hostess is closing due to strikes ?

[Eggysrun]

Pretty much avoided everything posted here, just gonna comment on the situation itself.

The unions seriously need to get off their high horses and realize that Hostess is NOT going to be the last company, especially unionized companies that are going to have to make some serious cut backs due to tax increases and Obamacare. This is why I hate Unions because they hold on to the very last penny they can give their employees even if it means the company going bankrupt.

Unions in the US need to serious re-evaluate their tactics because with increased taxes coming and Obamacare fucking over a lot of companies if they can't fire people, lower wages or get rid of benefits those companies will die. What good is a union if there's no company to work for anymore?

Unions need to understand that people are not entitled to jobs and businesses that work hard to survive have rights too.

Secondly, there's a TON of unemployed Americans out there. Let those Union fucks walk out and not work, Hostess should fire every single one of those people walking out on their jobs and hire people looking to work.

[jhood001]

You only need a group bargaining if you are lazy and otherwise not needed.

Invested in stocks? Part of a political party?

Simple minds with simple solutions. You've seen it here first, folks.

[gos]

Unions need to understand that people are not entitled to jobs and businesses that work hard to survive have rights too.

Well managed businesses will do just fine, regardless of taxes, unions, Obamacare, or anything else. Businesses do NOT have an automatic right to be profitable.

The free market system is supposed to chew up and spit out the weak links. Hostess, as a corporation, was the slow gazelle in the herd being chased by lions.

People (and businesses) are entitled to whatever they negotiate among themselves. If Hostess couldn't find replacement workers, that's Hostesses' problem, not the union's problem.

Since we have something close to 25 million people out of work, you don't think Hostess could have found a bunch of $7/hour people to squirt cream into twinkies?

[gos]

This article says it better than I can:

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/the...-a-good-thing/

[Great-Kazoo]

Well managed businesses will do just fine, regardless of taxes, unions, Obamacare, or anything else. Businesses do NOT have an automatic right to be profitable.

The free market system is supposed to chew up and spit out the weak links. Hostess, as a corporation, was the slow gazelle in the herd being chased by lions.

People (and businesses) are entitled to whatever they negotiate among themselves. If Hostess couldn't find replacement workers, that's Hostesses' problem, not the union's problem.

Since we have something close to 25 million people out of work, you don't think Hostess could have found a bunch of $7/hour people to squirt cream into twinkies?

WHAT??????????????????? Not be profitable??????????????? if i open another business i have every right to be profitable. PROVIDING I can be competitive, have good CS and listen to the customer.
The UNION does not Have a right to blackmail me with threats of picket lines, work slow downs and behind the scene trash talking of my company or product (inferior, NON-Union made etc) Nor does some low life scumbag like jesse jackson have the right to racist or rainbow coalition me in to hiring unqualified people of ANY COLOR.
SAME SHAKE DOWN, DIFFERENT GROUP DOING IT.

Sure we could have hired $7 hr labor. Can they run the machines, fix the conveyor belt, read & comprehend english?? Even a basic employment co has applicants do mechanical & comprehension skill test.

[Singlestack]

Well managed businesses will do just fine, regardless of taxes, unions, Obamacare, or anything else. Businesses do NOT have an automatic right to be profitable.

I truly cannot believe I read this. Businesses do not have a right to be profitable?

You need some basic education, sir. First of all, as a small business owner I'm responsible for making sure that my business stays in business. Not my "community", not my "government", not my "neighbors". Nobody else is awake at midnight working out my cash flow and receivables. Nobody else is making calls, meeting people, or doing anything else to grow my business. Nobody else is working OT when I'd like to watch the Broncos, to meet a deadline for a customer. I have news for you - if I'm NOT profitable, I'm not in business period. Same goes for any other business - if they ultimately cannot be profitable, they go under. You and most liberals seem to labor under the impression that all business ought to be charities and don't have a "right" to be profitable. Profits are how businesses grow. Growth means hiring more employees, making part time people into full time, giving people raises and improved benefits, buying new equipment and supplies, and investing more money in the system for other businesses to grow as well. When businesses are profitable, people are more profitable.

