Skip to main content

View Diary: Hostess and union agree to mediation (52 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Was ayn rand the Hostess CEO....? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    IreGyre

    The Hostess debacle and all the other recent outrageous statements by CEOs around the country planning on cutting off their noses to spite their faces/take their ball and go home by shutting down their companies (Aetna, PapaJohns, Florida real estate guy, etc.) really leave me speechless.

    Their arguments are basically:  "Now my taxes and health care costs are going up!  Screw all of you for voting for the Black Guy!  I'm gonna shut down the company and retire!  Cuz I won't be able to make all the money I want to!"

    For none of these d-bags was it a problem re: their companies no longer being able to run effectively or being able to make a profit; it was all about their bottom line in how much cash would be thrown off to allow them to continue to be multi-millionaires and billionaires.

    It all comes down to:  Gee, I'll end up making only hundreds of millions of dollars instead of billions!  Fuck that!  Screw all of you, I'm goin' home and retire on the beach and you all can suffer!

    Just like the "heroes" in an ayn rand novel.

    What she and they completely ignore is the fact that:  If they're unwilling to run their companies and make money in a given industry, there are plenty of other hungry competitors in every industry that will immediately step into the gap.

    The only person being hurt is the idiot deciding to forego profitable cashflow out of spite.

    Imagine if Steve Jobs or Bill Gates felt this way; if either one of them had at any point simply decided that they, personally, were so important to a given industry that they could extort their preferred behavior from customers or politicians by threatening to retire or shut down their companies, the market reaction would have been--punish their stock, and reward any and all competitors that would immediately be able to step in and fill the gap in the market left by such foolish hubris.

    The tantrum thrown by Hostess is in a similar vein.  "We're gonna hold Twinkies hostage!  If we don't get what we want from those mean old unions, there won't be any Twinkies anymore!"

    And the "ignant" masses believe it.

    If Hostess were to actually liquidate, some of their assets would be all their various brands that are household-names (twinkies, ho-hos, ding-dongs, etc.), and the accountants assign a value to each of these things.

    There is no such thing as Reardon Steel in the real world; given a recipe, anyone can build anything, including a Twinkie.

    If the market wants something, it will make it happen.  Including twinkies, and there's nothing that a petulant CEO can do about it.

    "When and if fascism comes to America...it will not even be called 'fascism'; it will be called, of course, 'Americanism'" --Professor Halford E. Luccock of Yale Divinity School; New York Times article from September 12, 1938, page 15

    by demongo on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 01:27:46 PM PST

    •  I think they are all "Going Galt" (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      demongo

      There seems to be a lot of CEOs who are convinced that they can "shrug", and that we will have to capitulate. If Papa John's were to vanish, we'd just buy our pizza somewhere else, we don't need them. Supply-side economics is backwards, demand-side makes sense. We just don't need them, we have alternatives.

      Even with Reardon Metal, anyone with a piece of the metal could make their own - at least if they know metallurgy, and there are plenty who do. It is only government-granted patent that would keep anyone from copying it.

      The wolfpack eats venison. The lone wolf eats mice.

      by A Citizen on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 08:46:24 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site