Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My girlfriend and I were discussing food budgets because her household income is taking a hit. She believes she is saving money if she buys the meats that are the cheapest price per pound. My experience has been that I spend more money doing this.
For example, a $20 roast might be cheaper per pound, but it's only one meal or two. Whereas, I can spend $20 on meat for an entire week's worth of dinners buying smaller amounts of meats that have higher price per pound when I need to be extra frugal.
Say those four chicken breasts cost almost $7. That means I'd get 12 meals out of $20 of breasts. (I don't eat the same meat every day of the week, just using this as an example.) I can't get 12 meals out of a $20 roast.
My girlfriend has a very hard time grasping a frugal budget that ignores price per pound. I feel she is wasting money by not seeing the big picture: what it costs per meal. It would be different if she was getting many meals from one roast, but she's only getting two. Three on vary rare occasions.
Am I the only person who noticed it's possible to waste money by being overly focused on price per pound?
This is not a price-per-pound issue, but, a roast vs chicken breasts issue. By your logic, one might conclude that one should instead buy 25-pound turkeys or perhaps even bags of potatoes ... then split those into even more uniquely prepared, meal-sized portions (?). It seems like all you have really said is, "I can buy chicken breasts for less than roasts."
How so?
Even at $5 per pound, that's 4 pounds of meat, which should get you more than a meal or two (unless those meals are for 8-10 people each).
Yet it doesn't always work that way. When cooking one large thing for the first time, it often gets overeaten with seconds and thirds. Leftovers usually only end up making one more meal and sometimes two. You'd think I'm just not talented at creating dinners from a roast, but my girlfriend doesn't get more from a roast than I do either.
This is not a price-per-pound issue, but, a roast vs chicken breasts issue. By your logic, one might conclude that one should instead buy 25-pound turkeys or perhaps even bags of potatoes ... then split those into even more uniquely prepared, meal-sized portions (?).
I only used roasts and chicken breasts as an example. I put this topic in the frugal forum because it's about putting a nutritious meal on the table as cheaply as possible. I'm saying that budget-wise it's most important to look at what it costs to make the meal, how much each plate costs, than how much it costs to buy the meat per pound. So yes, I am saying a 25 pound turkey should be split into more uniquely prepared meal-sized portions if it can be done as cheaply as another meat.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jghorton
It seems like all you have really said is, "I can buy chicken breasts for less than roasts."
I guess I'm saying I can feed a family more meals with less meat than my friend does. As a result, price per pound is irrelevant. I could become even more frugal and pay attention to price per pound and continue to find ways to cook those meats with less meat. You actually helped me figure out the best way to help my girlfriend with her food budget. I just need to explain to her that she needs to prepare meals that use less meat.
For example, a $20 roast might be cheaper per pound, but it's only one meal or two. Whereas, I can spend $20 on meat for an entire week's worth of dinners buying smaller amounts of meats
I also look at the amount of fat, as well as shrinkage.
Example: a store nearby was selling rib eyes for $4. Unfortunately, there was a huge chuck of fat in each of the cuts. I would have needed 3 pieces for two adults ($12). For $1 more ($5), I got a whole chicken, which gave me a dinner for two adults and two chicken salad sandwiches for lunch (plus I save the carcasses for rendering into stock for homemade soups -- I put them into the freezer until I have 3 of them).
Beef is high right now due to drought and other factors. Pork and chicken are the better buys in most markets. However, it's true that she will save money by using less meat overall.
I serve beans and rice twice a week to stretch the budget.
If price/lb is lesser then the meat should last longer if portion size is a constant.
I BOGO London Broil and it is $2.88/lb after discount.(Normally $5.75/lb) Yields sufficient meat for eight meals providing about 6oz-8oz per meal.
I also purchase New York Strip by the 5lb ball for $5.99/lb and carve out my own 6oz-8oz steaks. Typically these are $7.99-$9.99/lb pre-cut from the butcher section.
Have also purchased Porterhouse when on BOGO(rare occasion) and managed $4.99/lb after discount. $9.99/lb if purchased separately.
These are all at Winn-Dixie a local chain noted for their meat section.
The key is to purchase when discounted below typical market price. Either on BOGO or a large ball of a specific cut that one can pare down to meal sized portions. Freeze the remainder.
My girlfriend and I were discussing food budgets because her household income is taking a hit. She believes she is saving money if she buys the meats that are the cheapest price per pound. My experience has been that I spend more money doing this.
For example, a $20 roast might be cheaper per pound, but it's only one meal or two. Whereas, I can spend $20 on meat for an entire week's worth of dinners buying smaller amounts of meats that have higher price per pound when I need to be extra frugal.
Say those four chicken breasts cost almost $7. That means I'd get 12 meals out of $20 of breasts. (I don't eat the same meat every day of the week, just using this as an example.) I can't get 12 meals out of a $20 roast.
My girlfriend has a very hard time grasping a frugal budget that ignores price per pound. I feel she is wasting money by not seeing the big picture: what it costs per meal. It would be different if she was getting many meals from one roast, but she's only getting two. Three on vary rare occasions.
Am I the only person who noticed it's possible to waste money by being overly focused on price per pound?
She's the one with the food budget problem. She's spending more on food than I am.
If she was right, I'd be spending more on food than her.
I suspect you're stuck in the price per pound mindset and wasting money too.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
