Trumpenomics
-
@jon-nyc said in Trumpenomics:
I saw another report that said processed cocoa used in Reese’s has a 25% tariff.
That still doesn’t account for a 30% price increase.
The wholesale costs of cacao right now is $.15 per ounce. Hershey’s milk chocolate is 11% cacoa, or $.02 (rounding up) of cacao in every ounce. Reese’s PB cups have roughly 1.5 ounces of milk chocolate per cup, or $.03. There’s 2 cups per pack, so that’s $.06 of cacao per package. A 30% tariff on cacao would account for another $.02 per pack. Retail pricing on Reese’s are $1.99 per pack. A $.02 increase would be a 1% increase, not 30%.
-
@89th said in Trumpenomics:
Haha I think I’ll trust my friend who is like 2 levels below their CFO
Isn’t it funny how in the DC Crime thread you discount anecdotal evidence in favor of official statistics, but in this case you discount statistics in favor of personal anecdotes?
-
It’s not rocket science. The price of cacao is the price of cacao. The roasting and processing of the beans to cocoa powder or liquor generally yields 1-1 ratio. Hershey using 11% cocoa or cacao % in their milk chocolate is well established, as is the 1.5 oz of milk chocolate per Reese’s.
I don’t know the cost of processing, costs for the peanut butter, or costs for actually creating the cups, packaging, or marketing the products, but that’s irrelevant. The questions is how much does the cost of the cacao tariffs and the cost of cacao itself contribute the to 30% price increase. The answer is not much.
-
I’ll try one more time…If you’re talking about the ingredients, it doesn really matter. The actual costs of the ingredients, per unit, are small fractions of the actual costs for these items. The vast majority of-vast majority of the overhead for these goods will be labor, packaging, transport, and marketing. Especially when you are talking about the volume of production these guys have. Those are items that aren’t generally affected by the tariffs. But… The tariffs make a wonderful excuse for substantial price increases.
-
President Donald Trump this week insisted Americans are experiencing the “best economy we’ve ever had.” Privately, White House officials acknowledge people just aren’t feeling it.
The more things change, the more they are the same. This sounds so familiar to what the democrat were saying during 2024.
and from teh article
“That’s a thing that I know the White House political team is nervous about because there’s a reality and there’s a perception. And the reality is the economy is doing fine and the perception is people are still worried about things like grocery prices, which are still high, and still growing,” said Stephen Moore, an outside economic adviser to Trump who the president featured in an impromptu Oval Office press conference last month.
-
Swatch, limited time tariff edition:
Link to video -
@Axtremus said in Trumpenomics:
Chances are construction workers and contractors are still pro Trump by a wide margin.
Probably because his policies are helping prevent school counselors from talking 7 year old kids into chopping their testicles off.
Before you ask? Still beats the alternative…
-
Don't forget 4.5 million kids under the age of 5 dead by 2030 due to the US AID cut. Not saying reform wasn't needed perhaps, but if wea re talking about policies and their preventions...
-
Don't forget 4.5 million kids under the age of 5 dead by 2030 due to the US AID cut. Not saying reform wasn't needed perhaps, but if wea re talking about policies and their preventions...
@89th said in Trumpenomics:
Don't forget 4.5 million kids under the age of 5 dead by 2030 due to the US AID cut. Not saying reform wasn't needed perhaps, but if wea re talking about policies and their preventions...
LMAO
-
This is the Trumpenomics thread, not the RFK or MAHA thread.
-
Don't forget 4.5 million kids under the age of 5 dead by 2030 due to the US AID cut. Not saying reform wasn't needed perhaps, but if wea re talking about policies and their preventions...
@89th said in Trumpenomics:
Don't forget 4.5 million kids under the age of 5 dead by 2030 due to the US AID cut. Not saying reform wasn't needed perhaps, but if wea re talking about policies and their preventions...
If children in South Africa die of dehydration or diseases born by bad water, then they died because of a lack of clean water, not because of funding cuts in a nation that is being treated as an antogonist by their own government. And if you would like to prevent these children’s deaths from bad water, you can help by donating here: https://thewaterproject.org/ There are other charities working towards the same goal.
-
Personally I'm glad I'm unable to see videos of the people who have died and will die due to the abrupt removal of USAID support. Seeing 4K videos of them would make it much harder to me to be ok with the devastating impact of an abrupt withdrawal instead of a prudent adjustment with planning involved. The earth was overpopulated anyway!
