Fast-food isn't so affordable anymore. Here are the U.S. cities where prices are the highest.
Food industry analyst says food prices will rise due to tariffs, "no question about it"
Like Subway's $5 footlong, affordable fast-food may soon be a thing of the past.
The average price of fast-food in larger U.S. cities is now in the double digits, with the typical meal costing $11.56, according to a new report from LendingTree. Prices are highest in San Francisco, where the average fast-food meal costs $13.88, followed by Seattle at $13.48. Columbus, Ohio, has the most affordable fast-food, but meals still came to $10.01 on average.
Fast-food has long been considered a more economical, if not more healthful, way to eat. Whether it's Wendy's "Biggie Bag" or McDonald's "McValue" menu, most major fast-food chains offer some sort of meal deal for under $10. But as costs rise and inflation pinches Americans' wallets, the cost of burgers, fries and chicken nuggets may be slipping out of reach for many consumers.
A FinanceBuzz analysis found last year that average fast food prices have risen between 39% and 100% over the last decade. For example, a McDouble sandwich that cost $1.19 in 2014 would easily cost more than $3 in 2024, the personal finance site found.
Thirty-nine percent of Americans expect to spend less on dining given heightened uncertainty about the economy, according to a recent Bankrate survey.
According to McDonald's most recent earnings report, the company experienced a 3.6% drop in sales the first quarter, with executives citing tariffs as the reason behind the slower foot traffic.
"Heightened anxiety" about the economy is weighing on lower- and middle-income Americans, McDonald's CEO Chris Kempczinski said in a May 1 earnings call.
Among the consumers who may be struggling with the cost of fast-food — the low-income employees who make it. The average hourly wage for fast-food workers is $15.07, according to LendingTree. That means it takes workers more than two times longer than someone on an average wage in the U.S. to earn enough to afford a typical fast food meal, while factoring in the cost of other living expenses.
"No one has ever expected to get rich off of fast-food wages, but the fact that these workers can't even expect a livable wage is troubling," LendingTree chief consumer finance analyst Matt Schulz said in the report.
LendingTree found that a fast-food worker who purchased three meals a day from their employer, seven days a week, would end up spending 40% of their salary on average — leaving them with just 60% of their paycheck to live on.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
2 hours ago
- Business Insider
My 17-year-old will probably skip college and attend flight school instead. I think that's a smart plan.
My wife and I both went to college and graduated with bachelor's degrees. On the whole, I think we'd both agree that college was worth it for us. We got to have the careers we wanted. College degrees helped us to build a stable, prosperous, and interesting life. But college isn't for everyone. And our oldest child is on a very different path — a flight path. That's right: our 17-years-old son wants to be an airline pilot. And airline pilots don't have to go to college. Instead of a four-year degree, we're considering a different plan for him where he would stay at home for a year after high school and complete his pilot training at a private flight school near our home. Here are a few reasons why I'm totally fine with my son skipping college. College doesn't feel "worth it" for many Americans Several decades of rising tuition, high levels of student loan debt, and widespread economic uncertainty in the job market, have led many Americans to no longer believe that college is always worth the cost. A Pew Research survey in 2024 found that only 22% of Americans believe that college is worth taking out loans to pay for. My wife and I are lucky. Our student loans were manageable, and have been paid off for many years. But not every college graduate feels like their degree was a great investment and not every degree leads to a guaranteed six-figure salary. And if you run into financial trouble, student loans can be hard to get rid of. It can be difficult to get them discharged through bankruptcy, and the government can garnish your wages if you fall behind on student loan payments. The American college experience isn't always a carefree time of football games, fraternity parties, and Frisbee on the quad. It can be a big financial risk. Not every family wants to take that risk. We don't. We'd rather support our son in getting exactly the right training that he wants to have for his career, without spending a bunch of money on extra classes that he's not as interested in. College isn't for everyone Not everyone is cut out for full-time academic coursework — and that's okay. If a kid has already spent the first 18 years of their life going to school and following rules and doing homework and sitting indoors under fluorescent lights, they might not be excited for another four years of that experience. Many young people go off to college — and rack up a few semesters' worth of student loans — only to find that they don't want to sit in a classroom anymore, so they drop out. The financial stakes of making the wrong decisions about college can be high. People who don't finish their degree are twice as likely to default on their student loans. If you're not 100% sure that college is right for you, you might be better off not going. My son is in this category. He's good at high school, and he takes AP math and science classes, but he's highly motivated and focused on being an airline pilot. He doesn't want to be in a classroom, he wants to be in a cockpit. I don't want to hold him back from doing what he's most interested in and passionate about. We're focused on our child's needs If our son wanted to go to college and be an airline pilot, we would support him in that. There are great four-year universities and two-year community colleges that offer pilot training combined with academic degree programs. But we think a private flight school (with no college attached) might be a better fit for what he needs. He can live at home, save money on rent and car payments, and get flight training at our local airport — everything he needs to launch straight into his flying career. And most importantly, even aside from the money, fast-tracking his future with a private flight school just feels like what our son needs. He's passionate and highly motivated about aviation. He's taken aviation classes and private flight lessons while in high school. He's exceptionally level-headed and responsible. He's learning all the Federal Aviation Administration rules, airplane mechanics, and aviation lingo. He's already spent hundreds of hours training with flight simulation software. This is what he wants to be when he grows up, and he's ready to go after it, full throttle. And we're ready to watch him fly.
