Hostess

[HuskerNationNick]

I would almost guarantee that some other company will pick up these lines. I doubt we've seen the last of twinkies.

will they pick up the jobs?

 

If they buy out the rights to some of these brands, they will most likely be made out of the US, and there will be a few distribution plants. 18,500 jobs lost, maybe another 3-5,000 regained.

[krc1995]

I would almost guarantee that some other company will pick up these lines. I doubt we've seen the last of twinkies.

will they pick up the jobs?

 

If they buy out the rights to some of these brands, they will most likely be made out of the US, and there will be a few distribution plants. 18,500 jobs lost, maybe another 3-5,000 regained.

but on the bright side- twinkies will be cheaper if they come to us from other countries.

[HuskerNationNick]

If they buy out the rights to some of these brands, they will most likely be made out of the US, and there will be a few distribution plants. 18,500 jobs lost, maybe another 3-5,000 regained.

but on the bright side- twinkies will be cheaper if they come to us from other countries.

 

With inflation, who knows if that would be the case. The foreign companies obviously know we will pay for junk food, especially if they don't change the ingredients. Could be cheaper, could remain the same price lol.

[sd'sker]

If they buy out the rights to some of these brands, they will most likely be made out of the US, and there will be a few distribution plants. 18,500 jobs lost, maybe another 3-5,000 regained.

but on the bright side- twinkies will be cheaper if they come to us from other countries.

 

With inflation, who knows if that would be the case. The foreign companies obviously know we will pay for junk food, especially if they don't change the ingredients. Could be cheaper, could remain the same price lol.

i expect them to be made with even more cellulose and newspaper.

[Conga3]

twinkies, and quite frankly hostess, are overrated. if anything, we should be happy because there might be less of a strain on our health systems now.

 

If this is a serious post, you've got a fundamental misunderstanding of how economics work - along with a slant towards fascism over freedom.

i was serious about hostess being overrated. i also think people should not eat a lot of junk food, but i do not think my proclivity to want america to be healthier would categorize my politics as fascist.

 

um, not sure you realize this, but there are still a lot of unhealthy choices available for americans to make. however, not enough people choose hostess (i am unfamiliar with the specifics and the roles of unions in all of this). that is the free market, man. that statement was really a joke about obamacare and the fact that one of the best ways to reduce health costs is to just be healthier and focus on prevention.

 

and as brb stated, obviously i am not happy about anyone ever losing their job. i think that is one subject brb agree a lot on, we want more people to have jobs and to work, we just disagree about how to get those jobs.

 

Do you believe your statement :

 

we should be happy because there might be less of a strain on our health systems now

 

???

 

If so, you agree in the general concept that it is "good" when choices are reduced when those choices can add a burden to our healthcare system.

 

It is nationalistic to want your country to have a good healthcare system. I'm right there with ya.

 

How it is achieved, though, is up for debate all over our country.

 

Some believe it is good for central powers (local, state, federal gov.) deciding what choices should be available to us to achieve a "greater good" like a sustainable healthcare system.

 

Whatever you want to label this, it's counter to freedom and individuals making economic decisions, taking responsibility for them and living with the consequences.

 

--

 

I believe your comment demonstrates that you favor limited choices to achieve a "greater good".

 

--

 

And for those with low reading comprehension skills, I'm not commenting on the closing of the Twinkie factory, or its cause.

 

I'm commenting on the concept that the closing is "good".

[sd'sker]

twinkies, and quite frankly hostess, are overrated. if anything, we should be happy because there might be less of a strain on our health systems now.

 

If this is a serious post, you've got a fundamental misunderstanding of how economics work - along with a slant towards fascism over freedom.

i was serious about hostess being overrated. i also think people should not eat a lot of junk food, but i do not think my proclivity to want america to be healthier would categorize my politics as fascist.

 

um, not sure you realize this, but there are still a lot of unhealthy choices available for americans to make. however, not enough people choose hostess (i am unfamiliar with the specifics and the roles of unions in all of this). that is the free market, man. that statement was really a joke about obamacare and the fact that one of the best ways to reduce health costs is to just be healthier and focus on prevention.

 

and as brb stated, obviously i am not happy about anyone ever losing their job. i think that is one subject brb agree a lot on, we want more people to have jobs and to work, we just disagree about how to get those jobs.

