Twinkies....you will be missed

[Frank N]

Originally Posted by SpiritOne

go ahead, post as many as you want. It doesn't make me wrong. Like you said, some can't see the forest through the trees, and some cant see the elephant standing right in front of them.

The simple fact is this notion that rich people can do no wrong is horse****.

I didnt say rich can do no wrong...I just don't know any 'poor' people that create jobs. Do you have some examples?

Remember the d-bag they put back in office thinks 250k a year is 'rich'....

[SpiritOne]

Originally Posted by RobKar

Oh, so we are talking about the 1%. If we were to take all the money from the 1% and give it to the government, how many day's could the government run?

Easy answer = 10 to 15 days.

OK so I was thinking you were talking about rich people, but I still cant figure out what you think is rich, do you have a number that is not in an article or a book you want me to read?

Maybe this isnt directed at me but, I didn't say anything about taking away rich people's money and giving it to the government. In fact, I was pretty clear I said I don't give 2 ****s about class warfare (which this sounds like).

Originally Posted by RobKar

This is funny. Do you really think that the rich got there by taking it from someone else. They are evil huh?

Yes genius. The rich got rich by taking their money from other people. That's how its done. They didn't mint it themselves. Does that mean they are evil? No, I didn't say that either. You keep putting words in my mouth. I simply said that a lot of the rich Americans who are alive today have inherited their wealth, those that didn't inherit certainly stepped on a few people to get where they are. I simply said, they don't give a dam about the rest of us, and they don't go out of their way to "create jobs" for the rest of us, unless it benefits them and makes them more money. To suggest anything else, is lunacy and a complete misunderstanding of what capitalism is, and the human component of it.

I just do not understand why this has devolved into the argument it has been turned into. Some idiot, without any understanding of the situation decided the whole fault of Hostess going out of business should be laid at the fault of the Union. I'm not a union guy. I don't support the union. But any idiot with a half a brain who passed their third grade reading comprehension test can find out that this was more than they typical union shenanigans. You have executives who BORROWED MONEY during a bankruptcy raising their salaries by 80%. Fiscal responsibility? I think not. All I said was their is plenty of blame to go around.

Now we are having some ridiculously stupid circular argument amount the rich creating jobs, and its laid out like they do it out of the goodness of their big rich hearts. Well, thats not just bull****. That's Fvcking Bull****.

[SpiritOne]

Originally Posted by Frank N

I didnt say rich can do no wrong...I just don't know any 'poor' people that create jobs. Do you have some examples?

Remember the d-bag they put back in office thinks 250k a year is 'rich'....

Well frankly, I wish I made 250k a year. but I digress.

Once again, someone is trying to put words in my mouth. I didn't say poor people created jobs. I simply said that not all rich people spend their life wondering how they can help the rest of us scrubs. I also pointed out that quite a few of the people who are now belonging to the group we generally call rich, didn't work a day in their life for it, they inherited it. Read above for the rest of my thoughts.

[37L1]

A lot of people created the Hostess mess. It was mismanaged, that's for sure.

The final straw that sent them under was one small union's intransigence and now no one has a job that worked for that company. Brilliant.

Narrow minded self interest screws up a lot of things besides Twinkies. There seems to be a lot of that going around these days.

Victory has a thousand fathers but defeat is an orphan.
-John F. Kennedy

[Sftail1990]

Originally Posted by RobKar

Sftail1990, I find it funny that you even care what I would pay someone to run my company. I find it funnier still that you would care what he or she would do to that said company. It does not matter what I pay, its my choice not yours, even if you work for me and have a Union fighting for more money. That said, there are some companies that hit the ground hard, but others that do VERY well its called a free market. I know the free market thought seems to be coming to an end as we keep driving "rich" people out of business, and bailing out other companies so that we can say, we saved 100,000 jobs.

So the Rich are making at least "$352,900" per year or something else? Should we set a cap on how much people make? After all SpiritOne thinks that "I'm sick of this bullshit "rich people create jobs" So I would have to assume that if we cap the amount of money people can make it would improve this country and create more jobs in the process?

LOL, so missing the point here, but neither here nor there. I do recommend that you do some reading, there are many factors that drive a "free" market. More obviously than you are aware of, so many influences. If I work for a company, I should have the interest in who runs it. Many companies do their match, per lack of pensions, which used to be, in company stock. So why should I not care about the health of the company that I work for then? Should also read some information on what is driving a companies salary for those at the top, and the legislature should reform the tax laws so that those folks don't play the tax game at your expense. It is a well known fact the majority of the country disagrees with the current tax structure, I guess you are the lone wolf in thinking not, since you never did address that or any of the other topics I mentioned. Cayman Island circumvention of tax laws just another, and one of many. Seemed to be hung up on what I thought was "rich" and that was the end of discussion for you. I really don't think what I think is rich is the hinging point in the problems this country is facing.

[37L1]

So what do you think is "rich"?

