Conquer Club

Unions Shut Down Hostess

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby MeDeFe on Sat Nov 17, 2012 7:58 am

Phatscotty wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:okay, I want to ask something else.

How much food can you get for $1.25 in China? Laos? Somalia? Guatemala?


I used to make the assumption you did, PS: when people quoted numbers about how many people were living on less than $1/day, I knew that one US dollar would purchase a lot more in those nations than it would in the US. When I learned that this assumption was incorrect, and that the estimate of > 1 billion was based on purchasing power parity, I was stunned. It is quite seriously true that for 1.3 billion people around the world, their daily subsistence is based on what you could buy for $1.25 in an American supermarket. You can't buy a lot for that amount of money in such a supermarket. As I pointed out, a two liter bottle of soda costs more than that. Another way to think about it is to take what $1.25 would buy in the US, and convert that to whatever amount of local currency units would buy the same amount of food. The end result is the same. It's explicitly not based on exchange rates, which is what you are thinking of.

I'm such an American that I can hardly even imagine what it's like to live that way, and I've never visited an undeveloped nation that could help me see for myself. It's honestly hard for me to process, given how much relative wealth exists around me. I just know it's bad.


:cough cough:

source....

He already provided it... Look up a few posts.

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=181339&start=60#p3959465
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
User avatar
Major MeDeFe
 
Posts: 7831
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 2:48 am
Location: Follow the trail of holes in other people's arguments.

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby AAFitz on Sat Nov 17, 2012 8:12 am

Im sure the management of the company, had nothing to do with its demise.

Definitely blame the workers, who were going in every day, and just trying to make a living, and organizing to do it.

I agree in this case, they perhaps didn't understand the situation, but to suggest workers were responsible, and not the management that obviously ran the company, is as short-sighted as many of the night-strikes...
I'm Spanking Monkey now....err...I mean I'm a Spanking Monkey now...that shoots milk
Too much. I know.
Sergeant 1st Class AAFitz
 
Posts: 7270
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:47 am
Location: On top of the World 2.1

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby AAFitz on Sat Nov 17, 2012 8:14 am

Phatscotty wrote:
I just want to explore the reasons the union members walked off the job.


I for one suggest you go there and interview them personally.

And I fucking beg you...please bring a cameraman....with a splash-guard. :lol:
I'm Spanking Monkey now....err...I mean I'm a Spanking Monkey now...that shoots milk
Too much. I know.
Sergeant 1st Class AAFitz
 
Posts: 7270
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:47 am
Location: On top of the World 2.1

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby thegreekdog on Sat Nov 17, 2012 9:04 am

Metsfanmax wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:Have you donated time or money to ending world hunger?


No. I have a finite amount of money to donate to charitable causes (and not a lot of it either, since I'm still just a grad student), so I have to prioritize what I think is the most good I can do with my donation. Therefore I have chosen instead to donate money to efforts that directly save lives. For example, one of the leading causes (if not the most prominent) right now, is distributing bed nets to people at risk from malaria. A single net costs only a few dollars and protects against malaria, which is a deadly disease especially in Africa (malaria still kills more than half a million people per year).

Now, the research and the general consensus is that the most effective way most Americans can help is donations of money. It really is hard to donate personal time to help people on a different continent. I think that some day I would like to visit Africa and do so, but it won't happen any time soon.

I would consider donating 5% of my annual income for one year if certain assurances were made. I'm of the same opinion as Dukasaur in that underdevleoped countries would probably not be able to do much with my 5% (through no fault of their own).


This is of course a valid concern. I recommend looking into http://www.GiveWell.org. Their main job is to evaluate the efficacy of various charitable organizations, and determine which ones are the most cost effective in terms of donations. Periodically they update their list of recommended top charities, and the two they list have been selected both on the basis of need (obviously there are a lot of effective charities out there, but not all of them need money as their top priority) and on how well they have proven that their work actually does use people's donations effectively. I believe that you would be doing a significant amount of good if you even just donated your 5% to their top charity. But don't take my word for it -- look at their analysis!

They also research plenty of other organizations, so you can see what they have to say about a particular cause you are interested in, and how effective your donation would be.


I have never donated to non-US charities before. I probably won't do it until there is more security associated with such donations. There are enough people in the immediate area where I live who need help.

