155 New Jobs To Be Created At New Manufacturing Operation In Russell Springs

Posted: Aug 9, 2013

Governor Steve Beshear announced Friday Dr. Schneider Automotive Systems Inc., a Germany-based automotive supplier, plans to establish a manufacturing operation in Russell Springs. The new plant will create 155 full-time jobs and entail a more than $29 million investment in Kentucky.

The announcement marks the third German-owned company to locate a new operation in Kentucky this year, all three of which serve the auto industry.

"Dr. Schneider Automotive Systems will only add to Kentucky's thriving automotive industry and foreign direct investment, which are both vital components of our growing economy," said Gov. Beshear. "We welcome Dr. Schneider to Russell Springs, and are excited to see 155 new jobs and an investment of more than $29 million in the Commonwealth."

The 85-year-old family enterprise is a pioneer in the processing of plastics and produces high-end vent and trim systems for top automotive original equipment manufacturers around the world. To meet increasing customer demand, the company is looking to establish its wholly-owned U.S. subsidiary in Russell Springs, where the plant will manufacture parts for companies such as Ford, GM, BMW, Mercedes, Volkswagen and more.

"At the end of an intensive selection process where we checked 69 locations, we decided to choose Russell Springs," said Wilhelm Wirth, member of the Dr. Schneider board of directors. "The decisive factors included the quality and expandability of the facility and the competitive location costs. The professional cooperation with the local and state business development departments confirmed our decision as well. We are convinced that at this location we will be able to work more efficiently for our current customers, including Mercedes, BMW and Ford, and that we can win new partners."

Kentucky has experienced tremendous success in foreign direct investment growth, adding nearly 100 new facilities over the past decade. In 2012, nearly 35 percent of all capital investment and almost 20 percent of new jobs announced in the manufacturing, service and technology sector were a result of foreign-owned companies. Kentucky maintains economic development offices in Hamburg, Germany and Tokyo, Japan, which work to cultivate new and existing relationships abroad for the Commonwealth.

The location of Dr. Schneider also further strengthens Kentucky's auto industry, which today boasts over 450 motor vehicle-related facilities across the state. Just last year, Kentucky's auto production numbers topped one million vehicles, the highest in five years. Year-to-date 2013, Kentucky ranks third in light vehicle production in the United States and first on a per capita basis.

http://www.lex18.com/news/155-new-jobs-to-be-created-at-new-manufacturing-operation-in-russell-springs/

Kentucky doesn't seem to have anything special that Ohio doesn't have, save for a big lag in industrial development due to the Civil War.

Yet Kentucky and most other Southern states, which are low-tax and 'right to work' (as opposed to leech) are becoming (in some cases, have become) the US industrial heartland, while a former center like Ohio languishes in high-tax, unionized oblivion.

Kentucky was only known for whiskey, coal, cancer and horse shit before midwestern states voted themselves out of the labor market with their big government policies. Hell, most Ohio industries couldn't even save themselves by moving across the river, due to union and government entanglement. Industry had to come to Kentucky indirectly via Berlin and Tokyo, for Pete's sake, while Dayton and Akron rot.

I mean, if there is a multi-generational, industrial labor force with industrial infrastructure out the ass (Ohio) next to a bunch of niggered-up tobacco pickers (Kentucky), and the industry ends up in the tobacco patch, then it wasn't some sort of bad luck that brought that about.

But that's what you want, so keep voting for 'protectionist' policies, Ohio!

The voters of Ohio decided two years ago to permanently screw the state.

SB5 was legislation which was signed into law which limited the collective bargaining rights of public unions. Essentially, it allowed for only wage negotiations and most other issues would have been taken out of the negotiating process.

All unions went nuts and got an initiative on the ballot to revoke this bill. The revocation measure won overwhelmingly. 63% voting for eliminating the restrictions imposed by the law.

So, at the end of the day, the retards of Ohio, in their infinite wisdom, voted to continue paying their public "servants" at pay rates double of their own, to continue to give them pension and health benefits mulitiple times what they enjoy and continue to allow their "servants" to have permanent job security.

Dumocrazy in action.

Lots of these plants are moving to the South.

In Alabama, we have Mercedes in Vance, Honda in Lincoln, Hyundai in Montgomery. There is a new Airbus plant opening in Mobile and KIA recently opened up a plant in West Point, GA.

Lot of good folks in Ohio, btw.

It's just that a third or more of the Whites are fools.

Kentucky doesn't seem to have anything special that Ohio doesn't have, save for a big lag in industrial development due to the Civil War.

Yet Kentucky and most other Southern states, which are low-tax and 'right to work' (as opposed to leech) are becoming (in some cases, have become) the US industrial heartland, while a former center like Ohio languishes in high-tax, unionized oblivion.

Kentucky was only known for whiskey, coal, cancer and horse shit before midwestern states voted themselves out of the labor market with their big government policies. Hell, most Ohio industries couldn't even save themselves by moving across the river, due to union and government entanglement. Industry had to come to Kentucky indirectly via Berlin and Tokyo, for Pete's sake, while Dayton and Akron rot.

I mean, if there is a multi-generational, industrial labor force with industrial infrastructure out the ass (Ohio) next to a bunch of niggered-up tobacco pickers (Kentucky), and the industry ends up in the tobacco patch, then it wasn't some sort of bad luck that brought that about.

But that's what you want, so keep voting for 'protectionist' policies, Ohio!

"niggered-up tobacco pickers (Kentucky)"? Ohio has Kentucky beat by light years when it comes to niggers.

Kentucky is not a rust belt state, and did not benefit from the Great Lakes and canal systems that made getting goods to the Atlantic coast easy. But Kentucky has a long history of industry. Beyond coal, tobacco and whiskey, Kentucky produces far more electricity than it uses (which gets sold on the eastern grid). All Corvettes since 1981. Lots of Toyotas and Ford trucks. Steel and chemicals. Sweet corn and soy beans.

Yes, Kentucky has Louisville, which has tons of niggers. But Ohio must have 20 (about 5 actually) such cities more niggery than Louisville that it has to drag along.

Edit: After I wrote that I did some calculations. Both Kentucky and Ohio are about 86.3% White. Ohio does clearly have more nigs, even more per square mile (343200 vs. 1,380,000 niggers, 8.49 vs. 30.8 niggers per square mile, KY vs. OH respectively).

There are millions of decent Whites in both states.

"niggered-up tobacco pickers (Kentucky)"? Ohio has Kentucky beat by light years when it comes to niggers.

Kentucky is not a rust belt state, and did not benefit from the Great Lakes and canal systems that made getting goods to the Atlantic coast easy. But Kentucky has a long history of industry. Beyond coal, tobacco and whiskey, Kentucky produces far more electricity than it uses (which gets sold on the eastern grid). All Corvettes since 1981. Lots of Toyotas and Ford trucks. Steel and chemicals. Sweet corn and soy beans.

All that makes my point, and more so, since you mentioned the lack of lake/ocean freight in Kentucky. The vast majority of heavy industry/assembly is latter day stuff, located there due to low taxes and low union activity.

I actually didn't know that about the electricity and the uranium rods from Paducah. It's a big deal, I now see.

Yes, Kentucky has Louisville, which has tons of niggers. But Ohio must have 20 (about 5 actually) such cities more niggery than Louisville that it has to drag along.

Edit: After I wrote that I did some calculations. Both Kentucky and Ohio are about 86.3% White. Ohio does clearly have more nigs, even more per square mile (343200 vs. 1,380,000 niggers, 8.49 vs. 30.8 niggers per square mile, KY vs. OH respectively).

There are millions of decent Whites in both states.

Well, I was exaggerating in that one adjective to make a point about economics. Those are great points regarding Ohio and Kentucky niggerdom. I am happily corrected.

Actually, I love Kentucky, and I think I've mentioned that on this board before. Good people. Kentucky is the opposite of Kennedy's quip about DC, that it's a city with Southern efficiency and Northern hospitality. I think in large measure Kentucky takes the best from both and melds them admirably into a reasonably coherent state--and that with an East/West thing going on, too. Tennessee is similar, but maybe less efficient.

In Kentucky, you get a summer that isn't tropical, and a real winter. But you don't get the Great Lakes/Great Plains arctic express winter that is reminiscent of Fairbanks, AK. You get some mountains. You don't get an ocean (or even a Great Lake), but you do get river access and plenty of coal, not to mention great rail and river access to the eastern seaboard, Chicago and the Gulf. You get a very good state university in UK. You get a lot of the genuinely progressive North Carolina-type infrastructure (highway/education/etc) without all the Colorado/Massachusetts-type illiberal craziness, since those types don't want to move to Kentucky. You get to be Southern and keep your teeth.

Attention Kentucky Convention & Visitors Bureau:

Feel free to use any of this material. :)

I had a roommate one time from Kentucky whose brother called Louisville 'Loserville,' and whenever we rode past a nigger neighborhood he'd say something about 'Brown Town'.

"niggered-up tobacco pickers (Kentucky)"? Ohio has Kentucky beat by light years when it comes to niggers.

Edit: After I wrote that I did some calculations. Both Kentucky and Ohio are about 86.3% White. Ohio does clearly have more nigs, even more per square mile (343200 vs. 1,380,000 niggers, 8.49 vs. 30.8 niggers per square mile, KY vs. OH respectively).

There are millions of decent Whites in both states.

Niggers per square mile...

That is one hell of a calculation.

Edit: After I wrote that I did some calculations. Both Kentucky and Ohio are about 86.3% White.



There is no way that Ohio is 86.3% White. Cincinnati, Dayton, Cleveland, Youngstown, Akron, Toledo and Columbus are packed with niggers. Towel heads, indians (the stinky curry-eating types) and pakis are also quite numerous.

The mexcrements are all over the place as well. Relying on any published "official" sources regarding messican numbers is not reliable.

If Ohio is even 75% White, then I'd be surprised.

Niggers per square mile...

That is one hell of a calculation.

NPSM? Ask a REALTOR®.

Russell Springs KY is a little over 93% White according to their profile.

Russell Springs KY is a little over 93% White according to their profile.

That's what I was wondering but too lazy to look up, thanks!

I will say Kentucky always intrigued me, but I never spent any time looking around. Just driving through on I-64, and I'd always get gas at the Ashland/Grayson exit (if I recall), just to hear the girls speak with their accent. These are a very different type than you find in Missouri. Same with Knoxville, from our rallies. Very different way about people from this area.

