Inflation. Everyone’s discussing it these days, at least on X.

Is it bad? Is it fine? Are our perceptions skewed by virtue of living in 2026 which makes accurate evaluation of prices in 1996 impossible?

Going to McDonald’s was an occasion back then. There weren’t 35 different kinds of IPAs in the grocery store. Arugula didn’t exist until sometime around 2009.

It’s hard to know. Different people have different ideas on all of this and it’s hard to say one is more right than another. Sometimes there are multiple right answers.

Socialism starter

Matt Walsh wrote:

Grocery prices are insane. They’re still rising. Addressing this problem should be the number one priority of every elected leader. End the stupid foreign wars and focus on this issue. It’s one of the main reasons socialists are gaining power.

He’s not wrong. Grocery prices are higher than I ever remember. Most families I know are acutely aware of the situation. When you’re feeding growing kids, you can’t skimp the way you skimped when you were 21. You can’t feed them junk because it’s cheaper; you have to feed them nutritiously, and so you end up feeling those higher prices pretty sharply.

Burrito-nomics

Jeremy Kauffman wrote:

“So far as I can tell, it’s simply not true that food has gotten more expensive in real dollars in the United States. Why are people so convinced this is true? What’s the evidence?”

Below his post he shared a graph detailing the fact that grocery prices have only risen in nominal terms, not real terms, essentially saying prices are higher but so are wages.

In response to claims of $20 burritos being prohibitively expensive for young people, Kauffman detailed the hard numbers for feeding burritos to a family of eight with ingredients from Wal-Mart. The total price was $18.38

Kauffman isn’t wrong either. Although my wife handles the food in our house, I do know we buy our groceries from Meijer, Aldi, and Walmart. I know there are absolutely affordable prices to be found if you don’t buy your ingredients at Whole Foods and you make your food at home rather than going out. A gallon of milk from our local Walmart is $3.17; a gallon of milk from the nearby Whole Foods is $6.69.

To his point about prices rising nominally but not in real terms, I’m not an economist or a statistician, so I don’t know all the ins and outs of how these numbers are calculated, but I do know we tend to really notice in passionate and negative terms when the prices swell at the store but we don’t really notice or account for our paycheck swelling in our bank account. It’s a sad fact that we tend to focus on the bad more than the good.

Passion for premium

Lomez wrote:

Short answer is that post-boomers became accustomed to premium/boutique brands. These things do, in fact, cost a lot more than generics. No seed oils. All organic. Cage free. Etc. Etc. My family spends a lot more on groceries in *real* dollars than my parents did because, like just about everyone posting online about this, we over-extend and buy the$20 dollar bottle of nice Vermont maple syrup and $8 fancy French butter and do this across the board for almost every category [choose your own indulgence/health fixation]. I know we’re not alone in this. I’ve seen your pantries.

The longer answer is that other categories of spending have gone significantly up — housing, childcare, insurance — and so there’s less slack in the average person’s budget. Grocery prices might be flat as a general matter, but the belt can still feel — and actually be — a lot tighter.

He is certainly correct, and like most other very correct answers to complex questions, the people don’t want to hear it.

In the 1990s, before the foodie revolution, our parents fed us very plain food. We rarely went out to eat, and it was a big event when we did. There were no cans of sparkling water. We never had pop in the fridge. We didn’t even really stop at fast food when traveling; we packed sandwiches in a cooler full of half-melted ice bags at the bottom.

Going to McDonald’s was an occasion back then. There weren’t 35 different kinds of IPAs in the grocery store. Arugula didn’t exist until sometime around 2009. The children of 2026 have no experience with the iceberg lettuce salad of 1996 — you know the one, with bland white crispy lettuce, large tomatoes that aren’t even close to ripe, and three fat cucumber slices.

Our kids eat guacamole, sushi, organic eggs, copious amounts of raspberries with Greek yogurt in the morning, and a bunch of other stuff I didn’t even encounter until I was in my 20s.

RELATED: Greetings from my favorite vacation spot; it’s closer and cheaper than you may think

H. Armstrong Roberts/ClassicStock/Getty Images

Fancy feasts

It’s a fascinating story about class and taste. How even though our society is, in many ways, more classless and lowbrow than ever, many people are eating food that really only very wealthy and very health-conscious individuals ate back in 1996, and that fact plays some role in how we perceive prices.

