"Shrinkflation" is coming back as a narrative

[mindrust]

inflation is measured primarily by the consumer price index...
meaning prices of goods and services are inflation factors

Inflation is the expansion of the money supply.

Inflation, the name comes from the verb "to inflate" which means "to expand", like a balloon. Prices don't expand. They may hike. It is the increasing/expanding money supply which causes the price hikes because there aren't enough goods and services to counter the demand coming from the newly printed currency.

try looking passed the kindergarten dictionary explanation and see how the real world outside your house measures things
yes yesterdays national debt becomes tomorrows GDP where the domestic product is too a measure of inflation as its all part of the consumer price index. but you have to look into the details of how things happen and effects one thing has on the other,
hence the chicken and eggs
...

That's not kidergarten dictionary, it is the meaning of inflation.


There is no chicken and eggs. The cause for inflation is the expanding money supply. That's the only reason why we are experiencing price increases. The reason is simple, obvious and it is clear who does it.

Stop printing and the inflation stops immediately.

Why can't they stop printing? That's the question we need to ask.



^ That's inflation.


Source:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_school_of_economics

Austrians define inflation as 'increase in money supply'

Austrian economics = Real economics

[uneng]

Because the economic situation in some regions of the world continue to worsen, politicians are using newly invented economic terms like "Shrinkflation" to to blame the companies as being too greedy, and to "rationalize" the effects of printing too much money and having too much debt - that the government may never repay.

First usage of the term "shrinkflation" with its current meaning has been attributed to the economist Pippa Malmgren, though the same term had been used earlier by historian Brian Domitrovic to refer to an economy shrinking while also suffering high inflation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrinkflation

Politicians are used to take advantage of every terms they find useful for their own personal agendas and goals. However, it doesn't mean we should neglect or disconsider such terms as valid ones for our critical thinking over what is happening in our modern societies and how we are being negatively affected by the changes in the markets, especially the food market which is directly impacted by Shrinkflation.

Anyway, as quoted above, it wasn't politicians who created terms like Shrinkflation. It has been being used by economists and historians along the time who have studied enough to consider this theory, which nowadays can be easily verified by anyone, just by comparing a visit to a supermarket few years ago, to a visit to a supermarket right now.

I believe as Bitcoin HODLers, we should welcome more money-printing because Bitcoin will absorb some of that excess liquidity, and make the price surge. But it should also make us more distrustful of the policy makers because they know there's no "Shrinkflation", only inflation and the negative effects of money-printing.

Shrinkflation is a consequence of inflation. Both coexist together. And money-printing just accelerates the process.

It's actually not possible to deny the existence of Shrinkflation phenomenon... On the other hand, you can debate how innocent companies and businessmen are in this situation. That is, you can argue if you think they are greedy, or if they don't have any choices besides decreasing packagings' sizes to survive in the market.

[franky1]

Source:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_school_of_economics

Austrians define inflation as 'increase in money supply'

Austrian economics = Real economics

now ill complete the snippet you forgot to include(using your own source)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_school_of_economics#Inflation

Even prominent Austrian economists have been confused since Austrians define inflation as 'increase in money supply' while most people including most economists define inflation as 'rising prices'

but i did find it funny how you PURPOSEFULLY snipped off first third and last third of a sentence

inflation is measured by things like the CPI

where by for instance some measure it as what can you buy using $100 from 1900-2024
where by some for instance look at the cost of a loaf of bread over 100 years
some do real estate square-metre comps
some do a average shopping cart of groceries. and so on to measure inflation
some do an amalgamation of all of the above

[Wind_FURY]

Plus it's either the corporations perform "Shrinkflation" on their products/services, OR maintain the quanitity as what it had before, BUT increase the prices of their goods and services. It's simple economics. If a centralized entity in control of the money printer turns it on, and grows the total supply of morny, then inflation will always follow.

Simply, inflation and deflation are caused by changes in the monetary policy and government spending.

inflation is measured primarily by the consumer price index...
meaning prices of goods and services are inflation factors

when costs go up this makes public services cost more. which causes the treasury insufficient to pay for public services, which the causes governments to print money, to get money to pay for public services..
to cut the circuit. governments even try to do their own shrinkflation. by still charging people the same taxes but offering less public services. but eventually end up needing to money print

however printing money then causes consumer good sellers greedflation to raise prices because they see more money in the economy to take advantage of.

what being suggested is greedflation of consumer goods prices then cause even higher money printing. which if it continues, leads to hyper inflation

"Greedflation"? I believe there's no psychological effect in that matter. It's simply economics. Increase the money supply = purchasing power UP. Purchasing power UP = more demand for product and services. Prices will go up no matter the psychological state.

the big question is chicken or egg
some say its the egg.. governments printing money to bail out banks in 2008 started consumer greedflation, and the snowball began yet some will say it was the greedflation of real estate before 2008

It might have started before that when the banks were very lenient in giving loans out to borrowers at low rates. Government spending was also high. It simply wasn't sustainable, and the banksters themselves also made a casino out of those mortgages by making leveraged derivatives out of them for the foreign market.