As to your own situation, it appears you've made a similar value judgment to most Americans as to how your dollars and time are best spent, so I would say your critiques are misplaced. Most people don't like getting reprimanded by someone who does not practice what he/she preaches. This is not a criticism per se, just something you should think about. I get more angry with someone like Warren Buffett, who preaches about the rich paying more taxes, and yet who does not pay more taxes himself (or pay his poor secretary more money).
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7245
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby jimboston on Sat Nov 17, 2012 9:12 am

Metsfanmax wrote:
No one that I know of demands access to Twinkies like people demand access to alcohol (except for Woody Harrelson's character in Zombieland). Most people buy Twinkies because they're easy to buy in a grocery store, and cheap, not because they particularly love Twinkies. If you banned Twinkies, my bet is there would be no public outrage and consequent Twinkie black market.


Twinkies were selling on EBay yesterday after the announcement for double their normal store price.

There's been a rush on these things and hoarding. There IS a "black market". :)
User avatar
Private 1st Class jimboston
 
Posts: 5252
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:45 pm
Location: Boston (Area), Massachusetts; U.S.A.

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby jimboston on Sat Nov 17, 2012 9:13 am

Phatscotty wrote:Image


AWESOME!
User avatar
Private 1st Class jimboston
 
Posts: 5252
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:45 pm
Location: Boston (Area), Massachusetts; U.S.A.

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby jimboston on Sat Nov 17, 2012 9:23 am

Metsfanmax wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:okay, I want to ask something else.

How much food can you get for $1.25 in China? Laos? Somalia? Guatemala?


I used to make the assumption you did, PS: when people quoted numbers about how many people were living on less than $1/day, I knew that one US dollar would purchase a lot more in those nations than it would in the US. When I learned that this assumption was incorrect, and that the estimate of > 1 billion was based on purchasing power parity, I was stunned. It is quite seriously true that for 1.3 billion people around the world, their daily subsistence is based on what you could buy for $1.25 in an American supermarket. You can't buy a lot for that amount of money in such a supermarket. As I pointed out, a two liter bottle of soda costs more than that. Another way to think about it is to take what $1.25 would buy in the US, and convert that to whatever amount of local currency units would buy the same amount of food. The end result is the same. It's explicitly not based on exchange rates, which is what you are thinking of.

I'm such an American that I can hardly even imagine what it's like to live that way, and I've never visited an undeveloped nation that could help me see for myself. It's honestly hard for me to process, given how much relative wealth exists around me. I just know it's bad.


$1.25 ... is that per person or per family?

If you're thrifty you can make $1.25 go a long way. I'm not saying you wouldn't be hunger... you would. You'd not have a very healthy diet... you'd be missing a lot of essential vitamins and minerals... but you would load of up 'cheap calories'.

I never came close to $1.25... but in college I "lived on" probably $5 a day for long stretches.
User avatar
Private 1st Class jimboston
 
Posts: 5252
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:45 pm
Location: Boston (Area), Massachusetts; U.S.A.

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby GreecePwns on Sat Nov 17, 2012 9:57 am

$1.25 in an American supermarket gets you nothing. Absolutely nothing. Maybe one banana OR a pack of gum OR a water bottle and that's it.

I love that Phatscotty actually used the word "donated" to describe a pay cut, which would have been used to once again raise the CEO's salary several times over (as has been done in the past at this company). I don't blame the union for standing up to this.
Chariot of Fire wrote:As for GreecePwns.....yeah, what? A massive debt. Get a job you slacker.

Viceroy wrote:[The Biblical creation story] was written in a time when there was no way to confirm this fact and is in fact a statement of the facts.
User avatar
Corporal GreecePwns
 
Posts: 2656
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 7:19 pm
Location: Lawn Guy Lint

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby Metsfanmax on Sat Nov 17, 2012 11:19 am

thegreekdog wrote:I have never donated to non-US charities before. I probably won't do it until there is more security associated with such donations. There are enough people in the immediate area where I live who need help.


As I said, I think the moral argument is clear for helping people in southern Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. If you want to help both groups, good for you. But I can't help feeling that someone in Africa should not get less of my money than someone in America just because they didn't have the fortune of being born in the USA.

As to your own situation, it appears you've made a similar value judgment to most Americans as to how your dollars and time are best spent, so I would say your critiques are misplaced. Most people don't like getting reprimanded by someone who does not practice what he/she preaches. This is not a criticism per se, just something you should think about.