You Tube

You Tube

[Frank N]

Originally Posted by 37L1

So what do you think is "rich"?

That is a moving target...

Tax the rich, feed the poor
Till there are no rich no more


Somehow, in some peoples thought process they feel they can determine what people have, they can judge what they truly earned and what they can keep. So much for the land of opportunity, society is voting to put a speed limiter on opportunity.

At the end of the day, regardless of the reason, a bunch of people lost their job and I hope they wind up on their feet sooner rather than later.

[Walrus]

Once upon a time in America, the air traffic controllers went on strike and Ronald Reagan fired them.
I bet some of them went to work for Hostess after that.

[RobKar]

Originally Posted by SpiritOne

Yes genius. The rich got rich by taking their money from other people. That's how its done. They didn't mint it themselves. Does that mean they are evil? No, I didn't say that either.

So I make something cool (like an iPhone) or create a new drug (cures cancer). People pay me for this new thing. I guess I am the genius because I am not in jail because I "took" someone eases money. EVIL corporations want to make money, we should put them all in jail.

Originally Posted by SpiritOne

But any idiot with a half a brain who passed their third grade reading comprehension test can find out that this was more than they typical union shenanigans. You have executives who BORROWED MONEY during a bankruptcy raising their salaries by 80%. Fiscal responsibility? I think not. All I said was their is plenty of blame to go around.

OK, so the CEO comes out and tells the Union that we can not survive a strike and if you will not accept an 8% cut in pay, but you get 25% of the company and 2 seats on the board as well as 13% increase in pensions and 17% increase in health care then we will have to shut the doors. Oh and BTW there would be a 4% increase in pay withing 2 years. Well, the union said NO! The Union said "If we sacrifice for Hostess, we will have to sacrifice for other companies, so we are willing to sacrifice and loose jobs here".

Now, lets to the math because reading does not need to be involved. Lets see 4 individuals at the top received ~ 80% increase in pay. I have read a few numbers so I will put this in middle of what I read. 750,000 x 80% x 4 = $2.4Mil increase for 4 people. Now, lets do the math:
$2,400,000 / 18500 = $129 per year per person.
or lets just do the 6500 people that we in the bakers union
$2,400,000 / 6500 = $370 per year per person

The union stated that if they, the 4 at the top, would not have taken a raise that they would have been able to keep the company open, and pay for all the increases the union was demanding. "Reading" about this I can see where you could "feel" it was all upper management fault. But doing the "math" shows it was the Unions fault this time.

Originally Posted by SpiritOne

Now we are having some ridiculously stupid circular argument amount the rich creating jobs, and its laid out like they do it out of the goodness of their big rich hearts. Well, thats not just bull****. That's Fvcking Bull****.

HAHAHAHA! I would never give you a job out of the goodness of my heart! I would give you a job if you will help me make the "evil" money. I am not in business to "give" you anything. I am in business to enhance my bottom line.

[Frank N]

Originally Posted by RobKar

Now, lets to the math because reading does not need to be involved. Lets see 4 individuals at the top received ~ 80% increase in pay. I have read a few numbers so I will put this in middle of what I read. 750,000 x 80% x 4 = $2.4Mil increase for 4 people. Now, lets do the math:
$2,400,000 / 18500 = $129 per year per person.
or lets just do the 6500 people that we in the bakers union
$2,400,000 / 6500 = $370 per year per person

The union stated that if they, the 4 at the top, would not have taken a raise that they would have been able to keep the company open, and pay for all the increases the union was demanding. "Reading" about this I can see where you could "feel" it was all upper management fault. But doing the "math" shows it was the Unions fault this time.

That's ridiculous, using logic. How dare you belittle the whole situation by using objective math.

[daptech]

How much do you think the union leaders really cared about the employees?
Union leader salaries also increased at a time when the company was in trouble.

Frank Hurt salary increases.......large increase toward the end

[daptech]

Paul Krugman wrote an article in the New York Times today calling for much higher taxes.
It was labeled the Twinkie Manifesto.

[HRTKD]

The head of the Baker's union thinks the union members will get their jobs back when a buyer swoops in to purchase the company out of bankruptcy. (Story on FoxNews: Hostess union hopes for buyout that will put employees back to work | Fox News)

I doubt that anyone will purchase the company as a whole. If the Mexican billionaire buys it I would expect those jobs to move to Mexico, not stay in the U.S. The Union is too much baggage. Aging facilities and unprofitable product lines doesn't help either.

[daptech]

I read about the Mexican company having interest in Hostess for the last few years.
From what I have read about their business dealings in the past, I don't expect they
will be union friendly.

[Arachnid]

Originally Posted by daptech

How much do you think the union leaders really cared about the employees?
Union leader salaries also increased at a time when the company was in trouble.

Frank Hurt salary increases.......large increase toward the end

And don't forget union leaders typically don't pay dues, and they continue to get a paycheck even when their membership is on strike. Win Win!