is 290 calories.

                Two slices for the pan pizza seems fine too and with their typical pickup deals is the same price.

                Though their deals usually give you two toppings for free. My favorite is Chicken, Bacon, Ranch sauce on pan. It’s 2,960 a pizza, or 370 per slice. Right now my local dominos offers these for $8 each if you buy two. 6000 calories for $16. Stupid cheap and feeds minimum 6 people who want a thousand calorie meal each.

                • iopq@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  I eat 2700 calories a day to maintain my weight. If I ate a 600 calorie meal, I would be considered on a diet since I read 3 meals a day.

              • otp@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                I definitely get the appeal of fast food. It might also depend on what a “Medium” pizza is.

                6 people for 3 medium pizzas doesn’t seem too bad, especially if there’s other snacks or food. But if I had 10 people with 3 medium pizzas, I think I’d have 10 hungry people and 0 pizzas left, haha

    • bamfic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 months ago

      It was when I was a kid. “We have food at home” is what my mother always said when we wanted some fast food. That was in the 70s.

    • geekwithsoul@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      6 months ago

      No one seems to be reading the article - it was a survey of only 2,000 participants on a financial advice website. These folks have already made poor decisions and likely not experienced in managing their money. The usual FUD that the OP posts everywhere.

      • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        It being published on a financial advice website doesn’t imply that the survey was conducted on visitors to the website.

  • fpslem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    6 months ago

    How much of the increased price of fast food is because restaurants have to pay workers more than $7.25/hour now? It seems like the entire business model of cheap fast food was premised on low-quality food and labor costs so low that most fast-food workers qualified for public assistance. Leaving aside the low-quality oligarchical food product industry and just looking at the labor side, it’s still a failure. And a business model that relies on food stamps and welfare for its employees really isn’t a business model.

    • Allero@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Exactly. Guess those who disliked didn’t read it through.

      Turns out, the entire business model of fast food chains is based off ripping its employees.

      Now that this loophole is closed, we see the real price of it.

      Next step is to realize that it’s not fast food that is expensive - it’s our salaries that are pressed down so much we can’t afford some fries.

    • BigMacHole@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      6 months ago

      This is the EXACT reason why prices NEVER WENT UP until the $7.25 Minimum Wage was RAISED!

  • Verdant Banana@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    grocery store food is now a luxury too

    sure voting Trump or Biden will fix it depending on what color you like

    • njm1314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      No food is not a luxury food is literally a necessity that’s how living works