Can’t Annoy a Rich Person Without Devestating Someone in the Middle Class

Posted on November 16, 2012 11:00 am

Line I’ve seen a number of times already: “Twinkies can survive a nuclear apocalypse, but they can’t survive the Obama economy.”

Yes, because of failed union negotiations, Hostess is shutting down.

Now, I’m sure the owner of Hostess is devestated; it has to hurt to have to close your business — especially one that has been open for so long. So the union really taught him a lesson. But he’s probably pretty rich, and I’m guessing personally he’ll be okay. The 18,000 workes who are being layed off will probably not fare as well.

This reminds me of a rock solid rule I laid out in my book (has anyone really not bought that by now?): “You can’t mildly inconvenience rich people without devastating the middle class and the poor.”

I compare trying to go after the rich to trying to headbutt someone’s fist. You do it really hard, you can really scratch up their knuckles, but you’ll be the worst off person in that situation. And we’re in a blame the rich mode thanks to Obama. Those nasty rich not giving us everything we think we deserve, so we’re going to go after them and their businesses, and we’ll probably annoy them a lot and make them very upset… all while leaving thousands and thousands unemployed.

I guess we have to ask ourselves: How many unemployed middle class and poor people is worth the tear of a rich man? We might all be suffering, but at least we’ll know that a rich person is a bit annoyed. And that’s worth… what?

Send to Kindle
1 Star (Hated it)2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (Awesome) (13 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)

23 Responses to “Can’t Annoy a Rich Person Without Devestating Someone in the Middle Class”

  1. CarolyntheMommy says:

    Sort of like pitching a fit because Boeing wants to build in SC. We can’t have that!

    Unions: tantruming themselves and others out of civility and jobs wherever they go.

    Well since the union workers won’t be working I guess they’re free to go trash a state capitol now.

    I don’t own a business but if I did, I’d give preferential hiring to someone who lost his/her job due to a union worker.

    Speaking of union workers, how’d it work out with them hassling the Alabama power crews? Are the lights back on in Staten Island and Jersey? Oh. Bummer.

    I’ll amend my earlier statement to Unions: tantruming themselves and others out of civility, jobs, and life-saving/order-restoring electricity wherever they go.

    And here’s your irony for the day: I learned that I am directly descended from one of the AFL-CIO founders. Do I have to pay some sort of restitution for this?

  2. Harvey says:

    “And here’s your irony for the day: I learned that I am directly descended from one of the AFL-CIO founders. Do I have to pay some sort of restitution for this?”

    Buy me a pound of bacon and you’re forgiven.

  3. NO_MO_BAMA says:

    Well at least now Bloomberg won’t have to ban Twinkies. The unions could be used to outlaw bankrupt just about anybody, who’s next, Pepsi?
    So now the union is going to pay all their loyal members till they find new jobs….right?
    Isn’t that how it works?

  4. plentyobailouts says:

    It does not suck that 18000 union pos obsama voters are out of work.

    It sucks because I will not be able to get a Chocodile fix. Also the parasites will now dip their greedy little hippie palms into my wallet for 3 years of vacation,. I mean unemployment. union people are like hippies. they should be put in mexi-cannon and launched into an abyss.

  5. Brutus says:

    The plant closes. 18,000 out of work. The union goes away. The owner re-opens, hires 18,000 new workers and makes them sign non-unionizing agreements. Seems like a winning situation.

  6. CarolyntheMommy says:

    Thanks, Harvey. I’d like to think that with the founding were the original, true, honorable purposes of unions. Then again, I’m a fruit loop and my kind of crazy takes generations to germinate so there’s really no telling.

    I have to tell you though: it’s the Jewish side of the family so it’ll have to be turkey bacon. We have to keep it Kosher.

  7. Brutus says:

    And why not fight the union shops with non-union labor? I propose, UNUM (Union of Non-Union Manufacturers). All the non union shops can band together under one organization to fight. I’ll charge $5,000 a year for membership for non-union dues. I think some perks are in order for membership, maybe first year free for Hostess, a world class golf course and our own political party. Now, a motto… hmm…

  8. Jimmy says:

    I like Frank’s new, semi-serious approach.