I said that I do give money to people in need in Africa; I just said that the area I donate my money to is not the cause of eradicating world hunger, per se, but saving lives against disease and other harmful effects. Giving food aid is generally thought to be a bad idea; it does not give developing villages any ability to become self-sustaining. Therefore it is generally accepted wisdom that the best way to help is either through donations to help people reduce poverty, or through aid that helps communities build sustainable crop growing, etc. The Millennium Villages Project is attempting to do just this on a large scale in Africa. Microloans are also one of the big ways people contribute nowadays, and this can indirectly help with the world hunger problem, too.

I think it would be a great thing if people joined me in doing so. You don't have to pick the same cause as me; there's many areas people can help. I'm happy to give advice or ideas if people do want to help but don't know where to start.

I get more angry with someone like Warren Buffett, who preaches about the rich paying more taxes, and yet who does not pay more taxes himself (or pay his poor secretary more money).


Say what you will about Warren Buffett; the man pledged over $30 billion to charitable causes. If every person had the investment skill he did, and then used their incredible earnings to combat world poverty, we'd end this problem in no time.

jimboston wrote:$1.25 ... is that per person or per family?


It is per person.

If you're thrifty you can make $1.25 go a long way. I'm not saying you wouldn't be hunger... you would. You'd not have a very healthy diet... you'd be missing a lot of essential vitamins and minerals... but you would load of up 'cheap calories'.


It is true that you could basically buy some rice or something, and you'd have to make it last. But the fact that many people can survive that way doesn't mean that they should; it leads to malnutrition, which causes its own problems. It's certainly not a good plan to live that way for years at a time.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Metsfanmax
 
Posts: 6722
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby Night Strike on Sat Nov 17, 2012 11:31 am

Metsfanmax wrote:Yes, it is possible through one of two routes. One is by personal donation. For example, if the top 10% of America donated a modest amount of their income to international aid efforts, America could singlehandledly be responsible for achieving the UN's Millennium Development Goals, which basically aim to eradicate poverty and hunger on the global scale. I'll spare you the details unless you're interested, but it could be done with a progressive scale starting at 5% of income for those earning more than $100,000 per year. The rest of America would not even have to donate, although they could (and should).

Another is by switching to vegetarian diets on the large scale. Annually, the world feeds hundreds of billions of tons of grain to feed animals that we later eat. But the process is incredibly inefficient. For cows, for example, we get fewer than a 10% return in food compared to what we put in (in terms of pounds of food produced). If most of the developed world stopped eating meat, there would be enough food left over to end world hunger. I'm not exaggerating.


Yep, it's no longer good enough for the "evil rich 'merikans" to pay 40% of income to federal government, 10% to state government, and a bunch of other taxes and fees on every thing else. They now must pay money directly to the UN in order to "feed" other people. What ever happened to people working to better their OWN lives and the lives of their families? When will people be able to work for themselves instead of the government? It was mentioned already in this thread that when people don't get enough money for their time, they'll quit doing that job because they're wasting their time. Don't be naive enough to think that the exact same thing won't happen with those people who are spending the vast majority of their time working for the government instead of themselves.

Metsfanmax wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:Have you donated time or money to ending world hunger?


No. I have a finite amount of money to donate to charitable causes (and not a lot of it either, since I'm still just a grad student), so I have to prioritize what I think is the most good I can do with my donation. Therefore I have chosen instead to donate money to efforts that directly save lives. For example, one of the leading causes (if not the most prominent) right now, is distributing bed nets to people at risk from malaria. A single net costs only a few dollars and protects against malaria, which is a deadly disease especially in Africa (malaria still kills more than half a million people per year).


Malaria was about to be eradicated until the environmentalist demanded that they stop. Environmentalists chose to save birds over humans.
Image
User avatar
Major Night Strike
 
Posts: 8512
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:52 pm

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby Metsfanmax on Sat Nov 17, 2012 11:44 am

Night Strike wrote:Yep, it's no longer good enough for the "evil rich 'merikans" to pay 40% of income to federal government, 10% to state government, and a bunch of other taxes and fees on every thing else. They now must pay money directly to the UN in order to "feed" other people. What ever happened to people working to better their OWN lives and the lives of their families? When will people be able to work for themselves instead of the government? It was mentioned already in this thread that when people don't get enough money for their time, they'll quit doing that job because they're wasting their time. Don't be naive enough to think that the exact same thing won't happen with those people who are spending the vast majority of their time working for the government instead of themselves.