I have a super spreadsheet with the following information:

(State by State): Population, % White, OA IQ, White IQ, % jewish, % catholic, % nigger, % mexican, % other, % HS grad, % 4 yr degree.

% nigra:

Ohio 12% black White 83%
Kentucky 8% black White 88%
Georgia 30%
Louisiana 32%
Maryland 30%
S. Carolina 29%

I take a screenshot of the whole sheet and post here.

My mother was life-long friends with a couple from Kentucky: good, hard-working people, and the lady in particular was as sweet & gentle a soul imaginable. I've only been to Kentucky once when I was a kid: I remember we ooohed & ahhhed over how beautiful it was.

Kentucky doesn't seem to have anything special that Ohio doesn't have, save for a big lag in industrial development due to the Civil War.

Yet Kentucky and most other Southern states, which are low-tax and 'right to work' (as opposed to leech) are becoming (in some cases, have become) the US industrial heartland, while a former center like Ohio languishes in high-tax, unionized oblivion.

Kentucky was only known for whiskey, coal, cancer and horse shit before midwestern states voted themselves out of the labor market with their big government policies. Hell, most Ohio industries couldn't even save themselves by moving across the river, due to union and government entanglement. Industry had to come to Kentucky indirectly via Berlin and Tokyo, for Pete's sake, while Dayton and Akron rot.

I mean, if there is a multi-generational, industrial labor force with industrial infrastructure out the ass (Ohio) next to a bunch of niggered-up tobacco pickers (Kentucky), and the industry ends up in the tobacco patch, then it wasn't some sort of bad luck that brought that about.

But that's what you want, so keep voting for 'protectionist' policies, Ohio!


Yeah that's right, it's "the unions" that destroyed Detroit and Cleveland. :rolleyes: :rofl

This "Right To Work" is just a jew capitalist scam to screw over Workers Syndicates. Workers bargaining as a union or corporation is a necessity in order for such a concept like a MIDDLE CLASS to exist, if they do not then it's the individual against the boss, who for the most part would practice feudalism or slavery if they could get away with it in the Kwa.


The poorest states of America are mostly Right To Work states, while free bargaining (white) states have a far higher quality of health, etc because they get health care.

Berlin and Tokyo invest in Kentucky because states like that in America are a third world nation in comparison to the dignified and first world lives worthy of white men that workers in Germany have. They invest in Kentucky for the same reason America corporations invest in India or China. Do you want to live in a Right To Work country like Bangladesh, Leonard? So many jobs are created there every day, so many that even 9 year old kids have jobs! Long live globalization and jewish capital :rofl

The population of Georgia is estimated at 10,000,000.

3,000,000 nigras.

At least 1,000,000 Mexicans.

About 1,000,000 of God knows what.

I wouldn't be surprised to find out that ratio of non-Whites to Whites is 1 to 1.

Since the census considers everything White I think the state of Georgia is really about 50% White.

Kentucky sounds like heaven to me.

I was just in Missouri a few weeks ago.

I came up through Arkansas. The "boot heel" struck me as a very Southern area. I stopped in Hayti and Sikeston where I was introduced to SE Missouri BBQ.

There are a lot of Germans in St. Charles where I staying. In fact, I got a five hour lecture in German history while I was there. I didn't have the chance to venture into Northern Missouri, but I was told the area was "Midwestern."

Yeah that's right, it's "the unions" that destroyed Detroit and Cleveland. :rolleyes: :rofl

Before the theft of White earnings to fund layabouts (ie, welfare) became mandated everywhere, niggers migrated to where they could get the next best thing: in the unionized north. And your dumbass forebears sold out their White brethren to let them in the unions to forward the crazy, jew-promoted, devolved Christian, Workers of the World bullshit.

This "Right To Work" is just a jew capitalist scam to screw over Workers Syndicates.

So if government doesn't coerce workers and businesses to participate in a mutual fleecing that drives up local prices and leads to. . .any random, rusting midwestern hellhole, then that's a 'jew capitialist scam'. The egotistical self-delusion in this notion makes snake shakin' night down at the Pentecostal Holy Hut seem like a meeting of the Royal Society.

'Workers syndicates' = union gangsters, no matter how you dress it up.

Workers bargaining as a union or corporation is a necessity in order for such a concept like a MIDDLE CLASS to exist. . .

Except Southern and (many) western Whites have a higher standard of living, on average, because they have good wages and lower taxes--thanks to less government and union coercion--resulting in a lower cost structure, even with the increased burden of a large, perpetual non-White scam class.

I mean, Christ, the unionized utopias are the very states where the middle class is most under attack, the free states the least. What you're pushing is an inverted, pseudo-religious take on reality. You're making White men into niggers.

. . .if they do not then it's the individual against the boss, who for the most part would practice feudalism or slavery if they could get away with it in the Kwa.

Except the half of the country that isn't unionized is the half of the country where this doesn't happen. And they're trying to escape the union half the same way freedom lovers fled East Germany. It isn't just the weather.

See the Forbes net internal migration map, here: http://www.forbes.com/special-report/2011/migration.html .

I know this is like flashing a math book or dictionary at a religious zealot, but I feel obliged to try.

The poorest states of America are mostly Right To Work states, while free bargaining (white) states have a far higher quality of health, etc because they get health care.

Except Southern and (most) western fiscal positions are investment grade, while the Michigans and Californias teeter on bankruptcy. If you subtract the muds (niggers & spics) out of the former's statistics, you'll find Whites in those states do better than in the high tax, big government, unionized north--even with the permanent underclass of muds. The purported healthcare differential is similarly bogus.

In union-speak, gangster-style coercion = 'free bargaining'.

Berlin and Tokyo invest in Kentucky because states like that in America are a third world nation in comparison to the dignified and first world lives worthy of white men that workers in Germany have.

Berlin:

http://www.friendlyrentals.com/FR_imgs/blog/berlin-city-night.jpg

Lexington, KY:

http://www.visitlex.com/images/homepageimages/HPI_0816293379W3GdB8U3e.jpg

Dayton, OH:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_2Tvl-z6Unfo/RpAhZS-vJaI/AAAAAAAAAhE/ZY_Cg9FKJF4/s320/daveformayor+085.jpg

http://realdaytonohio.blogspot.com/

They invest in Kentucky for the same reason America corporations invest in India or China.

The question you should be asking is why they invest in Kentucky and not Ohio, which is a mere 300 feet away, with a pre-existing industrial workforce and infrastructure, and with better logistics.

Do you want to live in a Right To Work country like Bangladesh, Leonard? So many jobs are created there every day, so many that even 9 year old kids have jobs! Long live globalization and jewish capital :rofl

I already live in a Right To Work (ie, right not to be fleeced and antagonized by union scum) state: Always will, Lord willing and if the creek don't rise.

Joe, the difference between your position on economics and that of a religious maniac on God is that you substitute coerced gangsterism for The Most High. In Ohio and Kentucky, you have a latter-day East/West Germany scenario. They might as well rename the Ohio River der Spree. Truth is, Cincinnati is economically to Pyongyang as Lexington is to Seoul. That's ridiculous, but that's what you get when you put freedom next to big government. Rather than comporting with reality, they prefer to damn and repress normals so that their failures aren't so glaring. Facts don't sway religious fanatics.

Look at socialist Sweden: It's a fiasco across the board, contrary to generations of propaganda setting it forth as some sort of model. Perhaps it's a model of stupidity, of the path not to tread. The miracle is that the quality of the population was high enough so that the big government, high taxation, unionized, price-fixed mess didn't scuttle the people a quarter century ago. Think what they would have been and could be without the socialist boot on their neck! Now that the Swedes and other Scandinavians have opened the floodgates to non-White predation, their economic system has been shown-up as a sham, as having formerly succeeded in spite of itself. The same thing happened in northern US cities a hundred years ago, to predictably sorry results.

I was just in Missouri a few weeks ago.

I came up through Arkansas. The "boot heel" struck me as a very Southern area. I stopped in Hayti and Sikeston where I was introduced to SE Missouri BBQ.

There are a lot of Germans in St. Charles where I staying. In fact, I got a five hour lecture in German history while I was there. I didn't have the chance to venture into Northern Missouri, but I was told the area was "Midwestern."

I've only been through the bootheel once, I'm familiar with most of the rest of the state. The bootheel with swamps actually looks like Louisiana, it's almost amazing. It is very different from the rest of the state, looks like alligators should be living there. Missouri is mostly pasture and forests and rolling hills, the hills are what distinguish it from Illinois. People from Illnois will remark on how hilly it is, and people from Texas will remark on how lush it is - since Texas is very hot and burned up by comparison, in many places.

It's warmer and more verdant down there, in the Southern half of the state in general; you also see more christian stuff like signs with bible verses. The middle of the state is more forested, with a swath of Germans, wine country, and also you have your in-land boating/party culture in Osage beach and Mark Twain, a lot of people are really into that. Armadillos have made their way up to Adair county, 22 miles south of Iowa. I suppose it's more midwestern here, but it's not a huge difference, really. It's quite religious up here as well as in southern Missouri, but you can definitely see a difference in the type of people around, say, Joplin, compared with up here.

Before the theft of White earnings to fund layabouts (ie, welfare) became mandated everywhere, niggers migrated to where they could get the next best thing: in the unionized north. And your dumbass forebears sold out their White brethren to let them in the unions to forward the crazy, jew-promoted, devolved Christian, Workers of the World bullshit.I have a very limited amount of experience with Unions. I did belong to the IBEW for a short while. I signed up to do a job during a brief period where I was unemployed after the housing bubble crashed for the first time after 9-11.

It was an all White crew with the exception of one guy from Peru or somewhere.

One thing that I can say for the IBEW is that it conformed to a certain standard that seemed to keep people out that lacked a three digit IQ. Most darkies lack a three digit IQ.



So if government doesn't coerce workers and businesses to participate in a mutual fleecing that drives up local prices and leads to. . .any random, rusting midwestern hellhole, then that's a 'jew capitialist scam'. The egotistical self-delusion in this notion makes snake shakin' night down at the Pentecostal Holy Hut seem like a meeting of the Royal Society.

'Workers syndicates' = union gangsters, no matter how you dress it up.

Now this I will agree on 100%.