For some reasons, liberals seem to think profits are a "right" - as though it is something that governments can give and take away at will based on their benevolence (green energy under Obama, for example), or regulate and tax (the coal industry under Obama, for example). This is the picking winners and losers mentality, or as Romney said of Obama in the campaign - "picking losers", since Obama doesn't pick winners. For example, GM stands not far from bankruptcy, again.

Your first statement betrays the fact you know absolutely nothing about running a business, since a business owner knows their costs of running a business (" taxes, unions, Obamacare, or anything else") has EVERYTHING to do with running the business. If your revenue doesn't cover the costs, you don't have a business. You either need to figure out how to raise revenue or cut costs (or both) to stay in business. Is your point that a "well managed business" can just ignore costs and everything will work out fine? Or that somehow "well managed businesses" are so incredibly profitable (even though they don't have a right to be profitable, according to you) that none of their costs matter? More ignorance. I'll guarantee you that all successful companies watch the expense side of the balance sheet like a hawk - and that is a big reason why they are successful companies.

At the end of the day, I don't think I'll convince you of anything. More than likely you have had years of brainwashing from college professors and liberal friends/media. One post doesn't reverse that. My only hope for you is you will have the energy and entrepreneurial spirit to start your own business one day and really understand how the USA and free markets work. If you do, I'll guarantee you won't continue to believe what you do, since it can't stand up in the face of reality.

Singlestack

[Rucker61]

WHAT??????????????????? Not be profitable??????????????? if i open another business i have every right to be profitable. PROVIDING I can be competitive, have good CS and listen to the customer.

I think you have a different understanding of that word than I do. Hope, yes. Expectation, perhaps. A right to profitability? I don't think so.

[Byte Stryke]

well now the mechanics that were making $24/ can go make $10/ at Bimbo

and as I understand it, unless you are a shift supervisor, you do not get more than 30 hours a week...

YAY FREE ENTERPRISE!
I cannot WAIT to pay for more medicare and medicaid for other people!

[Great-Kazoo]

I think you have a different understanding of that word than I do. Hope, yes. Expectation, perhaps. A right to profitability? I don't think so.

I have a right as a business owner to expect profitability based upon how good my business model is. Do i deserve to be "Given" profit, no i only deserve to get out of what i and my co-workers put in to it. If i am successful then everyone who works hopefully can share in said wealth. Does the employee deserve the same amount of money and or benefits, i as the capital investor do, no.
Perhaps the wording was wrong, but i expect profit and rightly due it through hard work and diligence. Anyone not involved with my business as co-worker / employe has no right or deserves to reap monetary gain from our work.

[Singlestack]

On other thing bothers me about gos' post: the word "right" Liberals just love to talk about "rights", whether it is an imagined "right to free healthcare" or Sandra Fluke's "right to taxpayer-funded contraception". Where do "rights" come from? Is a "right" a "right" because I say so, because a law says so, or because of some higher-level construct like the Bill of Rights or the Constitution?

In a free society, who or what limits our "rights"? Who or what says "businesses do not have an automatic right to be profitable"? I can find no such language in the Bill of Rights or Constitution, or in any local, state, or federal laws I'm aware of. In fact, the "right to pursue happiness" can absolutely be reasoned to include a right to have a profitable business - since this allows me to better provide for myself and my family - and therefore to "pursue happiness". Yes, prosperity and security most definitely make me happy.

So I challenge Mr gos and the other liberals/socialist/marxists here who subscribe to the notion "businesses do not have an automatic right to be profitable" to step forward and state what authority they have for making such a statement in our founding documents or laws, and clarify if that is just their personal opinion and otherwise unfounded/unsupported. If all they have is their opinion, then I totally reject their suppression of my freedom and right to pursue happiness.

Singlestack