Dollar Tree says US$1.25 price point to become new standard(bnnbloomberg.ca)
bnnbloomberg.ca
Dollar Tree says US$1.25 price point to become new standard
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/dollar-tree-says-1-25-price-point-to-become-new-standard-1.1686022
340 comments
> They do it because it’s literally all they can afford anything else.
Dollar stores very often aren’t cheaper than other sources for similar products especially for grocery items (which they tend to have very limited selections of.)
People that shop for groceries at dollar stores do it because:
1. They shop for other things at dollar stores (either for price, or for reason #2, or because its the only place close by that carries the type of thing involved) and getting groceries there saves a trip,
2. Reputation for price without actual comparison,
3. Lack of actual grocery stores conveniently located,
Your own second article notes the relatively high prices (as well as quality issues) of dollar store groceries.
Dollar stores very often aren’t cheaper than other sources for similar products especially for grocery items (which they tend to have very limited selections of.)
People that shop for groceries at dollar stores do it because:
1. They shop for other things at dollar stores (either for price, or for reason #2, or because its the only place close by that carries the type of thing involved) and getting groceries there saves a trip,
2. Reputation for price without actual comparison,
3. Lack of actual grocery stores conveniently located,
Your own second article notes the relatively high prices (as well as quality issues) of dollar store groceries.
Classic analysis by someone who seemingly has never been dirt poor. It may be tough to believe, but y'know what'd surprise literally none of the poors if you told them? That they pay more money for less product at the dollar store than elsewhere.
Despite their limited ability, they ARE able to look at price tags in different stores and go "hey, wait a minute!"
If you're dollar store level poor, it's expensive and stressful, and you're constantly weighing spending money now versus keeping what little remains for whatever awful thing is going to leave you destitute. There's a fair amount of conflicting and complex psychology going on in that shopping decision beyond not just knowing that they should comparison shop.
Despite their limited ability, they ARE able to look at price tags in different stores and go "hey, wait a minute!"
If you're dollar store level poor, it's expensive and stressful, and you're constantly weighing spending money now versus keeping what little remains for whatever awful thing is going to leave you destitute. There's a fair amount of conflicting and complex psychology going on in that shopping decision beyond not just knowing that they should comparison shop.
Your first sentence sums up the majority of this site on any socioeconomic issue. At this point the term “financial literacy” is exclusively used by armchair poverty quarterbacks.
> armchair poverty quarterbacks
HA! I'm picturing the kid that owned the football and would threaten to take it home if he didn't get to be quarterback :)
HA! I'm picturing the kid that owned the football and would threaten to take it home if he didn't get to be quarterback :)
I'm very bad with money. I never look at my account balance when I spend money. Heck, often months pass without me looking at my account at all. When I end up seeing the balance it is always much higher than I expected.
What am I missing? Oh right, I earn more than the average person in my country and I'm so busy I don't even have time to spend the money.
What am I missing? Oh right, I earn more than the average person in my country and I'm so busy I don't even have time to spend the money.
Earning more money than average and spending less money than average is typically considered being “good” with money. Not the best if you are not investing it to keep up with inflation, but most people do not get past the “earning more money” requirement of being good with money.
I have been dirt poor most of my life. And I can tell you I was careful about where I shopped.
And many other poor people I knew _blew_ tons of money on McDonald's because "they couldn't afford to cook"
It's not so cut and dry.
And many other poor people I knew _blew_ tons of money on McDonald's because "they couldn't afford to cook"
It's not so cut and dry.
> Classic analysis by someone who seemingly has never been dirt poor.
I’ve been dirt poor; I’ve never been in a situation where “dollar store as regular grocery source” made sense (though I’ve shopped in dollar stores, and occasionally when I did found deals on grocery items that were worthwhile), and I am very much aware of why that was never the case for me and why it is and was sometimes for other people.
Also, not all people who shop at dollar stores are dirt poor.
> It may be tough to believe, but y'know what'd surprise literally none of the poors if you told them? That they pay more money for less product at the dollar store than elsewhere.
Actually, it would probably suprise some of them. Believe it or not, poorly informed poor people do exist. The idea that they don't is as misguided as the idea that all poor people are poorly informed.
> Despite their limited ability, they ARE able to look at price tags in different stores
Not really, when reason #3 (“Lack of actual grocery stores conveniently located”) applies. Comparison shopping takes time and effort that is something of a luxury in the best of cases, but it also takes having alternatives in the first place.
> If you're dollar store level poor, it's expensive and stressful, and you're constantly weighing spending money now versus keeping what little remains for whatever awful thing is going to leave you destitute.
That's true, but it doesn't contradict anything I said. It's like you have a canned rant about poor people that you arr trotting out independent of its actual relevance to the discussion.
> There's a fair amount of conflicting and complex psychology going on in that shopping decision beyond not just knowing that they should comparison shop.
Which would perhaps be an insightful counterargument if I had said something even approximately like “poor people who shop at dollar stores do it because they don't realize they should comparison shop”. Of the three reasons I gave for people shopping at dollar stores, only one relates to a failure to understand the price realities, and I never suggested that one was particularly common among the poor.
I’ve been dirt poor; I’ve never been in a situation where “dollar store as regular grocery source” made sense (though I’ve shopped in dollar stores, and occasionally when I did found deals on grocery items that were worthwhile), and I am very much aware of why that was never the case for me and why it is and was sometimes for other people.
Also, not all people who shop at dollar stores are dirt poor.
> It may be tough to believe, but y'know what'd surprise literally none of the poors if you told them? That they pay more money for less product at the dollar store than elsewhere.
Actually, it would probably suprise some of them. Believe it or not, poorly informed poor people do exist. The idea that they don't is as misguided as the idea that all poor people are poorly informed.
> Despite their limited ability, they ARE able to look at price tags in different stores
Not really, when reason #3 (“Lack of actual grocery stores conveniently located”) applies. Comparison shopping takes time and effort that is something of a luxury in the best of cases, but it also takes having alternatives in the first place.
> If you're dollar store level poor, it's expensive and stressful, and you're constantly weighing spending money now versus keeping what little remains for whatever awful thing is going to leave you destitute.
That's true, but it doesn't contradict anything I said. It's like you have a canned rant about poor people that you arr trotting out independent of its actual relevance to the discussion.
> There's a fair amount of conflicting and complex psychology going on in that shopping decision beyond not just knowing that they should comparison shop.
Which would perhaps be an insightful counterargument if I had said something even approximately like “poor people who shop at dollar stores do it because they don't realize they should comparison shop”. Of the three reasons I gave for people shopping at dollar stores, only one relates to a failure to understand the price realities, and I never suggested that one was particularly common among the poor.
Dollar stores are a relatively recent phenomenon, a consequence of the destruction of local retail by various chains--first chain groceries, then Wal-Mart, etc. Dollar stores have slowly filled in the gaps left by the closure of local retailers and low-end chains like A&P. At first chains drove down prices, such as precipitous price declines brought by chain groceries, and then those Wal-Mart brought to everything else. But consolidation in the chain industry, including Wal-Mart displacing lower end chains and then slowly moving up market, left gaps, especially at the very low end. Dollar stores slowly filled in those gaps, but as they did so they ceased being literal dollar stores. And like any for-profit chain, they've begun using their market dominance to increase prices.
> Despite their limited ability, they ARE able to look at price tags in different stores and go "hey, wait a minute!"
Not really. Dollar stores have become so ubiquitous precisely because of their market dominance in areas without options--retail deserts, if you will. If you've really been dirt poor--and dirt poor outside the major cities and suburbs--you would know that driving 20-30 miles to the Wal-Mart two towns over, presuming they even have lower prices, can be cost prohibitive (especially when considering wear-and-tear and the risk of breaking down) when you're living day-to-day, even though in the long-term you end up paying more at the dollar store. Drive across the vast areas of rural and poor America and you'll see dollar stores in the most random and remotest of places; places that 10, 20, or 30 years ago had more options--you may even see their long shuttered remains somewhere nearby.
This is the classic dilemma the impoverished face, and have always faced--it takes money to make (or save) money. Yes, increases in prices at dollar stores will negatively impact alot of people. But when decrying the state of the nation you have to understand why that is and what it means. For example, before someone blames inflation, maybe they should look at profit margins. AFAICT, they've rose relatively sharply since COVID-19: https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/DG/dollar-general/... Indeed, the "narrowing" of Dollar Tree's earnings forecast mentioned in the article, from $5.40-$5.60 to $5.48-$5.58, is maybe better described as an upward adjustment. I suspect the price increase will help margins even further.
> Despite their limited ability, they ARE able to look at price tags in different stores and go "hey, wait a minute!"
Not really. Dollar stores have become so ubiquitous precisely because of their market dominance in areas without options--retail deserts, if you will. If you've really been dirt poor--and dirt poor outside the major cities and suburbs--you would know that driving 20-30 miles to the Wal-Mart two towns over, presuming they even have lower prices, can be cost prohibitive (especially when considering wear-and-tear and the risk of breaking down) when you're living day-to-day, even though in the long-term you end up paying more at the dollar store. Drive across the vast areas of rural and poor America and you'll see dollar stores in the most random and remotest of places; places that 10, 20, or 30 years ago had more options--you may even see their long shuttered remains somewhere nearby.
This is the classic dilemma the impoverished face, and have always faced--it takes money to make (or save) money. Yes, increases in prices at dollar stores will negatively impact alot of people. But when decrying the state of the nation you have to understand why that is and what it means. For example, before someone blames inflation, maybe they should look at profit margins. AFAICT, they've rose relatively sharply since COVID-19: https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/DG/dollar-general/... Indeed, the "narrowing" of Dollar Tree's earnings forecast mentioned in the article, from $5.40-$5.60 to $5.48-$5.58, is maybe better described as an upward adjustment. I suspect the price increase will help margins even further.
> Dollar stores are a relatively recent phenomenon
Kind of, but only because of the brief interregnum of the ~1970s-1990s height of suburban shopping malls. Dollar stores are a revival of the general variety discount stores — “five-and-dime” or “dime stores” — that largely either fell to suburbanization and shopping malls or morphed out of the model into mega-retailers (Walton’s Five-and-Dime, for instance, is now known as WalMart) or did the latter but still ended up doing the fomer (e..g, Kmart); the new dollar stores were rising just as many of the earlier giants of the same model were taking their last breaths in the late 1990s and 2000s; at least one of the early dollar store chains (Dollar Zone) was a rebranding of a classic general variety discount store chain that had started as a literal dime store chain (McCrory’s).
The rise of dollar stores tracks pretty well with the decline of the malls that had marginalized the original variety discount stores. They weren’t so much a new phenomenon as something that went through about a generation of marginalization.
Kind of, but only because of the brief interregnum of the ~1970s-1990s height of suburban shopping malls. Dollar stores are a revival of the general variety discount stores — “five-and-dime” or “dime stores” — that largely either fell to suburbanization and shopping malls or morphed out of the model into mega-retailers (Walton’s Five-and-Dime, for instance, is now known as WalMart) or did the latter but still ended up doing the fomer (e..g, Kmart); the new dollar stores were rising just as many of the earlier giants of the same model were taking their last breaths in the late 1990s and 2000s; at least one of the early dollar store chains (Dollar Zone) was a rebranding of a classic general variety discount store chain that had started as a literal dime store chain (McCrory’s).
The rise of dollar stores tracks pretty well with the decline of the malls that had marginalized the original variety discount stores. They weren’t so much a new phenomenon as something that went through about a generation of marginalization.
[deleted]
> y'know what'd surprise literally none of the poors if you told them?
Because apparently all poor people all the same in your mind.
Because apparently all poor people all the same in your mind.
>Dollar stores very often aren’t cheaper than other sources for similar products especially for grocery items (which they tend to have very limited selections of.)
Yep. They're usually not competitive on unit price. In areas that aren't shopping deserts, they cater to folks who can't afford to fill their car's gas tank on a whim -- they need X, they need it today, so they'll get what they can today. "It's expensive to be poor."
What I've found them good for is stuff I use super sparingly, and odd items. For example, envelopes. A box of 20 for $1 isn't great per unit, but it takes me FIVE YEARS to go through that box that takes up less space than a larger one, so still a win. Toothbrush for $1 is hard to argue. Gift bags and greeting cards are a fraction of where you easily find them elsewhere. If I'm out and really need a drink, if it's the closest option I may get a diet soda or a bottle of water.
I rarely go to one, but I'll go through one periodically to observe what's there and make a mental note of the few things that are the obvious deal given my situation.
Yep. They're usually not competitive on unit price. In areas that aren't shopping deserts, they cater to folks who can't afford to fill their car's gas tank on a whim -- they need X, they need it today, so they'll get what they can today. "It's expensive to be poor."
What I've found them good for is stuff I use super sparingly, and odd items. For example, envelopes. A box of 20 for $1 isn't great per unit, but it takes me FIVE YEARS to go through that box that takes up less space than a larger one, so still a win. Toothbrush for $1 is hard to argue. Gift bags and greeting cards are a fraction of where you easily find them elsewhere. If I'm out and really need a drink, if it's the closest option I may get a diet soda or a bottle of water.
I rarely go to one, but I'll go through one periodically to observe what's there and make a mental note of the few things that are the obvious deal given my situation.
> "It's expensive to be poor."
This is a talking point I wish more people on HN understood.
Can't afford a dental cavity filling? It becomes a root canal next year. Maybe you'll settle on just a simple extraction, and now you're down a tooth with no hope of ever affording a dental bridge, let alone an implant.
Can't afford to get a lump checked out? Three years later, you're unable to afford the stage 3 cancer treatment.
Buying the massive 30-roll pack of toilet paper from Costco for $15 is cheaper than buying 6-packs for $5, but you only have $20 to last the week, and you gotta buy food, too.
This is a talking point I wish more people on HN understood.