I will "DYOR", I don't know the absolute details.

[franky1]

what being suggested is greedflation of consumer goods prices then cause even higher money printing. which if it continues, leads to hyper inflation

"Greedflation"? I believe there's no psychological effect in that matter. It's simply economics. Increase the money supply = purchasing power UP. Purchasing power UP = more demand for product and services. Prices will go up no matter the psychological state.

greedflation is not about when the good times role/ or more money printing in the economy = more purchasing power..
because purchasing power is more psychologically from the stand point of the consumer(in the good times) having more money to want to buy more things, less concerned with finding discounts..

greedflation is from the standpoint of the producer, shrinking goods and also raising prices.. emphasis: in the bad times when money is tight for consumers who need to/end up buying less and want to find discounts

yep purchasing power is when consumers(purchasers) have the power
where in the good times consumers are spending more and retailers get to raise prices, that is standard economics.. but not "greedflation"


also a side note
not all money printing causes "purchasing power" increase for the consumer
it depends if the money print is trickle up or trickle down

for instance money printing to bail out banks did not help the consumer gain purchase power
for instance money printing to give out covid stimulus cheques to citizens did help the consumer and thus purchase power
purchase power(hint is in the name) is when the consumer(as purchaser) has more power

not all money print enters the lower levels of the economy of the lower-class, working-class. but can be held and hidden in the upper echelons of institutions

[dezoel]

To be perfectly honest, the whole shrinkflation thing started when companies realized that they can't keep the product the same and just increase the price based on inflation. This means, if you make something go from 40 to 60 and then 60 to 80 and then 80 to 100, eventually at some point you will fail to sell, but if you just drop the cost then you could keep the price the same, make more profit, and keep selling it because people will keep on buying it.

The inflation reached a point in the world right now that I have literally zero clue how am I suppose to live. Like at this point, my income is lesser than my expense and there is no possible way for me to make that work, it's impossible for me to make any other way, it just can't be done. So this is why if any company increases the price, I would just stop buying it.

[umbara ardian]

Seems like some HODLers are cheering for more printed paper, thinking it'll pump the price like magic. But hold on, it ain't that simple. Sure, more money floating around can push Bitcoin's price up, but it's not guaranteed. Think of it like throwing gasoline on a fire – it might make it bigger, but it could also get outta control. Plus, relying solely on printed money for Bitcoin's success is like building a house on sand – not exactly stable, right?

Now, that "shrinkflation" thingy? It might sound fancy, but it's basically inflation in disguise. Smaller packages, same price? That's your purchasing power shrinking, bro. Ignoring it just because it benefits Bitcoin in some way ain't cool.

[Casdinyard]

Because the economic situation in some regions of the world continue to worsen, politicians are using newly invented economic terms like "Shrinkflation" to to blame the companies as being too greedy, and to "rationalize" the effects of printing too much money and having too much debt - that the government may never repay.

I believe as Bitcoin HODLers, we should welcome more money-printing because Bitcoin will absorb some of that excess liquidity, and make the price surge. But it should also make us more distrustful of the policy makers because they know there's no "Shrinkflation", only inflation and the negative effects of money-printing.

What if, and hear me on this one, Shrinkflation never left???

In the Philippines where I live, the term never died and is being actively used for everything that is goods and has noticeably gone down in size. I personally see it in indulgences like chocolate bars and candies while our goods here have sneakily reduced the size of their products while retaining the same price point to evade controversy. Personally there is benefits to shrinkflation compared to outright increasing the price. This is especially evident in third-world countries like the Philippines where the citizens are expected to not really be able to buy stuff at full price, that's why we have microstores here in the first place that sells items by the piece (pack of instant ramen per piece, sugar by the cup, etc.) to supplant the inability of the general public to buy these stuff in bulk or in full price. In an economic setting like that companies and providers couldn't really jack their prices up to retain the same quantity of contents in a product so to circumvent this and still be able to provide the public with their products, they are forced to shrink their product's sizes.

It's never good to have to work with inflation as nobody's winning in this game except the 1 percenters, but the thing is that in situations like these where you are forced to adapt you really have to do so or else you're going to be cooked.

[franky1]

money supply always needs to continue printing..
imagine a system where everyone equally had say $50k. you would think no new money is needed..
yet when someone else is born where is the money going to be for the new addition. are people suddenly suppose to live on $49k to supplement a 2% population growth, how about next year. how about the year after that

there is real reason why the comparison of population growth (2%) aligns with the magic number of preferred inflation. because growing populations cause growing need of consumer goods and services which affect the markets if not controlled

money supply was meant to be a counter to inflation. to control it and not cause it

[Lucius]

Shrinkflation seems to be one of the biggest problems in the US - because a great leader addressed the people and shared his thoughts Personally, I don't even mind that the packaging of unhealthy products has decreased, because that should be good for health, right?



