Could he have missed the point any more badly?

Gee, this is dumb!

No Twinkies Please, We’re Dying

By Mark Morford, San Francisco Chronicle | 22 November 12

Surely you must see. Surely you must understand. Don’t you know rockets are falling all over Gaza and Israel? Do you not read that more than 100 people have died already in brutal and insidious fighting that’s been going on since God was knee-high to a bogus misconception?

Jesus Christ, quit whining about Twinkies already. Stop anonymous commenting about your little pet peeve social issue tech glitch culture itch fashion bitch. You do not have it so bad. You have never, comparatively speaking and with the proper sort of lens in place, had it so bad.

Don’t you understand the planet is ever at peril? Surely you’re aware that we’ve had 332 straight months that were warmer than average, and even the notoriously heartless World Bank is a nervous wreck about it?

Surely you know diseases and wars are ravaging Africa, that factory pollution in China is causing cancer rates to skyrocket, that it is just slightly pathetic that American teenage girls hate on each other so violently on Facebook, when a 14-year-old girl in Pakistan just got shot in the face for suggesting that teenage girls are actually human in the first place?

You can read the rest of his rant here. But the author goes on about all of the problems the world faces, and even comes a bit close when he includes, “Our economy is struggling. People are going without jobs for a long periods of time.” But he never seemed to understand that people writing about the shut-down and liquidation of Hostess aren’t complaining about the demise of the Twinkie, but noting that 18,500 people are losing their jobs, right before Thanksgiving, due to the utter stupidity of some of their workers.

Now, Hostess was already on a downward spiral anyway. They had been in bankruptcy previously, and this was their second go at it. Some are complaining that the problem was bad management at Hostess, and perhaps that’s part of it, but the real problem is that the primary product of Hostess was various forms of snack cakes, a “food” losing popularity in the American culture. Eventually, Hostess would have had to have shifted their product line to something which had the prospect of rising, not falling, sales to consumers, or go out of business anyway. Still, that might have been a lengthier process, and perhaps when Hostess went out of business in the future, it would have shed product lines slowly, so that there wouldn’t be 18,500 people losing their jobs at once. Perhaps Hostess could have sold off some of their product lines which had an actual future to other investors, and some of the 18,500 kept their jobs with a company that had a future.

Your Editor is not a baker and your Editor is not an engineer. He does not know if the facilities to make Twinkies and HoHos could reasonably be reconfigured to produce granola bars or other products which actually have growing markets and a future ahead of them, or whether it would have been a total loss, you’d have to tear down the building and start from scratch. It is obvious, however, that the snack cake “food” line is not one with much of a future. But the actions of the bakers’ union made sure that the immediate future for 18,500 workers, the majority of whom were not represented by that union, is a somber Thanksgiving and a poorer Christmas. That has been the real point, not whether people can buy Twinkies in the future.

Comments are closed.