#1 Capitalism Is An Abject Failure Thread

[Joe_Smith]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-0...ld-cars-go-die

Where The World's Unsold Cars Go To Die

Above is just a few of the thousands upon thousands of unsold cars at Sheerness, United Kingdom. Please do see this on Google Maps....type in Sheerness, United Kingdom. Look to the west coast, below River Thames next to River Medway. Left of A249, Brielle Way.

Timestamp: Friday, May 16th, 2014.

There are hundreds of places like this in the world today and they keep on piling up...

THE WORLDS UNSOLD CAR STOCKPILE

Houston...We have a problem!...Nobody is buying brand new cars anymore! Well they are, but not on the scale they once were. Millions of brand new unsold cars are just sitting redundant on runways and car parks around the world. There, they stay, slowly deteriorating without being maintained.

Below is an image of a massive car park at Swindon, United Kingdom, with thousands upon thousands of unsold cars just sitting there with not a buyer in sight. The car manufacturers have to buy more and more land just to park their cars as they perpetually roll off the production line.

There is proof that the worlds recession is still biting and wont let go. All around the world there are huge stockpiles of unsold cars and they are being added to every day. They have run out of space to park all of these brand new unsold cars and are having to buy acres and acres of land to store them.

NOTE:

The images on this webpage showing all of these unsold cars are just a very small portion of those around the world. There are literally thousands of these "car parks" rammed full of unsold cars in practically every country on the planet. Just in case you were wondering, these images have not been Photoshopped, they are the real deal!

Its hard to believe that there are so many unsold cars in the world but its true. The worse part is that the amount of unsold cars keeps on getting bigger every day.

It would be fair to say that it is becoming a mechanical epidemic of epic proportions. If anybody from outer space is reading this webpage, we here on Earth have too many cars, why not come and buy a few hundred thousand of them for your own planet! (sorry but this is all I can think of)

Below is shown just a few of the 57,000 cars (and growing) that await delivery from their home in the Port of Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A. With Google Maps look South of Broening Hwy in Dundalk for the massive expanse of space where all these cars are parked up.



The car industry would never sell these cars at massive reductions in their prices to get rid of them, no they still want every buck. If they were to price these cars for a couple of thousand they would sell them. However, nobody would then buy any expensive cars and then they would end up being unsold. Its quite a pickle we have gotten ourselves into.

Below is shown an image of the Nissan test track in Sunderland United Kingdom. Only it is no longer being used, reason...there are too many unsold cars parked up on it! The amount of cars keeps on piling up on it until its overflowing. Nissan then acquires more land to park up the cars, as they continue to come off the production line.

[Joe_Smith]

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...w/35094462.cms

Apple's $3.2 billion acquisition of Beats, a luxury headphone maker and music-streaming service, is about to make its founders (rapper Dr. Dre and music producer Jimmy Iovine ) billionaires. Yet, the man who helped design the first pair of Beats headphones will be shut out.

Noel and his son Kevin Lee worked with Monster, the audio company that was responsible for creating the headphones. However, in 2011 Monster inked a deal that cut it out of the company after Beats sold a 51 per cent stake to HTC.

Commenting on the deal, Monster's CEO Noel Lee said, "What a deal for Jimmy and Dre! Now I'm thinking of what this means for Monster's valuation." Even after the split from Beats in 2011, Monster continued to create headphones. Ultimately, he said although that he has no regrets, he does wish that his company had gotten more out of the relationship.

"I feel that we weren't recognised," he said. "We got erased from the history of Beats. We were the founders. Most of the public is not even aware of Monster's participation and that the company went on to bigger and better things."

[Joe_Smith]

The general Liberal/Libertarian White Nationalist thesis is that central power exercised by whites would be almost as dangerous as government control by the Jews. But then...couldn't we apply this to the power wielded by big capital? Without the Judeo-capitalist millions and billions invested into the queer agenda, it simply would not exist.

http://www.theguardian.com/sustainab...g-gay-marriage

Corporate support for same-sex marriage: when the supreme court overturned Doma, Goldman Sachs flew an equality flag outside its New York headquarters. Photograph: Karen Bleirer/AFP/Getty

Not long ago, big companies ran from the gay-marriage debate.

In 2012, when North Carolina debated a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, not one Fortune 500 company headquartered in the state – they include Bank of America, Lowe's, Nucor, Duke Energy and VF, whose brands included North Face and Wrangler – took a stand on the issue.