Can't afford a dental cavity filling? It becomes a root canal next year. Maybe you'll settle on just a simple extraction, and now you're down a tooth with no hope of ever affording a dental bridge, let alone an implant.
Can't afford to get a lump checked out? Three years later, you're unable to afford the stage 3 cancer treatment.
Buying the massive 30-roll pack of toilet paper from Costco for $15 is cheaper than buying 6-packs for $5, but you only have $20 to last the week, and you gotta buy food, too.
> People that shop for groceries at dollar stores do it because:
4. They only have a dollar.
Yes, it's cheaper by the fluid ounce to buy a barrel of Pine-sol at Costco. But if you have $100 for groceries and household expenses this week, you'll pay more per ounce to minimize the cash-flow problem.
Their cash-flow constraints and cost of credit both prevent them from economizing. That is how most Americans shop.
4. They only have a dollar.
Yes, it's cheaper by the fluid ounce to buy a barrel of Pine-sol at Costco. But if you have $100 for groceries and household expenses this week, you'll pay more per ounce to minimize the cash-flow problem.
Their cash-flow constraints and cost of credit both prevent them from economizing. That is how most Americans shop.
> Yes, it's cheaper by the fluid ounce to buy a barrel of Pine-sol at Costco.
Its frequently cheaper to buy the same size package of a grocery item at a traditional grocery store than a dollar store; I've seen cases as extreme as things that regularly go 4/$1 (and occasionally go on sale at 10/$1) at regular grocery stores going for 1/$1 at a dollar store.
But if you don't have a regular grocery store in convenient distance (walking/biking distance if you don't have working car!), that doesn't matter. (Costco and similar stores present another level of problem; they tend to both be more distant for most people than even standard grocery stores and to bias toward larger package sizes—aside from whether you can afford to tie up money in the larger item even with a smaller unit cost, storage space becomes a problem.)
Its frequently cheaper to buy the same size package of a grocery item at a traditional grocery store than a dollar store; I've seen cases as extreme as things that regularly go 4/$1 (and occasionally go on sale at 10/$1) at regular grocery stores going for 1/$1 at a dollar store.
But if you don't have a regular grocery store in convenient distance (walking/biking distance if you don't have working car!), that doesn't matter. (Costco and similar stores present another level of problem; they tend to both be more distant for most people than even standard grocery stores and to bias toward larger package sizes—aside from whether you can afford to tie up money in the larger item even with a smaller unit cost, storage space becomes a problem.)
I have seen the same loss leaders at “traditional” supermarkets, but it’s also true that stores like that are disappearing from rural areas. And they’re usually losing out to a Dollar General or Dollar Tree. So even in head-to head competition, dollar stores are meeting some perceived need.
Then, in the suburbs, it seems grocery stores are trying to go up the chain by focusing on prepared foods. The cheap cafe has been replaced by bar covered in shiplap and the fruit trays run $25 after labor.
Then, in the suburbs, it seems grocery stores are trying to go up the chain by focusing on prepared foods. The cheap cafe has been replaced by bar covered in shiplap and the fruit trays run $25 after labor.
$100 is plenty to afford groceries at a grocery store. If they only had $4 or something your point would make more sense.
You can take $30 to a grocery store and walk out with a decent quantity of rice and beans, at good prices per ounce.
You can take $30 to a grocery store and walk out with a decent quantity of rice and beans, at good prices per ounce.
I'm not sure where "poor people should subsist on only rice and beans" became a valid idea. Sure, I mean, it's a cheap meal. But it's also boring and soulcrushing to have everyday.
You're also aside the fact that rice and beans takes a good amount of time to prepare, which is a problem if you're working 16 hours a day - making rice takes 30 minutes and that is coming out of your sleep.
But most importantly, only having $4 at a time is how a lot of poor people have to shop. They have $4 today. Maybe they have $4 every work day as a day laborer. But they don't necessarily have $100 at the start of the week to plan everything out.
You're also aside the fact that rice and beans takes a good amount of time to prepare, which is a problem if you're working 16 hours a day - making rice takes 30 minutes and that is coming out of your sleep.
But most importantly, only having $4 at a time is how a lot of poor people have to shop. They have $4 today. Maybe they have $4 every work day as a day laborer. But they don't necessarily have $100 at the start of the week to plan everything out.
"But it's also boring and soulcrushing to have everyday" It's also rich in vegetable protein and a great source of fiber.
Geez, when I think of "boring and soulcrushing" meals I think of SOYLENT not a nutritious meal enjoyed by tens of millions across LATAM on a daily basis.
Just plain rice and plain beans every day? I think there is a lot of work that goes into preparation you're willfully ignoring for in making it less boring and soulcrushing.
This is precisely why I avoided using adjectives such as savory or delicious. Taste is entirely subjective and varies widely from individual to individual. Nutrition on the other is based on scientific fact, hence why I chose to use terms such as: nutrients, fiber, protein.
Btw, I find the term "souldcrushing" to be an insult to the millions of individuals who rely on such food staples for their daily nutritional intake. Go do a quick search for levels of diabetes and obesity among nations which rely on plant based diets and then come back and talk to me about soulcrushing.
Btw, I find the term "souldcrushing" to be an insult to the millions of individuals who rely on such food staples for their daily nutritional intake. Go do a quick search for levels of diabetes and obesity among nations which rely on plant based diets and then come back and talk to me about soulcrushing.
You seem to have a very utilitarian view of food that most people do not have: the average person does not quantify food purely in terms of their nutritional value, and enjoying the taste of it is a pretty big factor for if they want to eat it every day or not!
And again, comparing subsisting on "$30 of rice and beans" is a completely different proposition to "nations which rely on plant based diets": people in these nations are not eating unflavored rice and beans every day.
And again, comparing subsisting on "$30 of rice and beans" is a completely different proposition to "nations which rely on plant based diets": people in these nations are not eating unflavored rice and beans every day.
The op mentioned "$100 is plenty to afford groceries at a grocery store." Surely some of that could go into things like: salt and garlic, no?
You also talk about "the average person" which makes me seriously wonder what you mean by this? What is an average person in your world view? I've had the opportunity to live in 3 different continents and I'd be hard pressed to describe an average person to you. Perhaps you are right and my views are a bit utilitarian, but I can assure you that my soul is not crushed whenever I sit down to eat a plate of moros y cristianos.
At $100/week you can trivially have have chicken every dinner. You made it $30/week to justify rice and beans as the sole meal. Which makes it harder to purchase addons. Especially if that works out to $7.50/person/week for a family of 4. Just over $1.07/person/day doesn't leave a lot of extra money.
>and enjoying the taste of it is a pretty big factor for if they want to eat it every day or not!
Yeah and people only enjoy the loudest music because they have to turn the volume down which makes everything else sound worse...
Sugar is like that, as you get used to the sugar rush, everything else tastes worse but only relatively worse, not absolutely worse.
Yeah and people only enjoy the loudest music because they have to turn the volume down which makes everything else sound worse...
Sugar is like that, as you get used to the sugar rush, everything else tastes worse but only relatively worse, not absolutely worse.
I'm sorry but
>username
>username
> Go do a quick search for levels of diabetes and obesity among nations which rely on plant based diets
And none of them rely on just rice and beans. They use spices and herb to make things taste better. You keep reading "rice and beans are soulcrushing" as "vegan food bad". When it's really a) repetitive and b) requires a lot of labor to make tasty. Most Asian saucy dishes are around making rice tastier.
And none of them rely on just rice and beans. They use spices and herb to make things taste better. You keep reading "rice and beans are soulcrushing" as "vegan food bad". When it's really a) repetitive and b) requires a lot of labor to make tasty. Most Asian saucy dishes are around making rice tastier.
If you believe that anyone counting cents is aware or concerned with it being "rich in protein" by your standards then count yourself among the disconnected. Survival is first.
"Geez"
"Geez"
I used to volunteer to feed the homeless vegan meals in downtown LA and also spent 2 years volunteering for a vegetarian soup kitchen in Copenhagen. Clearly you are the expert on the matter and I'm clearly the one "disconnected" from reality.
I don't know why we blame the poor for this but a bad diet is quite literally bad macro economics and good micro economics for the companies making the profits.
It's especially bad with all the fake/bullshit nutritional science that has to be debunked which created a whole weight loss industry.
Shitty refined carbs and sugar/corn syrup might save you money over the short term but over the long term you're going to pay the price with massive health issues. Considering most poor people's greatest asset is their own body that's false economics.
It's especially bad with all the fake/bullshit nutritional science that has to be debunked which created a whole weight loss industry.
Shitty refined carbs and sugar/corn syrup might save you money over the short term but over the long term you're going to pay the price with massive health issues. Considering most poor people's greatest asset is their own body that's false economics.
With an electric pressure cooker, say Instapot ($60 new, 11/23/21), prep time for rice is less than 3 minutes, and beans even less. Just did it. Cooking time from 1 cup beans (no presoak) to cooked is 1 hour, two cups rice to cooked is 20 minutes. Maybe you can do both combined at the same time in an hour. Total time of involvement by chef…about 5 minutes. And the pot keeps it warm until you wake up from your nap.
Don’t go “Four Yorkshiremen” on the price of the pressure cooker. You can get it for less used, and it’s a perfect present from anyone who knows money is an issue for you. Maybe free at dumpsters when college students are clearing out their dorm rooms.
Re: the “boring and soul rushing” bit…I recommend bringing that up with anyone in Mexico or Latin America. Or are those type of people just…different (or more creative)?
Don’t go “Four Yorkshiremen” on the price of the pressure cooker. You can get it for less used, and it’s a perfect present from anyone who knows money is an issue for you. Maybe free at dumpsters when college students are clearing out their dorm rooms.
Re: the “boring and soul rushing” bit…I recommend bringing that up with anyone in Mexico or Latin America. Or are those type of people just…different (or more creative)?
I also have a pressure cooker, cooking time for rice is nowhere close to 3 minutes, it's about 30 minutes.
Rice and beans is a basis. There's also a lot of corn. But it's not that those people are different, it's that preparation takes a real amount of time.
There's also the time cost and, in the case of Costco, membership cost. Plus the general lack of knowledge of all of the above.
With $100 perhaps I could walk into Costco and get huge quantities of maybe 1/4 of what I need in a given week, and because I bought it at Costco instead of Dollar Tree those items will last me two months instead of a week. But now I have to go to Dollar Tree anyway and that's hard because I work 6 days a week and Costco is really far away because I live in a rural town where even a Walmart is at least 20 minutes away.
It's of course smarter to take the 20 minute drive to Walmart and save even there, but if I'm rural and uneducated I probably don't know that and assume that the per unit price at Dollar Tree is roughly the same as Walmart.
With $100 perhaps I could walk into Costco and get huge quantities of maybe 1/4 of what I need in a given week, and because I bought it at Costco instead of Dollar Tree those items will last me two months instead of a week. But now I have to go to Dollar Tree anyway and that's hard because I work 6 days a week and Costco is really far away because I live in a rural town where even a Walmart is at least 20 minutes away.
It's of course smarter to take the 20 minute drive to Walmart and save even there, but if I'm rural and uneducated I probably don't know that and assume that the per unit price at Dollar Tree is roughly the same as Walmart.
Except it's not just a cash flow problem, it's first and foremost a community collapse problem. Poor immigrants buy in bulk and share all the time. Eventually the only way to avoid poverty is effectively cooperating with other people - at work to accomplish tasks worth paying for, social networking to get a job, staying married to provide for children. I am not patronizing anyone here, just acknowledging that their troubles have many more dimensions than just unit prices of small portions of various goods.
Yes, depopulation of small towns accompanies a lot of this, which means you have isolated seniors and the disadvantaged making up a lot of rural places.
But the economic incentives to leave it all behind for the big city are strong. The internet makes it better, in theory, but there’s an online political divide, too.
But the economic incentives to leave it all behind for the big city are strong. The internet makes it better, in theory, but there’s an online political divide, too.
They may not have the space for a barrel of Pine-sol either.
When I was a college student I priced Walmart and the dollar store on over one hundred items. My experience was that the dollar store was indeed cheaper than other sources.
I did notice that some of the products (like deodorant) typically "the sell by" date was much faster, but that wasn't a deterrent to me at the time.
I bought from the Dollar Store exclusively for 3 years for two reasons : 1) It was cheaper 2) the closest competitive store was 20 miles away
I did notice that some of the products (like deodorant) typically "the sell by" date was much faster, but that wasn't a deterrent to me at the time.
I bought from the Dollar Store exclusively for 3 years for two reasons : 1) It was cheaper 2) the closest competitive store was 20 miles away
In addition, there's people that run out of money at the end of the month and need smaller size packages even if the per unit cost is higher.
>Dollar stores very often aren’t cheaper than other sources for similar products especially for grocery items (which they tend to have very limited selections of.)
Some products are. Especially the unhealthy-- candy and soda is cheaper. I used to get bread there, they'd have the same bread as nicer stores just closer to the 'best by' date. But it tasted fine to me. I would get dishes and cups, silverware, and socks. Are ended up being cheaper than even Walmart. It can be cost effective even if you have other options
Some products are. Especially the unhealthy-- candy and soda is cheaper. I used to get bread there, they'd have the same bread as nicer stores just closer to the 'best by' date. But it tasted fine to me. I would get dishes and cups, silverware, and socks. Are ended up being cheaper than even Walmart. It can be cost effective even if you have other options
How often do you need to buy dishes, cups and socks?
"Buy once cry once" only works when you have money. If all you can afford are dollar store socks, you're going to be buying a lot of dollar store socks. Being poor sucks.
Of course dollar store socks don't last as long as nicer ones but (I haven't run the numbers) they may very well still be the cheapest (or damn close) on a per day of use basis.
