"so who's to say which side is "more right" than the other?"




That is, in my opinion, a very good question.


I know that, for my part, I am not in a position to make a judgement.




:-)

There is one side that is FAAAAR more wrong than the other though.

Do not believe vulture capitalist propaganda. Large companies are NOT looking out for your best interests no matter how much their bought and paid for news outlets and politicians tell you otherwise.

I was raised in two separate households. One was a banking household and the other was a union household. I got to see the shenanigans and experience the fallout of both institutional ideologies. I do not like overzealous unions but I'd trust a shady teamster over a banker/corporatist any day.

By the way the corporation that owns Pabst is eyeballing the remains of the company. They will buy it for pennies on the dollar, let the current plants fallow, hire all new workers at minimum wage with no bennies and rake in disgusting amounts of cash.

There was a specific statement from them about how pleased they were that the union is no longer an issue.

The company that is selling Hostess has been chipping away at the company for years intentionally destroying it so that they could do exactly what is happening.

That is why it is called "vulture" capitalism. Unless you are a mega millionaire (not even a regular millionaire) you should be completely against these scumbags. They are not only ruining your country (the US) they have tanked the world economy as well and are willing to do it again. Start hiring some politicians who will actually stand up to these jackals.

I just like asking questions... like how will the guys get their 1.95 million dollar bonuses if they don't have 18,500 workers to siphon it off?


"In March 2012, Brian Driscoll resigned from his position as CEO.[21] Gregory Rayburn, who had been hired and named Chief Restructuring Officer only nine days earlier, assumed the leadership position. Fortune  reported that unions within the organization had been unhappy with Driscoll's proposed compensation package of $1.5 million, plus cash incentives and a $1.95 million "long term compensation" package. Additionally, the court had discovered that Hostess executives had received raises of up to 80% the year prior. In an effort to restore relations, Rayburn cut the salaries of the four top Hostess executives to $1, to be restored on January 1 the following year."

They'll get a nice fat severance and a bonus for dismantling the company then get absorbed back into the parent company until they find a new mark.

Beepster... the thought that any company is supposed to "look out" for you is nonsense. Socialistic nonsense. This is a capitalist country based on individuals investing and building for the purpose of making a profit...and this has the side effect of allowing other folks with no investment at stake to be employed and earn a decent living. 

I started a company about 21 years ago. The purpose was to provide an income for me to pay my bills and do what I wanted to do. Buy a home, cars, take vacations, enjoy my hobbies, raise a family, save for retirement, etc.....  I didn't give a hoot about anyone else. I didn't start the company thinking I needed to "look out" for anyone other than me. That was,  and still is my sole reason for running this company. 

Through the years I have hired some folks and payed them what I considered to be a fair wage. They worked for me at that wage so they must have agreed it was fair. One day I will either close or sell this company when I determine that I'm ready to stop working and retire, or it becomes unprofitable to run the business. When that time comes, and I close or sell..... I deserve ALL the profits remaining from that sale because I built that business, and I made the investment in it.

There is not much difference in the Hostess story from my own except I am not dealing with union demands and my income/profit numbers are much smaller then Hostess' numbers. They made the decision to shutter the business due to unprofitable conditions (regardless of the reasons) they have the full right as the owners to maximize their investment in every way possible and cash out with as much as possible.... after all they do own it. And just as easily as walking away with what you think is a bundle of cash, they could have walked away broke and in debt. That is the risk every business owner and investor takes when they get into business or make that investment. 

Capitalism is not perfect, but it is still the best system available on this planet to raise the living standards of everyone who participates in it. 

The company WAS profitable. I have no problem with how you describe your business or people making money. I used to be somewhat of a business man myself and am looking to get back on the horse. But what these guys do is take advantage of a broken system to crush otherwise healthy companies to get a quick return on their investment no matter what kind of devastation they leave in their wake.

It is funny that you brought out the "socialism" line like it is a dirty word. Socialism is not communism. It is merely describing what happens when a SOCIety works together for the greater good of all its citizens. As a business owner and American citizen you participate in and benefit from socialism every day. Without the laws and regulations established by government, without the infrastructure of the country like roads, highways, railways, etc... without the protection of the police and fire department, without government sponsored technical research, without import/export treaties, without other countrymen being financial stable enough to pay for your wares and services, without a federal monetary system you would not be able to run your business properly, safely or efficiently. You would have to trade shiny pebbles and farm animals to survive out of a handbuilt shack in a field under constant threat of marauders out to forcefully take everything you have. That is what would happen if we removed all elements of socialism from western society. You want a good example of this? Look at Somalia.

I don't hate rich people. I don't want to stifle people's ability to run their businesses. I don't want take an unfair portion of hardworking business owners profits. What I want to see is responsible business and government working together to build up society. Not tear it down like it is now.

You mentioned you served in the military. The US military is one of the largest examples of socialism the world has ever seen. It is paid for by the people to protect the people. That is socialism.

Also capitalism is great. I believe very strongly in capitalism. I am a capitalist myself. I like money. I like the things it buys. I like the good I can do with it. But to have a healthy capitalist system people need to actually have money and not just a few guys at the top. Everyone needs a chance to participate. The folks we are discussing are not responsible capitalists and in fact although they are quite good at making money in the short term they suck at making sure they CONTINUE to make money in the future. Once everyone is on minimum wage or outright unemployed who is going to buy their crap? What's going to happen to our societies?

The point is these guys are bad. They hide behind the whole "small business" rhetoric when trying to manipulate public policy and opinion but they want to hoover up all those companies and keep the entire pie for themselves. They are not your friends.

And now I think I've broken the TOS enough for one day.

Peace. 

What I don't get... so I'll ask another question.

If everything Herb just said is true.. and it's hard not to agree... then why do the hucksters go to the trouble of trying to get the general public to agree to blame it on labor?

Why not just pick up the marbles and go home with as many as possible?




The pension agreements are history... trying to get out of existing contracts so that the owners can take home extra marbles seems to be above and beyond the basic mechanism of "capitalism".

So I guess I'll ask this too; How does that work?

Guitarhacker

And just as easily as walking away with what you think is a bundle of cash, they could have walked away broke and in debt. That is the risk every business owner and investor takes when they get into business or make that investment.   

Clever people have learned to put most of the risk on others while still reaping rewards. When a company goes bankrupt, the people who haven't been paid yet are in a different situation from people who have already made a profit or "earned" compensation.

And if someone is employed by a company and is "earning" extravagant compensation when that company is in difficulty or decline, it suggests that their compensation is not strictly determined by the capitalist theory of market pricing. 

  @Mike... They need to keep up appearances so they can push policy through that benefits them. Because the US is still a democracy they have to actually get their guys elected and sugar coat the ideologies. People are finally starting to wake up to these dirty tricks. The sad part is they really would even lose all that much profit if they behaved more responsibly. I've said it for years. Business schools need to start putting a far heavier emphasis on ethics and how to create a sustainable business environment instead of making everything about the bottom line no matter what the damage.  

It is foolish, destructive behavior that will eventually leave almost EVERYONE broke. Look at all the guys who thought they had it made before the financial collapse but lost their shirts as well. They thought they were part of the club but they were just being used like everyone else. It has to stop.