Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
questionmark

No more twinkies, hohos and scooter pies?

70 posts in this topic

Time to start stocking up...

I have 50 boxes of Ding Dongs,50 boxes of Twinkies,but could not find sno balls,What a life to live without Ding Dongs,NNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember when twinkies were actually good, a nice, dry, lite angelfood cake and a actual creamy filling.

Now they're sticky and gunky, filled with something that is little more than sweetened wallpaper paste.

LMAO
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What the heck are moms to put in their kids' lunches? Fruit?

*shudders*

I don't Obama I blame the First Lady for this!

Edited by QuiteContrary
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I loved Twinkies, Ding Dongs and whole wheat wonder bread. I ate the bread far more than the sack cakes. We could see twinkes and the other products again if another company buys the rights to it.

I don't think it was all the Unions fault. I think both parties can share in the blame.

It was the Bakers Union who were to greedy for their own good and ruined it for everybody else,I hope the bakers union buns in H.E.double toothpicks.I hope they eat the nasty Bimbo company's poor quallity snacks and get the runs.Bimbo messed up Mrs Bairds Breads,those people had a good product and screwed the product with inferier ingredients,like the Yeast was replaced with 3rd rate yeast,Mrs Bairds used to use yeast from Budwieser which is the best in the world,Bimbo doesnt even care what it is serving the general public,they are only in it for the money nothing else,just like that greedy Bakers Union,I can Honestly say I Hate them Both with a pashion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

good those things tasted like crap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of my friends used to do vile things to Twinkies....

Anyhoooo....

Pabst blue ribbon wants to buy it .

My mum worked for them . I have all sorts of Pabst glasses and serving trays in the basement ,from the 60s.

. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/19/twinkies-may-survive-pabst-brewing-company-pbr-buy-auction_n_2158928.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pabst blue ribbon wants to buy it .

My mum worked for them . I have all sorts of Pabst glasses and serving trays in the basement ,from the 60s.

. http://www.huffingto...ref=mostpopular

Will the catch phrase be "Twinkie Me... A.S.A.P.?" ;)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was the Bakers Union who were to greedy for their own good and ruined it for everybody else,I hope the bakers union buns in H.E.double toothpicks.I hope they eat the nasty Bimbo company's poor quallity snacks and get the runs.Bimbo messed up Mrs Bairds Breads,those people had a good product and screwed the product with inferier ingredients,like the Yeast was replaced with 3rd rate yeast,Mrs Bairds used to use yeast from Budwieser which is the best in the world,Bimbo doesnt even care what it is serving the general public,they are only in it for the money nothing else,just like that greedy Bakers Union,I can Honestly say I Hate them Both with a pashion.

Right, the greedy bakers union that didn't want to take an 8% paycut, along with a 32% benefit cut, all the while the CEO took a 300% raise, also giving 9 execs raises ranging from 60-100%. ( while filing their 2nd bankruptcy)

Also, during that time amassing huge debt from private equity funds.

And you want to blame the WORKERS??

It's completely amazing to me that people are this ignorant to the facts.

I'm sure you are somehow blaming '3rd rate yeast' on the union as well...

The Bakers Union has no intention to run their business into the ground, how would that serve them at all? They'd lose their Union dues. The CEO however, has NOTHING to lose. He gets paid either way. Check out how they want to make sure they execs still get their bonuses. These people raid companies, steal from the Pension fund (which they also did in this case) and then move onto the next company, where they are welcomed with open arms.

STOP BLAMING THE PEOPLE THAT MADE LESS THAN 20 BUCKS AN HOUR!!!

Edited by supervike
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, the greedy bakers union that didn't want to take an 8% paycut, along with a 32% benefit cut, all the while the CEO took a 300% raise, also giving 9 execs raises ranging from 60-100%. ( while filing their 2nd bankruptcy)

Also, during that time amassing huge debt from private equity funds.

And you want to blame the WORKERS??

It's completely amazing to me that people are this ignorant to the facts.

I'm sure you are somehow blaming '3rd rate yeast' on the union as well...

The Bakers Union has no intention to run their business into the ground, how would that serve them at all? They'd lose their Union dues. The CEO however, has NOTHING to lose. He gets paid either way. Check out how they want to make sure they execs still get their bonuses. These people raid companies, steal from the Pension fund (which they also did in this case) and then move onto the next company, where they are welcomed with open arms.

STOP BLAMING THE PEOPLE THAT MADE LESS THAN 20 BUCKS AN HOUR!!!

It's not the workers. It's their representatives. How can you blame a union employee. It's always a good deal for them. Besides, you know the bakers union big shots are just as slimy. All jobs come with somebody at the top so that's never going to change and the governments always going to be there to take something from your paycheck too and then you have the unions who are just another paycheck filter where the guys at the top are always going to be in a position to be set for life should the union collapse just like the nothing to lose CEOs. Really though its not the workers fault their representatives are so good at riling and making big fat promises at somebody else's expense who happen to care so much about the cause that the only thing they ask for is millions of dollars to lobby to the democrat party and several hundred thousand dollar salaries with incredibly generous pensions who work out of multimillion dollar headquarters. And you can't inject the even greater deals the CEOs have because the CEOs own the company and the unions don't. Plus all the money the unions make is paid for by the CEOs who could be using all those millions for employee benefits, salaries and expansion hence more job opportunities. So with all the fair worker laws already on the books it seems that unions have already set out what they intended to do and now are just another filter your paycheck must go through or another group of power hungry people who make big promises just in exchange for your hard earned money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just going to make it THAT much harder for Woody Haraldson to find a twinky after the Zombie Apocolypse.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how many Union bosses there are being laid off and what their average salaries were?