The cheapest things being the most cost effective uncommon for goods that are consumable due to long term wear and tear. You need to actually run the analysis for any given class of product.
The cheapest things being the most cost effective uncommon for goods that are consumable due to long term wear and tear. You need to actually run the analysis for any given class of product.
This for sure. Been wearing a particular brand of socks for the last few years, a little more expensive. They fit great but I’m not sure they last any longer than my cheap ones did.
There are also plenty of items that will be treated as disposable no matter the “quality” in real life. A $20 toilet plunger that sits unused for a couple of years will have dry rot on the rubber and break on the first or second use the same as a $1 plunger.
There are also plenty of items that will be treated as disposable no matter the “quality” in real life. A $20 toilet plunger that sits unused for a couple of years will have dry rot on the rubber and break on the first or second use the same as a $1 plunger.
My point is it's such a rare purchase it doesn't really matter if the price even doubles for the cheapest ones, especially compared to regular quality items, that may last marginally longer but are a lot more expensive.
1$ socks 4 times/year << 20$ socks 1 time/year even if the socks double in price. And that's with the assumption that 1$ socks are 4 times more likely to break, which is incredibly pessimistic.
Not the case for bread! 1$ bread twice a week for a year starts to look bleak if it increases in price.
1$ socks 4 times/year << 20$ socks 1 time/year even if the socks double in price. And that's with the assumption that 1$ socks are 4 times more likely to break, which is incredibly pessimistic.
Not the case for bread! 1$ bread twice a week for a year starts to look bleak if it increases in price.
Everytime you get evicted and the landlord throws your stuff on the curb
>Dollar stores very often aren’t cheaper than other sources for similar products especially for grocery items (which they tend to have very limited selections of.)
This isn't true for many of the core staple items sold by traditional retail and dollar channels. There are many identical or equivalent products that are sold at significantly lower price points.
I know this because I've literally read product cannibalization reports the retailers produce to quantify the margin loss associated with sales via the dollar channel.
This isn't true for many of the core staple items sold by traditional retail and dollar channels. There are many identical or equivalent products that are sold at significantly lower price points.
I know this because I've literally read product cannibalization reports the retailers produce to quantify the margin loss associated with sales via the dollar channel.
Can also see this by finding basically any product on Amazon and then being suggested like 30 competitors offering the same the same thing made in the same factory.
This is my experience with Dollar General when on trips and stopping for cheap snacks. Only the no brand generic items are cheap. Name brand items are not.
Dollar Tree, on the other hand, every item is a dollar and it's possible to get cheap cereal and other groceries but many small things like candy are more expensive.
Dollar Tree, on the other hand, every item is a dollar and it's possible to get cheap cereal and other groceries but many small things like candy are more expensive.
Just because a store has 'dollar' in its name doesn't mean it's a dollar store. Dollar General in particular is not the kind of store where all or even most things are a dollar, which was the traditional meaning of 'dollar store'.
At least your own source notes this: "And despite their names, many dollar chains, including Family Dollar and Dollar General, sell items that cost $10 or more. Dollar Tree remains the only major retailer that continues to price its entire inventory for $1."
I shopped at a couple Dollar Generals on a road trip this past summer (it was interesting to see how many towns we passed through had one, as opposed to some other brand) and it seemed to me like a scaled down Fred Meyer, or a super scaled down Walmart. Maybe a scaled up gas station? And that's fine for most people, as evidenced by their market success. They tend to stock the same popular stuff as a bigger grocery store would. But you're not magically going to pay $1 for your full sized frozen pizza just because of the name. Indeed I can see an ad advertising two-for-$8 Tombstone pizzas, which is about the same as routine sales at my local Safeway in the rich Seattle area.
(And an edit for your edit, you're vaguely complaining that something is wrong for the subset of people where such stores are the only option, as if shipping and delivery don't exist, but whatever, you want them to have no options? I know you probably don't but it'd be more constructive to articulate what you actually want.)
At least your own source notes this: "And despite their names, many dollar chains, including Family Dollar and Dollar General, sell items that cost $10 or more. Dollar Tree remains the only major retailer that continues to price its entire inventory for $1."
I shopped at a couple Dollar Generals on a road trip this past summer (it was interesting to see how many towns we passed through had one, as opposed to some other brand) and it seemed to me like a scaled down Fred Meyer, or a super scaled down Walmart. Maybe a scaled up gas station? And that's fine for most people, as evidenced by their market success. They tend to stock the same popular stuff as a bigger grocery store would. But you're not magically going to pay $1 for your full sized frozen pizza just because of the name. Indeed I can see an ad advertising two-for-$8 Tombstone pizzas, which is about the same as routine sales at my local Safeway in the rich Seattle area.
(And an edit for your edit, you're vaguely complaining that something is wrong for the subset of people where such stores are the only option, as if shipping and delivery don't exist, but whatever, you want them to have no options? I know you probably don't but it'd be more constructive to articulate what you actually want.)
"In the US, half of shoppers buy groceries from a dollar store."
I do not think it means half of Americans buy groceries from dollar general. I do not think it means of all those who shop groceries, half of them buy it from dollar general. I think it means, half of the people who buy stuff at dollar store also buy some groceries there. It does not mean much when put it that way.
I am familiar with poor people's shopping habits. The biggest advantage that Dollar stores have over others is not the price but rather their convenient location. A lot of Indians/Chinese students who come on shoestring budget would often buy lot of junk food from dollar store because they did not own car. For other items such as rice etc. they would request me to buy a large bag for them and then divide it among themselves. Similarly, trip to walmart etc. were rationed mostly because they did not own cars. People who owned cars on other hand could stretch their budgets even more. It was not uncommon for 5 of the folks to share one car, share a costco membership and buy in bulk and save lot of money in the process.
I do not think it means half of Americans buy groceries from dollar general. I do not think it means of all those who shop groceries, half of them buy it from dollar general. I think it means, half of the people who buy stuff at dollar store also buy some groceries there. It does not mean much when put it that way.
I am familiar with poor people's shopping habits. The biggest advantage that Dollar stores have over others is not the price but rather their convenient location. A lot of Indians/Chinese students who come on shoestring budget would often buy lot of junk food from dollar store because they did not own car. For other items such as rice etc. they would request me to buy a large bag for them and then divide it among themselves. Similarly, trip to walmart etc. were rationed mostly because they did not own cars. People who owned cars on other hand could stretch their budgets even more. It was not uncommon for 5 of the folks to share one car, share a costco membership and buy in bulk and save lot of money in the process.
The big problem with this is that Dollar Stores generally don't have a produce section. Everything is in a box, bag, or can. This is not healthy. $40/week for a single person isn't an easy food budget, but I think could manage that at my grocery store. It's $5.71 per day for three meals. You really need to optimize for calories. Pasta, dried beans, potatoes, not much meat or dairy, even produce is a bit of a luxury. This is the kind of budget that puts those "just drink one less Starbucks coffee a day" comments into perspective. And forget about eating out, even a single fast food meal would blow your entire budget for the day. This becomes a very serious challenge if he's trying to feed a family of 4 on that budget.
> You really need to optimize for calories. Pasta, dried beans, potatoes, not much meat or dairy, even produce is a bit of a luxury.
Pasta, rice, beans, and potatoes are good for calories but time consuming to prepare. They're also difficult to prepare if you've got a shitty stove, a lot of cheap apartments have ridiculously terrible electric stoves. The above food are also bland without some seasoning which is another thing to buy. A microwave a one or two good microwave safe containers is usually much cheaper, faster, and more consistent.
If you're on $5 a day to eat you'll get more variety and options just getting canned food. While dollar stores lack fresh produce they usually have a fair amount of canned produce. While obviously not as good it's better than pasta and rice every day.
Pasta, rice, beans, and potatoes are good for calories but time consuming to prepare. They're also difficult to prepare if you've got a shitty stove, a lot of cheap apartments have ridiculously terrible electric stoves. The above food are also bland without some seasoning which is another thing to buy. A microwave a one or two good microwave safe containers is usually much cheaper, faster, and more consistent.
If you're on $5 a day to eat you'll get more variety and options just getting canned food. While dollar stores lack fresh produce they usually have a fair amount of canned produce. While obviously not as good it's better than pasta and rice every day.
Everything may be in a box, bag, or can (perhaps even frozen!) but that doesn't mean it's not healthy. Nor does availability of produce mean a particular individual is going to buy a (presumably healthy?) sack of apples over that (presumably unhealthy?) super sugary apple juice, or box of Apple Jacks cereal.
Philosophically, man, humans weren't meant to have fresh produce of all kinds from all over the world year-round. That a lot of us do can be a nice luxury for some, but I think it'd be really hard to justify such a state as a necessary component of a healthy diet.
I agree with you that budgeting sucks and is harder the less you have, though.
Philosophically, man, humans weren't meant to have fresh produce of all kinds from all over the world year-round. That a lot of us do can be a nice luxury for some, but I think it'd be really hard to justify such a state as a necessary component of a healthy diet.
I agree with you that budgeting sucks and is harder the less you have, though.
Completely off topic but as someone who had to do something equivalent in an European country you can eat well for less than 40$ a week if you know how to cook.
Buying a whole chicken is far less expensive that buying cuts and is a cheap source of meat. You can make good stock from the bones. Vegetables at the end of their shelf life are often substantially marked down and you can often freeze what you cook with them (sauce and curry for exemple). Rice is very cheap, polenta too. Fresh pasta are easy to make and delicious as are homemade tortillas. Eggs are only 16c a piece. Fresh garlic and ginger are not too expensive and with a small selection of spices and soy sauce they will go a long way in making things better. Then, you can somewhat easily grow basil, parsley, thymes and cilantro on a window sill.
Olive oil and butter were the only expensive product I used to buy but a little goes a long way.
Buying a whole chicken is far less expensive that buying cuts and is a cheap source of meat. You can make good stock from the bones. Vegetables at the end of their shelf life are often substantially marked down and you can often freeze what you cook with them (sauce and curry for exemple). Rice is very cheap, polenta too. Fresh pasta are easy to make and delicious as are homemade tortillas. Eggs are only 16c a piece. Fresh garlic and ginger are not too expensive and with a small selection of spices and soy sauce they will go a long way in making things better. Then, you can somewhat easily grow basil, parsley, thymes and cilantro on a window sill.
Olive oil and butter were the only expensive product I used to buy but a little goes a long way.
> $40/week for a single person isn't an easy food budget
What? One person can easily get by on $40/week for food.
What? One person can easily get by on $40/week for food.
Start working it out at your grocery store. It's not as easy as it looks.
I'm not saying it is impossible, far from it, but you do have to be conscious of every single purchase. That head of broccoli is $2 this week? Maybe not in the budget. Apples are up to $1/each again, those are right out. These aren't crazy organic prices either, this is regular produce and store brands. This goes double if you're trying to eat a healthy balanced diet and not going for a college kid ramen diet.
Even worse with a budget so small it is hard to take advantage of buying in bulk to save money. Buy a 50lb sack of potatoes and you can't afford to each much of anything else for the week. Buying flour to make bread is a great cost saver when you are buying in 40lb bags, but not so great in the 5lb bags with the markup.
I'm not saying it is impossible, far from it, but you do have to be conscious of every single purchase. That head of broccoli is $2 this week? Maybe not in the budget. Apples are up to $1/each again, those are right out. These aren't crazy organic prices either, this is regular produce and store brands. This goes double if you're trying to eat a healthy balanced diet and not going for a college kid ramen diet.
Even worse with a budget so small it is hard to take advantage of buying in bulk to save money. Buy a 50lb sack of potatoes and you can't afford to each much of anything else for the week. Buying flour to make bread is a great cost saver when you are buying in 40lb bags, but not so great in the 5lb bags with the markup.
[deleted]
The dollar store I go to has a big frozen food section including frozen veggies which are as nutritious as fresh as far as I’ve heard.
> In the US, half of shoppers buy groceries from a dollar store.
I think you are misreading the (ambiguous) mashed.com text, "More than half of shoppers now visit dollar stores to buy groceries, eMarketer reports, up from 21 percent just a few years ago.". It does not mean that more than half of all grocery shoppers buy their groceries at dollar stores, but that more than half of dollar store shoppers are shopping at the dollar store to buy groceries.
Actual market share of dollar stores in the grocery business is 2.9%, but this is expected to increase to 3.2%
https://www.supermarketnews.com/issues-trends/will-supermark...
I think you are misreading the (ambiguous) mashed.com text, "More than half of shoppers now visit dollar stores to buy groceries, eMarketer reports, up from 21 percent just a few years ago.". It does not mean that more than half of all grocery shoppers buy their groceries at dollar stores, but that more than half of dollar store shoppers are shopping at the dollar store to buy groceries.
Actual market share of dollar stores in the grocery business is 2.9%, but this is expected to increase to 3.2%
https://www.supermarketnews.com/issues-trends/will-supermark...
> afford
Afford is an elusive concept. Dollar stores are often more expensive per-unit, but cheaper per-package. If the shoppers had better access to financing, some might choose to take a longer trip to, say, Costco, and buy things at a cheaper per-unit price in a more expensive package.
Afford is an elusive concept. Dollar stores are often more expensive per-unit, but cheaper per-package. If the shoppers had better access to financing, some might choose to take a longer trip to, say, Costco, and buy things at a cheaper per-unit price in a more expensive package.
Pretty sure the idea of financing groceries, or common daily/weekly expendables isn't a very good one.
Why do you think payday loan shops exist?
Primarily to pay government fines and auto repair bills. Nobody is getting a payday loan to buy groceries. They're doing it to stave off things that if ignored will cause them to lose their income and slide further into poverty.
They're poor, not stupid.
They're poor, not stupid.
Actually the most common reason is to pay rent because you can't bill that on a credit cart.
Depends on the price, of course. Compare the per-unit prices, your warehousing costs, and the interest rate on the loan.