One of the things that they explained to me is that I must vote for some super liberal hack just because he supported the 'Unions'.

They wanted politicians that would guarantee them ALL local and state jobs.

So if government doesn't coerce workers and businesses to participate in a mutual fleecing that drives up local prices and leads to. . .any random, rusting midwestern hellhole, then that's a 'jew capitialist scam'. The egotistical self-delusion in this notion makes snake shakin' night down at the Pentecostal Holy Hut seem like a meeting of the Royal Society.

'Workers syndicates' = union gangsters, no matter how you dress it up.

Now this I will agree on 100%.

One of the things that they explained to me is that I must vote for some super liberal hack just because he supported the 'Unions'.

They wanted politicians that would guarantee them ALL local and state jobs.

Yep.

It's not that there aren't good White men with union cards. There are.

The union scheme undoes itself, everywhere and always, by pushing for a monopoly on labor that eventually prices itself out of the market and leaves its communities in ruin, not to mention the companies unfortunate (or foolish) enough not to escape ensnarement. Union evangelists believe in the mystic power of monopoly, so they seek a monopoly on labor to 'counter-balance' what they see as the tendency toward monolithic monopoly for business.

But real businesses don't thrive in monopoly. They flounder and fail in a free market. See AT&T and the Pennsylvania Railroad, both formerly enmeshed with the feds, not unlike the big jewish banks today. Real businesses (as opposed to pseudo-'private enterprise' that makes its living off of government regulation, which only regulates competition) collapse all the time, and the bigger and more integrated, the quicker the fall. Union True Believers refuse to accept this fact of life, so they promote the very big government regulations that allow bloated corporations to exist in the first place. Union activists are the agents of their own bogeymen.

Another reason unions are always pushing for illiberal candidates is because Big Government is their only steady employer, so the bigger, the better, from the union point of view. Think about it: The unions' biggest and only steady employers are corrupt organizations that confiscate the hard-earned wealth of the actually productive. And to hear the union zealots, they are the bulwark of the middle class . . .because what the middle class needs is $200,000/yr-for-life police dispatchers and school 'teachers'.

The rank-and-file look up to the crooked union leadership, who are screwing these regular Joes along with their communities, and pine to be one of the 'big guys' in the union. They're like niglets who believe they're going to bling it up in the NBA, but of course the super-majority never will.

The whole union connivance is a crooked snake level of crooked, predicated on a crazy religion level of crazy.

If you grew up in Toledo or Fort Wayne, etc, and you're in a trade or other union position, there's not much that you, yourself, can do about unions. You were, in all likelihood, born into it. If you want to work for a railroad (outside of management) pretty much anywhere, or as a longshoreman, etc, then you have to join a union. That's just the way things are, currently.

But the union humpers would have you believe that if you don't go off the cliff with the union, in body and especially in soul, then you're some sort of traitor or morally bankrupt. Again, this is another crazy religion aspect of unions.

You don't have to short-circuit your brain about the circumstances of your condition. That's what cults and jews demand.

Are you going to tell us how union gains come from suppressing non-union wages?

Are you going to tell us how union gains come from suppressing non-union wages?

I'd phrase it as the suppression of non-union wages is a consequence of union manipulation.

Basically, unions are a government-backed cartel that raise prices by limiting the availability of labor. Non-union workers are forced into the non-union labor market, where too many mouths vie for the scraps from the union table. That's the supply side. The demand side consequence is that less labor tends to be employed across the board in union industries because of the higher labor costs. Unions are inefficient every which way, not to mention their erecting an artificial division within society.

So non-union members get the shaft both ways, being either locked-out or tending to be priced-out.

I googled 'unions suppress non-union wage' and found this, which I've skimmed. It seems to be a thorough primer, at a glance.

Labor Unions
by Morgan O. Reynolds

Although labor unions have been celebrated in folk songs and stories as fearless champions of the downtrodden working man, this is not how economists see them. Economists who study unions—including some who are avowedly prounion—analyze them as cartels that raise wages above competitive levels by restricting the supply of labor to various firms and industries.

Many unions have won higher wages and better working conditions for their members. In doing so, however, they have reduced the number of jobs available in unionized companies. That second effect occurs because of the basic law of demand: if unions successfully raise the price of labor, employers will purchase less of it. Thus, unions are a major anticompetitive force in labor markets. Their gains come at the expense of consumers, nonunion workers, the jobless, taxpayers, and owners of corporations.

According to Harvard economists Richard Freeman and James Medoff, who look favorably on unions, “Most, if not all, unions have monopoly power, which they can use to raise wages above competitive levels” (1984, p. 6). Unions’ power to fix high prices for their members’ labor rests on legal privileges and immunities that they get from government, both by statute and by nonenforcement of other laws. The purpose of these legal privileges is to restrict others from working for lower wages. As antiunion economist Ludwig von Mises wrote in 1922, “The long and short of trade union rights is in fact the right to proceed against the strikebreaker with primitive violence.” Interestingly, those who are expected to enforce the laws evenhandedly, the police, are themselves heavily unionized.

U.S. unions enjoy many legal privileges. Unions are immune from taxation and from antitrust laws. Companies are legally compelled to bargain with unions in “good faith.” This innocent-sounding term is interpreted by the National Labor Relations Board to suppress such practices as Boulwarism, named for a former General Electric personnel director. To shorten the collective bargaining process, Lemuel Boulware communicated the “reasonableness” of GE’s wage offer directly to employees, shareholders, and the public. Unions also can force companies to make their property available for union use.

Once the government ratifies a union’s position as representing a group of workers, it represents them exclusively, whether or not particular employees want collective representation. In 2002, unions represented about 1.7 million waged and salaried employees who were not union members. Also, union officials can force compulsory union dues from employees—members and nonmembers alike—as a condition for keeping their jobs. Unions often use these funds for political purposes—political campaigns and voter registration, for example—unrelated to collective bargaining or to employee grievances, despite the illegality of this under federal law. Unions are relatively immune from payment of tort damages for injuries inflicted in labor disputes, from federal court injunctions, and from many state laws under the “federal preemption” doctrine. Nobel laureate Friedrich A. Hayek summed it up as follows: “We have now reached a state where [unions] have become uniquely privileged institutions to which the general rules of law do not apply” (1960, p. 267).

Labor unions cannot prosper in a competitive environment. Like other successful cartels, they depend on government patronage and protection. Worker cartels grew in surges during the two world wars and the Great Depression of the 1930s. Federal laws—the Railway Act of 1926 (amended in 1934), the Davis-Bacon Act of 1931, the Norris-LaGuardia Act of 1932, the National Labor Relations Act of 1935, the Walsh-Healy Act of 1936, the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, various war labor boards, and the Kennedy administration’s encouragement of public-sector unionism in 1962—all added to unions’ monopoly power.

Most unions in the private sector are in crafts and industries that have few companies or that are concentrated in one region of the country. This makes sense. Both factors—few employers and regionally concentrated employers—make organizing easier. Conversely, the large number of employers and the regional dispersion of employers sharply limit unionization in trade, services, and agriculture. A 2002 unionization rate of 37.5 percent in the government sector, more than four times the 8.5 percent rate in the private sector, further demonstrates that unions do best in heavily regulated, monopolistic environments. Even within the private sector, the highest unionization rates (23.8 percent) are in transportation (airlines, railroads, trucking, urban transit, etc.) and public utilities (21.8 percent), two heavily regulated industries.

What have been the economic consequences of unions? In 2002, full-time nonunion workers had usual weekly earnings of $587, 21 percent lower than the $740 earned by union members. H. Gregg Lewis’s 1985 survey of two hundred economic studies concluded that unions caused their members’ wages to be, on average, 14–15 percent higher than wages of similarly skilled nonunion workers. Other economists—Harvard’s Freeman and Medoff, and Peter Linneman and Michael Wachter of the University of Pennsylvania—claimed that the union premium was 20–30 percent or higher during the 1980s. In a recent National Bureau of Economic Analysis study, David Blanchflower and Alex Bryson found a union wage differential of 18 percent, a relatively stable premium from 1973 through 1995.

The wage premium varies by industry and stage of the business cycle. Unions representing garment workers, textile workers, white-collar government workers, and teachers seem to have little impact on wages. But wages of unionized mine workers, building trades people, airline pilots, merchant seamen, postal workers, teamsters, rail workers, and auto and steel workers exceed wages of similarly skilled nonunion employees by 25 percent or more. During the job boom of the late 1990s, the union premium eroded, following a historical pattern. Union wage agreements tend to be relatively rigid for three years, so gains lag behind the more responsive and flexible nonunion sector during a boom. The reverse happens during an employment slump like that of the early 2000s because nonunion wage growth slumps as hiring weakens, while union wage gains march on.

The wage advantage enjoyed by union members results from two factors. First, monopoly unions raise wages above competitive levels. Second, nonunion wages fall because workers priced out of jobs by high union wages move into the nonunion sector and bid down wages there. Thus, some of the gains to union members come at the expense of those who must shift to lower-paying or less desirable jobs or go unemployed.

Despite considerable rhetoric to the contrary, unions have blocked the economic advance of blacks, women, and other minorities. That is because another of their functions, once they have raised wages above competitive levels, is to ration the jobs that remain. The union can discriminate on the basis of blood relationships or skin color rather than auctioning off (openly selling) the valuable jobs to the highest-bidding applicants. Because craft unions such as the carpenters’ and railway unions have had more monopoly control over wage rates and hiring practices than industrial unions such as the auto and steel workers have had, craft unions have had more opportunities to exclude minority workers. Industrial unions have had to organize whoever was hired, and industrial companies have hired large numbers of black workers. The degree of racial discrimination exercised by union officials depends on their ability and willingness to exclude. For example, leaders at the local shop level facing contested elections and turnover in office cannot stray far from median membership preferences, while insulated top union leaders have more discretion.