I didn't say people have to do anything. I'm just asking people to consider giving a small fraction of their income, an amount that for most people would not substantially affect their happiness and comfort level, to causes that help people that are in much more dire circumstances than people in the USA. If you don't feel that you can afford to do so, that's ok. But if you have extra money that you don't need for basic necessities such as food, rent, etc., I ask you to consider contributing to such causes. There's a lot more that you can do for somebody with that extra money than you could do for yourself; you could go out for a nice dinner and movie, or you could use that money to try and save a life. And I bet that if you try the latter, you'll feel a lot more fulfilled than if you had gone to see the movie. Try it. If I'm wrong, no harm done, and you can go back to the way things were.

I think that many people who earn under $100,000 could give away 1% of their income without significantly affecting their comfort level. And you'd be doing an incredible amount of good. That $1000 can very likely save a life.

Malaria was about to be eradicated until the environmentalist demanded that they stop. Environmentalists chose to save birds over humans.


Agricultural pesticides such as DDT were shown to poison water supplies, and cause increased levels of cancer in humans. We were saving more than just the birds and the plants; we were helping to save ourselves by no longer doing that way. We can still use insectides to end malaria, and in fact we are doing so; we are just also doing so in a way that doesn't threaten human health by poisoning our food and water.

Incidentally, in many areas DDT is no longer even effective due to a resistance built up among mosquitoes.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Metsfanmax
 
Posts: 6722
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm

Postby 2dimes on Sat Nov 17, 2012 11:52 am

Actually when Canada exports junk food to fill the void it will be all the same Hostess stuff since Suputo is unaffected.

But carry on with what you guys are discussing.
User avatar
Corporal 2dimes
 
Posts: 12622
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 1:08 pm
Location: Pepperoni Hug Spot.

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby Nola_Lifer on Sat Nov 17, 2012 1:19 pm

AAFitz wrote:Im sure the management of the company, had nothing to do with its demise.

Definitely blame the workers, who were going in every day, and just trying to make a living, and organizing to do it.

I agree in this case, they perhaps didn't understand the situation, but to suggest workers were responsible, and not the management that obviously ran the company, is as short-sighted as many of the night-strikes...


What is there to understand? I agree with what you said but, as you say, management miss managed so the workers have to take the pay cut to save the company. The workers did their job, so why should they pay for mismanagement? You can't piss on the workers for simply doing their job and not being satisfied with a pay cut.
Image
User avatar
Major Nola_Lifer
 
Posts: 819
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 4:46 pm
Location: é›Ŗå±±

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby notyou2 on Sat Nov 17, 2012 2:42 pm

Phatscotty wrote:
patches70 wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:I just want to explore the reasons the union members walked off the job.


I have no idea, I'd guess because they weren't making enough money. Now they're making nothing, but it's all good. Now each person can explore other options in life, instead of trying to rely on a dead company.

"Let the dead bury the dead"

AOG wrote:Isn't Hostess just going to sell the rights to the Twinkie to some other brand?

Yes! Anything of value will be liquidated. I'd bet a nickel to a doughnut that Grupo Bimbo will get many of the various trademarks of Hostess. They tried to buy the company outright back in 2006, after all.


I can't help but wonder if 99 weeks of unemployment benefits has something to do with it. They will probably take a 20% cut, but I bet that's okay with some of them, if not many of them


You sure do have a pessimistic outlook on life. How do you live day to day? The freeloading bums of your country must drive you bonkers. You need to take things into your own hands. I assume you have an arsenal and ammunition?
Image
User avatar
Captain notyou2
 
Posts: 6447
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 10:09 am
Location: In the here and now

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby Phatscotty on Sat Nov 17, 2012 3:40 pm

notyou2 wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:
patches70 wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:I just want to explore the reasons the union members walked off the job.


I have no idea, I'd guess because they weren't making enough money. Now they're making nothing, but it's all good. Now each person can explore other options in life, instead of trying to rely on a dead company.

"Let the dead bury the dead"

AOG wrote:Isn't Hostess just going to sell the rights to the Twinkie to some other brand?

Yes! Anything of value will be liquidated. I'd bet a nickel to a doughnut that Grupo Bimbo will get many of the various trademarks of Hostess. They tried to buy the company outright back in 2006, after all.


I can't help but wonder if 99 weeks of unemployment benefits has something to do with it. They will probably take a 20% cut, but I bet that's okay with some of them, if not many of them


You sure do have a pessimistic outlook on life. How do you live day to day? The freeloading bums of your country must drive you bonkers. You need to take things into your own hands. I assume you have an arsenal and ammunition?