Really, even if the top ten guys got 10 million total, and that was redistributed to the employees, that would not have saved the company. It was already going into a grave. All a union paycut was going to do was save peoples jobs for a short while. I guess now they will just get an earlier start on their 3 years of unemployment. Basically there was no way for the Union to win, and no way for the CEO/execs to loose.

Edited by DieChecker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obama should step in and save the Twinkie industry!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how many Union bosses there are being laid off and what their average salaries were?

Really, even if the top ten guys got 10 million total, and that was redistributed to the employees, that would not have saved the company. It was already going into a grave. All a union paycut was going to do was save peoples jobs for a short while. I guess now they will just get an earlier start on their 3 years of unemployment. Basically there was no way for the Union to win, and no way for the CEO/execs to loose.

Probably true, but like I said union bosses while not CEOs are likely set up pretty good in the event of being put out of work. I think one of the things that I think about as an employer is the idea that if my employees unionized, which by law I can't fire them for or at least for the consideration of doing so, here I am one day running shop as usual and this large powerful group of thugs and lawyers come and tells me from now on here is how you're going to operate your business and we are going to make you and and employees pay for the 'privilege'. Imediate reaction; Just who the hell do you think you are? This is my business. YOU didn't build that, somebody else made that happen! I did mofo! And now I have to charge my customers considereably more thanks to your interference.

Personally, I am pretty considerate concerning reasonable qualms from my employees. I'm not a sap, I won't give in just because, but I'm not the devil either. If it comes down to losing a good guy over a few bucks a week then I know what I have to do. On the other hand from my experience the ones who demand the most and think they're worth the most are ususally delusional and full of self entitlement and usually end up working for someone else by my choice, not theirs.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
*snip*

Plus all the money the unions make is paid for by the CEOs who could be using all those millions for employee benefits, salaries and expansion hence more job opportunities.

What are you talking about? The Union dues are taken from the employees, not the CEO. The CEO can't decide to use that money for other benefits.

The CEO doesn't fund the union at all, it's all from the employees. They grouped together and decided they needed fair representation. And Unions have very strict rules about what money is earmarked for. Union dues do not go to political parties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are you talking about? The Union dues are taken from the employees, not the CEO. The CEO can't decide to use that money for other benefits.

The CEO doesn't fund the union at all, it's all from the employees. They grouped together and decided they needed fair representation. And Unions have very strict rules about what money is earmarked for. Union dues do not go to political parties.

Sorry, if you read this pre-edit. I got my union smashing threads confused but I'll just stick with the following...

And as for your last sentence.... ROTFingFLMAO!!! You kidding me?

Edited by -Mr_Fess-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is why there is something called COPE at almost all unions.

Committee on Political Education. That is seperate volunteer money that unionists can pay. This money is specifically earmarked for Political Parties.

Union Dues CANNOT be used for Political Parties. That's the law. If you know otherwise, maybe you should report it to the proper authorities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is why there is something called COPE at almost all unions.

G

Committee on Political Education. That is seperate volunteer money that unionists can pay. This money is specifically earmarked for Political Parties.

Union Dues CANNOT be used for Political Parties. That's the law. If you know otherwise, maybe you should report it to the proper authorities.

Alright but it's not as if they don't try their hardest to push liberal politics on their employees. Is that not a way of taking advantage or at the least being trying to sell a little snake oil. I get the teamsters new letter magazine. I seen what their election coverage was like. It was the most hardcore msnbc type bias you could imagine. All it was was meant to be was drum up democrat support and donations to the cause.

Imagine this... Walmart sends out monthly news letter magazines to its million employees just trashing the democrat party and holding the GOP on a pedestal so high only a bird could be perched upon it all in an effort to sway the vote and garner lobbying money. Think about that for a minute and tell me that wouldn't be all the outrage on the MSM. Walmart would be slandered for all the usual liberal slanderings with extrememely sinister and evil connotations attached to the headlines. 'Oh these poor people are being told who to vote for. It's as if their jobs depend on it.' But unlike the corrupt unions Walmart leaves their employees to their own devices and don't tell them how to think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not pretending that Unions don't have very strong political ties to the Dems.

If you ask me, that is part of their image problem. I wish it wasn't so prevelant, but that's the way it is now. . The ties are so strong because it's quite often the Democrats are the ones looking out for the working class. They each get a mutual benefit, thus the relationship.

But, Unions are much more than simply political arms of the Democrats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm wondering if all this is so Blatently Wrong... that the employees had such a good case, and the Corporate Bigwigs were so very in the wrong... I'm wondering why a Federal Court kept OKing all these actions. Reportedly the Court OKed the CEO raises, and the paycuts and everything else. Is there a Bad Judge behind all this? or is everything on the Up and Up?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand how the court would 'ok' the pay raise, they'd have nothing to do with that.

From what I understand, a judge blocked the bankruptcy, asked both sides to agree to a mediator. That failed, so now they are back on the liquidation tract.

But, shame on the BOTH sides for not trying to has this out through mediation. Maybe something could be done, but it sounds like it's become a huge p***ing match between the two sides.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.