(click on the picture to watch the video)

[franky1]

shrinkflation has its advantages.. it pushes people to live back within their means and not over indulge
it still provides products when costs have gone up but without causing retail prices to go up
far better then saying sorry no product unless you pay 2x straight away

we have also seen the times where the opposite of shrinkflation occurs. where you go to fast food places and they offer "super size" soda cheap/as standard offerings, or convenience store 'meal deals' of a sandwich, snack and a drink offering larger 'share size' snacks. and drinks go from 500ml bottle

it runs in cycles..
the share size is the normal offering then shrinkflation makes the snack sizes the normal offering with a 330ml drink... then in good times again the share size returns as the snack and 500ml bottle return

when things start turning to good times you get the snack size doing "buy one get one free" to prime people that the pricing are to 2x but advertised as "free extra". then bulk buy at the 2x, then change it to large share size at same pricepoint. then shrink back to snack size at same price point.. rinse and repeat

[electronicash]

shrinkflation has been happening for some time, it's only this time that a president is actually talking about it and it's not about explaining why. it's trying to blame. does he want chaos to happen there?

the old man doesn't even realize he is the president but can complete a lie talking about shrinkflation to blame the businesses. it is like inviting people to loot the companies that's the narrative. he didn't mention the black national anthem? they must know this is going to happen, no wonder they need police security in the Superbowl in the state where they want police defund. 

[franky1]

shrinkflation has been happening for some time, it's only this time that a president is actually talking about it and it's not about explaining why. it's trying to blame. does he want chaos to happen there?

shrinkflation re-occurs. i remember it recently and i remember it in the 2008 era and in the 1990s
.. but.. between each crisis we get the good economic times.. where companies sell things in bulk.. and then we complain how companies are making people fat by offering huge portions.. lets call it bloatflation

in the UK we usually complain about winters too cold summers too hot.. america complain about portion sizes too small or too big

welcome to the world of ever changing weather and economics

over the decades ive heard it before.. brands coming out saying "we heard you, we listened" and then showing how they are re-releasing their "original recipe" versions again. and other names of things to suggest things going back to pre-shrikflation stuff

[icalical]

Shrinklfation is when a company sells less quantity of a product at the same price, instead of rising the price for the previous quantity.

Thanks for providing the definition, this should be in the OP. I think not everyone has heard about this term.

Because the economic situation in some regions of the world continue to worsen, politicians are using newly invented economic terms like "Shrinkflation" to to blame the companies as being too greedy, and to "rationalize" the effects of printing too much money and having too much debt - that the government may never repay.

I believe as Bitcoin HODLers, we should welcome more money-printing because Bitcoin will absorb some of that excess liquidity, and make the price surge. But it should also make us more distrustful of the policy makers because they know there's no "Shrinkflation", only inflation and the negative effects of money-printing.

Well, in my experience companies actually does reduce the quantity of the product, I notice usually on some snack or drink. And this new term doesn't eliminate the reality that there is an inflation happening and change my perception about that. So it's just another term to describe one of the effect of inflation. Other than that, printing more money without good and thorough without proper fiscal research will only harm the economy.
Sure Bitcoin would absorb some of those money, but the effect of excessive circulation of money, Bitcoin woldn't solve that.

[trendcoin]

Nobody is a God. Only God can create out of nothing... I think it is normal to use methods like this if inflation continues to rise and it is no longer possible to increase the price of products any further. If the size of a chocolate bar we like has shrunk, the company that produces the chocolate bar has had to do so to meet certain calculations. We won't die if we don't eat our favorite chocolate. Before the 1850s, chocolate as we know it was not produced. If certain conditions around us are beyond our control, we must adapt to our environment.

money supply always needs to continue printing..
imagine a system where everyone equally had say $50k. you would think no new money is needed..
yet when someone else is born where is the money going to be for the new addition. are people suddenly suppose to live on $49k to supplement a 2% population growth, how about next year. how about the year after that

there is real reason why the comparison of population growth (2%) aligns with the magic number of preferred inflation. because growing populations cause growing need of consumer goods and services which affect the markets if not controlled

money supply was meant to be a counter to inflation. to control it and not cause it

I agree with this idea because if the money supply remains constant, we don't produce new value and if we don't produce new value, total welfare remains constant and development stops.

[franky1]

also worth noting credit cards didnt exist pre 1970's
all the speak of "credit rate" and peoples fico scores is only 50 years old.

suggesting inflation is related to debt, or money supply is just silly things school kids are told, educated in bad economics where they need to have a good credit rate to beat inflation and prosper(the whole 'use credit as there is not enough money supply to earn your way through life' lies)

heck mindrust tried to debunk that inflation was related to goods price by showing a FRED-M2 chart, suggesting inflation was money supply..
funny part is people were not screaming about inflation 2013-november 2021. yet M2 money didnt rise after november 2021 according to his own chart.. yet price of goods did rise and shrinkflation reduced produce weight/quality after nov 2021. and people did start screaming inflation in 2022-2023

gotta love it when someones own sources debunk their own premiss.

..
what the chart does reveal is the trickle up economics of covid stimulus cheques of 2020-2021 ended up being syphoned out of M2 money(into M4 that includes the institutional investments stuff). which did not mean inflation. it actually cause another different economic crises.. "the wealth gap" between rich and poor