:roll:

Why does it always have to be about me??? I don't have anything to do with it.
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby thegreekdog on Sat Nov 17, 2012 8:00 pm

Metsfanmax wrote:As I said, I think the moral argument is clear for helping people in southern Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. If you want to help both groups, good for you. But I can't help feeling that someone in Africa should not get less of my money than someone in America just because they didn't have the fortune of being born in the USA.


I don't disagree with that.

Metsfanmax wrote:I said that I do give money to people in need in Africa; I just said that the area I donate my money to is not the cause of eradicating world hunger, per se, but saving lives against disease and other harmful effects. Giving food aid is generally thought to be a bad idea; it does not give developing villages any ability to become self-sustaining. Therefore it is generally accepted wisdom that the best way to help is either through donations to help people reduce poverty, or through aid that helps communities build sustainable crop growing, etc. The Millennium Villages Project is attempting to do just this on a large scale in Africa. Microloans are also one of the big ways people contribute nowadays, and this can indirectly help with the world hunger problem, too.

I think it would be a great thing if people joined me in doing so. You don't have to pick the same cause as me; there's many areas people can help. I'm happy to give advice or ideas if people do want to help but don't know where to start.


I'll take a look and make a decision.

Metsfanmax wrote:Say what you will about Warren Buffett; the man pledged over $30 billion to charitable causes. If every person had the investment skill he did, and then used their incredible earnings to combat world poverty, we'd end this problem in no time.


I don't like being told I'm rich by someone who has thousands of times the net worth that I do. I don't like being told I need to "pay my fair share" by someone like that either. If Warren Buffett put himself into a position where he was in the middle class, I would be more likely to take him seriously. His pledging $30 billion to charitable causes (whatever that means) does not sway to support paying more tax dollars while I do my tax return from the comfort of my $200 couch in my small two-bedroom townhouse.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7245
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby Nola_Lifer on Sat Nov 17, 2012 9:03 pm

Phatscotty wrote:
notyou2 wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:
patches70 wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:I just want to explore the reasons the union members walked off the job.


I have no idea, I'd guess because they weren't making enough money. Now they're making nothing, but it's all good. Now each person can explore other options in life, instead of trying to rely on a dead company.

"Let the dead bury the dead"

AOG wrote:Isn't Hostess just going to sell the rights to the Twinkie to some other brand?

Yes! Anything of value will be liquidated. I'd bet a nickel to a doughnut that Grupo Bimbo will get many of the various trademarks of Hostess. They tried to buy the company outright back in 2006, after all.


I can't help but wonder if 99 weeks of unemployment benefits has something to do with it. They will probably take a 20% cut, but I bet that's okay with some of them, if not many of them


You sure do have a pessimistic outlook on life. How do you live day to day? The freeloading bums of your country must drive you bonkers. You need to take things into your own hands. I assume you have an arsenal and ammunition?


:roll:

Why does it always have to be about me??? I don't have anything to do with it.



Image

I don't have access to whole article.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 06050.html
Image
User avatar
Major Nola_Lifer
 
Posts: 819
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 4:46 pm
Location: é›Ŗå±±

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby spurgistan on Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:58 pm

Yes, the private equity firms who wanted the unions to take cuts for the second time in three years probably didn't have anything to do with it. Probably.
Mr_Adams wrote:You, sir, are an idiot.


Timminz wrote:By that logic, you eat babies.
Sergeant spurgistan
 
Posts: 1868
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 11:30 pm

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby karel on Sat Nov 17, 2012 11:33 pm

well 1 good thing,is americans wont be getting as fat
Private 1st Class karel
 
Posts: 1157
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 3:01 pm
Location: montana........rolling in the mud with the hippies

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby aad0906 on Sun Nov 18, 2012 12:21 am

spurgistan wrote:Yes, the private equity firms who wanted the unions to take cuts for the second time in three years probably didn't have anything to do with it. Probably.


Nope, it's not management's fault either. They did such a good job last year that they received 80% pay increase. But don't worry because the private equity firms, our nation's "job creators" will see their secured loans repaid from the proceeds of the sale of the brands/trademarks/recipe's.
User avatar
Major aad0906
 
Posts: 552
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 8:15 pm
Location: New Jersey, USA

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby Juan_Bottom on Sun Nov 18, 2012 1:04 am

aad0906 wrote:
spurgistan wrote:Yes, the private equity firms who wanted the unions to take cuts for the second time in three years probably didn't have anything to do with it. Probably.


Nope, it's not management's fault either. They did such a good job last year that they received 80% pay increase. But don't worry because the private equity firms, our nation's "job creators" will see their secured loans repaid from the proceeds of the sale of the brands/trademarks/recipe's.