Dollar General is not a "dollar store"
> Even though Dollar General has the word “dollar” in its name, everything in the store doesn’t go for a buck; their merchandise is just low priced.
https://www.rd.com/article/dollar-tree-vs-dollar-general/
> Even though Dollar General has the word “dollar” in its name, everything in the store doesn’t go for a buck; their merchandise is just low priced.
https://www.rd.com/article/dollar-tree-vs-dollar-general/
Also, a lot of places that don't have a local grocery store do have a dollar store. You can make $40 into a pretty luxurious week of food at Aldi if you know how to cook, and a perfectly fine week of food if you don't. The problem is when the nearest Aldi is miles away, or you don't drive.
Maybe HN is richer than I thought, but I shop at Dollar Stores all the time and have a very good paying job. And I’m not alone, it’s not just poor people who shop there (go to the one in Daly City and see the clientele).
This thread comes across as incredibly out of touch. It’s like a bunch of upper middle class who imagine themselves lower middle class and anyone who shops at Walmart (yuck!) or Dollar Store must be destitute. Despite those stores being pretty average places to shop for most Americans.
You can get killer deals there. They tend to sell two different things:1) excess stock they got cheap and sell cheap and 2) normally high margin items for less.
Their health section is amazing compared to say CVS or Walgreens. We’re talking 80% cheaper for the same thing.
Not everything is cheaper but a lot of it is.
This thread comes across as incredibly out of touch. It’s like a bunch of upper middle class who imagine themselves lower middle class and anyone who shops at Walmart (yuck!) or Dollar Store must be destitute. Despite those stores being pretty average places to shop for most Americans.
You can get killer deals there. They tend to sell two different things:1) excess stock they got cheap and sell cheap and 2) normally high margin items for less.
Their health section is amazing compared to say CVS or Walgreens. We’re talking 80% cheaper for the same thing.
Not everything is cheaper but a lot of it is.
There are other reasons that people buy from dollar stores. I occasionally buy a few things at Dollar Tree when I want a smaller portion sizes for some basic goods. I also just like going when I'm in the mood to impulse buy stuff for hobbies etc.
Dollar General, on the other hand, has notoriously positioned itself in underserved areas. While it's true that many of these areas are underserved because they are low-income areas, that's not necessarily the case. In semi-rural areas, Dollar General is often the closest general goods store, and people of all income levels will go there.
Dollar General, on the other hand, has notoriously positioned itself in underserved areas. While it's true that many of these areas are underserved because they are low-income areas, that's not necessarily the case. In semi-rural areas, Dollar General is often the closest general goods store, and people of all income levels will go there.
His Chrysler 300?
This thing Wikipedia describes as a V8 powered “full-size luxury car”?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_300
This thing Wikipedia describes as a V8 powered “full-size luxury car”?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_300
In my experience it is incredibly common for people without much money to have cars that seem impractical, because they are easy to buy but hard to maintain. I think this is pretty common with cars that were very popular when they were first released (the 300 was) so the market is saturated with old ones in rough condition that are cheap to purchase but terrible to maintain.
Sample size of 1, but my roommate in college (I was in college, he was not) went through 3 cars in the amount of time I had just 1 because he only ever had enough money to buy a crappy car and had terrible credit. They all broke down pretty quickly so he ended up spending more in the long-run, but in the end he had to get to work, so he did what he had to do.
Sample size of 1, but my roommate in college (I was in college, he was not) went through 3 cars in the amount of time I had just 1 because he only ever had enough money to buy a crappy car and had terrible credit. They all broke down pretty quickly so he ended up spending more in the long-run, but in the end he had to get to work, so he did what he had to do.
Well cared for FCA products (and several other makes) are rare because they offer permissive financing and tons of incentives and intentionally design to keep low MSRPs. This results in lots of of people of more modest means owning them initially. That is a recipe for hard miles and minimal maintenance.
Your average Chrysler 300 is likely to have far more wear on the bump stops and in the back seats and trunk and far fewer scheduled maintenance items done than a 4Runner or some other car that has high class first owners.
Your average Chrysler 300 is likely to have far more wear on the bump stops and in the back seats and trunk and far fewer scheduled maintenance items done than a 4Runner or some other car that has high class first owners.
I was wondering why my dodge dropped in value so fast. I kept it over 8 years so it averaged out but those first years were tough.
I had to repair a thermostat and condenser in those 8 years, but I found it was much easier to work on then my brother in law’s Ford - the thermostat was impossible to get to without destroying your hand on that one.
I had to repair a thermostat and condenser in those 8 years, but I found it was much easier to work on then my brother in law’s Ford - the thermostat was impossible to get to without destroying your hand on that one.
It probably has way more to do with quality & reliability. You could treat a 4Runner like absolute shit for a decade and it would probably have more quality miles & years left in it than most other makes (much less American vehicles, sadly).
If you really want to take a gamble though, buy a Porsche Cayenne from 2002-2009, there’s like 3 or more for sale in every medium sized city for $8k max. If you drive it for 2 years and the transmission explodes, hey $333 / month Porsche SUV minus scrap! If it dies in 6 months, not such a great deal.
If you really want to take a gamble though, buy a Porsche Cayenne from 2002-2009, there’s like 3 or more for sale in every medium sized city for $8k max. If you drive it for 2 years and the transmission explodes, hey $333 / month Porsche SUV minus scrap! If it dies in 6 months, not such a great deal.
These are a dime a dozen on the used market.. Could easily be one from the mid 2000s. Literally 1-3k for a 2005-08 (condition varies of course)
Probably more like a cheap V6 leaking or burning oil. Something like this [0] (Not that I'm accusing that specific one, but I wouldn't bet against it either)
[0] https://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/vehicledetails.xhtm...
[0] https://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/vehicledetails.xhtm...
Just about every full size luxury car depreciates faster then anything else on the market meaning an older luxury sedan COULD be affordable to the average person. All though I would not consider this a smart idea unless you are mechanically inclined. Chrysler sold more V6 300's than V8's anyway -- Try again.
In no world is a Chrysler 300 a luxury car.
It isn't a good luxury car, but it objectively is one. "Luxury car" is a description of market segment, not a measure of quality.
It's usually a greater-than decade old vehicle, common in the early-mid 2000's. Luxury cars (especially American luxury cars) have a trend of being extremely inexpensive to purchase compared to other vehicles when the age vs. their original price.
For example, a similar year Toyota, Subaru, or pre-CVT Nissans will hold higher values than equivalent American brand vehicles, with some exceptions.
For example, a similar year Toyota, Subaru, or pre-CVT Nissans will hold higher values than equivalent American brand vehicles, with some exceptions.
>For example, a similar year Toyota, Subaru, or pre-CVT Nissans will hold higher values than equivalent American brand vehicles, with some exceptions.
Cars move down the economic ladder as they age. A similiar year Camry, Accord, or other InternetApproved(TM) cheap to run commuter car, is going to be in much nicer shape because it started a few dozen rungs higher than that '04 Impala, Sebring or whatever domestic we're comparing to. The price will reflect that niceness.
The Camry that's the same price as the average '04 Impala is going to be in equivalently rough shape and will be an older model year because it took it longer to get to that point because it started in nicer hands.
Seriously, punch in a $3000 price limit into your preferred classified section and see what it gets you.
These people are poor, not stupid. They're buying Big3/Korean/VW/Nissan sedans because that's what's available in the best condition and lowest miles at that price point because nobody wants them because they're not as practical as crossovers and people making white collar money don't fetishize them as ideal beater cars the way they do Toyotas and Hondas of that era.
Cars move down the economic ladder as they age. A similiar year Camry, Accord, or other InternetApproved(TM) cheap to run commuter car, is going to be in much nicer shape because it started a few dozen rungs higher than that '04 Impala, Sebring or whatever domestic we're comparing to. The price will reflect that niceness.
The Camry that's the same price as the average '04 Impala is going to be in equivalently rough shape and will be an older model year because it took it longer to get to that point because it started in nicer hands.
Seriously, punch in a $3000 price limit into your preferred classified section and see what it gets you.
These people are poor, not stupid. They're buying Big3/Korean/VW/Nissan sedans because that's what's available in the best condition and lowest miles at that price point because nobody wants them because they're not as practical as crossovers and people making white collar money don't fetishize them as ideal beater cars the way they do Toyotas and Hondas of that era.
And there are 2006 Chrysler 300s in the Bay Area for under $4 grand a piece on craigslist. As an asking price. The parts seem fairly affordable as well, judging from the parted out ones also on the bay area craiglist.
It's entirely reasonable that poor people have older model luxury cars, either purchased 3rd hand or from when they were better off financially. After all, how much do you think you'd pocket selling your old 2006 [any non-collectable car] if you had to buy something new to drive around.
It's entirely reasonable that poor people have older model luxury cars, either purchased 3rd hand or from when they were better off financially. After all, how much do you think you'd pocket selling your old 2006 [any non-collectable car] if you had to buy something new to drive around.
Yeah. If you want a V8 sedan on a budget Chrysler 300s are a great option (as were the used Ford panther family of cars that preceded them in that market niche).
....which is why they're so stigmatized by the white collar well to do crowd.
....which is why they're so stigmatized by the white collar well to do crowd.
They are stigmatized because they are garbage quality FCA vehicles.
My first car was a luxury car... fifteen years before I bought it. I like to think I got a good deal thanks to the ugly tomato red interior.
I mean, it probably was a "luxury" car when it was new. They do not hold their value though.
[deleted]
My city’s Craigslist has several listed for sale:
- 06, $500
- 06, $4k
- 06, $12k
- 07, $5.9k
- 08, $2k
- 08, $6.2k
- 11, $17k
- 12, $12k
- 13, $7.5k
- 13, $7.9k
- 06, $500
- 06, $4k
- 06, $12k
- 07, $5.9k
- 08, $2k
- 08, $6.2k
- 11, $17k
- 12, $12k
- 13, $7.5k
- 13, $7.9k
A 50lb bag of white rice can be had on Amazon for $88, which translates into roughly 1k calories/$1 delivered to your doorstep for free in two-three days. You can get similar calorie/$ value with pasta, peanut butter, oatmeal. No one who has $40/week to spend on food in America needs to go anywhere close to hungry if they don't waste their money and time driving to dollar stores to buy overpriced non-bulk groceries. You Americans can't afford frozen pizza and think that means you're suffering
If someone only has $40 for groceries, how will they be able to come up with $88 for just plain rice?
The answer is that they can’t get those same discounts buying larger scale items.
I agree there are still some cases where people may spend irresponsibly, but it’s a different problem than “cheaper calories exist in large enough quantities”
The answer is that they can’t get those same discounts buying larger scale items.
I agree there are still some cases where people may spend irresponsibly, but it’s a different problem than “cheaper calories exist in large enough quantities”
Ok, so you now need:
A credit card + bank account
A stable address and room to store bulk stuff
A place to get packages where they won't be stolen
$88
A credit card + bank account
A stable address and room to store bulk stuff
A place to get packages where they won't be stolen
$88
You’re talking homeless which is a subset of poor.
Whenever someone says “the poor can do this” someone comes along to give an example of poor people who can’t. We get it, but there are plenty of poor who can do those things.
Whenever someone says “the poor can do this” someone comes along to give an example of poor people who can’t. We get it, but there are plenty of poor who can do those things.
You can add cash to your Amazon account at AllPoint ATMs, CVS, Walgreens, RiteAid, GameStop, 7-11 and many other stores.
That price is not even cheap, grocery stores have rice at a much lower unit price in much smaller packages. Dollar store rice is likely in between them and still a very solid calorie deal. There is still a requirement that one has time, equipment & energy to cook with, though.
> A 50lb bag of white rice can be had on Amazon for $88
There's an obvious problem with cost per unit tricks like this. You have to be able to front the money to buy the big bag of rice. If your food budget is $40/wk, how are you going to spend $88 on a bag of rice? With your non-existent savings account? By eating plain rice and literally nothing else for > two weeks?
There's an obvious problem with cost per unit tricks like this. You have to be able to front the money to buy the big bag of rice. If your food budget is $40/wk, how are you going to spend $88 on a bag of rice? With your non-existent savings account? By eating plain rice and literally nothing else for > two weeks?
I think the point is that people on the poverty line eventually have to start making decisions that will break them out of the cycle. There are plenty of programs out there that will do just that. A 50lb bag of rice might very well be too much upfront but it might mean hitting the local food pantry while building up a pantry full of staples from EBT.
I don't pretend this is an easy process but continuing to do that same and getting the same results shouldn't be surprising to anyone.
Additionally, it can't be stated enough how important it is to build up credit for these people.
You could do a community purchase with your neighbors. Where I'm from people even register officially as cooperatives in order to buy stuff at bulk with proper accounting. Now some people who are super poor might also have horrible social skills, but that is already a compounding issue and moves goal posts.
I'm picking your response, but it's typical of an archetype that's bothersome in a different way to the GP's archetype of pointing out that volume discounts exist. When you're poor, your food budget isn't a crisp reliable $40/wk that you give like an API call to the store for a constant amount of the same food with $0 left. No, the amount varies up and down, as does the kind of food you get that week, as does the amount left over after all ordinary expenses. This leads to the conclusion that if your time frame expands beyond one week, saving is possible! Even poor people understand saving up, despite archetypes like the GP imagining this is unknown to them and that their particular proposal is the best course of action, or archetypes like yours imagining that it's somehow impossible for them. Oh, and a savings account is unnecessary.
Incidentally, the median US household is said by the BLS to be capable of saving $1k/mo after all ordinary expenses. For those who actually save, a savings account typically isn't the mechanism to do it. This leads to "funny" statistics pushed by news outlets on how a huge percentage of people, even HNers who have thousands or even millions saved up in mostly liquid assets, have no savings, because they're sampling either non-existent or non-useful-and-thus-empty savings accounts.
