Re: Tuna fish

On Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:33:57 -0500, "William Wixon"
<wwixon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Wes" <clutch@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:6SWXl.154325$Tp1.66100@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I'm back on a diet and to make the salads worth palatable, I bought some
tuna to put into
it. It has been at least a year since I've purchased tuna. The cans have
5 oz of tuna in
them, I seem to remember 6 oz and 2 servings vs 2.5. Am I dreaming?

Wes

a couple months ago i bought some canned tuna. i had a few cans in my cart
and i JUST BARELY noticed something was different, almost imperceptible. i
can't remember now if i had to wait till i got home and compared it to the
other cans i had on the shelf or if i knew right away in the store, but i
was like "WTF?!" it's an insignificant problem but i was totally outraged.
yeah, the cans i had at home were 6 oz. cans at the store were 5 oz.. i
don't ordinarily contact product manufacturers about piddly little stuff
like this but this seemed sneaky to me, i was outraged, i sent them an angry
email, they replied something like "everyone's doing it", that didn't make
me any less angry, instead of just dropping it like i ordinarily do or
should've done i sent back a reply "if everyone was jumping off a bridge
would you too?!", they didn't reply to that.

b.w.

(i also only just recently noticed the rectangular plastic lidded containers
they put take out chinese food in are SLIGHTLY shallower than they had
been(!). i save the containers to put small parts in, the most recent take
out chinese i got i washed the container and stacked it with my other
containers and it didn't fit right and i was like WTF?, that's when i
noticed it was about 3/8 or 1/2 inch less deep than the others. WTF?!

=========
Its called price pack. Rather than rasing the prices, cut the
amount of product per package.

This is the equivalent to inflation for money.

This will continue until the government steps in and mandates
standard package sizes, to be accompanied by howls of rage by the
packers who will claim interference with the free market [which
it is]. Another example of "bringing it on yourself" (along with
everybody else).

FWIW -- don't just complain on this NG. Below is an email I sent
to Washington. Feel free to use all, any or none of it, but be
sure to let them know how you feel.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
http://www.house.gov/
http://senate.gov/
{tip when you identify your 2 senators and representative,
bookmark their URL, and the Preze's for easy reference in the
future.}
http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/contact.shtm
premarkt@xxxxxxxxxxx {email} This appears to be the "controlling
legal authority" for food to use Al Gore's famous phrase.

----- start of email -----
To:
President Obama
Senator Brownback
Senator Roberts
Representative Moran
Representative Tiahrt
Federal Trade Commission
Food and Drug Administration,

* I *N*F*L*A*T*I*O*N* *A*L*E*R*T*
- Not US money, but shrinking US consumer products.

The private sector is again attempting to, and in many cases
succeeding in, deceiving the public by short filling traditional
size containers with significantly less product, for example
gallon sized ice cream containers with 56 ounces (or less) of
product [12.5% short], 5 gallon sized roof sealer containers with
4.75 actual gallons of sealer [5% short], one pound coffee cans
containing 14.5 ounces of coffee [9% short], and six ounce cans
of tuna shrunk to 5 ounces [16.7% short]. To be sure this may be
disclosed in fine print on the label, but is still a deceptive
and unfair trade practice.

Other than concealing substantial price increases, there appears
to be no reason for this deception.

I am not a fan of governmental regulation, but it has become
clear that the majority of corporations will now gouge their
customers in any way they can.

From another point of view, this increasing tendency to "pack to
price" is not only deceiving the public into paying higher
prices, but in many cases is resulting in a proliferation of
non-standard containers, increasing the cost of container
production and inventory.

Thus it is time to not only slam, but nail this loop hole shut.

It is proposed that the old standard of customary weights and
measures be enacted into criminal and civil law by mandating the
use of standardized quantities for retail sale, for the vast
majority of consumer items. There are few plausible exceptions
to be made for some consumer food items such as spices, but there
appears to be no justification for packing ice cream, meat,
cheese, etc. in anything other than 4 ounce, 8 ounce [1 pint], 16
ounce [1 quart], etc. increments, for shrinking packed tuna from
6 ounces to 5 ounces per can, etc. There is no justification for
tinkering with the packaging of commercial products such as roof
sealer. The standard size should be 5 gallons, period.

The most rapid process would appear to be to require the FDA to
include a limited number of acceptable package sizes in their
"standards of identity" for food items, and for the FTC to
declare packaging of non-food items in other than standard pint,
quart, 1/2 gallon, gallon, etc., is a deceptive trade practice,
with substantial fines and seizure of the product for violation
of the regulations of either agency.

Because of the large increase in international trade,
accommodations will have to be made for products packed to metric
standards, and imported into the US. If less than some
reasonable amount, say 25%, of their total production is
imported, it would appear to be adequate to affix a red "non
standard quantity" warning label, however odd metric price packs
must also be discouraged, and odd sized [imperial] imports by the
trans-national corporations should be prohibited, if the same
products are produced in the US in standard container sizes.

Given the current economic recession, the last thing that should
be allowed is additional and continued gouging of the American
consumer who is already in distress.

----- end of email -----


Unka' George [George McDuffee]
-------------------------------------------
He that will not apply new remedies,
must expect new evils:
for Time is the greatest innovator: and
if Time, of course, alter things to the worse,
and wisdom and counsel shall not alter them to the better,
what shall be the end?

Francis Bacon (1561-1626), English philosopher, essayist, statesman.
Essays, "Of Innovations" (1597-1625).
.