I'm with this guy.
This is so obviously the fault of the horrible management that to even suggest that the union was to blame is treason of the conscience.
I stand with the Union. Fool me once, shame on you. But fool me twice,....
& American's do not give into threats or terrorism, no matter what. I'm proud of them for bravely standing by our principles, come what may.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Juan_Bottom
 
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 4:59 pm
Location: USA RULES! WHOOO!!!!

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby AAFitz on Sun Nov 18, 2012 8:18 am

Metsfanmax wrote:Say what you will about Warren Buffett; the man pledged over $30 billion to charitable causes. If every person had the investment skill he did, and then used their incredible earnings to combat world poverty, we'd end this problem in no time.


If every person only had the investment skills he has, there would be absolutely nothing to invest in.
I'm Spanking Monkey now....err...I mean I'm a Spanking Monkey now...that shoots milk
Too much. I know.
Sergeant 1st Class AAFitz
 
Posts: 7270
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:47 am
Location: On top of the World 2.1

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby AAFitz on Sun Nov 18, 2012 8:25 am

Juan_Bottom wrote:
aad0906 wrote:
spurgistan wrote:Yes, the private equity firms who wanted the unions to take cuts for the second time in three years probably didn't have anything to do with it. Probably.


Nope, it's not management's fault either. They did such a good job last year that they received 80% pay increase. But don't worry because the private equity firms, our nation's "job creators" will see their secured loans repaid from the proceeds of the sale of the brands/trademarks/recipe's.



I'm with this guy.
This is so obviously the fault of the horrible management that to even suggest that the union was to blame is treason of the conscience.
I stand with the Union. Fool me once, shame on you. But fool me twice,....
& American's do not give into threats or terrorism, no matter what. I'm proud of them for bravely standing by our principles, come what may.


A good nightstrike gives no weight to reason, reality, or common sense, and this is a typical nightstrike.

There is no doubt that the people in the families that worked in Unions, and whose lives were made better by Unions, and allowed for their descendants to go to colleges and universities in order to gain a middle management position, are rolling in their graves, as their hard work and sacrifice are being pissed on by the very benefactors of that sacrifice.
I'm Spanking Monkey now....err...I mean I'm a Spanking Monkey now...that shoots milk
Too much. I know.
Sergeant 1st Class AAFitz
 
Posts: 7270
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:47 am
Location: On top of the World 2.1

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby thegreekdog on Sun Nov 18, 2012 8:28 am

aad0906 wrote:
spurgistan wrote:Yes, the private equity firms who wanted the unions to take cuts for the second time in three years probably didn't have anything to do with it. Probably.


Nope, it's not management's fault either. They did such a good job last year that they received 80% pay increase. But don't worry because the private equity firms, our nation's "job creators" will see their secured loans repaid from the proceeds of the sale of the brands/trademarks/recipe's.


Mother of pearl, you guys give me a headache. It looks like, if nothing else, the 2012 presidential election has generated a lot of angst against private equity firms. Private equity firms save jobs. There is no benefit to private equity owners if the business they just bought goes under. How is that hard to understand? I'm waiting for you all to start an anti-private equity group.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7245
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby AAFitz on Sun Nov 18, 2012 8:29 am

Nola_Lifer wrote:
AAFitz wrote:Im sure the management of the company, had nothing to do with its demise.

Definitely blame the workers, who were going in every day, and just trying to make a living, and organizing to do it.

I agree in this case, they perhaps didn't understand the situation, but to suggest workers were responsible, and not the management that obviously ran the company, is as short-sighted as many of the night-strikes...


What is there to understand? I agree with what you said but, as you say, management miss managed so the workers have to take the pay cut to save the company. The workers did their job, so why should they pay for mismanagement? You can't piss on the workers for simply doing their job and not being satisfied with a pay cut.


Well, technically I didn't say management miss-managed anything....All my suggestion about "understanding the situation" means, is that its possible they didn't realize the company would fail, and perhaps for some, the pay-cut would have been better.

That being said, I'm sure a lot of slaves would have been better served by just working and not rebelling against their masters throughout history, but that doesn't necessarily mean they made the wrong decision.
I'm Spanking Monkey now....err...I mean I'm a Spanking Monkey now...that shoots milk
Too much. I know.
Sergeant 1st Class AAFitz
 
Posts: 7270
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:47 am
Location: On top of the World 2.1

PreviousNext

Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users