Are you joining the Tyson Foods boycott?

I have my own business....I do not need to process chickens for Tyson.  But there are Americans who will who are low skilled workers.  The government should not be importing (opening the border) to drive wages down for those low skilled Americans. 

The bill the Dems wanted was not securing the border....it was putting it in law opening the bordered allowing thousands in a day every day. 

We need to shut it down.  Remain in Mexico while waiting for their case. This post was edited by my2cents at March 18, 2024 12:03 PM MDT

"Basic Minimum Rate (per hour): $15.00; $16.00 (New York City, Nassau County, Suffolk County, & Westchester County)

Premium Pay After Designated Hours: Weekly - 40"

That applies to any worker, so they can't pay asylum seekers less than anyone else. 

The point is the fired American workers with the intent to hire non-Amercians.....I don't care if they pay the same or not....I cannot find the wage and benefits of the fired workers exactly....number fluctuates from site to site and even on the same site. 

Fire Americans and I will not be buying from you. And I am not the only one by any means. 

Well, don't forget that most restaurant and fast food chains are supplied by Tyson. 

Let me know which ones...we will add them to the list. 

It has a near monopoly. Something I have stated before is an issue with food suppliers. McDonald's,  KFC, Popeyes, Taco Bell, Chik Fil-A are among those who buy Tyson chicken. 

Perhaps Biden should apply those price gauging monopoly laws to them and break them up.  As I said I would support breaking up the food monopolies. 

Weren't you the one who said the government had no business dictating private business' prices?  You can't have it both ways, can you?

I was referencing another question here about Biden and his committee attacking businesses claiming they are price gauging.  Jane S said he was going after the food monopolies.   
I do support anti-monopoly laws as I said on that thread.  I believe in free market competition, we cannot have that with monopolies.  

I do not however believe Biden has proposed to break up any of the food monopolies.   

I'll bet you didn't even know that Tyson was a food monopoly until something about illegal aliens was brought up.  

No I did not for the fast food restaurants.  But I have known that most foods sold in the US are sold by about 10 different food companies for several years now. 

And you think that ten different food companies constitute a monopoly that should be disbanded?  Wake up.  Individual farmers couldn't possibly distribute their goods to the number of people in this country.

Where do you think the food is coming from.....the farmers are distributing it to where it needs to go. 
And small food packing company can do the same thing the large ones are and should be....that is the purpose of the free market.  To have the businesses compete for the dollar (or the grocers dollar who then compete for our dollar) But if it is just a few companies they do not have to compete as much because there are only a few companies competing. 

The government hasn't broken up a monopoly since AT&T in the 80's. The government is supposed to help prevent monopolies from forming by overseeing mergers and acquisitions to make sure they will not restrict competition. For example,  the FTC is suing to block the merger of Albertsons and Krogers. They also enforce antitrust laws where these companies use unfair pricing due to lack of competition (including shrinkflation, which you said was justified). Some monopolies are not formed by mergers and acquisitions, (like Apple).  Big companies spend millions on lobbying and on political contributions and it seems to pay off. 

As you said the lobbying pays off...they have not broken a monopoly up since the 1980s....shame on them.  
Does not mean they should not be breaking them up.  
Skrinkflation is happening because of the inflation in the economy....it is not the greed of the food giants. If it was just their greed the costs of other items would not be increasing as well.  And we all know everything has been affected not just food. 

Shrinkflation is the result of pure greed.

“When companies are passing along increases in costs to themselves, I totally get it,” says [Elizabeth] Warren.  “But here's the deal…over the past few years, their profits have gone up, their profit margins by 75%.  Now, that's not just passing along increased costs. If that were the case, profit margins would have stayed the same. Instead, it's using inflation kind of like a smokescreen.” 

https://www.nbcboston.com/investigations/consumer/shrinkflation-is-hurting-consumers-at-the-grocery-store-a-new-bill-aims-to-stop-it/3295198/

This post was edited by Spunky at March 21, 2024 11:25 AM MDT

If costs go up, the selling price increases by a percentage.  And yes the % can result in a larger dollar amount of profit.  
   
So a $10 cost item will sell for $11.00-$12.00
(Profit $1.00-$2.00)
If that cost increases to $15 will sell for $16.50-$18.00
(Profit $1.50-$3.00)

That is how markup works....if you keep the same markup a higher cost item will result in a higher return on sales.  As it should be the amount of risk must be worth the reward. 

That  is just markup....business also make adjustments based on sales forecasts takes measures cut other costs to remain or increase profit. Be it labor, finding cheaper materials, etc. 

Which food company profit margin has increased.75% in a year?  It is not the one in your image...General Mills profit averages 12%

https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/GIS/general-mills/profit-margins

This post was edited by my2cents at March 21, 2024 4:35 PM MDT

Just a couple of points to clarify, in case anyone is following this. 

If an item costs $10 to produce and sells for $11, that is a 10% profit margin
If it costs $15 to produce and sells for $16. 50, that is still a 10% profit margin

Saying that profit margin increased by 75% is not disproved by saying that their profit margin is only 12%. If that $11 selling price  goes to $11.75, with no increase in cost,  then the profit margin increases by 75%. The profit of $1.75 is a profit rate of 17.5%. So 17.5% is 75% higher than 10%.
  
It might be easier to see if we say the price went to $12. That would be a 20% profit margin, which is double the original 10%, so profit margin increases 100%

Hope this helps. 

Again, as you can see from the chart the General Mills (which was used in the image) never had a year that the profit margin increased by 75%.  

I made no comment about General Mills. I just clarified how profit margins work, because I know something about this.

You responded to my post which addressed Spunky's post highlighting  Elizabeth Warren's claims of 75% profit increases.  General Mills is pictured. 

So what? 

My mistake in making Elizabeth Warren's comments appear to relate to the General Mills info posted before that.  I did not mean to imply that General Mills profits were 75%.  

Warren should tell us what specific company profits increased 75% in one year....