Economist Ray Marshall, although a prounion secretary of labor under President Jimmy Carter, made his academic reputation by documenting how unions excluded blacks from membership in the 1930s and 1940s. Marshall also wrote of incidents in which union members assaulted black workers hired to replace them during strikes. During the 1911 strike against the Illinois Central, noted Marshall, whites killed two black strikebreakers and wounded three others at McComb, Mississippi. He also noted that white strikers killed ten black firemen in 1911 because the New Orleans and Texas Pacific Railroad had granted them equal seniority. Not surprisingly, therefore, black leader Booker T. Washington opposed unions all his life, and W. E. B. DuBois called unions the greatest enemy of the black working class. Another interesting fact: the “union label” was started in the 1880s to proclaim that a product was made by white rather than yellow (Chinese) hands. More generally, union wage rates, union-backed requirements for a license to practice various occupations, and union-backed labor regulations such as the minimum wage law and the Davis-Bacon Act continue to reduce opportunities for black youths, females, and other minorities.

The monopoly success of private-sector unions, however, has brought their decline. The silent, steady forces of the marketplace continually undermine them. Linneman and Wachter, along with economist William Carter, found that the rising union wage premium was responsible for up to 64 percent of the decline in unions’ share of employment in the last twenty years. The average union wage premium for railroad workers over similarly skilled nonrailroad workers, for example, increased from 32 percent to 50 percent between 1973 and 1987; at the same time, employment on railroads declined from 520,000 to 249,000. By 2002, railroad employment had slipped to 216,000, down 13 percent since 1987, while total nonfarm employment grew 26 percent during the same period. Increased wage premiums also caused declines in union employment in construction, manufacturing, and communications. The silent, steady forces of the marketplace continually undermine labor cartels.

In recent decades, union representation of workers has declined in all private industries in the United States. A major reason is that employees do not like unions. According to a Louis Harris poll commissioned by the AFLCIO in 1984, only one in three U.S. employees would vote for union representation in a secret ballot election. The Harris poll found, as have other surveys, that nonunion employees are more satisfied than union workers with job security, recognition of job performance, and participation in decisions that affect their jobs. And the U.S. economy’s evolution toward smaller companies, the South and West, higher-technology products, and more professional and technical personnel continues to erode union membership.

In the United States, union membership in the private sector peaked at 17 million in 1970 and had fallen by nearly half—to 8.8 million—by 2002. Barring new legislation, such as a congressional proposal to ban the hiring of nonunion replacement workers, private-sector membership will likely fall from 8.5 percent to 5–6 percent by 2010, no higher than the percentage a hundred years ago. While the unionization rate in government jobs may decline slightly from 37.5 percent, public-sector unions are on schedule to claim an absolute majority of union members within the next few years, thereby transforming a historically private-sector labor movement into a primarily government one. Asked in the 1920s what organized labor wanted, union leader Samuel Gompers allegedly answered, “More.” Today’s union leader would probably answer, “More government.” That answer further exposes the deep, permanent conflict between union members and workers in general that inevitably arises when union-represented employees are paid monopoly prices for their services.

Assuming that unions continue to decline, what organizations might replace them? “Worker associations” that lack legal privileges and immunities and that must produce services of value to get members may fill the need. Such voluntary worker associations could negotiate labor contracts, serve as clearinghouses for workers to learn what their best alternatives are, monitor administration of fringe benefit plans, and administer training and benefit plans. Worker associations could also institute legal proceedings against collusion by employers, as the Major League Baseball Players’ Association does so successfully for free agents. Such services could be especially valuable to the immigrant, minority, and female workers now dominating entry into today’s labor force.

http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/LaborUnions.html


Brain dead final sentence, concluding with the weakest possible point. White men are the only humanoids on the planet who have the capacity to build a civilization that isn't a hellish anthill--and then only some Whites can do that. Kowtowing to fantasy illiberals is a variety of the Republican error of courting nigger (and now spic) votes, which they've failed at since the 50s. It's a loser strategy forwarded by cowards, fools and saboteurs.

Free enterprise raises all boats. Unions weld them to the dock at low tide, drowning the hapless of every stripe 6 hours later. Muds don't like succeeding on merits? Fuck'em.

Before the theft of White earnings to fund layabouts (ie, welfare) became mandated everywhere, niggers migrated to where they could get the next best thing: in the unionized north. And your dumbass forebears sold out their White brethren to let them in the unions to forward the crazy, jew-promoted, devolved Christian, Workers of the World bullshit.

"Welfare layabouts" are made by the system and your capitalists, it has nothing to do with having a social system.

I've argued this with Linder many times, and now with you. Government social programs are the only thing keeping workers from killing their bosses and taking over the factories. It's a way for big capital to pass off the wages required to pay for even basic necessities, to the tax payer. And although some rich people do pay taxes, it's nothing in comparison to the profits they reap from this new system.

Concessions such as welfare, medicare, disability and other government programs are the only reason why Bolshevism (the traditional type, not cultural Marxism) today is no longer a looming threat in the West. Many of the concerns Communists had in the 1920's and 30's were legitimate and did need to be addressed, which is why Third Way economics attempt to bridge gaps between worker and manager as mutually dependent entities.

By allowing workers syndicates, professional syndicates, and managerial syndicates to come to the table and come into a rational and ethical relationship with the racial State as the moderator, based on mutual respect and racial comeraderie you avoid the destruction of the nation via internal dispute.


So if government doesn't coerce workers and businesses to participate in a mutual fleecing that drives up local prices and leads to. . .any random, rusting midwestern hellhole, then that's a 'jew capitialist scam'. The egotistical self-delusion in this notion makes snake shakin' night down at the Pentecostal Holy Hut seem like a meeting of the Royal Society.

Prices are the same or more expensive now despite the freezing of wages and globalization of industry. While a pair of nike's costs pennies for children to produce in the third world, you still pay 150 bucks for the latest models at the shoe store, often with the credit card. Jew plastic usury cards have benefitted big Jew capital as much as the loaners, as it gives non-existent purchasing power to underpaid and exploited working people.

Those rusting midwestern hellholes are what they are because cheaper industrial opportunities are available in China and India. However, prices have barely budged, and everything is now disposable. Products made by union labor have always been superior, even in the middle ages with the Guilds. The French Revolution was literally a grab by Jewish merchants to undermine the craft guilds. Jews wanted to import cheaply made furniture, for example, to France but they did not meet Guild price or quality standards. So the Jews launched a "Revolution" that later effectively BANNED workers guilds, flooded the market with imported and disposable crap, and when the guild compettition was neutralized charged as much or more with none of the quality.

The real myth is that big capital is some kind of victim with only good intentions. If you can't trust an entity with a discernible face that can be punished if need be, like a state, how in God's name can you trust faceless money whose sole expressed goal is to make as much money as possible at the expense of anything and anyone.



'Workers syndicates' = union gangsters, no matter how you dress it up.

Often workers unions in the cultural Marxist west have been victims of Jewish or Bolshevik infiltration. But the idea of a check and balance against capitalism is a good one, as well as very basic part of the history of Western civilization (as I mentioned before, the power of the Guilds before the Jewish and Judeo-cratic led revolutions of the 18th and 19th centuries).



Except Southern and (many) western Whites have a higher standard of living, on average, because they have good wages and lower taxes--thanks to less government and union coercion--resulting in a lower cost structure, even with the increased burden of a large, perpetual non-White scam class.

Most Southern whites are working mcJobs. The higher standards are more likely due to Southerners having more segregated and homogenous towns and cities, than anything to do with taxes.

There's no doubt that Montana and North Dakota (states with the lowest tax rates in America) are nicer to live than New York City or Chicago. But that has nothing to do with unions. Anyone who argues different, is still suffering from Conservatitis . To argue from such a perspective is the same one as how the cultural Marxists debate: it's not a problem of race, it's social structure .

It would be far better to compare places with high white populations and also government regulation, like Portland. Portland, despite the faggy left-leaning cultural marxism, is still unwillingly very white and with a lot of government intervention. It also has higher scores of health care, larger middle class, and other proofs of economic well-being compared to low-tax, corporate-friendly Southern cities.

Whites work best in socialist economies. This is a historically proven fact only Anglo-Americans seem to be allergic to.


I mean, Christ, the unionized utopias are the very states where the middle class is most under attack, the free states the least. What you're pushing is an inverted, pseudo-religious take on reality. You're making White men into niggers.

Yes having a union and bargaining for wages and health care is something for niggers. You're dead wrong.

The people trying to turn whites into niggers are fiscal neo-cons like yourself trying to enforce failed enlightenment Jewish and British theories, even when they have shown to create massive backlash, national weakness, and incredible amounts of waste. You want white workers to be exploited wage-slaves, and sing Zippity Doo-Dah like Uncle Remus in Songs of the South while it happens.

The automobile industry in the USA failed for two reasons. 1) the massive influx of negro workers and 2) the gross incompetence of its CEO's, who are beneficieries of capitalist nepotism or Harvard egg heads that would shriek if they had to work on a car. If the white workers of General Motors got together to plan a car that ordinary people would like, their profits would shoot through the roof.

The workers know cars, the eggheads on top are too busy cutting corners (in regards to quality of materials as well as appreciation of workers) which eventually catches up to you. Then they go ahead and blame "unions" for their own fuck ups.


Except the half of the country that isn't unionized is the half of the country where this doesn't happen. And they're trying to escape the union half the same way freedom lovers fled East Germany. It isn't just the weather.

Thanks Ronald Reagan (and his cabin composed of Jewish trotskyites). A large percentage of East Germans are to this day nostalgic for communist Germany. Freedom lovers who fled to West Germany were looking for the promises of gold toilets, heroin, Levi jeans, and The Beatles, not for some abstract 'Kwan principle.

Not saying Bolshevism was a good thing, but even today we get too see the spiritual and moral gap between West and East Germans. It is a pathetic irony that Bolshevism was better at preserving some Aryan instincts like tribalism and community than your Judeo-Capitalism did, with its open gateway to Cultural Marxism.


See the Forbes net internal migration map, here: http://www.forbes.com/special-report/2011/migration.html .

Straw man. All I see, for the most part, is whites fleeing niggers and other muds.


I know this is like flashing a math book or dictionary at a religious zealot, but I feel obliged to try.

You can insult me all you want, but the reality is that we are on 2 different planes. Your arguments focus around economics and yet ignore race. You want to blame white worker's unions for the destruction of industrial heartlands like Detroit or Cleveland. Your very British and Judaic worship of the rich blinds you to the reality of niggers.


Except Southern and (most) western fiscal positions are investment grade, while the Michigans and Californias teeter on bankruptcy. If you subtract the muds (niggers & spics) out of the former's statistics, you'll find Whites in those states do better than in the high tax, big government, unionized north--even with the permanent underclass of muds. The purported healthcare differential is similarly bogus.