Incidentally, the median US household is said by the BLS to be capable of saving $1k/mo after all ordinary expenses. For those who actually save, a savings account typically isn't the mechanism to do it. This leads to "funny" statistics pushed by news outlets on how a huge percentage of people, even HNers who have thousands or even millions saved up in mostly liquid assets, have no savings, because they're sampling either non-existent or non-useful-and-thus-empty savings accounts.
All good points. I was using GP’s $40/wk for the sake of argument, and “savings account” more as a figure of speech than to literally refer to a savings account (for the reasons you pointed out). I do contend that, for people who have such a small amount available for food every week, saving any amount of money (let alone $1k/mo) is extremely difficult. Life is a never ending barrage of unexpected financial hits, especially when you’re already living frugally.
As pointed out elsewhere, when you are dirt poor it's not about unit price. It's about cash flow. Very often it's impossible to drop $90 at once on anything, not to mention the luxury of having Amazon Prime.
I don’t think that was supposed to be the bottom example, it’s half as expensive per unit at Target for 2 lb bags.
All of the people objecting to your comment seem to believe that the poor have no access to credit. Obviously, they do, often to a dangerous extent. And obviously, a wise use of the same credit that gets plastic trash at Walmart could get bulk food. But there are people (and not just "the poor") who simply don't plan ahead, ever, and sure don't plan ahead something that will require very bland-sounding food prep, week after week after week.
I don’t think you appreciate that everything at “Dollar Tree” actually costs a dollar or at leas did.
They have a higher priced section now. Not everything is $1 at Dollar Tree any more. At least here in Colorado.
If you want to save money on groceries you should be going to Aldi or Sav a Lot, not Dollar stores. Their products are terrible (mostly house brands) and prices aren't even good.
Save a Lot's packaging and bags are extremely poor quality. Try dropping one of their yogurt containers (when it's not past its expiry date or moldy before that) or walking a distance with one of their paper bags.
Neither of those are in rural areas. Heck, people I know in urban areas are still excited when the Aldi's come to town.
There’s one in the town of 20,000 next to me (15 minutes away) along with two other grocery stores and a Walmart.
There’s nothing in my town of 2,000 of course, though I believe there’s a Dollar-Something in another local town.
There’s nothing in my town of 2,000 of course, though I believe there’s a Dollar-Something in another local town.
I mean, nexuses of grocery stores exist in rural areas. But 15 minutes is pretty close for such a town. 5% of rural people live in a food desert. Meanwhile you probably live in Ohio or Illinois, because if you look at the Aldi map, that seems to be where most rural Aldis are. (WI and FL are the next guesses.) But, with three exceptions in NM and a bunch in Cali, there are no Aldis west of Dallas. That's a huge area.
Minnesota, actually.
For what it’s worth I don’t shop there. The one time I did I was unimpressed - that was the first time I’ve ever seen fruit flies in a grocery store. I also needed to go to my regular grocery store after and it was a huge timesuck.
For what it’s worth I don’t shop there. The one time I did I was unimpressed - that was the first time I’ve ever seen fruit flies in a grocery store. I also needed to go to my regular grocery store after and it was a huge timesuck.
Also, you're implying (2,000; 20,000) that you live in a rural area (that was the topic.) But there are a lot of suburbs of Minneapolis that seem to fit that bill.
I found Aldi to be perfectly fine, although you had to want whatever random stuff you got outside of a few fresh fruits. No flies at the ones I've been to, but that could just be because it's closer to a distribution hub? MN is the extreme ccorner of the area they serve.
I found Aldi to be perfectly fine, although you had to want whatever random stuff you got outside of a few fresh fruits. No flies at the ones I've been to, but that could just be because it's closer to a distribution hub? MN is the extreme ccorner of the area they serve.
The first model of the recent generation was 2005, so it could be a 16 year old car. A quick check on Autotrader shows these cars selling for about $6500.
That's the significance of Dollar Tree making this announcement - they are the dollar store chain that does actually price everything at $1.
> grocery shopping in dollar stores
> Dollar General
Dollar General has never been a "dollar store" in the way you're thinking.
> Dollar General
Dollar General has never been a "dollar store" in the way you're thinking.
Are they selling the same goods as walmart/target etc. or have their own branded goods?
Isn't that the motor oil that's not rated for cars after the mid-80s or something?
It was probably thrown in to give a sense of the variety available, but just about every grocery store or even gas station has cheap motor oil available. It's not like you need very much of it very often. It's just a bad article with bad quotes. I'm sure a huge number of people on HN remember weeks as a poor student and having to hack $10 to last a week or more. $40 a week, that's a luxury!
> It's not like you need very much of it very often
You never drove an old hooptie, like I did in my early years!
You never drove an old hooptie, like I did in my early years!
Oh, how I am reminded that I need to add yet another quart of oil into my Isuzu for the next two weeks.
So that’s how you keep it from rolling over.
Dollar Tree motor oil is API SN rated. It is basic oil that will work in many basic late model vehicles.
Whenever an article says cheap food is bad, just close it.
You can get a loaf of whole wheat bread for $1, or you can buy a TV dinner for $1.
Efficiency Is Everything website has researched this.
This is a low information problem, not a capitalism problem.
You can get a loaf of whole wheat bread for $1, or you can buy a TV dinner for $1.
Efficiency Is Everything website has researched this.
This is a low information problem, not a capitalism problem.
hear hear
That quote is absurd. A Chrysler 300 is a luxury car.
Eh. I mean, I know it wants to be one. And brand new I'm sure they're nice. But most 300s I see around me are old beaters you can buy (even now) for less than $6k. [0]
And if someone needs an occasional quart of oil for their car, it's likely got some miles on it. It's not some pricey luxury automobile anymore. It's just an old Chrysler.
[0] https://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/vehicledetails.xhtm...
And if someone needs an occasional quart of oil for their car, it's likely got some miles on it. It's not some pricey luxury automobile anymore. It's just an old Chrysler.
[0] https://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/vehicledetails.xhtm...
[deleted]
Chrysler 300s have been on the road for a long time. Just because new one is in the $35k range doesn’t mean that one from 10-15 years ago is that expensive. Chryslers also generally depreciate faster than say a Toyota Camry or Corolla.
Not necessarily, let's say it's a 2008, you can easily find 300 junkers now worth almost nothing.
Are these any good? I might need a car on the cheap soon.
It depends on what your criteria for "any good" are. Most cars that have depreciated rapidly do so because their maintenance burden is high. If you think you have a better-than-average ability to absorb or mitigate this risk, then it might be a wise purchase. If you cannot, it is probably an unwise purchase.
If you're mechanically inclined and have a place to do the work, pretty much any old American (due to parts availability) car is "good enough." Buying your own tools is almost always far less expensive than going to a mechanic. Time is the real cost!
It's easier now than it has been to learn how to keep cars running.
It's easier now than it has been to learn how to keep cars running.
Cool. Get hung up on one aspect of the story (for no good reason) and ignore the broader economic and societal implications.
I may be mistaking it for another car, but they also seemed to be popular with Uber drivers. So maybe he got conned into the “buy a Chrysler 300 on this here loan and drive for Uber black” thing.
They have been selling for a dollar for 35 years. I'm really curious how their inventory has changed over this period. One 2020 dollar is 40 cents in 1985 dollars, but the cost of consumer goods has decreased significantly since 1985. So I wouldn't be surprised that their package sizes have not changed much.
Related trivia: Between 1886-1959, the price of a bottle of Coke was a nickel [1].
[1] https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/11/15/165143816/why-...
Related trivia: Between 1886-1959, the price of a bottle of Coke was a nickel [1].
[1] https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/11/15/165143816/why-...
Likely through shrinkflation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrinkflation
Next time you’re at the supermarket check if the bacon brands you remember are still a pound. I bet many of them are now 12 ounces.
Next time you’re at the supermarket check if the bacon brands you remember are still a pound. I bet many of them are now 12 ounces.
12 ounces is, apparently, 0.75 pounds. It's about 340 grams.
I wish you were always 12 minutes in front of me in comment threads :)
by charging huge markup on per unit cost by reducing quantity. 3 pills of Tylenol for example for $1 instead of a bottle which may have dozens for $6 . The brands create special mini-sized packages specifically for dollar stores. Big business.
Also great for someone with an occasional sweet tooth and insufficient willpower to have junk food at the house. Sometimes I just want 4 Oreos and I’ll happily pay a huge per-unit markup to avoid eating the whole box.
ever so often I get that crazy look from the store assistant when they offer me (something like) double what your're buying for a few pence more and I say no thanks - typically I'm holding my belly whilst saying no
With often same great sized packaging only with smaller amounts inside. Very wasteful. Deodorant, chips, pills, etc all look like a normal sized bottle but in reality is a smaller size for dollar stores. I have also heard things like canned goods of say a brand of soup they have special made for places like Costco that demand higher quality ingredients where the dollar store would get lower quality versions. Perhaps cheaper meat or less of it. Still tastes like the original just that it’s not actually nutritionally the same.
This reminds me of an argument I had a few Thanksgivings ago with an aunt who loudly proclaimed that the $0.49 can of black beans from the bargain store is exactly the same as the $3.49 can of black beans from the supermarket.
Your brand name super markets dramatically mark up items that Dollar Stores don’t.
Next time your in your local Hispanic or Asian market, go and see what those same beans cost. It won’t be anywhere near the price of Safeway or Wholefoods.
Next time your in your local Hispanic or Asian market, go and see what those same beans cost. It won’t be anywhere near the price of Safeway or Wholefoods.
That could be the case, for black beans. $3.49 for a can of black beans is highway robbery. Beans are among the cheapest foods on the planet.
My local Whole Foods charges $0.89 for a 15oz can.
My local Whole Foods charges $0.89 for a 15oz can.
(Not from around there) Costco demands higher quality ingredients? I thought it was a low-end cheap bulk/wholesale place?
Costco is not low-end; it is inexpensive, but that is because its revenue model is near-zero margin on items with its profit derived from membership charges, focuses on large package sizes, etc. Reputation for quality is part of what helps it sell memberships, so its important.
Costco is known for less of a choice, but whatever choice there is you can trust it to be of a higher quality.
When I go to Costco I definitely have my guard down and don’t vet and don’t scrutinize each product as much as i would do at other stores.
When I go to Costco I definitely have my guard down and don’t vet and don’t scrutinize each product as much as i would do at other stores.
Be careful, though; this isn't necessarily the case on costco.com.
For example: https://www.costco.com/theradome-evo-laser-hair-growth-devic...
For example: https://www.costco.com/theradome-evo-laser-hair-growth-devic...
Low level laser/light therapy has been shown to promote hair growth.
I don’t have a source on that claim I believe I saw it in a video that was discussing the food supply chain. The same is true for some grocery stores. Walmart for example gets low grade fruits and veggies. Where somewhere like a Quality Foods gets higher end stuff graded better. It will be sweeter or Moreno flavourful. It sounds believable but again don’t have a source for you.
See Sharpie pens, which are sold at dollar stores with less ink.
Which is why I buy mine there. I have never run a Sharpie out of ink but I have lost them or broken them.
That’s exactly why I shop there. No sense paying $5 for 100 tablets that expire when I could spend $1 for 5 tablets that will get used.
My wife's preferred brand of pre-made iced tea recently slightly changed the packaging for their large-sized bottles. Checked, and sure enough, they dropped from 64oz to about 59oz.
[EDIT] Oh, and in the case of Everything's a Dollar (used to be better than Dollar Tree, dunno if it's still around) and similar: as someone who got a lot of toys there as a kid and has been in a handful of times in the last few years for various things, I can vouch for their toy selection being much better in the '90s.
[EDIT] Oh, and in the case of Everything's a Dollar (used to be better than Dollar Tree, dunno if it's still around) and similar: as someone who got a lot of toys there as a kid and has been in a handful of times in the last few years for various things, I can vouch for their toy selection being much better in the '90s.
What are the economics like on prepared drinks? Seems like transporting a bunch of water around is wasteful and expensive. I guess the revenues are so much greater than costs it doesn't matter - but here we have them shrinking the portion size.
>Next time you’re at the supermarket check if the bacon brands you remember are still a pound. I bet many of them are now 12 ounces.
Coffee as well.
Coffee as well.
It’s been a long time since a “half gallon” of ice cream became 3 pints in size.
Many years ago they went to 1.75 qt across the board. I was mad, but what could I do?
Then they dropped it again to 1.5 qt (3 pints), except for Tillamook. So I bought Tillamook and was happy they were the benevolent company that took a stand against shrinkfla... shit Tillamook is now 1.5 qt as well.
I'm mad again. At least they still use actual ice cream ingredients. I won't punish them for succumbing to the shrink ray. They held out longer than others.
Then they dropped it again to 1.5 qt (3 pints), except for Tillamook. So I bought Tillamook and was happy they were the benevolent company that took a stand against shrinkfla... shit Tillamook is now 1.5 qt as well.
I'm mad again. At least they still use actual ice cream ingredients. I won't punish them for succumbing to the shrink ray. They held out longer than others.
And then the inevitable "Now, 30% more!".
When you go to the grocery store now, at least locally, seems that there are more varieties in package sizes of the tiny 7.5 oz cans of coke vs the full size 12 oz cans. If you want the tiny cans a six pack or a full case is available, if you want the large cans you have to get the entire case of 12, no six pack sold. If you convert the price per ounce you get a pretty raw deal on the tiny cans. IIRC the 12 pack was only like a dollar less for the 7.5oz cans vs the 12oz 12 pack.
Those used to be 8oz cans, too, I think.
In EU stores have to provide price per kg or another relevant unit.
It's the same in the US.
Dollar Tree sells $1 steak. They are like 3oz
Globalisation happened, massive economies of scale in manufacturing.
