- Next story The Spanish Civil War: A Product of Appeasement
- Previous story Jury Finds Amber Guyger Guilty
Search
TEN SECOND BUZZ
- The FTC has banned (nearly all) non-compete agreementsApril 23, 202418 Comments
- More Campus Palestine Protests, More Arrests, More Viral VideoApril 23, 202417 Comments
- Open Mic for the week of 4/22/2024April 22, 202440 Comments
- Open Mic for the week of 4/15/2024April 15, 2024232 Comments
- OJ Simpson: Football Great, Murder Suspect, and Convicted Felon, Dead at 76April 11, 2024115 Comments
Features
Hot Posts
A Message From Devcat
We have been experiencing some system resource issues. We believe the problem may be resolved, but if it is not please bear with us.
Recent Comments
- LeeEsq on Free Speech, But No Freedom to HarassOne of the things that I don't understand from Pro-Palestinian Westerners is how they keep on insist…
- Dark Matter in reply to LeeEsq on Free Speech, But No Freedom to HarassThink of all the bricks that get thrown at BLM. The theory of building a minority organization is di…
- Dark Matter in reply to DavidTC on Free Speech, But No Freedom to HarassWhen I read the wiki on the alleged sex crimes during the attack we seem to have a large volume of c…
- Dark Matter in reply to DavidTC on Free Speech, But No Freedom to HarassOne of the issues with "subtract the situation" is "everything we know could be wrong". So for examp…
- LeeEsq in reply to Jaybird on Free Speech, But No Freedom to HarassThe time frame is more complicated. Even after the Six Day War, it was seen as a larger Israel-Arab…
- Jaybird in reply to LeeEsq on Free Speech, But No Freedom to HarassIf you haven't seen this, you should. It's only a few seconds and it's really a treat. (Note: You sh…
- Jaybird in reply to LeeEsq on Free Speech, But No Freedom to HarassThe underdog status ended after the Six Day War over there. It's wobbly over here but there are stil…
- LeeEsq in reply to Jaybird on Free Speech, But No Freedom to HarassI also expect that the period where Jews were seen as an underdog was short and not entirely univers…
- Michael Cain in reply to North on The Shifting Politics of AbortionThe two big stories of political geography in the US over the last 30 years is the huge swing from b…
- LeeEsq in reply to Chip Daniels on Free Speech, But No Freedom to HarassAnd what really pisses me off isn't necessarily the anti-Zionism per se but just treating Jews as di…
Comics
-
April 24, 2024
-
April 23, 2024
-
Friend Husband At The Ballpark
April 22, 2024
-
Good Morning! Are You An Amateur?
April 21, 2024
More Comments
- LeeEsq in reply to Jaybird on Free Speech, But No Freedom to Harass
- North in reply to Michael Cain on The Shifting Politics of Abortion
- Dark Matter in reply to DavidTC on Free Speech, But No Freedom to Harass
- Jaybird in reply to LeeEsq on Free Speech, But No Freedom to Harass
- Chip Daniels in reply to LeeEsq on Free Speech, But No Freedom to Harass
- LeeEsq in reply to Chip Daniels on Free Speech, But No Freedom to Harass
- Michael Cain in reply to North on The Shifting Politics of Abortion
- Chip Daniels in reply to LeeEsq on Free Speech, But No Freedom to Harass
- Dark Matter in reply to DavidTC on Free Speech, But No Freedom to Harass
- North in reply to Michael Cain on The Shifting Politics of Abortion
- Dark Matter in reply to LeeEsq on Free Speech, But No Freedom to Harass
- Michael Cain in reply to Chip Daniels on The Shifting Politics of Abortion
- LeeEsq in reply to Chip Daniels on Free Speech, But No Freedom to Harass
- LeeEsq in reply to Saul Degraw on Free Speech, But No Freedom to Harass
- Chip Daniels in reply to Michael Cain on The Shifting Politics of Abortion
Just for fun, I plugged this into an inflation calculator here.
33 cents in 1916 (I am guessing from the ’16 on the cartoon it was drawn in that year) would be equivalent to almost $8 today. Granted, I don’t know how sugar prices have fluctuated vs. general inflation, but $8 is a pretty nice box of the typical candy sold at groceries or drugstores (think Russel Stover)Report
33 cents seems like a lot. Just googling around a bit, penny candies were a thing in 1916: “‘Penny candy’ encompassed a broad range of confection. Established and large-scale manufacturers who produced many higher priced goods also sold bulk candies designed to appeal to children and to be sold so many pieces to the penny. These might included molded hard or soft candies, suckers, licorice in all sorts of shapes, marshmallows, or caramels, and would be distributed by ‘jobbers’ to various retail stores. At the other extreme, such penny candies might also be manufactured by hand in small ‘candy kitchens’ and sold in local shops or from street carts. The conditions of manufacture, and the quality of ingredients, might therefore vary significantly. Especially at the lower rungs of the trade, ‘adulterants’ such as artificial dyes and non-food fillers were occasionally used to make candy look more appealing or to lower the price of production.”
The bulk of this piece is about the panic that emerged from a 1916 polio epidemic, which resulted in wrapping of candies on which brands could be promoted.
https://candyprofessor.com/candy-bibliography-library/polio-and-childrens-candy-around-1916/Report