The thing about shifting expectations after the foodie revolution is that it doesn’t feel like any of those things that were fancy and expensive in 1996 are elite in 2026. Fresh guacamole is now the Kraft American cheese single, and now no one would eat the Kraft American cheese single, and this skews our perception.

Of course, it goes without saying that someone does eat the Kraft American cheese single. Millions of people do, just like we did. Actually, in fact, we didn’t eat the Kraft American single at the Root house in 1996 because they were considered kind of fancy and more expensive than buying a block of cheese and cutting it yourself.

Reality bites

The truth about inflation is that whether it’s real bad, pretty normal, or the end of the world as we know it, we can’t do anything about it. You, dear reader, have no way to meaningfully change the global financial system or the American economic situation at this time. These things are too big for an individual citizen to have any control over. You can’t make the prices lower, you can’t stop the bleeding, you can’t do anything other than buy what you need to buy while doing your best to stay within your budget.

We humans have a terrible tendency to focus very heavily on things we can’t really change. I don’t know why it is, but it is. Is it because we are naturally malcontent? Or is it because we are whiners with no strength? Or maybe we are masochists? Obsessing endlessly about something you view as terrible and painful when you have no way to change it seems like a form of masochism, doesn’t it?

Whatever it is, it isn’t good. We can’t focus all our energy or emotional firepower on being angry about inflation. Maybe we should be angry; maybe we shouldn’t be angry. I don’t know. But I do know that all we can do is acknowledge the reality of the world as it is, whether it be good or bad, and do our best to adapt to the current situation, live the best life we can in the meantime, and hope for the best.

That’s how it was in 1996 and how it is in 2026.

​Budget, Economists, Family, Food, Grocery prices, Inflation, Lifestyle, Prices, Reality, Walmart, Socialism, Dsa, The root of the matter 

President Donald Trump announced on July 30 that his Board of Peace had “reached a HISTORIC agreement” in Gaza that would bring an end to a conflict that has claimed well over 70,000 lives.

While the president characterized his proposed resolution as a major win for the Palestinian people and for Israel alike, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is evidently of a different mind.

‘President Trump will be very, very disappointed.’

Netanyahu — whom Trump has rebuked repeatedly in recent months for undermining his initiatives in the region — rejected the Board of Peace’s 15-point peace plan on Sunday, telling his cabinet that some of its terms are unacceptable.

Peace proposal

The peace plan released by Trump’s Board of Peace, which would be undertaken in stages, requires, among other things, that:

Israel, Hamas, and “other Palestinian factions” suspend military operations in Gaza;Hamas and other factions in Gaza agree not only that all civilian governance and security functions in Gaza will be taken over by the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza, but that the committee can carry out its responsibilities independently;the NCAG will oversee the disarmament process;Gaza will be “governed according to the principle of One Authority, One Law, One Weapon”;Israeli forces — who presently occupy more than half of Gaza — will execute a phased withdrawal from Gaza; andthe International Stabilization Force will separate Israeli forces from NCAG-controlled areas during the withdrawal.

“This agreement is a critical step towards Gaza finally being governed by a new Palestinian government that will work closely with the Board of Peace to help the Palestinian people,” Trump said in a statement. “At the same time, Israel will have the security it deserves, with Gaza no longer used as a base for terror attacks.”

RELATED: It’s the economy, stupid — again

Khan Yunis in the southern Gazan Strip on July 31, 2026. Bashar Taleb/AFP/Getty Images.

“The threat that emerged from Gaza on October 7 will NOT be allowed to rebuild!” continued the president. “Under this agreement, Gaza will finally be in the hands of a new Palestinian government that serves its PEOPLE.”

After announcing the deal, which Hamas accepted through Egyptian mediators, Trump told reporters that “Israel is very happy.”

While the Israeli security cabinet initially approved of having the International Stabilization Force enter Gaza to aid in the disarmament of Hamas and the transition, top officials called on Netanyahu to reject the plan, reported the Times of Israel.

Rejection

Netanyahu, who facing both a tough re-election battle and an ongoing corruption trial, told his cabinet on Sunday, “Israel rejects the 15-point document.”

