this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2024
895 points (100.0% liked)

196

16484 readers
2072 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] schnokobaer@lemmy.ml 50 points 8 months ago (5 children)

for cash-strapped families

Is Kellogg's cereal even cheap at all?? I'm not in the US so I could only imagine but I'd guess it's not, is it?

[–] FakeGreekGirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 21 points 8 months ago

Not really, no. I mean, it's cheaper than, like, steak, but it usually goes for twice as much or more than the store brand or bargain brand cereals.

[–] Paradachshund@lemmy.today 13 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Cereal is actually weirdly expensive nowadays. You can do much better for less.

[–] clubb@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

I'm pretty sure Ukraine was a big cereal exporter before the war, so it makes sense I guess

[–] Infynis@midwest.social 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It's cheaper than good cereal, but more expensive than the identical store brand

[–] schnokobaer@lemmy.ml 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

And compared to dinner?

I'm asking because if I was "strapped for cash" I'd always go for cooking something rice or potato based myself, rather than buying already processed and packaged food, a most likely overpriced brand no less!

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I think it’s partly that any home cooking is more difficult and time consuming than it. I have cheap and easy meals I do but they’re less feasible than cereal. Except dipping bread in pesto that’s dirt cheap and easy as fuck

[–] schnokobaer@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago

Good point, time consumed by cooking has value in itself.

[–] HotDogFingies@kbin.social 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] Chriswild@lemmy.world 13 points 8 months ago (3 children)
[–] funnystuff97@lemmy.world 16 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Fun fact: if you were to drink a cup of gasoline, it would have enough calories to sustain you for the rest of your life!

[–] itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 8 months ago (3 children)

A gallon of gasoline only contains about 28k Calories, so about enough energy for 10 days

A cup would barely last you a day

[–] BeigeAgenda@lemmy.ca 15 points 8 months ago

A day sounds about right if it ends up being the last day 😵

[–] FakeGreekGirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 8 months ago

Sure, but neither would you, if you drank a cup of gasoline.

[–] psycho_driver@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

A cup would barely last you a day

I believe that was their point . . .

[–] itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 8 months ago

I may be dense... xD

[–] Chriswild@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I prefer to eat a kilo of uranium

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 9 points 8 months ago
[–] IndiBrony@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

Just a lick of the demon core will last you your whole life 👌

[–] kibiz0r@midwest.social 5 points 8 months ago

At point of sale. If you include subsidies and tax breaks for fossil fuel corpos...

[–] psycho_driver@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

You haven't watched the trailer for Summer 2024 yet, have you?

[–] XTornado@lemmy.ml 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

It's cheaper than a traditional dinner probably... But yeah might as well get the cheaper cereal.

[–] Swallowtail@beehaw.org 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'm betting it would actually be cheaper to cook something like rice and beans than it would be to eat cereal.

[–] DessertStorms@kbin.social 2 points 8 months ago

Not everyone has cooking (as well as cool storage) facilities and/or can afford to power them. Cereal requires no cooking and can be stored anywhere, as can UHT milk.