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
Majority of Americans back sanctions on Russia, allies that purchase oil: Survey
A majority of Americans say they support sanctions on Russia and its allies over the ongoing war with Ukraine, according to a poll released Friday by YouGov. The survey found that 44 percent of U.S. citizens said the country should increase sanctions on Moscow, compared to 19 percent who say the set sanctions should remain. Twenty three percent of respondents were unsure about how to move forward while 6 percent said sanctions should be decrease. Nine percent said the U.S. should end all sanctions. The survey was taken after Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and other GOP lawmakers urged President Trump to punish his counterpart, Russian President Vladimir Putin, with economic restrictions following repeated strikes on Kyiv. The over three years-long war has been backed by U.S. dollars sent to Ukraine to bolster their defense against their neighbor. Graham said he believes his bill, which has more than 60 cosponsors, to impose new sanctions on Russia and tariffs on countries that purchase Russian oil, gas and uranium would help put an end to the conflict overseas. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has spoken out against the effort while Trump his still mulling his support. 'The Graham bill would derail President Trump's efforts to negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine. Self-defeating economic warfare is no way to achieve peace,' Paul said on the social media platform X. 'This bill won't force China or India to change behavior, but it will impose an effective embargo on ourselves that will hurt American families,' he said. YouGov's Friday poll shows that most Democrats — 59 percent — and more than a third of Republicans, 37 percent, support sanctions on Russia. Forty-two percent of independents said they feel the same. YouGov's poll was conducted online between June 12 and June 16 with 1,133 U.S. adult citizens from an opt-in panel. The margin of error for the overall sample is approximately 4 percentage points.
USA Today
3 hours ago
- USA Today
Medicaid cuts, no taxes on tips and overtime: What's in the Trump-backed Senate megabill?
Big changes are ahead for Americans if the Trump-backed bill becomes law. Republicans are trying to pass it by a self-imposed July 4 deadline. WASHINGTON − High-income earners, waiters and waitresses could soon see greater tax breaks locked in under a bill backed by President Donald Trump that's on track for votes this weekend in the Republican-led Senate. People who rely on Medicaid access and funds for federal food aid would come out on the short end of the stick under the plan, too. There's plenty more that could affect the lives of everyday Americans inside the Senate's latest 940-page version of the Trump-backed megabill that emerged near midnight and which Republicans are scrambling to turn into law ahead of a self-imposed July 4 deadline. It's still unclear if the GOP will have enough votes when the debate begins around 2 p.m. EDT on June 28 on the president's biggest second-term priority for the Republican-led Congress. Supporters are emphasizing the chief engine of the Senate's proposal - extending Trump's 2017 tax cuts - and significant boosts to military and border security spending. They are also proceeding despite needing to remove sections of their bill that didn't meet the Senate's unique rules that would have repealed student loan relief and environmental regulations, restricting federal judges' powers and the Trump administration's efforts to bulk up immigration enforcement. More: Could Trump fail on tax bill? Why going 'big' doesn't always work out as planned "If you like higher taxes, open borders, a weak military and unchecked government spending, this bill is your nightmare," Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, chairman of the Budget Committee, said in a statement. Graham's team did have to make several adjustments in recent days. Certain Medicaid-related proposals were also left on the Senate cutting room floor. But other reforms − including new work requirements for able-bodied Americans − survived a complex review process and are now on deck for approval in the upper chamber. The Trump administration 'strongly supports' the Senate version of the bill, in a White House Office of Management and Budget statement June 28. 'President Trump is committed to keeping his promises, and failure to pass this bill would be the ultimate betrayal," the statement said. Democrats are not on board with the legislation that Trump and Republicans have dubbed the "big, beautiful bill." Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Connecticut, said the president's legislative agenda looks more like a "big, ugly betrayal" because it gives tax breaks to wealthier Americans while cutting services to low-income people. "I am dedicated and determined to fight these kinds of changes that really impact adversely everybody in Connecticut and the country," Blumenthal said in a June 27 video posted to X. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-South Dakota, has been working behind the scenes to whip his members into a consensus. He's got support from Trump, who has spent days putting public pressure on any GOP senators considering defection. But it's still far from clear if Thune and Trump will be successful. Here's a closer look at what's in the Senate bill as the weekend floor debate gets underway. Medicaid and SNAP Medicaid, which provides health insurance to more than 71 million low-income Americans, has been a regular point of contention for both chambers grappling with the legislation. After the House narrowly approved big changes to the program that would save at least $625 billion − and potentially cause 7.6 million Americans over the next 10 years to lose their health insurance − the Senate sought even deeper cuts. Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough axed a handful of changes from the Senate bill, including prohibiting coverage for non-citizens and barring funds for gender-affirming care. The upper chamber's legislation maintains new work requirements and increased eligibility checks. The Senate plan seeks to force able-bodied adults to work 80 hours per month until age 65 to qualify for benefits, but it does include exemptions for parents or guardians of children under 14 and those with disabilities. Reforms to SNAP, another federal aid program long known as "food stamps," were sifted through the Senate's review process. MacDonough initially rejected Senate Republicans' attempt to push costs onto states. But the parliamentarian gave them the go ahead after Senate Republicans did some tweaking to the language that included giving states more time before they start paying. The latest version would also give Alaska and Hawaii temporary exemption from the cost-sharing and able-bodied requirements for up to two years, if the Agriculture secretary finds the two states are making a "good faith effort" to comply with the requirements. Many view the offer as a way to keep Alaska's two GOP senators, particularly Sen. Lisa Murkowski, in support of the overall bill. Extending Trump's 2017 tax cuts The heart of the legislation is an extension of the big tax cuts that Trump passed in 2017, which are set to expire on Dec. 31, 2025. The highest earner would continue to be taxed at a 37% rate under the bill, instead of 39.6% if the tax cuts expired. For individuals making between $9,525 and $38,700, they would continue to be taxed at 12%, instead of the 15% rate that would kick in if the legislation doesn't pass. More: How much will Trump's tax bill save you? Gains could vary by income. The 2017 law made other big changes to tax policy that will remain in place under the Senate bill, including doubling the child tax credit from $1,000 to $2,000 and nearly doubling the standard deduction. Other provisions in the 2017 tax law that affect both individuals and businesses will remain. 'This bill prevents an over-$4 trillion tax hike and makes the successful 2017 Trump tax cuts permanent, enabling families and businesses to save and plan for the future,' Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, said in unveiling the bill language. No taxes on tips, overtime Addressing one of Trump's most high-profile 2024 campaign promises, tipped employees like waiters and hairstylists would be able to claim a new tax deduction for tips through 2028, as could workers who are paid overtime wages. More: Americans are tired of tipping. Experts say no tax on tips could make things worse. The Senate kept this measure from the House version of the bill, but added on a $25,000 per year cap for the deduction and weakened the tax break for individuals whose income is above $150,000 or married couples making more than $300,000 combined. $5 trillion debt limit increase The Senate version looks to raise the nation's debt limit by $5 trillion, which is expected to aggravate fiscal hawks who were already concerned about the House bill, which projections say would raise that limit by $4 trillion. Including the language in this overall bill would give the federal government the OK to pay for programs that Congress has already authorized. Billions for U.S. military and 'Golden Dome' defense One area Republicans didn't spare an expense is defense spending, which some MAGA allies had suggested was "too much" in the lead up to the legislation's unveiling. More: Trump pushes $175 billion 'Golden Dome' missile defense plan The proposal injects roughly $150 billion into the military, including $9 billion for service members quality of life such as housing, healthcare, childcare and education. Another $1 billion is earmarked for border security, which Republican committee members have said will help carry out the president's immigration and "counter-drug enforcement" plans. One of the larger expenditures is $25 billion allotted for an initial investment in a "Golden Dome" missile defense shield that Trump promised will be fully operational by the end of his term in 2029. Green energy roll-backs A handful of moderate senators had pushed for a gentler approach to rolling back green energy tax credits passed under former President Joe Biden. The Senate's proposal heeds their call, slowing the phase-out of multiple clean energy provisions that the House had sought to eliminate more quickly. Billions for the border, deportations The Senate held onto the massive increase in funding for the Department of Homeland Security, increasing the department's budget by roughly $150 billion – which would more than double its current funding. The bill authorizes $45 billion for new immigration detention centers. Under the DHS umbrella, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement already operates more than 160 detention centers around the country. Many are full, as the Trump administration ramps up arrests of immigrants. Another $27 billion would go to fund the administration's mass deportation campaign, including to pay for 10,000 more deportation agents. ICE currently has about 6,000 deportation agents. At that funding level, the current administration "will be poised to dramatically expand community arrests and expand cooperation with state and local law enforcement agencies," according to an analysis by the American Immigration Council, which advocates for immigrant rights. The Trump administration's border czar, Tom Homan, said without additional money, "it's going to be a hard road" to achieve the president's goal of deporting 1 million immigrants this year. "We have a lot of people to look for, a lot of people to arrest, a lot of national security threats we know are in this country," Homan said during a White House press conference June 26. "We need to find them. We need more money to do that. We need more agents to do that."