In 2011, Target's chief executive, Gregg Steinhafel, said at the company's annual meeting that the big retailer would stay out of the debate over a proposed amendment to prohibit gay marriage in Minnesota. "Our position at this particular time is that we are going to be neutral on that particular issue, as we would be on other social issues that have polarizing points of view," Steinhafel said, awkwardly. His remarks disappointed many inside Target, which has an exemplary record when it comes to its own LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans) employees.

The tide has turned. Last year, when the supreme court pondered the fate of the Defense of Marriage Act (Doma), which barred same-sex couples from receiving federal marriage benefits, a friend-of-the-court brief urging the repeal of Doma was signed by nearly 300 employers, including such big brands as Apple, CBS, Citigroup, eBay, Facebook, Google, Marriott, Mars, Nike, Starbucks and Walt Disney.* Goldman Sachs flew an equality flag outside its downtown New York headquarters when the court overturned Doma.

Now, as the battleground shifts backs to the states, businesses have allied itself with supporters of gay marriage in Oregon and Indiana. In Oregon, a liberal-leaning state, you might expect a youth-oriented company like Nike to back marriage equality, and it has – with a $280,000 donation to the cause. The Portland Trail Blazers, meantime, became the first NBA team to back gay marriage.

More surprising is the role of two big companies in Indiana, a Republican stronghold. Cummins, the world's largest manufacturer of diesel engines, and Eli Lilly, the big US maker of insulin products, each gave $100,000 to Freedom Indiana, a coalition of businesses, community groups and faith leaders trying to keep a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage off the ballot this fall.

Unlike Target's Gregg Steinhafel, Cummins' vice-president and chief administrative officer Marya Rose didn't mince any words when talking about the issue.

The amendment to ban gay marriage, she told the state legislature earlier this month, "sends a negative message that Indiana is not a place that welcomes people of all backgrounds and it jeopardizes our ability to be competitive in global markets and to attract and retain top talent." This "message of intolerance", she went on, "has no place in a state that professes to treat all citizens with dignity".

As if that weren't enough, Rose said putting a referendum before the voters would cause a great deal of harm. "Debates like this pit neighbor versus neighbor, elected official versus elected official," she said. "This debate causes hate to be spewed across social media. We don't need that debate here – not in Indiana."


Rob Smith, the senior director of corporate responsibility at Eli Lilly, helped kick off the Freedom Indiana campaign last year. "Our values and our commitment to diversity require us to take a stand in opposing this amendment," said Smith, according to press reports.

The reaction to the company's stand has been mostly positive, an Eli Lilly spokesmen told me this week by email. "We strongly believe that a constitutional amendment prohibiting same-sex marriage is bad for business and bad for Indiana," said Greg Kueterman, director of corporate communications, citing the need to recruit and retain the best global talent.

Not all companies back gay marriage, of course. Willie Robertson, a star on the A&E reality show Duck Dynasty, was suspended from the program last year for making anti-gay remarks, but he was quickly reinstated after conservatives protested. The president of Chick-fil-A, which has donated to groups described as anti-gay, tweeted that it was "a sad day for our nation" after the supreme court overturned Doma.

Why have companies embraced marriage equality? One reason is that they are hearing from their own well organized LGBT workers and their supporters. "The network of (LGBT executives) and their allies is so much bigger today", says Bob Witeck, a Washington DC consultant who advises Fortune 500 companies including Marriott and American Airlines on LGBT issues. "When an issue arises, there's a group of people in senior positions who can make the business case for marriage equality."


Business is both reflecting and driving shifts in public opinion. Young people, in particular, support marriage equality, Witeck notes, and "people 35 and under are future customers and future employees."

There's no doubt where this story is going. Despite the waffling from Target's CEO, Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton signed a marriage equality bill into law last year. "You changed the course of history," Dayton told supporters at a raucous outdoor ceremony. As many Minnesotans know, Dayton is the great-grandson of George Dayton, the founder of Dayton's – the department store that later became Target.


*Other companies opposing Doma before the court include Alcoa, Cisco, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank, Exelon, Goldman Sachs, Intel, Johnson & Johnson, Levi Strauss, Microsoft, Morgan Stanley, Oracle, Pfizer, Qualcomm, REI, Twitter, UBS, Viacom and Xerox. [Mostly Jew-owned, but also some non-Jew owned.]

[Sam Emerson]

Originally Posted by Joe_Smith

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-0...ld-cars-go-die

Where The World's Unsold Cars Go To Die

Capitalist problem: Too many cars.

Communist problem: Car? You want car, comrade? Ha! Line forms on left, see you in fifteen years.

