For years now, the term “shrinkflation” has been on my radar; a malignant force threatening the very structure and goodwill of our society. For those who aren’t familiar with this, it refers to when a product is reduced in size but its price remains the same (or even rises). This is most commonly seen in groceries, of course, but has occurred even within the tech world (when last year, the PS5’s 1TB storage was reduced to 825GB). Its equally evil, if lesser known brother, “skimpflation” then involves the cheapening of a product, usually by replacing one ingredient with a less expensive alternative (e.g. more palm oil in chocolate, a lesser coffee bean, etc.) Such measures are justified on the basis of economic hardship, when profits aren’t quite as fat as these multi-billion dollar industries would like, which is why these issues have become more prevalent than ever.


As a result of the current energy crisis and post-pandemic adjustment, we’ve experienced some of the worst years of inflation in recent memory (4.7% in 2021, 8% in 2022, 4.1% in 2023, 2.9% in 2024, and 2.6% last year; for contrast, the 2010s saw a 1.76% average annual rate). This has been made ever more burdensome due to panic-led speculation in Wall Street and the AI bubble driving pre-emptive cost measures, i.e. taking advantage, price gouging, “excuseflation”, etc. Many of us (the weak ones) accept ever-worsening standards and shrinkflation / skimpflation as a result of the flotsam and jetsam associated with all this carnage because it’s easier than having to engage with a seemingly-complex economic discussion. To yield to cop-out responses like “what can one do” or “complaining won’t help” irks me however, because frankly, it can.


Besides the fact that public outrage makes shareholders nervous and at least factors into companies’ decisions, it keeps the pressure mounting and makes others aware. (It feels like a lot of people don’t examine these subsets beyond the broader idea of “inflation”.) Plus, certain measures could be taken at governmental level. In France for example, it was mandated that supermarkets have to post warning notices on shelves two months in advance of a product’s reduction in size or weight. In Europe, there hasn’t been the same will to sell out, as Americans have, to increasingly sketchy food alternatives (and preservatives), e.g. like when they switched to high fructose corn syrup over cane sugar in the 1970s in the US. Attentiveness, and responsible Government legislation, it seems can actually make a difference, so long as special interests are kept at bay.


Of course, industrialist priority and shareholder value have always compromised America’s interests. We see shrinkflation as an economic burden on the average American, for obvious reasons, and skimpflation as that and a legitimate health threat (as regards FDA regulations). In so far as the actions taken by the Health Secretary, the (shall we call it) “inconsistent” Robert Kennedy, there have been some promising changes in the narrative surrounding UPFs (ultra-processed foods). But even then, critics have pointed out scientific errors in certain dietary guidelines set out in the MAHA (Make America Health Again) agenda and noted corporate pressure has lately, softened the tone surrounding pesticides. To suppose things pessimistically, any positive changes to food products would also likely result in a notable price hike for the consumer. 


Ultimately, corruption at the highest level, dictates response to inflation. For all his complaints about the shrinkflation of his beloved ice cream tubs, President Biden hardly used the bully pulpit as President Teddy Roosevelt would have done, to establish a new Square Deal. Until such measures are taken though, profit “must” ultimately maintain, by lay offs, increased implementation of AI, price hikes, and most mischievously, shrinfklation and skimpflation.