So white working men are the reason for California and Michigan teetering on bankruptcy? Give me a break.


In union-speak, gangster-style coercion = 'free bargaining'.



Berlin:

http://www.friendlyrentals.com/FR_imgs/blog/berlin-city-night.jpg

Lexington, KY:

http://www.visitlex.com/images/homepageimages/HPI_0816293379W3GdB8U3e.jpg

Dayton, OH:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_2Tvl-z6Unfo/RpAhZS-vJaI/AAAAAAAAAhE/ZY_Cg9FKJF4/s320/daveformayor+085.jpg

http://realdaytonohio.blogspot.com/


What is your point with all these pictures? Are neon lights and professional advertisement photographs your litmus test for a place that is nice to live? Why don't you move to Jew York then?


The question you should be asking is why they invest in Kentucky and not Ohio, which is a mere 300 feet away, with a pre-existing industrial workforce and infrastructure, and with better logistics.

Because the labor is cheaper. They invest there for the same reason they invest in China.

Now answer me this Leonard, why don't you pack your bags and move to a place where you can be 'free' from those white working men who stand up for the value of their work, that oppress you so much?

How's Bangladesh or Belize sound? :D


I already live in a Right To Work (ie, right not to be fleeced and antagonized by union scum) state: Always will, Lord willing and if the creek don't rise.

Joe, the difference between your position on economics and that of a religious maniac on God is that you substitute coerced gangsterism for The Most High. In Ohio and Kentucky, you have a latter-day East/West Germany scenario. They might as well rename the Ohio River der Spree (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spree). Truth is, Cincinnati is economically to Pyongyang as Lexington is to Seoul. That's ridiculous, but that's what you get when you put freedom next to big government. Rather than comporting with reality, they prefer to damn and repress normals so that their failures aren't so glaring. Facts don't sway religious fanatics.

More Cold War bullshit.

I am heartily against Bolshevism, but your point is an attack on the planned economy. I don't agree with many aspects of Communist economics (especially the ban on small business, which I believe is inherently good as long as Jewish monopolies and very large corporations are destroyed), but even if you want to argue Communism vs Capitalism , the reality destroys the neo-con myths.

In the 50's, 60's , and well into the 70's, North Korea's economy grew at a faster rate than South Korea's across the board. Standard of living was better in North Korea, even though the growth was focused on heavy industry , in terms of the common mans access to health care and consumer products. It was only in the 1980's that South Korea, at least in cold hard numbers, surpassed North Korea. But this was due mostly to the reduction of Soviet subsidies, while American preferential aid and investment to South Korea was not affected.

The same was true in East vs West Germany. And this was considering the fact that West Germany had all of Germany's industrial base in tact, while East Germany was utterly destroyed by the Allies. East German living standards began to wane in the 1980's, granted, but it was nowhere near as bad as neo-cons wanted it to be.

The reality is that the majority who lived in East Germany still think it was better to what they have now, and this is in one of the wealthiest countries in the world: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/homesick-for-a-dictatorship-majority-of-eastern-germans-feel-life-better-under-communism-a-634122.html


Look at socialist Sweden: It's a fiasco across the board, contrary to generations of propaganda setting it forth as some sort of model. Perhaps it's a model of stupidity, of the path not to tread. The miracle is that the quality of the population was high enough so that the big government, high taxation, unionized, price-fixed mess didn't scuttle the people a quarter century ago. Think what they would have been and could be without the socialist boot on their neck! Now that the Swedes and other Scandinavians have opened the floodgates to non-White predation, their economic system has been shown-up as a sham, as having formerly succeeded in spite of itself. The same thing happened in northern US cities a hundred years ago, to predictably sorry results.

So you are blaming economics for the fact that niggers and invaders abuse white ways of life. By that definition, then you should also support gun control, because giving niggers easy access to guns would increase gun crime.

Here's a question for all you free-market capitalists, where would you rather live:

Cuba, which despite its majority negro population, has low crime rates, high scores in health care, and literally reaps the highest potential of negroes with its education system. The white minority population of Cuba also has some of the most doctors amongst its ranks, and they are sought after and invited to treat people in all sorts of third world countries. Against all the odds, little niggerfied Cuba has fought wars abroad, such as one against South Africa, and won. Regardless of their side, pragmatically, one can look at Cuba as a very powerful argument for planned economies in terms of historical relevance and stretching out the few resources (human and natural) you have to the furthest extent.


What can be done with a country rich in human and natural resources? I would recommend looking at life, in culture, spirit and economics, in the Third Reich, then compare it to the disgrace of all those depression era Americans starving to death in front of jewish owned boutiques full of rotting food nobody could afford at the very same time.


-or-

Any nigger infested city of "free" America? Or even comparable Caribbean islands with "Free" economies like Haiti or Dominican Republic?

If a planned economy, blockaded from the world and virtually self-sufficient compared to any given Western country, can achieve what it has in Cuba, with a negro population that has an average IQ of 85, what heights can white people achieve if we took a few lessons from the overwhelmingly white Cuban central committee?

Here's a question for all you free-market capitalists, where would you rather live:

Cuba, which despite its majority negro population, has low crime rates, high scores in health care, and literally reaps the highest potential of negroes with its education system. The white minority population of Cuba also has some of the most doctors amongst its ranks, and they are sought after and invited to treat people in all sorts of third world countries. Against all the odds, little niggerfied Cuba has fought wars abroad, such as one against South Africa, and won. Regardless of their side, pragmatically, one can look at Cuba as a very powerful argument for planned economies in terms of historical relevance and stretching out the few resources (human and natural) you have to the furthest extent.


What can be done with a country rich in human and natural resources? I would recommend looking at life, in culture, spirit and economics, in the Third Reich, then compare it to the disgrace of all those depression era Americans starving to death in front of jewish owned boutiques full of rotting food nobody could afford at the very same time.


-or-

Any nigger infested city of "free" America? Or even comparable Caribbean islands with "Free" economies like Haiti or Dominican Republic?

If a planned economy, blockaded from the world and virtually self-sufficient compared to any given Western country, can achieve what it has in Cuba, with a negro population that has an average IQ of 85, what heights can white people achieve if we took a few lessons from the overwhelmingly white Cuban central committee?


Too bad those enlightened niggers enriched by Communism do not feel the same way as you. They will attempt to float over here to one of the worst of the worst nigger Urban areas in the nation by any means necessary. Castro plays hell just trying to keep them over there.

Maybe we should ask one of those guys the same question.

And this was AFTER he sent the worst of the lot our way.

Exactly what is it that Cuba is self-sufficient with? Growing niggers? We are pretty good at that ourselves.

Don't think about forming a union. Just keep your mouth shut, do your 80 hrs. a week, and be grateful for your $9.00 per hr.

Just keep repeating: freedom of association on the part of people who actually do the actual work = communism. (Collective bargaining is oppressive.) While pan-earth free trade agreements by billionaires to force wages down and keep themselves farting through silk = liberation.

Keep busting your hump and blowing your disks with no health insurance and no money in your pittance to pay for it, no future, no stability, no solid ground to build a family or a society on (there really is "no such thing as society," these days), and no right, in "right to work" land, to dream of asking for these things. Tug your forelock and keep your head down.

Hey boy! Didn't you know that's what "right to work" is about? It means, if there is a job, that you have the right to work paycheck to paycheck, to help put billions in the pockets of kikes. And that lazy greedy paycheck part is still there only because the billionaires haven't yet succeeded in getting rid of the bete noir of all serious capitalists: the 13th Amendment to the Constitution (no slavery).

Quick - start chanting again that the only alternative to private totalitarianism is totalitarian communism. And that the reason Detroit failed is not because of niggers, but because of laziness and a lack of personal responsibility and worker greed. They actually wanted to be paid enough to live on while they worked, and actually got together to bargain for it. We can never hear enough how it's that unbridled arrogance and lack of realism that's responsible for Detroit going under.

Yes, tell some more tall ones about auto workers making $200,000 per yr. for life, and how your union organizer is standing in the way of your personally bargaining for a great high-paying contract with your boss and how this interference between two equals is communism. And while you're at it - just for old times sake - throw in one about the black welfare momma who drives around in three Cadillacs that she bought by selling her food stamps.

Tell 'em quick, though, because otherwise someone might figure out that locating industrial plants in areas of "niggered-up tobacco pickers (Kentucky)" is not proof of those areas' superiority; it actually means these areas are the nearest Western equivalent to Bangladesh: full of dumb, disorganized serviles who will take any form of abuse to have the illusion of meaning and a future. Admitting this would not only hurt our American pride, it would also be like really negative and rude and unhelpful, dude.

Tell these old chestnuts of the bat-dip right-wing quick - because we have to get back to work: if we get overtime this month, maybe we can make at least part of our car payment.

Let's all fall down and worship the international hebes and their billions of shekels made of our blood, sweat, and tears. To do otherwise is to be a socialist, like that notorious character Adolf Hitler.

I wonder how easy a sell laissez-faire capitalism would be to the average Golden Dawn member. Guess we'll have to get Bryan Caplan on that right away.

Too bad those enlightened niggers enriched by Communism do not feel the same way as you. They will attempt to float over here to one of the worst of the worst nigger Urban areas in the nation by any means necessary. Castro plays hell just trying to keep them over there.

The logic is very simple: why live in Cuba where the white man makes you produce or contribute something to earn your keep, when you can live in America where you have to do nothing what so ever and live like a king?

Not to mention easy access to white women, bling bling , pot, and every other banal bullshit Jews bait nigger instincts with. America even with its white majority is more niggerfied, spiritually, than Cuba.

In America, Cuban niggers who wash up on our shores get treated better than natives, by government decree. Read it for yourself http://cubantriangle.blogspot.com/2010/12/federal-benefits-are-safe-and.html



Maybe we should ask one of those guys the same question.

And this was AFTER he sent the worst of the lot our way.

Exactly what is it that Cuba is self-sufficient with? Growing niggers? We are pretty good at that ourselves.


Cuba is able to feed, clothe, and keep their black population relatively civilized with its system, even though it is economically blockaded. What would happen if Detroit or LA did not have federal funding from America's whites? What would THOSE shitholes look like?