[Marin]

I don´t know if it´s logical to dismiss capitalism only because an specific car dealer hasn´t sold too many cars, but nobody can deny that capitalism has allowed the western civilization to flourish greatly, air travel, washing machines, tons of electrical devices, or the fact that I could go to a restaurant and have a meal that would make kings of the past jealous. This is all possible because of capitalism.

The problems we have today are simple, we have far too many collectivist and leftist people who hold too much power in governments, and they are the root of our problems, along with the fact of the prostitution of the U.S dollar by the FED, banks, etc, don´t contribute to our prosperity, and they violate the fundamental principle of capitalism, which is business without someone getting screwed.

We need currencies backed by tangible assets, maybe oil or natural gas. I would suggest to back currencies on work, like it was tried on Germany before WWII, all the wealth of a nation backed and sustained on productivity along with a free market economy.

P.D: English is my second language.

[Alex Linder]

What's the matter, Joe, did Kim Il Dung reject your immigration application?

[Alex Linder]

It doesn't do any good to discuss things at the level of disputed abstractions, which fits 'capitalism,' a term as contrarily used as socialism these days.

Better to talk of markets.

Markets work.

Should all things be subject to markets?

No.

Should everyday matters be subject to them?

Yes.

[Joe_Smith]

Originally Posted by Sam Emerson

Capitalist problem: Too many cars.

Nice way to put a massive waste of steel, rubber, and [specialized] labor hours. On top of that, these auto manufacturers would rather have these perfectly good cars rot in a parking lot over selling them at more affordable prices, because this would effect their artificially inflated "market value" of the car.

Market allocation means raw materials shift based on necessity and demand. In capitalism, they are allocated in abstract and wasteful ways. Thousands of tons of materials sitting in a massive car-dump = tons of materials not going towards infrastructure, upgrades, or other social and private necessities.

These cars weren't produced based on necessity. They weren't produced based on consumer demand. So why the fuck were they produced? And better yet, since they're already here, doesn't it make more sense to sell them at a discount, to at least break even? Just another mystery of the market.

But it's not so mysterious. Many big capitalists would rather burn down their factory over paying their workers better wages or selling their products at reasonable prices.

Capitalism is a wasteful system, both materially, time, and creativity wise.

When Soviet planners would over produce one material good and under produce another, Austrian school kikes jumped all over it. But what answer do they have when this happens in capitalism?

Communist problem: Car? You want car, comrade? Ha! Line forms on left, see you in fifteen years.

Furthermore, even if I choose to encounter your strawman (there are multiple alternatives to capitalism that aren't communism), one could argue that while you had to wait on average 10 years for a trebant in East Germany, in the United States it takes almost as many years for the average person to pay off their car loans and officially own their vehicle, all with the looming threat of repossession if for whatever reason you're not able to make your payments. http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/03/...ying-priority/

The immediate access to automobiles in modern capitalist societies are a product of easy credit and jewsury not actual buying power, which inevitably causes long term consequences. In other words, the average person being able to buy a car immediately is a Jewish created illusion and a carrot on a stick that will lead you straight into debt-interest slavery. If we were to eliminate usury-parasitism and institute responsible spending, it would take 10-15 years for the average American to save up to buy a car, and lord knows how much longer to buy a home.

[Marin]

Originally Posted by Joe_Smith

Nice way to put a massive waste of steel, rubber, and [specialized] labor hours. On top of that, these auto manufacturers would rather have these perfectly good cars rot in a parking lot over selling them at more affordable prices, because this would effect their artificially inflated "market value" of the car.

Market allocation means raw materials shift based on necessity and demand. In capitalism, they are allocated in abstract and wasteful ways. Thousands of tons of materials sitting in a massive car-dump = tons of materials not going towards infrastructure, upgrades, etc.

These cars weren't produced based on necessity. They weren't produced based on consumer demand. So why the fuck were they produced? And better yet, since they're already here, doesn't it make more sense to sell them at a discount, to at least break even? Just another mystery of the market.

But it's not so mysterious. Many big capitalists would rather burn down their factory over paying their workers better wages or selling their products at reasonable prices.

Capitalism is a wasteful system, both materially, time, and creativity wise.

When Soviet planners would over produce one material good and under produce another, Austrian school kikes jumped all over it. But what answer do they have when this happens in capitalism?

Furthermore, even if I choose to encounter your strawman, one could argue that while you had to wait on average 10 years for a trebant in East Germany, in the United States it takes almost as many years for the average person to pay off their car loans and officially own their vehicle, all with the looming threat of repossession if for whatever reason you're not able to make your payments. http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/03/...ying-priority/

The immediate access to automobiles in modern capitalist societies are a product of easy credit and jewsury not actual buying power, which is now reaping long term consequences

Just one question, who exactly should define necessity in any given society? I kinda like going to the movies, but what if big government decides that I only need a small TV and a state run channel?