And now globalization has equalized global workforces with purchase and compensation parity. Costs must rise.
Money is to be made on trade and labor cost deltas, but those eventually, almost thermodynamically, equalize.
Money is to be made on trade and labor cost deltas, but those eventually, almost thermodynamically, equalize.
Comparative advantage is still in effect. It just comes down to stuff like economics of scale, language, local laws, etc rather than simply ultra low wages.
An interesting long term effect of this is there is a second whiplash as stalled first world economies eventually benefit from the world catching up to them.
An interesting long term effect of this is there is a second whiplash as stalled first world economies eventually benefit from the world catching up to them.
That's one thing. Also, China is no longer buying US treasuries, which for a long time contributed to reducing US inflation via underpriced imports.
So what are they doing with the extra US dollars now?
Belt and Road Initiative:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_and_Road_Initiative
Basically, they're using it to buy American heavy equipment and build infrastructure in developing nations, principally in Africa and Central Asia. They lease the infrastructure back to the host country for cash (i.e. favorable terms of trade), and if the host country defaults, there's a clause that China can take over the infrastructure. They may have similar clauses in case of military action, though in that case, it kinda doesn't matter what the law or contract says.
It's China's version of the petrodollar-for-military-bases system. When you run a trade surplus, use that to build up infrastructure that you can take advantage of in geopolitical conflicts. Colonialism never really went away, it just got more refined.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_and_Road_Initiative
Basically, they're using it to buy American heavy equipment and build infrastructure in developing nations, principally in Africa and Central Asia. They lease the infrastructure back to the host country for cash (i.e. favorable terms of trade), and if the host country defaults, there's a clause that China can take over the infrastructure. They may have similar clauses in case of military action, though in that case, it kinda doesn't matter what the law or contract says.
It's China's version of the petrodollar-for-military-bases system. When you run a trade surplus, use that to build up infrastructure that you can take advantage of in geopolitical conflicts. Colonialism never really went away, it just got more refined.
This also contributes to increasing China's global influence, which means reducing the US's. Proxy economic war, rather than colonialism, imo.
> China's version of the petrodollar-for-military-bases system
What do you mean when you say "petrodollar for military basis system"?
Before you answer, please remember that a petrodollar is the analogue of a eurodollar -- it refers to dollar assets owned by petroleum exporting states, namely OPEC.
What do you mean when you say "petrodollar for military basis system"?
Before you answer, please remember that a petrodollar is the analogue of a eurodollar -- it refers to dollar assets owned by petroleum exporting states, namely OPEC.
Buying oil, I think. And perhaps saving some for Evergrande's rainy day.
I would trust a private inventory and accounting audit of the dollar tree for insight into inflation more than almost any government funded study.
This was inevitable, but rather than maintain the status quo or even introducing shrinkflation, they should have made the jump to 2 dollars. 1.25 is maintenance, and effectively we are still getting what a dollar used to get. 2 dollars would get us a bit more time (inflation is not going to stop) and the ability to introduce a (relative) more premium product assortment. I only mention this premium product range because the dollar stores near me now sell things such as headphones and phone accessories.
I think you're thinking of this from the wrong perspective. To me, an extra 75 cents don't really matter. I'd pay it without blinking.
But to many people in the US, going from $1 to $2 would literally double their expenses for the month and hurt an already tight budget.
"Kyle Dishman can’t afford to shop at the local grocery store anymore. Instead he goes to Dollar General, where he can make $40 stretch into a week’s worth of groceries and the occasional can of motor oil for his Chrysler 300."
If you went from $1 to $2, all of a sudden Kyle only gets to eat every other day. Half of all shoppers in the US buy groceries from a dollar store, and they aren't doing it because the Dollar General has the freshest produce in the area.
Sources:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/08/20/growing-n...
https://www.mashed.com/224027/think-twice-before-buying-food...
But to many people in the US, going from $1 to $2 would literally double their expenses for the month and hurt an already tight budget.
"Kyle Dishman can’t afford to shop at the local grocery store anymore. Instead he goes to Dollar General, where he can make $40 stretch into a week’s worth of groceries and the occasional can of motor oil for his Chrysler 300."
If you went from $1 to $2, all of a sudden Kyle only gets to eat every other day. Half of all shoppers in the US buy groceries from a dollar store, and they aren't doing it because the Dollar General has the freshest produce in the area.
Sources:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/08/20/growing-n...
https://www.mashed.com/224027/think-twice-before-buying-food...
Are you aware that Dollar Tree and Dollar General are different stores with different business models?
Dollar General does not price all their items for $1. I don't believe they ever have.
And Dollar Tree does not sell groceries (at least not any I've ever been to).
Dollar General does not price all their items for $1. I don't believe they ever have.
And Dollar Tree does not sell groceries (at least not any I've ever been to).
>And Dollar Tree does not sell groceries (at least not any I've ever been to).
May be regional, because all of them around here do. At least canned/dry goods and frozen foods. Teeny-tiny steaks. No fresh produce, obviously.
May be regional, because all of them around here do. At least canned/dry goods and frozen foods. Teeny-tiny steaks. No fresh produce, obviously.
Dollar Tree doesn't sell fresh groceries, but they certainly sell food.
https://www.nogettingoffthistrain.com/shopping/dollar-tree-g...
But even if you ignore food, the point applies to all sorts of things (cosmetics, clothing, pharmacy, etc) people go to both for at a low price point.
https://www.nogettingoffthistrain.com/shopping/dollar-tree-g...
But even if you ignore food, the point applies to all sorts of things (cosmetics, clothing, pharmacy, etc) people go to both for at a low price point.
Dollar Tree sells nonperishable and frozen-foods.
You don't have to eat twice as much because the unit price doubled. I'm pretty sure the suggestion wasn't intended to mean that they should sell the same amount of product for $2 as they now do for $1.
> This was inevitable, but rather than maintain the status quo or even introducing shrinkflation, they should have made the jump to 2 dollars.
Yeah, there's Five Below, where everything is $5 or less, and the quality of the stuff that they supply is substantially higher quality, and as a result I find it more fun to walk around there nowadays than Dollar Tree.
Yeah, there's Five Below, where everything is $5 or less, and the quality of the stuff that they supply is substantially higher quality, and as a result I find it more fun to walk around there nowadays than Dollar Tree.
Not to take it too far off-topic but Five Below's wordmark/logo is deeply unsettling.
> deeply unsettling
Care to elaborate? What about the logo makes you feel this way?
Care to elaborate? What about the logo makes you feel this way?
it's those beady little °s
That's just keyboard elitism. You wouldn't be so bothered by them if they had a proper shift-key/fn-key press. Maybe you should step outside of your ASCII bubble an realize there's a whole world of Unicode to explore that can't be encompassed by a double key-stroke.
For the longest time I thought it was a winter coat store. It wasn't until I saw beach balls out front one day that I gave them a second look.
The degree symbol is what drew me to the brand in the first place. It made it sound clever and novel. They might not need it anymore but I think it helped them become popular.
To me, it’s more that lower-case f.
Bingo.
Exactly right. Just like the US should get rid of all coins < $0.25.
But then how would the coin suppliers stay in business?
All the zinc that goes into pennies is worth $9 million per year, based on a back of the envelope calculation. Last year, zinc suppliers/miners sold $17.3 billion of the metal, and will do even more this year.
$9 million is less than a rounding error there.
$9 million is less than a rounding error there.
[deleted]
Offer $5 & $10 coins
This isn't a Chuck E. Cheese, paper notes are just fine. Nobody asked "what about the guy who makes the yokes" when John Deere took his first spin.
Other countries saved money by getting ride of low denomination coins and swapping the highest used paper currencies to coin because it typically lasts longer.
Although recent studies have shown that since we finally improved paper currency's sturdiness the $1 bill is lasting long enough now to be worth keeping around.[1]
[1]https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-19-300
Although recent studies have shown that since we finally improved paper currency's sturdiness the $1 bill is lasting long enough now to be worth keeping around.[1]
[1]https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-19-300
The "worth" of money is more than just the durability of the physical material. The #1 most important factor is its use in facilitating trade. We've introduced multiple Dollar coins into general circulation in the US and they've always failed because people culturally don't like using them, and businesses don't like wasting money accepting them.
Paper notes are extremely expensive to maintain because they can't stay in circulation long before they're worn out and need to be replaced.
We really should be using $1, $2, $5 and $10 coins
We really should be using $1, $2, $5 and $10 coins
Canada's physical currency is pretty great:
No penny; typical nickles, dimes, and quarters; loonies and toonies ($1 and $2 coins); as well as very durable and fancily-secured polymer bills for $5, $10, $20, $50, and $100.
The only complaint might be that all the bills are the same size instead of on a log-scale like eu or aus, but I prefer it that way.
I wouldn't see much value in coins >$2, bills are far simpler to carry and don't make noise or scratch screens.
No penny; typical nickles, dimes, and quarters; loonies and toonies ($1 and $2 coins); as well as very durable and fancily-secured polymer bills for $5, $10, $20, $50, and $100.
The only complaint might be that all the bills are the same size instead of on a log-scale like eu or aus, but I prefer it that way.
I wouldn't see much value in coins >$2, bills are far simpler to carry and don't make noise or scratch screens.
The GAO actually did a study on this in 2019! They determined that for the first time since they started tracking the issue this is not true. Paper bills are overall cheaper than coinage now. I can't link right now but it's GAO report # GAO-19-300
I live in New Zealand which has NZ$1 and NZ$2 coins: they truely suck because the value is enough to care about but the coins don’t fit well into your pocket. I also hate similar value coins in €, £, AUD. $1 notes are awesome.
2 NZD ~= 1.40 USD.
Note that NZ’s smallest coin is 10 cents - it is good not having pennys nor nickels.
2 NZD ~= 1.40 USD.
Note that NZ’s smallest coin is 10 cents - it is good not having pennys nor nickels.
Paper and linen are renewable materials that are made from easy low-impact resources to be extracted and processed, they can be remade and reissued many times for a fraction of the impact of a metal coin, not to mention the cost to transport any amount over pocket change.
There is very little in the world that is more recyclable than metal.
And they're more convenient for the wallet
And I've never lost a paper bill, but I'm forever losing change.
This is America. Tons of industries exist because they became outmoded but instead lobbied for protective legislation to ensure that what happened to all the horseshoe makers and stable owners won't ever happen to their industry, like car what dealers have done to make sure Ford has to sell their cars through these sleezeball third parties.
[deleted]
Along these line why is the US still minting pennies? At some point we could just start rounding to the nearest nickel (or dime).
Also, why is gas always ab extra 9/10 of a penny? Reminds me of paying 3123 RON for a Big Mac in Romania -- that last digit is just noise at the consumer level.
Also, why is gas always ab extra 9/10 of a penny? Reminds me of paying 3123 RON for a Big Mac in Romania -- that last digit is just noise at the consumer level.
> why is the US still minting pennies?
A lobbying group funded by the producer of the blanks used to make pennies opposes penny abolition [1]. There is no similarly-motivated group promoting it. (Citizens to Retire the Penny exists, but their last news item is from 2019 [2].)
When the U.S. eliminated the half cent it was worth 14 cents [3], so there is a good case of nixing the nickel alongside the penny, whenever we get around to it.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americans_for_Common_Cents
[2] http://www.retirethepenny.org
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penny_debate_in_the_United_Sta...
A lobbying group funded by the producer of the blanks used to make pennies opposes penny abolition [1]. There is no similarly-motivated group promoting it. (Citizens to Retire the Penny exists, but their last news item is from 2019 [2].)
When the U.S. eliminated the half cent it was worth 14 cents [3], so there is a good case of nixing the nickel alongside the penny, whenever we get around to it.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americans_for_Common_Cents
[2] http://www.retirethepenny.org
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penny_debate_in_the_United_Sta...
> why is the US still minting pennies?
> > A lobbying group...
It is astonishing how many problems in this country start with those three words.
> > A lobbying group...
It is astonishing how many problems in this country start with those three words.
This is a good long-term argument for nationalizing money production.
Not to mention other countries have done this with little issue.
[deleted]
>Also, why is gas always ab extra 9/10 of a penny
Others have replied to the why, but it is technically 9 Mills. The thousandths unit was established in the Coinage Act of 1792 as the smallest unit of the dollar.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mill_(currency)#United_States
This is some useless trivia that I know for some reason :)
Others have replied to the why, but it is technically 9 Mills. The thousandths unit was established in the Coinage Act of 1792 as the smallest unit of the dollar.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mill_(currency)#United_States
This is some useless trivia that I know for some reason :)
We stopped minting pennies here in Canada in 2012. Pennies are still legal tender, but cash purchases are rounded to the nearest 5 cents. I don’t think anyone here misses the pennies.
See that's the thing. If we didn't have pennies, companies couldn't ask their customers to fund as much of their tax writeoff every year when they ask them to round up for some random cause.
https://gizmodo.com/why-gas-is-priced-in-tenths-of-cents-169...
> that last digit is just noise at the consumer level.
That’s exactly the point.
The optics of eliminating the penny during inflation are really bad. The optics would be honest but politically bad. Maybe the next time we have a booming economy and high consumer confidence, we can make pennies seem tacky and get rid of them that way.
Buddy, there's no way you paid 3123 RON for a Big Mac, since that's approximately 750 dollars. You probably paid 3123 ROL (the old currency before it was redenominated circa 2005).
(You are correct that amounts below 100 ROL were totally meaningless.)
(You are correct that amounts below 100 ROL were totally meaningless.)
They should abolish coins. There is probably less need for them (who wants to carry them!) now the technology to accept notes in machines.
Maybe the people who make the note readers can lobby to abolish coins.
Maybe the people who make the note readers can lobby to abolish coins.
I have to wash my clothes at the laundromat. Get annoyed every time I have to shovel $6 of quarters into the machine, one-at-a-time.
