Hostess outta business

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
It's the government's responsibility to ensure everyone has access to basic necessities (a trivial task in any modern society), not a corporation's. In Ivory Tower land, people like me can be scientists because there are few people still required to farm crops.

The government can't ensure anything if people are not productively employed.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
As your good friend Bastiat would say: look at what is unseen, not just what is seen. People aren't going to stop snacking just because they can't buy Twinkies anymore. Hostess' competitors will gain market share and therefore there will be new jobs there. Not necessarily the same amount, but if the competitors can create the same amount of snacks with fewer people it would only be a good thing.

I'm sure that's more than adequate consolation to the 18,500 people that are now unemployed. They did it to themselves; now they get 100% of nothing.

Originally posted by sasquatch672
I'm sure that's more than adequate consolation to the 18,500 people that are now unemployed. They did it to themselves; now they get 100% of nothing.

now they get 100% of nothing.

Wrong again A. They'll get unemployment for at least a year and a half, or until they find another job. Foodstamps if necessary. Their pension money etc etc. You tea party freaks just never get the message. Slavery is long gone. lol

Originally posted by KingDavid403
[b]now they get 100% of nothing.

Wrong again A. They'll get unemployment for at least a year and a half, or until they find another job. Foodstamps if necessary. Their pension money etc etc. You tea party freaks just never get the message. Slavery is long gone. lol[/b]

http://gawker.com/5961444

Originally posted by vivify
Perhaps this is a good sign for an obese America? Maybe McDonalds will the next to file for brankruptcy.

EDIT: Never mind. McDonalds keeps people employed; so ironically, McDonalds is good for America.

But if Obamalism manages to lay waste to the fast food and munchy industries in the US, then Obamacare will be affordable due to the plummeting Diabetes figures, and the fast food outlets n munchy factories can retool and pump out paranoid republican bumper stickers.

Originally posted by KingDavid403
[b]now they get 100% of nothing.

Wrong again A. They'll get unemployment for at least a year and a half, or until they find another job. Foodstamps if necessary. Their pension money etc etc. You tea party freaks just never get the message. Slavery is long gone. lol[/b]

Tea Party? Not me. Freaks...ha! How's your blood pressure, Richard?

"Screw you, we'll just go on the dole". Very principled of you. Zero opportunity in government assistance. Not a whole lot of dignity either.

Let me tell you what you're seeing. You're seeing the real-world effects of your nonsensical ideology.

And by the way - you, a doctor? I doubt it. You haven't the temperament.

Originally posted by KingDavid403
[b]now they get 100% of nothing.

Wrong again A. They'll get unemployment for at least a year and a half, or until they find another job. Foodstamps if necessary. Their pension money etc etc. You tea party freaks just never get the message. Slavery is long gone. lol[/b]

Who ran up a $16 trillion debt? I'll give you a hint, it is not the "tea party freaks".

Who forced the economic down grade? Who is pushing the country and the world over a fiscal cliff?

Originally posted by whodey
Who ran up a $16 trillion debt? I'll give you a hint, it is not the "tea party freaks".

Who forced the economic down grade? Who is pushing the country and the world over a fiscal cliff?

Was it Haliburton?

Originally posted by whodey
Who ran up a $16 trillion debt? I'll give you a hint, it is not the "tea party freaks".

Who forced the economic down grade? Who is pushing the country and the world over a fiscal cliff?

I'll give you a hint, yes it is. It's called tea party vulture capitalists like Romney. They buy companies, break them up, sell off, make millions. Ship jobs to China or Mexico for 99 cent hour labor. Blame US workers and unions because they won't live 5 familys in a one bedroom house with no benefits. Don't worry tho. Thing are going to turn around.

Bush and tea party republicans ran up the 16 trillion debt.

Bush and the tea party republicans forced the economic down grade.

Bush and the tea party republicans are the ones who have almost forced us over the fiscal cliff.

Get a clue.

Originally posted by KingDavid403
I'll give you a hint, yes it is. It's called tea party vulture capitalists like Romney. They buy companies, break them up, sell off, make millions. Ship jobs to China or Mexico for 99 cent hour labor. Blame us workers because they won't live 5 familys in a one bedroom house with no benefits. Don't worry tho. Thing are going to turn around.
B ...[text shortened]... rty republicans are the ones who have almost forced us over the fiscal cliff.

Get a clue.

Zero opportunity in government assistance. Not a whole lot of dignity either.
And theres Zero opportunity or dignity working your butt off at a job were the CEOs double their pay from one million to two while telling their workers they have to cut their pay AGAIN and they now have to give up their health care and pensions.

Give me my unemployment I've paid into for years and I'll take some time off and enjoy life for awhile and then find another job. Oh Hurt me please. LOL

Originally posted by KingDavid403
I'll give you a hint, yes it is. It's called tea party vulture capitalists like Romney. They buy companies, break them up, sell off, make millions. Ship jobs to China or Mexico for 99 cent hour labor. Blame US workers and unions because they won't live 5 familys in a one bedroom house with no benefits. Don't worry tho. Thing are going to turn a ...[text shortened]... rty republicans are the ones who have almost forced us over the fiscal cliff.

Get a clue.

The Tea Party was not around during the Bush years.

The Tea Party is against continuing massive deficits.

The Tea Party is against massive entitlements like the one Bush passed with the drugs for seniors legislation.

I have no idea what the rest of this mindless rant is about. My question to you is, who ran up the massive deficit? It was pre-tea party Republicans you seem to have loved along with their Democrat cohorts.

Originally posted by KingDavid403
[b] Zero opportunity in government assistance. Not a whole lot of dignity either.
And theres Zero opportunity or dignity working your butt off at a job were the CEOs double their pay from one million to two while telling their workers they have to cut their pay AGAIN and they now have to give up their health care and pensions.

Give me my unemp ...[text shortened]... ke some time off and enjoy life for awhile and then find another job. Oh Hurt me please. LOL[/b]

Are you OK?

Originally posted by kevcvs57
Was it Haliburton?

Nope, not just Haliburton, it was Bain as well.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Yes, producing things is far more important than people being able to earn a livelihood in Ivory Tower Land.

Capitalism is at least in part, about trying to ensure greater efficiency. In business, in a capitalist system, producing things is more important than people being able to earn a livelihood.
To solve this problem, the solution is to have non-capitalist entities taking up the slack. ie when unemployment is high, government either employs more directly, or creates more employment via spending on things like infrastructure, tax breaks, social services etc.
I personally think that keeping things inefficient in order to keep people in employment is just plain stupid. Its an admission that we are unable to properly manage our society. It make far more sense to find more productive use for people than simply pushing them into unproductive employment for the sake of an excuse to pay them.
Similarly, although I support unemployment benefits, I think that in the majority of cases, the government should instead put the unemployed into productive jobs.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Capitalism is at least in part, about trying to ensure greater efficiency. In business, in a capitalist system, producing things is more important than people being able to earn a livelihood.
To solve this problem, the solution is to have non-capitalist entities taking up the slack. ie when unemployment is high, government either employs more directly, o ...[text shortened]... in the majority of cases, the government should instead put the unemployed into productive jobs.

Should Obama buy the Twinkie Industry?