On Sun, 31 May 2009 22:09:38 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

> "blake murphy" > wrote in message
>>>
>>> But that's part of it, George. If a person's 'set point' has been
>>> reached at $4.99 for a half gallon of whatever and they won't pay more
>>> than that, they can still have the same *satisfaction-by-food* with a
>>> little bit less and still not pay more than $4.99. Now, at what point
>>> does such a person feel the rip-off? I don't know. And there must be
>>> more of 'them' than you because the manufacturers get by with it.
>>>
>>
>> i think you can be pretty certain that they have researched these issues
>> and have chosen the alternative that makes them the most money. these
>> things are not left to chance.
>>
>> but it is possible they researched it 20 years ago and never looked at it
>> again, though.
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>
> The half gallon worked for the past 60 years that I'm aware of. I also
> recall the price less than a dollar too. Once you start reducing the
> package size, where do you stop? 1.5 quarts? 1 quart? pint? ounce? It is
> going to be tough going back unless they come out with a new "value pack"
> with a full half gallon.
>
> Same tactic applies to taxes. The various governments keep raising the
> percentage as they increase spending. At some point the tax rate will be
> 110%. Governments have to stop spending in tough times, not increasing
> rates.

stopping government spending in a recession is a very foolish idea.

blake