• 🌞 Alexander Daychilde 🌞@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    23 hours ago

    I am making no such assumption, and you clearly do not know how businesses operate.

    I’m not fond of much of what they do, but I’m speaking in realities, not idealations.

    • MrShankles@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      17 hours ago

      You “make no such assumptions” of whether both sizes were available in 1991, but you do assume that the user has no idea how businesses operate. You’re not speaking in reality at all, you’re just arguing nonsensically

        • MrShankles@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          12 hours ago

          If people weren’t buying more of them, they wouldn’t’ve changed the size

          That’s what you said. If a business is already making sales and profit, why would they decrease the size? You think they were selling the candy at a loss or something, and had to slowly increase revenue?

          It’s the definition of “shrinkflation” and it’s anti-consumerism because they aren’t making it obvious that they’re increasing the cost of the product

          What kind of ignorant are you, that you can’t wrap your head around that? Go spout your elitist, anti-intellectualism elsewhere, cause ain’t nobody here buying it

          And if you truly believe in what you’re saying, good luck my dude, and may god have mercy on your soul