What the white men of Cuba's central committee have done with their niggers is a model and worthy of commending. All you recovering neo-cons that don't see it are letting your ideology cloud your judgement of results. I don't give a shit about Bolshevism or capitalism, I despise both for different reasons, but I give credit where it is due, because conceding a point to either will not shake my views as they are based on race and soul, not on phoney baloney 2-sides-of-the-same-coin cold war politics.

To me America is as bad as the USSR ever was, and life in both countries was not as radically different as some of you raised on GI Joe and Captain America think it is. The only big difference i can see is that Soviet bureaucrats after the mass Jew exodus to America from the Eastern Bloc in the 1950's and 60's, had good intentions, while American planners were mostly subversive kikes and subjugated Anglo lap dogs.

The logic is very simple: why live in Cuba where the white man makes you produce or contribute something to earn your keep, when you can live in America where you have to do nothing what so ever and live like a king?So your argument for Socialism while trying not to argue for Socialism is that for American nigger's we have become more Socialist than Cuba?

Not to mention easy access to white women, bling bling , pot, and every other banal bullshit Jews bait nigger instincts with. America even with its white majority is more niggerfied, spiritually, than Cuba. Touche. But that is just because they have already bred all the White folks out of Cuba.

In America, Cuban niggers who wash up on our shores get treated better than natives, by government decree. Read it for yourself http://cubantriangle.blogspot.com/2010/12/federal-benefits-are-safe-and.html Despite all this Socialism has failed in Cuba just as it has failed everywhere else. It is free trade that has been correcting Cuba's massive unemployment for years.

BTW, The US is pretty Socialist it's self so you are just comparing one Socialist shithole to another one.







Cuba is able to feed, clothe, and keep their black population relatively civilized with its system, even though it is economically blockaded. What would happen if Detroit or LA did not have federal funding from America's whites? What would THOSE shitholes look like? Yes feed and cloth them via welfare.

What the white men of Cuba's central committee have done with their niggers is a model and worthy of commending. All you recovering neo-cons that don't see it are letting your ideology cloud your judgement of results. I don't give a shit about Bolshevism or capitalism, I despise both for different reasons, but I give credit where it is due, because conceding a point to either will not shake my views as they are based on race and soul, not on phoney baloney 2-sides-of-the-same-coin cold war politics.Why give either credit for anything. Both systems have failed any race completely with the exception of the Jewish race.

To me America is as bad as the USSR ever was, and life in both countries was not as radically different as some of you raised on GI Joe and Captain America think it is. The only big difference i can see is that Soviet bureaucrats after the mass Jew exodus to America from the Eastern Bloc in the 1950's and 60's, had good intentions, while American planners were mostly subversive kikes and subjugated Anglo lap dogs.Soviet bureaucrats had good intentions?

"Welfare layabouts" are made by the system and your capitalists, it has nothing to do with having a social system.

Yeah, because free market proponents are all about confiscating wealth and transferring it to the unproductive, unlike unionists. Wait. . .

I've argued this with Linder many times, and now with you.

Tip: If you're getting the same push-back from multiple different people on a subject amenable to scientific analysis, and they're giving you the same documented story, it isn't them: it's you.

Government social programs are the only thing keeping workers from killing their bosses and taking over the factories.

Newsflash: The world isn't 1952 Detroit. Detroit isn't even that. Most people don't work in factories, and most union flunkies 'work' for the government.

Most U.S. Union Members Are Working for the Government, New Data Shows

By STEVEN GREENHOUSE
Published: January 22, 2010

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/23/business/23labor.html?_r=0

If what you claim were true, we'd see more frequent incidents of crime on industrial property in the non-union South and west than we see in the north and midwest. We don't see it because the phenomenon you assert doesn't exist. If there's any substantive regional difference, I bet it's the opposite of what you claim.

It's a way for big capital to pass off the wages required to pay for even basic necessities, to the tax payer.

Business can't be passing-off what they never provided to begin with. Your 'basic necessities' come from your paycheck, not the government. You want to freeload off of other people, as has been my contention of union activists all along, learned from personal experience.

And although some rich people do pay taxes, it's nothing in comparison to the profits they reap from this new system.

Yeah, because the Vanderbilts, Carnegies and Rockefellers were just scraping by in laissez-faire days, unlike now.

Your conception of economic history is completely backwards.

Concessions[ie, transfer payments --LR] such as welfare, medicare, disability and other government programs are the only reason why Bolshevism (the traditional type, not cultural Marxism) today is no longer a looming threat in the West. Many of the concerns Communists had in the 1920's and 30's were legitimate and did need to be addressed, which is why Third Way economics attempt to bridge gaps between worker and manager as mutually dependent entities.

Communism collapsed because it's an uneconomical clusterfuck, conceived by jewish revolutionaries and foisted at gunpoint upon half of the White world, who are still suffering in its wake. Yet you hoist up your communism-lite as our champion over its big brother.

Again, the analogy is to religious zealotry. Christians claim all credit, deflect all blame. That's what union apologists do.

By allowing workers syndicates, professional syndicates, and managerial syndicates to come to the table and come into a rational and ethical relationship with the racial State as the moderator, based on mutual respect and racial comeraderie you avoid the destruction of the nation via internal dispute.

As Linder has observed, your type doesn't actually have a problem with totalitarianism. You just want to be the boss instead of jews. Screw that. You can have your human termite mound. Keep your hands off of me and mine.

Prices are the same or more expensive now despite the freezing of wages and globalization of industry. While a pair of nike's costs pennies for children to produce in the third world, you still pay 150 bucks for the latest models at the shoe store, often with the credit card

Did the seamstress pay for the factory to make the shoes? More to the point, did she risk the capital to build the factory? Did she pay the shipping? Did she buy the ships? Does pay the costs of the wholesaler? How about the costs of the shoe store?

Top end nigger shoes cost the same or less than they did 20 years ago, and the dollar has depreciated precipitously in that time. The shoes are less expensive today, and it isn't close.

Again, you warp reality to suit your pro-socialist polemic.

Jew plastic usury cards have benefitted big Jew capital as much as the loaners, as it gives non-existent purchasing power to underpaid and exploited working people.

No one is making anyone use credit, and it's written off in bankruptcy. If your own political position weren't bankrupt, you'd be showing us pictures of all the starving Visa users living under a bridge in the Cleveland suburbs, rather than blustering on and on. You can't because they don't exist.

FACT: Wal-Mart has done more for the working man in the past 30 years than every government welfare scheme has, collectively, in the entire history of mankind.

Those rusting midwestern hellholes are what they are because cheaper industrial opportunities are available in China and India.

Union Ohio was not long ago the tire capital of the world. It's now a toss-up between South & North Carolina.

Stop flailing for scapegoats. It isn't the rest of the world: It's you.

However, prices have barely budged, and everything is now disposable.

Price contention debunked above. See shoes.

You would rather live in a world where disposable diapers were not available, and one wipes his behind with his hand. That's the punchline of the socialist joke, ie, nightmare.

Products made by union labor have always been superior. . .

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/cimarronad.jpg?print=1

vs.

http://www.gtspirit.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Detroit-2013-BMW-Z4-Facelift.jpg



. . .even in the middle ages with the Guilds. The French Revolution was literally a grab by Jewish merchants to undermine the craft guilds. Jews wanted to import cheaply made furniture, for example, to France but they did not meet Guild price or quality standards. So the Jews launched a "Revolution" that later effectively BANNED workers guilds, flooded the market with imported and disposable crap, and when the guild compettition was neutralized charged as much or more with none of the quality.

And the American Revolution was really over bed sheet thread count.

You're just pushing some sort of gnostic union fables now.

The real myth is that big capital is some kind of victim with only good intentions. If you can't trust an entity with a discernible face that can be punished if need be, like a state, how in God's name can you trust faceless money whose sole expressed goal is to make as much money as possible at the expense of anything and anyone.

What planet do you live on? Christ, have you ever been to the DMV? How about Chick-fil-a? Go to both on the same day and tell me which is faceless. Eat first to survive the wait.

Government is largely faceless, since they have no skin in the game. Business largely is not, since owners have their own capital at risk. And non-owner managers have to answer to owners.

I can tell you the board members and principles of the Fortune 500 at will. I bet you can't name one member of your local planning commission, to say nothing of the underlings who do the policy grunt work in DC.

Again, you invert reality.

Often workers unions in the cultural Marxist west have been victims of Jewish or Bolshevik infiltration. But the idea of a check and balance against capitalism is a good one, as well as very basic part of the history of Western civilization (as I mentioned before, the power of the Guilds before the Jewish and Judeo-cratic led revolutions of the 18th and 19th centuries).

They have to build walls (tangible and otherwise) to keep the burdened citizens of workers' paradises in, while free-er countries need to build walls to keep them out. That's all you need to know.

Most Southern whites are working mcJobs. The higher standards are more likely due to Southerners having more segregated and homogenous towns and cities, than anything to do with taxes.

You don't know what you're talking about. The United States has a higher industrial output now than it's ever had, and its new industrial heartland is in the South. The new aerospace centers are Charleston and Mobile, for Pete's sake.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_otfwl2zc6Qc/TS98OQxn-7I/AAAAAAAAO0Y/koPoBNdF-iY/s1600/usmfg.jpg

http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2011/01/us-is-still-worlds-1-manufacturer.html

http://www.charlestonbusiness.com/news/48108-alabama-s-c-in-race-to-grow-aerospace-industries?rss=0

http://blog.al.com/press-register-business/2012/08/airbus_may_lift_aerospace_work.html

http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/news/2012/11/09/charleston-sc-not-seattle.html?page=all

There's no doubt that Montana and North Dakota (states with the lowest tax rates in America) are nicer to live than New York City or Chicago. But that has nothing to do with unions.

Yeah, no shit. That's the point.

Eastern Montana is a barren moonscape, and western Montana isn't as nice as Idaho. Both parts have all the charm of Antarctica for 4 months of the year. Yet White Californian refugees can't get there fast enough.

Anyone who argues different, is still suffering from Conservatitis . To argue from such a perspective is the same one as how the cultural Marxists debate: it's not a problem of race, it's social structure .

This is almost exactly the same form that double-digit IQ Christian apologists use in 'debate'. Just fling an assertion and tut-tut it.