I've asked my landlord if they would let me buy back the quarters from them since it's such a pain getting them in a coin shortage. They didn't respond. Rent is already in the thousands, really my landlord should just stomach the $8 they get off me from the laundry room a month and just make it free. I'd honestly pay my landlord even higher rent if I didn't have to deal with getting rolls of quarters.
The thinking might be that when word gets out, people let their friends come do their laundry for free.
[deleted]
Tangential but I find it interesting that as a general rule US apartment tenants don’t have a washer/dryer eg as a front-loader combo.
I gather from research online it comes back to the practice of generally renting furnished apartments, a preference for wood building construction, a practice of having non-water-proofed wet areas, historical custom (perhaps coinciding with apartments being constructed post-war when these appliances were large and highly expensive?), and the chicken-and-egg problem of there not being a market for smaller appliances and therefore there not being great supply of smaller appliances.
I gather from research online it comes back to the practice of generally renting furnished apartments, a preference for wood building construction, a practice of having non-water-proofed wet areas, historical custom (perhaps coinciding with apartments being constructed post-war when these appliances were large and highly expensive?), and the chicken-and-egg problem of there not being a market for smaller appliances and therefore there not being great supply of smaller appliances.
[deleted]
I'm not sure I've ever even met someone who rented a furnished apartment.
I just think it's because it's weird to have a washing machine in your kitchen for Americans, and nobody has managed to find the right marketing tone to make this feel normal. Also, for landlords to tolerate this, put hook-ups in, or simply offer it as a feature, you'd have to start with upper-middle class people wanting one and have it trickle down. But Americans get bigger places as a sign of wealth, so they really just want normal sized machines in-unit.
I just think it's because it's weird to have a washing machine in your kitchen for Americans, and nobody has managed to find the right marketing tone to make this feel normal. Also, for landlords to tolerate this, put hook-ups in, or simply offer it as a feature, you'd have to start with upper-middle class people wanting one and have it trickle down. But Americans get bigger places as a sign of wealth, so they really just want normal sized machines in-unit.
In Australia too almost never is a washing machine or dryer in the kitchen. Almost all houses and apartments will have a laundry room, away from the kitchen, even if it is just a 1 square meter closet with the washer and dryer stacked in there.
Coming from the UK, where the washing machine is always in the kitchen and having a laundry room is seen as extravagant, I think this is great because washing machines are noisy and shaky and sometime leaky. Having a separate wet room with drainage for this is a good idea. It means you can wash/dry at any time too (e.g. even if you are eating in the kitchen/diner area and want some peace!)
Coming from the UK, where the washing machine is always in the kitchen and having a laundry room is seen as extravagant, I think this is great because washing machines are noisy and shaky and sometime leaky. Having a separate wet room with drainage for this is a good idea. It means you can wash/dry at any time too (e.g. even if you are eating in the kitchen/diner area and want some peace!)
The simple solution is minting larger value coins.
If they were going to change anything, it would be likely to get rid of both the penny and nickel and use 1 decimal place for prices; the current US nickel already has a melt price/ face value of 124% currently (https://www.coinflation.com/), which is never a good thing
> why is gas always ab extra 9/10 of a penny
Same reason things are $.99, $19.95, $299.99 instead of $1.00, $20.00, $300.00.
In the US, there's many places that have 2 or 3 gas stations in near vicinity and price competition is fierce. So the $0.01 matters, people will drive to the gas station down the block to save that penny per gallon.
Same reason things are $.99, $19.95, $299.99 instead of $1.00, $20.00, $300.00.
In the US, there's many places that have 2 or 3 gas stations in near vicinity and price competition is fierce. So the $0.01 matters, people will drive to the gas station down the block to save that penny per gallon.
If it is 9/10 of a penny, then it is $0.001 per gallon. Fueling a 20 gallon tank is $0.02.
> If it is 9/10 of a penny, then it is $0.001 per gallon. Fueling a 20 gallon tank is $0.02.
… and some people will drive down the block for those 2 cents, even though they may not realize that it’s only 2 cents. It’s just “cheaper” to them.
… and some people will drive down the block for those 2 cents, even though they may not realize that it’s only 2 cents. It’s just “cheaper” to them.
Gas prices are quoted to fractions of a penny and then rounded to the nearest cent when a card is swiped. For people paying with cash, rounding to the nearest ten cents isn't that much of a leap.
It's a problem if it's always rounding up. Throwing away the penny also requires legislation enforcing round to nearest.
I dunno, usually it's 2 "upscale chain brand" gas stations with identical high prices and 1 "local brand" gas station nearby with significantly cheaper gas. I don't understand how competition works in the gas station business but $0.01 difference clearly does not matter.
It's a bit of the "look, it's not the next unit up," but it's also a bit of a tongue in cheek "this last 9/10th of a cent is the government collecting tax." It's no longer really true, since taxes make up much more than 1 cent of the cost of fuel, but it's stuck around as a reminder anyway.
That's worth at least a penny for your thoughts
My thoughts are worth only a monatary rounding error I guess...
"Actually it's a buck and a quarter staff, but I'm not telling him that." ~ Daffy
I appreciate this.
Dollar Tree can't be beat for things like cleaning supplies, commodity-type CPG items like soap and seasonal decorations-- but those items likely aren't where they make their money (they average a 30% GM, imported trinkets will have higher margin but lower volume than consumer staples). I've spoken to managers at multiple locations and the consensus top category by volume is candy, followed by paper goods. After that, the responses tend to vary.
Things like food are already a bad deal when compared to standard retailers-- they are typically smaller quantities at a much higher price per unit, and the products they carry are more processed so as to reduce costs and increase shelf-life. Then when a 1:1 comparison is made, they are often 30-50% more expensive (e.g. can of chunk light tuna for $1 vs $0.65 or less at Aldi). Going the route of 99 Center or the fast growing Five Below chain where they sell items for under $3 or $5, but with better quality items would have been an interesting approach, but that probably encroaches too much on their "up-market" Family Dollar locations? All being told, I wonder the price elasticity of candy and hyperprocessed foods are.
Things like food are already a bad deal when compared to standard retailers-- they are typically smaller quantities at a much higher price per unit, and the products they carry are more processed so as to reduce costs and increase shelf-life. Then when a 1:1 comparison is made, they are often 30-50% more expensive (e.g. can of chunk light tuna for $1 vs $0.65 or less at Aldi). Going the route of 99 Center or the fast growing Five Below chain where they sell items for under $3 or $5, but with better quality items would have been an interesting approach, but that probably encroaches too much on their "up-market" Family Dollar locations? All being told, I wonder the price elasticity of candy and hyperprocessed foods are.
> they are typically smaller quantities at a much higher price per unit
I think that's true throughout most of the country, but in NYC I actually think Dollar Tree is a fairly good deal. They sell the same little frozen pizzas (that I'm addicted to for some reason) as the C-Town a block away from me, but for half the price. I think that is largely because NYC is ridiculously overpriced to live in.
I think that's true throughout most of the country, but in NYC I actually think Dollar Tree is a fairly good deal. They sell the same little frozen pizzas (that I'm addicted to for some reason) as the C-Town a block away from me, but for half the price. I think that is largely because NYC is ridiculously overpriced to live in.
Sure, if you have time to wait on a huge line. Every time I find myself in a dollar store there’s one cashier serving dozens of angry people lined up to checkout. Whatever deal I might be getting isn’t worth my time to actually wait to pay.
I think this is highly variable between stores. When I lived in Dallas, the line to check out at Dollar Tree was ridiculous, but the one I live near in Brooklyn typically has multiple lines with a few cashiers working. I don't think I've ever waited more than 15 minutes, and typically I wait less than five.
If I have to wait in line at all, it's 99% a no-go. Add convenient self-checkout with wireless payments, and you've got my business. I wouldn't normally stop at CVS, but find myself doing so regularly. Why? Because there's no line. I can walk immediately to the items I need, then quickly scan them, tap my watch and walk out. It's easy, fast, and efficient.
Nowadays, waiting in line is a frustrating anachronism. The exceptions would be higher end stores like Publix that actively guide customers into the fastest checkout lines. But when purchasing a smaller quantity of items, self-checkout is most certainly preferable.
Nowadays, waiting in line is a frustrating anachronism. The exceptions would be higher end stores like Publix that actively guide customers into the fastest checkout lines. But when purchasing a smaller quantity of items, self-checkout is most certainly preferable.
Not much is still a dollar there, and they use that gimmick to charge people more than other stores anyway[1].
1. https://boingboing.net/2021/08/17/this-chart-reveals-that-do...
1. https://boingboing.net/2021/08/17/this-chart-reveals-that-do...
This isn't a very good comparison. It singles out certain products that are probably the worst deals in the store. I am a very value contentious person and there's so many things that are great values at Dollar Tree. To name a few:
1. Dishwasher pods 10/$1.00. The best deal I've found anywhere. 2. Seeds packs 4/$1.00 - local hardware store sells the same seeds for $1 a pack. 3. Office supplies - 10 packs of ballpoint pens, 8 packs of steno-sized paper pads clipboards, poster board, foam core 4. Pasta and beans are cheaper than most of the grocery stores around here. 5. Kosher salt and other spices 6. CA (superglue) in various bottles add pack sizes. 7. 100% cotton t-shirts 8. Mylar balloons and other party supplies 9. Ziplock bags, sandwich baggies, etc. 10. There's often random bulk buys that get orders of some name brand thing in that's a really good price ($1 for a $5 or $10 item, for example).
1. Dishwasher pods 10/$1.00. The best deal I've found anywhere. 2. Seeds packs 4/$1.00 - local hardware store sells the same seeds for $1 a pack. 3. Office supplies - 10 packs of ballpoint pens, 8 packs of steno-sized paper pads clipboards, poster board, foam core 4. Pasta and beans are cheaper than most of the grocery stores around here. 5. Kosher salt and other spices 6. CA (superglue) in various bottles add pack sizes. 7. 100% cotton t-shirts 8. Mylar balloons and other party supplies 9. Ziplock bags, sandwich baggies, etc. 10. There's often random bulk buys that get orders of some name brand thing in that's a really good price ($1 for a $5 or $10 item, for example).
But also as you shrink stuff, the proportion of it that goes to packaging increases, right? Like, even if you aren't trying to trick people, smaller containers of stuff perhaps should be more expensive per unit net weight. If you go to a normal retailer that sells multiple sizes of the same product (dish soap, tooth paste, whatever), the larger size will typically be cheaper per oz basis.
I suppose their employees would then be justified asking for a 25% raise?
Anyone who hasn't gotten a raise in the past year should get at least 6.2%, unless their employer is signaling to them that they value their contributions 6.2% less than last year. If you improved your skills at all, or took on additional responsibilities due to Covid 25% isn't at all a stretch, especially at dollar store wages.
>Anyone who hasn't gotten a raise in the past year should get at least 6.2%, unless their employer is signaling to them that they value their contributions 6.2% less than last year.
Fruits and vegetables are very nutritious, but the price I pay for them has little bearing on their value to me. I would easily pay double or triple or even more. But I do not because a different fruit and vegetable seller is willing to sell them for less.
Similarly, it is possible for the supply and demand curves to move in a manner that makes the price of certain types of labor not increase or even decrease compared to price increases of other types of labor.
For example, labor where you can sit safely inside a home behind a computer screen rather than deal with sick people with contagious infections.
Fruits and vegetables are very nutritious, but the price I pay for them has little bearing on their value to me. I would easily pay double or triple or even more. But I do not because a different fruit and vegetable seller is willing to sell them for less.
Similarly, it is possible for the supply and demand curves to move in a manner that makes the price of certain types of labor not increase or even decrease compared to price increases of other types of labor.
For example, labor where you can sit safely inside a home behind a computer screen rather than deal with sick people with contagious infections.
> unless their employer is signaling to them that they value their contributions 6.2% less than last year
Not getting a raise doesn't mean your employer necessarily values you less - it could just mean others value you less so your employer has less competition for you.
Supply and demand. If nobody's buying hammers and the price of hammers goes down, that doesn't mean the value my hammer brings me has gone down, but if I need to buy a new hammer I pay less.
Not getting a raise doesn't mean your employer necessarily values you less - it could just mean others value you less so your employer has less competition for you.
Supply and demand. If nobody's buying hammers and the price of hammers goes down, that doesn't mean the value my hammer brings me has gone down, but if I need to buy a new hammer I pay less.
Last year hammers cost $5, this year it's $4. Go to a jobsite and ask a guy what his hammer is worth and last year he would say $5, this year he says $4. He's not making a value judgment based on anything intrinsic about the hammer, it's just worth less due to the cost of replacement falling. He literally values it less.
Humans, unlike hammers can decide to train to become a screwdriver or change from Binford Tools to Craftsman, who may value low turnover more than Binford and thus pay more to retain employees.
If the management or ultimate customers of your industry or firm don't support paying you a wage that keeps up with the CPI, I suggest working hard to find better managers and customers. You are fighting a losing battle otherwise. There is a ton of demand out there right now for almost everything.
Humans, unlike hammers can decide to train to become a screwdriver or change from Binford Tools to Craftsman, who may value low turnover more than Binford and thus pay more to retain employees.
If the management or ultimate customers of your industry or firm don't support paying you a wage that keeps up with the CPI, I suggest working hard to find better managers and customers. You are fighting a losing battle otherwise. There is a ton of demand out there right now for almost everything.
> don't support paying you a wage that keeps up with inflation
Your employer doesn't care what inflation is. They care about what they have to pay on the market to get you, and they care what you produce.
Going to them and talking about inflation is making an irrelevant argument. Inflation isn't part of the equation that determines how much they pay you. Tell them your market value, and tell then your productivity. But talking about inflation is just going to illicit a 'so what?'