[Marin]

Joe Smith starts the day early, having set his alarm clock (made in China), for 600 A.M.

While his coffee pot (made in China) is perking, he puts his blow dryer (made in Taiwan) to work and shaves with his electric razor (made in China).

He puts on a dress shirt (made in Taiwan), his designer jeans (made in Singapore), and a pair of tennis shoes (made in Korea).

After cooking up some breakfast in his new electric skillet (made in Philippines), he sits down to figure out on his calculator (made in Mexico), how much he can spend today.

After setting his watch (made in Switzerland) to the radio (made in China), he goes out, gets in his car (made in Germany) and goes looking - as he has been for months - for a good paying American job.

At the end of another discouraging and fruitless day, Joe decides to relax for a while.

He puts on a pair of sandals (made in China), pours himself a glass of wine (made in France), and turns on his TV (made in Japan)...

... and ponders again why he can't find a good paying American job.

I actually find this satire fun and telling at same time. I agree that there should be incentives for american corporations and business to hire and produce in America, tax reductions and other benefits.

I really hope you can find the way out for all the troubles that have arise because of the excessive greed of some bankers and politicians.

[Joe_Smith]

Originally Posted by Marin

Just one question, who exactly should define necessity in any given society? I kinda like going to the movies, but what if big government decides that I only need a small TV and a state run channel?

I support free enterprise when it comes to banalities like this. I understand the challenges of economic planning keeping up with the whims of the masses, but then again, they exist equally or greater in capitalist societies too.

For example, I think we can all objectively agree that in spite of Jewish political control and propaganda present in both public and private sector, the quality of entertainment on the BBC or PBS is far superior to the dogshit you see on Fox or ABC. With that said, HBO also produces pretty good entertainment albeit Jewy and subversive, so I would support both private and public sector competition in this regard.

The issue of gargantuan private sector waste should be debated by plebiscites or citizen councils. Companies that allocate 100 million dollars to make The Adventures Of Pluto Nash should be scrutinized beyond the box office and punished via tax penalties, in my view. But this should be decided by citizen referendums, not the central government on its own.

[Joe_Smith]

Originally Posted by Alex Linder

What's the matter, Joe, did Kim Il Dung reject your immigration application?

I want to live in North Korea about as much as you want to live in a libertarian paradise like Somalia. "Go live in North Korea" is not an adult response to criticism of unrestrained capitalism.

Even if I were to get on this level, your implications still fail. If we compared oranges to oranges, North Korea had a higher standard of living, faster recovery from the war, and greater economic growth than South Korea until the 1980's, even with the United States giving generous economic subsidies to the latter . I would like to see what position South Korea would be in today if its biggest trading partners like America, the EU, and Japan suddenly embargoed them or collapsed, like happened to North Korea after the fall of the USSR and liberalization of China.

[Joe_Smith]

Originally Posted by Marin

Joe Smith starts the day early, having set his alarm clock (made in China), for 600 A.M.

While his coffee pot (made in China) is perking, he puts his blow dryer (made in Taiwan) to work and shaves with his electric razor (made in China).

He puts on a dress shirt (made in Taiwan), his designer jeans (made in Singapore), and a pair of tennis shoes (made in Korea).

After cooking up some breakfast in his new electric skillet (made in Philippines), he sits down to figure out on his calculator (made in Mexico), how much he can spend today.

After setting his watch (made in Switzerland) to the radio (made in China), he goes out, gets in his car (made in Germany) and goes looking - as he has been for months - for a good paying American job.

At the end of another discouraging and fruitless day, Joe decides to relax for a while.

He puts on a pair of sandals (made in China), pours himself a glass of wine (made in France), and turns on his TV (made in Japan)...

... and ponders again why he can't find a good paying American job.

I actually find this satire fun and telling at same time. I agree that there should be incentives for american corporations and business to hire and produce in America, tax reductions and other benefits.

I really hope you can find the way out for all the troubles that have arise because of the excessive greed of some bankers and politicians.

Are you going to say these made in China products you seem to love, are of better quality or even that much cheaper? If you support globalization, why are you here?

While some of these products are cheaper, superficially, they aren't in the long-run. Comparing Western, white made products from the past to the made in China trash of today is like comparing a Rolex to those toy watches you used to get with a burger king happy meal. The falling quality of consumer products is caused by capitalist greed, and the only way to correct this is via state intervention that would prevent them from doing this, or make outsourcing very expensive.