  9. slapout says:

    Bakers have a union? What kind of horrible conditions are they working in that they need a union?

  10. Bubba says:

    From what I understand, the Teamsters had renegoiated with Hostess but it was the bakers that held out and shut the deal down (didn’t think the 17:00 Thursday deadline was for real I guess). These are just the first unfortunate 18K+ casualties of the ‘righting of the ship’…the unions got their boy re-elected, but the real guys righting the checks are now concidering the balances.

  11. slaphappy says:

    Need… my…. Donettes……

  12. DamnCat says:

    The company wanted to avoid bankruptcy but they couldn’t raise the dough.

  13. DamnCat says:

    Seriously, those teamsters who are out of work over this have to be pissed. It’s probably the easist truck driving gig you can get. Small truck, traveling only in your own town/county, delivering lightweight goods, working regular and reliable hours.

    HA,HA!

  14. NO_MO_BAMA says:

    The election is over, the union doesn’t need the money any more, why don’t they buy it? Since they think paying people 3 times what the job is worth is a successful business model, I’d think they’d jump at the chance.

  15. Writer says:

    If it helps The Obamanation to build his following, then it can’t be all bad. -Obama

  16. CTCompromise says:

    …And what are the chances those workers will get hired somewhere else-even if they find a company that’s hiring? I know if I was a person screening applicants and saw that Hostess was their last employer, my first thought would be “So this is a worker who would rather lose their job than go against their union…Hmmm Let me see who else applied.”

  17. CTCompromise says:

    Yay!!! The union sure screwed those greedy corporate bosses !! Now….how many union dues will they be collecting next month?

  18. CTCompromise says:

    …Also, by filing bankruptcy the company can walk away from money they owe to their suppliers, shareholders, etc. and hurt more businesses. As for the the pensions which “weren’t big enough”…How do ya’ like ‘em now?

  19. Son of Bob says:

    Grown men who need a daddy figure to negotiate their job for them. Yeah, union folks are perfectly normal…umm, okay.

  20. NoMoBama says:

    NO HOSTESS-NO PEACE!

  21. CarolyntheMommy says:

    And the liberal idiots take on this? The greedy CEO paid himself millions and then tossed his workers out on the street.

    Ever wonder if liberals just wake up in the morning and say to themselves, “Oh my gosh. I am so completely unwilling to see the truth that I’ll act bat-crap crazy to avoid it”?

  22. NoMoBama says:

    Hostess CEO Falsely Blames Bakery Closures on Strike

    BCTGM members voted to strike Hostess after the company imposed cuts that included ending payments to the employees’ pension plan while executives awarded themselves massive bonuses. Among the raises was a 300 percent raise (from approximately $750,000 to $2,550,000) for the then-CEO of Hostess. At least nine other top executives of the company also received massive pay raises, including one who received a pay increase from $500,000 to $900,000 and another received one that brought his salary from $375,000 to $656,256.

    $2,550,000-$750,000=$1,800,000/18,000= 100 bleeping dollars per employee per YEAR! aka 40 CENTS a day!

    $400,000 raise = $22.22 per YEAR per employee

    $281,256 raise = $15.63 per YEAR per employee

    $137.85 PER YEAR = 55 CENTS A DAY!!!!!!!! (assuming they work 250 days and since they’re union scum, they do NOT)

    Give me a f’*#g break! Can’t these idiots even do math? Oh wait, they went to union schools so obviously not.

  23. NoMoBama says:

    meanwhile, assuming just a $40/hr cost per employee (with insurance and taxes and union extortion etc etc etc that’s probably low)

    $320.00 per day = $80,000.00 X 18,000 employees = $1,440,000,000.00 /year
    $1.00 per day = $250.00 X 18,000 employees = $4,500,000.00 /year
    Total of salaries cited $4,106,256.00 /year

    So if the 3 evil rich CEOs they mention all worked for FREE, it would amount to LESS than $1 a day per employee.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>