Your employer doesn't care what inflation is. They care about what they have to pay on the market to get you, and they care what you produce.
Going to them and talking about inflation is making an irrelevant argument. Inflation isn't part of the equation that determines how much they pay you. Tell them your market value, and tell then your productivity. But talking about inflation is just going to illicit a 'so what?'
If a business is unable to grow at a rate that is faster than inflation, that would mean it's shrinking in real terms. Why am I sticking around in a firm that is shrinking dramatically? Either the industry is dying or the business is being poorly managed. Working longer hours and throwing additional value on that fire doesn't seem like a great plan. You are probably better off spending your effort looking for a new job and lately you'll end up with more then 6% to show for it.
> If a business is unable to grow at a rate that is faster than inflation, that would mean it's shrinking in real terms.
But - again - you aren't paid a salary based on how well the business is doing. When a company's profits double do you think they double everyone's salaries? Of course not - surely you know that? You're paid based on what the market for you is, and what you produce and how valuable it is to the company.
Like inflation, the size of the business isn't part of that equation.
But - again - you aren't paid a salary based on how well the business is doing. When a company's profits double do you think they double everyone's salaries? Of course not - surely you know that? You're paid based on what the market for you is, and what you produce and how valuable it is to the company.
Like inflation, the size of the business isn't part of that equation.
The business isn't doing any better if it grew by 6.2% this year, the currency they are receiving and paying you with has reduced in value by 6.2%, so it is breaking even. I'm not saying this in a "capitalism is bad" sort of way, I'm saying this in a "capitalism is good" sort of way. Wages are up in the majority of sectors, unemployment is falling, if your company or industry can't do 6% this year you likely have other options that can. Use at will employment to your advantage.
> if your company or industry can't do 6% this year you likely have other options that can
That's the right argument to make. Not inflation as you were saying before.
Talking about inflation to motivate pay rise is a logically unsound argument.
'Inflation is up 2%' - so what?
'I can get 2% elsewhere' ok we can talk.
That's the right argument to make. Not inflation as you were saying before.
Talking about inflation to motivate pay rise is a logically unsound argument.
'Inflation is up 2%' - so what?
'I can get 2% elsewhere' ok we can talk.
Yeah I'm not certain where we disagree. I mainly reject the assertion that I may have misread, that workers should deliver additional value beyond what they are currently delivering in order to earn a raise. The currency has less value then last year and this is reflected in wages in aggregate. If you want to retain people, you'll need to keep up otherwise you should anticipate high turnover.
>Talking about inflation to motivate pay rise is a logically unsound argument.
I get the rest of what you're saying, but I don't see how it's logically unsound.
To me, it logically unsound if a company raises prices to match inflation, and all of it's costs other than employee salaries raise at roughly the inflation rate. Why are salaries solely exempt as a cost subject to inflation?
I get the rest of what you're saying, but I don't see how it's logically unsound.
To me, it logically unsound if a company raises prices to match inflation, and all of it's costs other than employee salaries raise at roughly the inflation rate. Why are salaries solely exempt as a cost subject to inflation?
Why does your employer pay you at all? To get you to work for them.
So how much do they pay you to work for them? As little as it takes to convince you to work for them and not someone else.
So how much does it take you to convince you to work for them? Just a little more than anyone else will pay you.
So your pay depends on how much anyone else will pay you.
Where does inflation enter that logic?
You can say 'my costs have gone up by inflation I want to be paid that much more' but can you see how your costs don't figure into what they pay you? If you said 'this company will pay me more' than that works. But just 'inflation' doesn't.
So how much do they pay you to work for them? As little as it takes to convince you to work for them and not someone else.
So how much does it take you to convince you to work for them? Just a little more than anyone else will pay you.
So your pay depends on how much anyone else will pay you.
Where does inflation enter that logic?
You can say 'my costs have gone up by inflation I want to be paid that much more' but can you see how your costs don't figure into what they pay you? If you said 'this company will pay me more' than that works. But just 'inflation' doesn't.
You could say that for any good or service, yet inflation is a thing.
Yeah, that sounds cool and all, but somehow I ended up with a job that pays over $100K a year, that makes me work for about 3 hours a week from home and has been paying me for years to do that. And I'm pretty sure my manager knows that.
If I were to quit, I'd end up with another job that makes me work for 30+ hours a week, for the exact same salary. And that's just one example. I know many more like that.
Your supply and demand can't explain that, yet it is my daily reality in a capitalist society. Capitalism is just another lie we tell each other to make each other believe we live in a just world.
If I were to quit, I'd end up with another job that makes me work for 30+ hours a week, for the exact same salary. And that's just one example. I know many more like that.
Your supply and demand can't explain that, yet it is my daily reality in a capitalist society. Capitalism is just another lie we tell each other to make each other believe we live in a just world.
How do you explain it? Do you think they pay you out of charity? Seems unlikely to me.
>somehow I ended up with a job that pays over $100K a year, that makes me work for about 3 hours a week from home and has been paying me for years to do that
That seems entirely consistent with the supply and demand explanation? If your employer thinks they're getting 100k worth of value from you, and that there's nobody that can do your job for cheaper, the fact that you wfh for 3hr/week doesn't affect the analysis.
>If I were to quit, I'd end up with another job that makes me work for 30+ hours a week, for the exact same salary.
That can partially be explained by the fact that labor is an illiquid market, caused by switching costs and lack of information. On the flip side, you might be able to get 500K working for MANGA if you grind leetcode/whiteboard prep.
That seems entirely consistent with the supply and demand explanation? If your employer thinks they're getting 100k worth of value from you, and that there's nobody that can do your job for cheaper, the fact that you wfh for 3hr/week doesn't affect the analysis.
>If I were to quit, I'd end up with another job that makes me work for 30+ hours a week, for the exact same salary.
That can partially be explained by the fact that labor is an illiquid market, caused by switching costs and lack of information. On the flip side, you might be able to get 500K working for MANGA if you grind leetcode/whiteboard prep.
It is a free country, anyone is justified to ask for any raise anytime they want.
It is a free forum, we can post the most obvious insights anytime we want.
My tongue-in-cheek point is that no one should wait for their employer to raise the price of the goods or services they are selling to ask for a raise, because there is no justification needed other than doing what you want to do, which includes selling your labor to a different employer for a higher price.
This is Dollar Tree. They are known for only hiring part time to the tune of ~15-20 hours a week so they don't have to pay any benefits. (At least they are here in Fort Smith, AR. It may be a local manager policy.)
Not if they're raising prices because salaries have already increased.
Sure, but they are probably raising prices because their wholesale costs have increased. The didn't just get the idea to raise prices for no reason.
Honestly, it would probably be better if things sold for $4.
We have Dollorama in Canada. Things sell for $4. The jump in quality is noticeable from $1 to $4. The difference between useless junk, and something quite good, or at least good enough. Makes the shopping experience much better too.
We have Dollorama in Canada. Things sell for $4. The jump in quality is noticeable from $1 to $4. The difference between useless junk, and something quite good, or at least good enough. Makes the shopping experience much better too.
Tangentially related, I always find these stores amusing:
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5521128,0.0516247,3a,75y,157...
For those who don't want to click on the link: There is a store called "99p Plus Extra", and 3 doors down is another one called "98p Plus Extra".
It would be interesting to know whether they both started as pound stores.
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5521128,0.0516247,3a,75y,157...
For those who don't want to click on the link: There is a store called "99p Plus Extra", and 3 doors down is another one called "98p Plus Extra".
It would be interesting to know whether they both started as pound stores.
It looks like The Simpsons parodied real life: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2tv_CGuVPM ; https://simpsons.fandom.com/wiki/Thirty_Minutes_Over_Tokyo
Slightly off topic: The New Yorker had a really interesting article about dollar stores and how their presence can potentially harm communities rather than help.
https://archive.ph/O7EbO
https://archive.ph/O7EbO
They should update the price point annually based on some simple algorithm, like the amount they pay an entry level employee per 20 minutes of work. That serves to index the unit price to purchasing power.
A single business can’t make a dent in taming stagflation. They’ll be trying to turn a tide with an oar!
If the supplier charges more they’ll have to put the price up. If they put it up too high to compensate staff people will go elsewhere.
If the supplier charges more they’ll have to put the price up. If they put it up too high to compensate staff people will go elsewhere.
Been a couple years since I've stepped foot in a Dollar Tree, but by and large I don't recall very many things actually still being under a dollar, except maybe candy?
They ought to bite the bullet and jump to "Tree Fiddy"
They could run a variety of them under the same brand umbrella. When I was a kid, there were small chains of clothing stores with names like Simply Six and Max 10, all run by the same company (oddly enough, KinderCare).
I so want to see that store become a reality
I always thought the “Dollar Store” was a poor name given the fluctuation of the dollar over the years.
Then again, it’s a damn successful business. I wonder how much the name actually had to do with it becoming established vs. the price point.
Then again, it’s a damn successful business. I wonder how much the name actually had to do with it becoming established vs. the price point.
Reminds me of the 99c DREAMS stores in Brooklyn. "Everything 99c and up!"
Dollar tree is really interesting to me, they get remaindered books from all over the spectrum I would have heard of if it weren’t a stop on my walks. My most recent find was “when you die you won’t be scared to die”.
They were so close to being called: The Dollar "Three".
What this also doesn't mention is shrinkflation and quality reduction, so for many items you're probably paying closer to $1.50 - $1.75.
Pregnancy tests still a dollar? I went to dollar tree a lot when I was first married...
Pregnancy tests are like $0.25/each if you buy the cheap strips in bulk:
https://www.amazon.com/AccuMed-Pregnancy-25-Count-Individual...
https://www.amazon.com/AccuMed-Pregnancy-25-Count-Individual...
Should have done $2. Math is easier, and its good for another 20 years.
Looking forward to the day where we start printing 1000$ bills again.
The folks who want your bank to snitch on you each time you have a transaction $600 or larger aren't going to let you have such a large denomination bill that they can't track. Wouldn't be surprised if at some point they try to do away with the $100.
I am always reminded of that song by Adam Sandler: Toll Booth Willie
In Europe we also have 1 Euro shops that now sell for 1.10€
Loosely related anecdote:
For the past ~two months the IKEA nearest to me (Covina, CA) has been constantly out of stock for a table [0] I'd wanted, priced at $199.
Earlier this month I received a notification of it being in stock. That afternoon I made the trip to go pick one up, out of stock, shelves largely barren. Asked staff WTF? They'd received _one_ and it was immediately sold.
Still out of stock at that location today, but now when I check the site it's $229 (+15%), yay.
[0] https://www.ikea.com/us/en/p/norden-gateleg-table-birch-9042...
For the past ~two months the IKEA nearest to me (Covina, CA) has been constantly out of stock for a table [0] I'd wanted, priced at $199.
Earlier this month I received a notification of it being in stock. That afternoon I made the trip to go pick one up, out of stock, shelves largely barren. Asked staff WTF? They'd received _one_ and it was immediately sold.
Still out of stock at that location today, but now when I check the site it's $229 (+15%), yay.
[0] https://www.ikea.com/us/en/p/norden-gateleg-table-birch-9042...
I read elsewhere that IKEA have huge supply chain problems. Perhaps related to the container shortage that was recently discussed here.
Googling found me this:
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/14/ikea-warns-supply-chain-disr...
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/14/ikea-warns-supply-chain-disr...
Yeah, there’s three or four items I’ve been meaning to buy for about half a year that haven’t come back. Sometimes I’ll get the stock notification but it will disappear quickly, and they don’t let you place pickup orders for items with less than 5 units in stock.
i see dollar tree going broke...they used to sell groceries and sundry goods cheaper than the big stores...now they are more expensive with a lot of item as compared to the bigger stores...convenience stores with gas pumps can get away with that--everyone needs gas...but now that dollar store is no longer cheaper than the big stores, and have no gas pumps, what is the attraction?
If you are close to a bigger store, then you have a choice. In lots of the US, the closest grocery and department store could be quite a ways away. They are growing like crazy in these areas. I agree that they are becoming a mix of a grocery store, convenience store and Wal-Mart but I think that is what the rural markets want. If they need something special, that can be saved for a special trip to "town".
Hard to understate this. There are rural areas where there's a Dollar Tree in every little town, but you have to drive 1-2 hours to the nearest WalMart—and further to the nearest Anything Else Worth Shopping At.
Dollar General is more common here, which is slightly better — the prices are slightly higher and some have produce etc.
The company also owns the Family Dollar chain and has been converting some stores into dual brands. Those conversions might increase as it gives the company a way to maintain both brands but not be limited by the $1 (or $1.25) price point.
Family Dollar hasn't sold things at a dollar price point in years. They're basically big convenience stores with makeup, clothing, and toiletries sections.
Are you thinking Dollar General? No Dollar Tree I've been in had groceries--maybe candy, but usually it's things like cheap plastic toys, paper plates/plasticware and cheap decorations for birthdays and the current holiday.
Motel 6 used to be $6.
Its transitory
Motel 6
Do Canadians have Toonie Town stores?
Ah, so I was wrong. I've been watching how much cooler things at the Dollar Tree were getting and predicted that eventually I'll buy my next car there. I guess I was wrong...
If they bump up the price of those fruity Tootsie Rolls I'll cry.
If they bump up the price of those fruity Tootsie Rolls I'll cry.
"Kyle Dishman can’t afford to shop at the local grocery store anymore. Instead he goes to Dollar General, where he can make $40 stretch into a week’s worth of groceries and the occasional can of motor oil for his Chrysler 300."
Sources:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/08/20/growing-n...
https://www.mashed.com/224027/think-twice-before-buying-food...
EDIT: Of course not all things cost $1, but it's certainly weighted in that direction. You don't go to a dollar store for nice things; you do it because it's the only option for you. A lot of the responses seem to want to debate how poor people are making choices, and I think that misses the point.