Quality over quantity is an Aryan concept, while the opposite is a ghetto Jew one. Most whites, if given a choice, would rather invest in a more expensive refrigerator that will last them 50 years, over flimsy Taiwanese junk that gives you problems after 5.

I can tell you right now from my Dr Martens boots. The price of DM's hasn't changed much (probably gone up), yet the quality has plummeted since they moved their production facilities to China. The only thing capitalist globalization does is charge you more for inferior quality.

[Marin]

Originally Posted by Joe_Smith

Are you going to say these made in China products you seem to love, are of better quality or even that much cheaper? If you support globalization, why are you here?

I posted an analogy between the lack of american made products you find in your daily life and how it affects the average working or middle class in america. It was a satire.

[Crowe]

Regulated Capitalism can work, if its done in the correct way and for the right reasons. But most people would consider such a system "Socialism". The popular belief is anything other than free market globalism = Socialism.

According to the same logic, suggesting we should make American and buy American, and provide a platform where American products remain the most competitive in our own country would be "Socialism".

Socialism isn't against supply and demand, but it needs to be within a certain box to where things don't get completely out of hand. Things happening such as companies teaming together to artificially inflate the prices of their products by collectively manipulating the supply, etc. We know for a fact this is being done with gas prices. This is why someone needs to be the referee.

[Sam Emerson]

Originally Posted by Joe_Smith

Nice way to put a massive waste of steel, rubber, and [specialized] labor hours. On top of that, these auto manufacturers would rather have these perfectly good cars rot in a parking lot over selling them at more affordable prices, because this would effect their artificially inflated "market value" of the car.

What happens to these cars after their model year ends? I bet they sell them off to car rental companies. And the next model year they don't manufacture so many. Government industries can overproduce unwanted crap for decades. Just look at how many niggers are produced by welfare. Obsolete farm equipment with no demand.

Originally Posted by Joe_Smith

Furthermore, even if I choose to encounter your strawman (there are multiple alternatives to capitalism that aren't communism), one could argue that while you had to wait on average 10 years for a trebant in East Germany, in the United States it takes almost as many years for the average person to pay off their car loans and officially own their vehicle, all with the looming threat of repossession if for whatever reason you're not able to make your payments.

An abundance of easy credit is an intentional result of central bank policy. There were no seven year loans to buy a horse before central banking.

Without government encouraging debt the prices of homes and education would fall. Closing the borders would put further downward pressure on housing prices.

[Sam Emerson]

Originally Posted by Joe_Smith

The issue of gargantuan private sector waste should be debated by plebiscites or citizen councils. Companies that allocate 100 million dollars to make The Adventures Of Pluto Nash should be scrutinized beyond the box office and punished via tax penalties, in my view. But this should be decided by citizen referendums, not the central government on its own.

You use an example from the Jew movie industry to pander to WN but you're not limiting this policy to idiotic movies. Any business that had a really bad year would not only bear the costs of their failure, they'd be kicked in the head while they were down by heavy taxes imposed by the scumbags who would be drawn to these citizen councils like flies to shit, and no doubt heavily packed with public employees or their relatives who benefit from higher taxation.

[Sam Emerson]

Originally Posted by Crowe

Regulated Capitalism can work, if its done in the correct way and for the right reasons. But most people would consider such a system "Socialism". The popular belief is anything other than free market globalism = Socialism.

According to the same logic, suggesting we should make American and buy American, and provide a platform where American products remain the most competitive in our own country would be "Socialism".

Socialism has the collective attempt to manage business. That's nationalism. You set a few ground rules and then let the market work.

[Gibson]

Originally Posted by Joe_Smith

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-0...ld-cars-go-die

Where The World's Unsold Cars Go To Die

How do we know they're left to rot? How do we know they're not fresh off the ships, and waiting to be distributed to dealers? Or in the case of Sunderland, maybe waiting until they have a ship-full for export to Europe?

An economist might say we know there are not a large number of cars left to rot, because if a company makes many cars that no-one buys, that company will go bust.

The only thing that might enable them to make unwanted cars and not go bust is if they are bailed out by the government (as were Ford and GM), but that would be edging into communism. Go figure.

BTW,

Wikipedia (Links)

Sheerness

is the largest port in the UK for car imports and exports, total 400,000 cars per year (ref) - what you see in the picture above is probably the imports and exports for a week.

.

[Gibson]

Originally Posted by Joe_Smith

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-0...ld-cars-go-die

Where The World's Unsold Cars Go To Die

Unsurprisingly, this whole article is complete bullshit. See http://www.snopes.com/photos/automobiles/unsoldcars.asp