“The IDF will not carry out any withdrawal until Hamas is disarmed,” continued Netanyahu. “And when I say Hamas must be disarmed, I mean the heavy weapons, the less-heavy weapons, all weapons. And we are talking about genuine disarmament, not a fictitious one.”

The Israeli leader — whose nation is the “largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign assistance since World War II” — noted that his government has raised its reservations over the peace deal with Washington.

“They have ideas,” said Netanyahu, apparently referring to the Americans behind the peace deal. “Some of them are acceptable to us and some are unacceptable to us, and we know how to stand up to these things. We have proven this in the past, and we are proving it today as well. In addition, the IDF will continue to thwart threats against our forces and against our citizens.”

The White House did not immediately respond to Blaze News’ request for comment.

While flatly rejecting Trump’s peace plan, Netanyahu nevertheless spoke warmly of the American president.

“I have great appreciation for President Trump,” said the foreign leader. “He is a great friend of ours in the White House. I greatly appreciate the historic partnership with the United States against Iran’s attempts to acquire nuclear weapons. And I want to emphasize again: With an agreement or without an agreement, as long as I am prime minister, Iran will not possess nuclear weapons.”

“Unlike all those who preach to us, we are doing what needs to be done for Israel’s security, and we can and know how to stand our ground even against our very best friends when necessary,” added Netanyahu.

In addition to rejecting the peace deal, Netanyahu rejected the possibility of a Palestinian state in Gaza.

The prime minister’s remarks were welcomed by various Israeli officials, including finance minister Bezalel Smotrich, the leader of the Religious Zionist Party.

“We went to war with a central goal: the destruction of Hamas,” said Smotrich, in a statement reported by the Times of Israel. “The (military) cannot withdraw even a millimeter from the Gaza Strip. The Gaza Strip cannot begin any process of reconstruction before the complete dismantling and demobilization of Hamas and the Gaza Strip.”

Hamas, on the other hand, remains supportive of Trump’s plan and has asked Washington to pressure Israel to get on board.

According to an X.com translation of the original Arabic, Basem Naim, a member of Hamas’ politburo, stated on Sunday, “We are committed to the roadmap reached with the representatives of the Peace Council in Cairo just days ago, and our agreement, despite all the challenges, reflected a commitment to the interests of our Palestinian people.”

“We expect the mediators and the American guarantor to press Netanyahu and his government to compel him to adhere to the roadmap and not obstruct the path for internal political and electoral reasons,” added Naim.

After Trump first announced the deal, a U.S. official told the Washington Post, “We’re not asking Israel to do anything other than agree to the 20-point plan that they agreed to initially, and so we’re very confident they will adhere to it. If they don’t, obviously, President Trump will be very, very disappointed.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Benjamin netanyau, Donald trump, Gaza, Israel, Peace plan, War, Politics 

Actor Jon Bernthal is defending pit bulls from what he calls “racism” — but that doesn’t alleviate concerns about the breed potentially being a legitimate safety issue.

During an appearance on “The Howard Stern Show,” Bernthal compared the stigma surrounding pit bulls to human discrimination, arguing that it’s wrong to judge the breed out of fear.

“He said the widespread fear of pit bulls is ‘dog racism,’ and he said it was compared to judging people on their race or sexual orientation,” Stu comments.

Bernthal has pit bulls himself and has called them “honest.”

“So, apparently they’re giving him factual statements and sticking to their beliefs,” Stu laughs.

The actor also claimed that a pit bull is just as likely to bite as any other dog.

“Look, I think it’s wise to be a little bit skeptical of pit bulls, and I like all dogs. Personally, I know a lot of people that have pit bulls, and I like them, but you know, I think that you should discriminate a little bit,” Dave says.

“So, I don’t know what that says about me, but it’s probably a good idea to be wary,” he adds.

“There does seem to be a more likely terrible outcome when it comes to pit bulls. But still, it’s probably a small percentage of the dogs, right?” Stu asks.

“Not all pit bulls, they’re not all going to be the same, but they were bred for violence initially, I believe, for fighting,” Dave says.

“And sometimes the dog will protect itself against you, the owner,” he adds.

Want more from Stu and Dave?

To enjoy more of Stu and Dave’s lethal blend of wit, humor, and insightful commentary subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Dave landau, Howard stern show, Jon bernthal, Stu burguiere, Blazetv show, Pit bulls, Racism