HockeyDad
13 years ago
I just bought a box of chocolate filled Twinkies. I'll trade it for a 5 pack of AF Hemingway Classics.
tailgater
13 years ago

I just bought a box of chocolate filled Twinkies. .

HockeyDad wrote:



Racist!
sd72
13 years ago
Rather have skittles anyway. Never cared much for chocolate. Starburst are good too.
victor809
13 years ago

I just got filled like a chocolate Twinkie for a 5 pack of AF Hemingway Classics...I feel so dirty.

HockeyDad wrote:



Huh... been visiting TW?
sd72
13 years ago
Except for white chocolate macadamia cookies. Those are good. Snicker doodles are better though.
DadZilla3
13 years ago

Everyone knows that Twinkies is the only food that will survive a nuclear holocaust. Without Hostess, how you folks going to stock your bunkers?

dpnewell wrote:


I'm torn. Now I have to decide whether to get rid of some ammo and Spam to make room for a stash of Twinkies, or do I just keep the ammo and Spam, and forage for still-fresh Twinkies after TEOTWAWKI? 🤔
Gene363
13 years ago

Twinkies, they could survive a nuclear holocaust, but not 4 years of Obama.

DrafterX
13 years ago
DrMaddVibe
13 years ago


Twinkies, they could survive a nuclear holocaust, but not 4 years of Obama.

Gene363 wrote:





GM is NEXT![frypan]
DrafterX
13 years ago
I'm still waiting for my free Volt... 😠
tailgater
13 years ago

I'm still waiting for my free Jolt... 😠

DrafterX wrote:



Paging TW!
tailgater
13 years ago

Except for white chocolate macadamia cookies. Those are good.

sd72 wrote:



So white chocolate is good, but not dark chocolate?

RACIST!
Brewha
13 years ago

So white chocolate is good, but not dark chocolate?

RACIST!

tailgater wrote:



Twinkies have always been at the center of the race/class war.

Just sayin'
DrafterX
13 years ago
I thought oreos were.... 🤔
Brewha
13 years ago
Oreos are just the shameless pawns.
The kingpins have always been the big cream filled Twinkies.
rfenst
13 years ago

Corporate profits are at an average all time high, but that's not the workers business to worry about. Is it?

sd72 wrote:



No it's not. It's the stockholders'/owners' business. Screw the employees, unless they are equity stakeholders.

The employees can go piss in the wind. They can either work for what is being offered or what is agreed upon- or go find work elsewhere. Plenty of unemployed people who would gladly fill their shoes.

Since 5,000 have gone out on strike of their own volition (as opposed to being ready willing and able to work like others) and would still be earning significantly more than unemployment pays had they taken what was offered until they found themselves better pay - I say those who went out on strike should get zero unemployment compensation with government money.

The new reality people need to come to terms with is that there are plenty of other people in the world willing to do the same jobs for less pay. I wouldn't condemn the other union(s) whose employees where willing to work for less. Their union(s) kept its/their members employed. They don't deserve any criticism form us for that and are an example of the good unions CAN do.
rfenst
13 years ago

Majority of non-union workers agreed to cuts, except for the Bakers Union. Dispute over health benefits and pensions. So now everyone looses including non-unions workers because of a union decision. Good job.

"Too late." Now trying to liquidate assets.

cacman wrote:



There are union workers from other unions who are willing to work. Condem the particular union that screwed up, not all unions.
rfenst
13 years ago

Heard Rush this morning blaming the union completely for this. I think there is some blame there but the 800lbs silent gorilla in the room is energy cost and a dollar not worth a sheet.

Fuel has driven the cost up for Hostess (raw goods and logistsics) to the point that they were hemmoriging money.

ZRX1200 wrote:



There is no silent gorilla in the room. I won't believe that increased fuel expenses and/or a weak dollar are why Hostess is failing unless you can show me Hostess' numbers that prove that.
rfenst
13 years ago

Honestly guys... what's the big deal?

victor809 wrote:



The real big deal? We all love Twinkies or other Hostess baked goods and cannot stand the possibility that they might stop making them. We feel the need to go buy anything made by Hostess and cram it down our guts at least one last time. I am dead serious. And, I am not even stoned.
HockeyDad
13 years ago

The real big deal? We all love Twinkies or other Hostess baked goods and cannot stand the possibility that they might stop making them. We feel the need to go buy anything made by Hostess and cram it down our guts at least one last time. I am dead serious.

rfenst wrote:





I see you eyeballing my box of Twinkies.
Users browsing this topic