It would be far better to compare places with high white populations and also government regulation, like Portland. Portland, despite the faggy left-leaning cultural marxism, is still unwillingly very white and with a lot of government intervention. It also has higher scores of health care, larger middle class, and other proofs of economic well-being compared to low-tax, corporate-friendly Southern cities.

Portland is high as hell, in multiple senses, and benefits from the relocation of California refugees. Oregon is the state-level equivalent to a suburban county that benefits from the White flight of an adjacent nigger hellhole city. When the California refugee tide ebbs, look for socialist Oregon to go the way of socialist Washington State, ie, to shit.

Fact: Chattanooga and Huntsville have at least equivalent quality of life to Portland, with better standards of living since they're so damned cheap. Plus, you can shoot intruders without fear of your wackjob neighbors judicially lynching you, the victim.

Whites work best in socialist economies. This is a historically proven fact only Anglo-Americans seem to be allergic to.

Yes having a union and bargaining for wages and health care is something for niggers. You're dead wrong.

Well, you may not have noticed, but I have a bottle of scotch as my avatar, and I believe Linder has expressed his opinion of Anglo culture, particularly in contradistinction to the Germanic, repeatedly and at length. You may want to google that. :)

The people trying to turn whites into niggers are fiscal neo-cons like yourself trying to enforce failed enlightenment Jewish and British theories, even when they have shown to create massive backlash, national weakness, and incredible amounts of waste. You want white workers to be exploited wage-slaves, and sing Zippity Doo-Dah like Uncle Remus in Songs of the South while it happens.

Yeah, 'fiscal neo-con' pushing 'failed. . .jewish. . .theories'. That's me!

The automobile industry in the USA failed for two reasons. 1) the massive influx of negro workers and 2) the gross incompetence of its CEO's, who are beneficieries of capitalist nepotism or Harvard egg heads that would shriek if they had to work on a car. If the white workers of General Motors got together to plan a car that ordinary people would like, their profits would shoot through the roof.

The US auto industry is stronger than ever, and centered in South Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee and Alabama. (Surprise: It isn't unionized.)

The workers know cars, the eggheads on top are too busy cutting corners (in regards to quality of materials as well as appreciation of workers) which eventually catches up to you. Then they go ahead and blame "unions" for their own fuck ups.

Yeah, because management wants to go out of business. What are you smoking?

Thanks Ronald Reagan (and his cabin composed of Jewish trotskyites). A large percentage of East Germans are to this day nostalgic for communist Germany. Freedom lovers who fled to West Germany were looking for the promises of gold toilets, heroin, Levi jeans, and The Beatles, not for some abstract 'Kwan principle.

Yeah, this poor lad died for heroin:

http://mccurrysworld.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/fechter.jpg

http://mccurrysworld.wordpress.com/2013/04/16/the-killing-zone/

No, you don't look like a piece of union shit for claiming it.

Not saying Bolshevism was a good thing, but even today we get too see the spiritual and moral gap between West and East Germans. [B]It is a pathetic irony that Bolshevism was better at preserving some Aryan instincts like tribalism and community than your Judeo-Capitalism did, with its open gateway to Cultural Marxism.

I think I'll not subscribe to your metaphysic on morality.


See the Forbes net internal migration map, here: http://www.forbes.com/special-report...migration.html .

Straw man. All I see, for the most part, is whites fleeing niggers and other muds.

Refugees from Michigan, northern Ohio and western PA and New York would be moving to Ontario if they were merely escaping niggers, but Canada is even more socialist than those failed states.

http://allthingsmundane.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/american-gothic.jpg

"Paw, we've got to git away from these niggers."

"Well, Ma, I know just where to go. . .Atlanta."

Do you realize how crazy you sound?

http://splicd.com/dRQtjVzj1bo/76/101



You can insult me all you want, but the reality is that we are on 2 different planes.

Delta is ready when you are, Joe. You can probably transfer in Paris to Pyongyang.

Your arguments focus around economics and yet ignore race. You want to blame white worker's unions for the destruction of industrial heartlands like Detroit or Cleveland. Your very British and Judaic worship of the rich blinds you to the reality of niggers.

You want White niggers, the kind who think screwing his neighbor out of his own property is the highest aspiration of mankind. I want White men, the kind who conquer continents and fly to the moon, who compose beautiful music and who respect other people's property. You want press gangs and I want freedom.

You covet other people's possessions and project your own character deficiencies onto your victims.

So white working men are the reason for California and Michigan teetering on bankruptcy?

Of course not. Those are union states.

Give me a break.

I rest my case.

What is your point with all these pictures? Are neon lights and professional advertisement photographs your litmus test for a place that is nice to live? Why don't you move to Jew York then?

Spartanburg:

http://www.careymoving.com/images/myimages/spartanburg.jpg

http://www.cityprofile.com/forum/attachments/south-carolina/18435-greer-bmw-zentrum.jpg

Toledo:

http://subwaynut.com/amtrak/toledo/toledo9.jpg

http://www.mnn.com/sites/default/files/Toledo_factory.jpg

Because the labor is cheaper. They invest there [Kentucky as opposed to Ohio] for the same reason they invest in China.

That's obviously not the only reason, or they'd have built in China instead of Kentucky.

You can't face facts: Unions and their sugar daddy, big government, have rendered Ohio a rusting, backward, economic basket case, while coal mining, tobacco picking, whiskey distilling, shit shoveling Kentucky now looks like Bavaria by comparison.

Now answer me this Leonard, why don't you pack your bags and move to a place where you can be 'free' from those white working men who stand up for the value of their work, that oppress you so much?

How's Bangladesh or Belize sound? :D

I'm not the one bitching. You are. You don't even have the sense to move to Cuba. It has as many covetous idiots as the Rust Belt, but the scenery is much nicer and the weather is a hell of a lot better.


I already live in a Right To Work (ie, right not to be fleeced and antagonized by union scum) state: Always will, Lord willing and if the creek don't rise.

Joe, the difference between your position on economics and that of a religious maniac on God is that you substitute coerced gangsterism for The Most High. In Ohio and Kentucky, you have a latter-day East/West Germany scenario. They might as well rename the Ohio River der Spree. Truth is, Cincinnati is economically to Pyongyang as Lexington is to Seoul. That's ridiculous, but that's what you get when you put freedom next to big government. Rather than comporting with reality, they prefer to damn and repress normals so that their failures aren't so glaring. Facts don't sway religious fanatics.

More Cold War bullshit.

The only objects to which a 'Union Made' label should be affixed are bankruptcy filings and high school diplomas.

I am heartily against Bolshevism, but your point is an attack on the planned economy. I don't agree with many aspects of Communist economics (especially the ban on small business, which I believe is inherently good as long as Jewish monopolies and very large corporations are destroyed), but even if you want to argue Communism vs Capitalism , the reality destroys the neo-con myths.

In the 50's, 60's , and well into the 70's, North Korea's economy grew at a faster rate than South Korea's across the board. Standard of living was better in North Korea, even though the growth was focused on heavy industry , in terms of the common mans access to health care and consumer products. It was only in the 1980's that South Korea, at least in cold hard numbers, surpassed North Korea. But this was due mostly to the reduction of Soviet subsidies, while American preferential aid and investment to South Korea was not affected.

I've misjudged you, Joe. I thought you were a well-meaning, yet misinformed, union cheerleader. But what you've written above is pure Marxist horseshit, with the names changed from the Soviet Union to North Korea. I mean, you are a dyed in the wool commie hack.

The judeo-academic scam purported for decades that their beloved judeo-Soviets were ahead of the US economically (easy to hide pre-internet and with a closed economy) until it became blatantly obvious by the 80s that Soviet GNP was less than that of California.

The same was true in East vs West Germany. And this was considering the fact that West Germany had all of Germany's industrial base in tact, while East Germany was utterly destroyed by the Allies. East German living standards began to wane in the 1980's, granted, but it was nowhere near as bad as neo-cons wanted it to be.

Wait, I thought the Communist Bloc was doing so wonderfully. But they couldn't build East Germany to modern standards in. . .50 years?

The reality is that the majority who lived in East Germany still think it was better to what they have now, and this is in one of the wealthiest countries in the world: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/homesick-for-a-dictatorship-majority-of-eastern-germans-feel-life-better-under-communism-a-634122.html

Yeah, Joe. Dipshit White holdouts in Chicago are still waiting on the second coming of FDR for their salvation. So what?

So you are blaming economics for the fact that niggers and invaders abuse white ways of life. By that definition, then you should also support gun control, because giving niggers easy access to guns would increase gun crime.

Huh?

You: White niggers.

Me: White men.

Grunt grunt.

BTW, I think Montana--all parts--is beautiful, and the Ohio countryside is gorgeous.

Yeah, because free market proponents are all about confiscating wealth and transferring it to the unproductive, unlike unionists. Wait. . .

Essentially, you are. Monopoly capitalism swallows up small businesses and exports industry to the third world, which effectively turns ordinary people from independent and productive craftsman, into 8 dollar an hour Wal-Mart servants. Why do you think Wal-Mart gets so much resistance in small white towns when they want to open up shop? It's because a big monopoly can afford to drop prices at a loss (especially when they sell EVERYTHING), until they drive out all the small compettitors, then they simply jack the prices up when all the compettition is gone.

That isn't free enterprise nor free compettition. That is economic dictatorship. Made in China Furniture you buy at Wal-Mart doesn't hold a candle in terms of quality to furniture made in America by a craftsman, and at the end of the day you end up paying the same for it, whether via reduced income you get by Wal-Mart being the only jobs in town, or via price gouging.


Tip: If you're getting the same push-back from multiple different people on a subject amenable to scientific analysis, and they're giving you the same documented story, it isn't them: it's you.

By that logic I should accept that the Holocaust really happened, or that race is nothing but a skin color :rolleyes:


Newsflash: The world isn't 1952 Detroit. Detroit isn't even that. Most people don't work in factories, and most union flunkies 'work' for the government.

If what you claim were true, we'd see more frequent incidents of crime on industrial property in the non-union South and west than we see in the north and midwest. We don't see it because the phenomenon you assert doesn't exist. If there's any substantive regional difference, I bet it's the opposite of what you claim.


This has more to do with race than anything else.

While it's true that today's white workers in the South do not rise up against their bosses (anymore), that is not because working in the non-union south is so great. That is because of the plethora of social programs available, where people despite being hopelessly exploited, can still squeak by.