 

Do you believe your statement :

 

we should be happy because there might be less of a strain on our health systems now

 

???

 

If so, you agree in the general concept that it is "good" when choices are reduced when those choices can add a burden to a healthcare system.

 

It is nationalistic to want your country to have a good healthcare system. I'm right there with ya.

 

How it is achieved, though, is up for debate all over our country.

 

Some believe it is good for central powers (local, state, federal gov.) deciding what choices should be available to us to achieve a "greater good" like a sustainable healthcare system.

 

Whatever you want to label this, it's counter to freedom and individuals making economic decisions, taking responsibility for them and living with the consequences.

people freakin' chose not to eat hostess. that is the point and that is the free market. goodness. had more people freely choose (which they were free to do) to eat hostess foods (or if hostess had a better business model) they would still be in existence. sorry for finding a silver lining, even if it was tongue-in-cheek.

 

i do believe the healthier the choices we make as americans is better for the nation. am i wrong?

[beanman]

Can't we all just get along? I have a terrible diet. I like Twinkies. But, I am still skinny. If I did become a fatass, I wouldn't eat any more Twinkies. That's my simplistic view on things. I have no problem with what SD said in trying to find a silver lining to the whole deal.

 

RIP Twinky. My 32 years on this earth with you by my side were nothing short of spectacular.

[HuskerNationNick]

I feel people's weight issues are a personal thing and something they don't care about. There are some who can't control their weight, but each one of us have 30 minutes of free time a day to do something physical to burn calories. Those others will find another way to eat unhealthy, even if you make these companies follow new laws about calories or whatever.

[sd'sker]

I feel people's weight issues are a personal thing and something they don't care about. There are some who can't control their weight, but each one of us have 30 minutes of free time a day to do something physical to burn calories. Those others will find another way to eat unhealthy, even if you make these companies follow new laws about calories or whatever.

this really was not suppose to be the issue. people should decide to eat healthier, absolutely. and people should have the choice not to, unfortunately will power is a lot more rare than junk food. i am surprised at the turn this thread took. i do think most can control their weight, and if they truly can not, they can be healthy even if heavy.

[Conga3]

people freakin' chose not to eat hostess. that is the point and that is the free market. goodness. had more people freely choose (which they were free to do) to eat hostess foods (or if hostess had a better business model) they would still be in existence. sorry for finding a silver lining, even if it was tongue-in-cheek.

 

i do believe the healthier the choices we make as americans is better for the nation. am i wrong?

 

OK, your comment was "tongue-in-cheek". Good.

 

I disagree that the loss of our beloved Twinkie is based on "free market" choices though. No doubt sales being down and an increase in no-name brands that have $0 marketing budgets is the driving force for their bankruptcy.

 

The company, however, had instruction from the bankruptcy court to restructure, part of which included a cut in wages and benefits to unionized workers. The union said no way - we strike.

 

The death of the Twinkie is at the hands of a few bureaucrat leaders of the union, who curiously were put there to protect the jobs of the unionized employees.

 

Why on earth would they make this decision? Because the union is bigger than the employees of Hostess.

[knapplc]

I would almost guarantee that some other company will pick up these lines. I doubt we've seen the last of twinkies.

will they pick up the jobs?

 

An interesting question, considering how avidly Republicans were advocating letting GM fail.

[The Dude]

Little Debbie.

 

'nuff said.

[Michiganball]

I don't know anyone who eats these nuclear age last longer on the shelf then the post apocalyptic Roach species concoction's, maybe their time has just come. For any of you who still like the taste of preservative goodness there is still some out there, but I would really recommend you try some fresh bakery type sweets.

[JJ Husker]

This is just one of the many ways trying to get blood out of a turnip manifests itself. The workers (union) were oblivious to what this company could afford. Unfortunately, I think we will see more things like this. It brings to mind the state employees in Wisconsin and all those in this country who expect the government to endlessly provide for them. Well, this is one of those ends when the resources just aren't there to pillage any further.

[Conga3]

I would almost guarantee that some other company will pick up these lines. I doubt we've seen the last of twinkies.

will they pick up the jobs?

 

An interesting question, considering how avidly Republicans were advocating letting GM fail.

 

What is wrong for preferring that a bankrupt company accept restructuring in bankruptcy court?