Business can't be passing-off what they never provided to begin with. Your 'basic necessities' come from your paycheck, not the government. You want to freeload off of other people, as has been my contention of union activists all along, learned from personal experience.

Yes having a job that can pay for food and shelter is not an "entitlement", Ayn Rand. The whole system of the JEw S A is a train wreck, and there is a lot of work to do indeed. What I don't understand is how workers coming together in a union to collectively bargain with their boss is "freeloading off of other people" by asking for a living wage.


Yeah, because the Vanderbilts, Carnegies and Rockefellers were just scraping by in laissez-faire days, unlike now.

Do you have any idea how many incidents and workers uprisings those old plutocrats had to deal with back then?


Your conception of economic history is completely backwards.

Funny how most of continental Europe discarded British and Jewish economic theories, after experimenting with it. Germany under Bismarck or Japan under the Mejiis are good examples of leaders who scrapped British/Jewish capitalist economic theories for planned economies, after repeated failures and the spread of communism.

If it weren't for your economic theories, Jews would've never seen an opportunity to spread bolshevism.


Communism collapsed because it's an uneconomical clusterfuck, conceived by jewish revolutionaries and foisted at gunpoint upon half of the White world, who are still suffering in its wake. Yet you hoist up your communism-lite as our champion over its big brother.

FYI most Jews broke with the USSR at varying points during the Stalin era. For example, the "Old Guard" of Jewish Bolsheviks, were for the most part liquidated by Stalin over time. The see-saw battle between Jews and Stalin culminated with new purges targetting Jews in the 50's, and eventually the poisoning of Stalin by his Jewish doctors.

That is not to say Jews did not help Stalin too, but after WWII world Jewry generally abandoned the USSR and instead took on Trotskyism and Neo-conservativism. Most of your "fiscal conservative" and "neo-conservative" ideologues in America today were red diaper babies, or ex-Trotskyites.

As Linder has observed, your type doesn't actually have a problem with totalitarianism. You just want to be the boss instead of jews. Screw that. You can have your human termite mound. Keep your hands off of me and mine.

I'd rather live in a "human termite mound" like classical Rome or the Third Reich than in 1920's plutocrat and jew owned Ameri-Kwa. Your premise is ideologically the polar opposite of every great racialist nation or system in history.


Did the seamstress pay for the factory to make the shoes? More to the point, did she risk the capital to build the factory? Did she pay the shipping? Did she buy the ships? Does pay the costs of the wholesaler? How about the costs of the shoe store?

What does any of this have to do with running an ethical business, that puts your own racial kin to work and treats them in a way they are worthy of?

How is it that Henry Ford can do it, but magically nobody can do it nowadays?

Having one foot in one market and another foot in the other is A-racial, a-national, it's fucking kikey. The Jews have been global merchants throughout the ages doing this very same thing, I'm surprised Leonard that you don't have a bunch of portraits of famous hooked nosed parasites all over your walls, like Ron Paul does? :rofl

John Galt, Ayn Rand's fictitious Sci-Fi Golem, is not an Aryan hero on par with Marcus Aurelius, Hermann, Pizarro, or Hitler. He's an egotistical cock sucker that embodies the Jewish soul that penned him.


Top end nigger shoes cost the same or less than they did 20 years ago, and the dollar has depreciated precipitously in that time. The shoes are less expensive today, and it isn't close.

You completely omit, of course, the fact that wages have remained stagnant since the 1970's even with inflation, which means that they cost more.


No one is making anyone use credit, and it's written off in bankruptcy. If your own political position weren't bankrupt, you'd be showing us pictures of all the starving Visa users living under a bridge in the Cleveland suburbs, rather than blustering on and on. You can't because they don't exist.

The reality is that private debt is higher than government debt:
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/14566-private-debt-not-government-debt-will-destroy-america

The reason you're not seeing people living under the bridge is the same reason you're not seeing the US Federal government collapse. There's fictitious Jew rope at the end of the real rope, and when the usurers decide to pull the plug, that is when you will start seeing those Visa users on the breadlines.

Guess you learned nothing from the credit crash of '29.


FACT: Wal-Mart has done more for the working man in the past 30 years than every government welfare scheme has, collectively, in the entire history of mankind.

Yeah, but destroying skilled white jobs, and employing useless niggers to push the lever for the pellet.

Don't you see this is precisely what the N.W.O. and world Jewry wants? They want to destroy dignified white working men and small business owners, and replace them with Mexicans and Negroes who can do menial labor for menial prices.

How families requiring both parents to work, flooding the market with disposable made in China plastic junk, and outsourcing of industry is good for the race, the nation or the Aryan family is beyond me. You only seem to see dollars and cents Lenny.


Union Ohio was not long ago the tire capital of the world. It's now a toss-up between South & North Carolina.

Stop flailing for scapegoats. It isn't the rest of the world: It's you.

Here we go again, making this personal.

Oh those poor, poor plutocrats, always being scapegoated for betraying their nation, race, and the working people that are what keep their machine running. Of course those non-Union jobs have high turnover rates because the pay is ridiculously low and the conditions are barely fit for Calcutta, but it doesn't matter, just import some Mexicans that live 20 to a house and don't care what you pay them!

That's the world you want Leonard? Then don't whine when your neighbors are all Guatamalans. You are a globalist by association.


Price contention debunked above. See shoes.

Stagnant wages. Go Fish.


You would rather live in a world where disposable diapers were not available, and one wipes his behind with his hand. That's the punchline of the socialist joke, ie, nightmare.

Another straw man.




http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/cimarronad.jpg?print=1

vs.

http://www.gtspirit.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Detroit-2013-BMW-Z4-Facelift.jpg

Your point is?


And the American Revolution was really over bed sheet thread count.

The American revolution was funded by a fucking Jew, just like the Bolshevik revolution, because they were both steps on the anti-Western ladder:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haym_Solomon




What planet do you live on? Christ, have you ever been to the DMV? How about Chick-fil-a? Go to both on the same day and tell me which is faceless. Eat first to survive the wait.

Why do you omit that most DMV's employ lazy, idiotic, fat black ladies who get those jobs thanks to a Jewish run government?

On top of this, the comparison of dealing with detailed paperwork and getting some chicken and french fries off a heating tray is also absurd.


Government is largely faceless, since they have no skin in the game. Business largely is not, since owners have their own capital at risk. And non-owner managers have to answer to owners.

So a government official has a lower profile than a big businessman or speculator? Is that why most 'Kwans see and often despise Obama or Bush, but have no clue who Sheldon Adelson and George Soros, the financiers of the two political parties in America, are?


I can tell you the board members and principles of the Fortune 500 at will. I bet you can't name one member of your local planning commission, to say nothing of the underlings who do the policy grunt work in DC.

Why do you keep thinking I somehow support the current economic policies of the Jew S A?

Out of those Fortune 500 "heroes" of yours, how many have precious minerals in their last names? :jew:


They have to build walls (tangible and otherwise) to keep the burdened citizens of workers' paradises in, while free-er countries need to build walls to keep them out. That's all you need to know.

The 1980's called, it wants its Chuck Norris movie cliches back.

I'll give you that Cultural Marxist American propaganda was far more sophisticated and effective than Soviet propaganda, but that doesn't mean either system was desirable. They equally are trash, but as tragic as it is, the East German mentality was infinitely less sick than the West German one, and you can see the results of this today (Jews always whining about East German "xenophobia"). NPD's strongholds are all in East German, there are better family values, and more sense of community than in the cosmopolitan , immigrant infested "free" West you love so much.


You don't know what you're talking about. The United States has a higher industrial output now than it's ever had, and its new industrial heartland is in the South. The new aerospace centers are Charleston and Mobile, for Pete's sake.

Is that why the JEW S A trades at a deficit?
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/business/economy/us-trade-deficit-grew-in-may-analysts-downgrade-forecasts.html?_r=0




Yeah, no shit. That's the point.

Eastern Montana is a barren moonscape, and western Montana isn't as nice as Idaho. Both parts have all the charm of Antarctica for 4 months of the year. Yet White Californian refugees can't get there fast enough.

Nothing to do with the fact that California has a non-white majority, huh? *shrug*


This is almost exactly the same form that double-digit IQ Christian apologists use in 'debate'. Just fling an assertion and tut-tut

Not going to respond to the ad hominem here on out.


Portland is high as hell, in multiple senses, and benefits from the relocation of California refugees. Oregon is the state-level equivalent to a suburban county that benefits from the White flight of an adjacent nigger hellhole city. When the California refugee tide ebbs, look for socialist Oregon to go the way of socialist Washington State, ie, to shit.

So when Californians move to Montana, its because of how great capitalism is, but when they move to states that are just as white and just as or more pleasant to live in with a more social-state, it's because of white flight?

You can't have it both ways, Lenny.


Fact: Chattanooga and Huntsville have at least equivalent quality of life to Portland, with better standards of living since they're so damned cheap. Plus, you can shoot intruders without fear of your wackjob neighbors judicially lynching you, the victim.

I agree with you completely on this, however the chances of having intruders, at least dangerous ones, in Portland are pretty miniscule to begin with.


Well, you may not have noticed, but I have a bottle of scotch as my avatar, and I believe Linder has expressed his opinion of Anglo culture, particularly in contradistinction to the Germanic, repeatedly and at length. You may want to google that. :)


I don't understand why Linder makes all those good points when contrasting cultures, yet still picks Judeo-Anglo plutocracy/capitalism over German socialism.

One of the greatest Western analysts after WWII, Francis Parker Yockey, believed that socialism was superior and western, while capitalism was the alien judaic belief. This irrational fear and hatred of the state (when run by Aryans) stems from Jews and bourgeois allies,and their historical fear of a strong, centralized Goyim or meritocracy.

I wonder what the greatest men of Aryan history would think of you kvetching about "totalitarianism" (a jew smear word invented to defame Mussolini and the quest for a new Western rebirth), they would laugh heartily.


Yeah, 'fiscal neo-con' pushing 'failed. . .jewish. . .theories'. That's me!

Your arguments are straight from the O'Reilly factor, or a Milton Friedman conference. Are you going to argue otherwise? The White working man collectively bargaining is the cause of all the innocent kike capitalists woes.


The US auto industry is stronger than ever, and centered in South Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee and Alabama. (Surprise: It isn't unionized.)


Those also happen to be the poorest states in America, thanks for making my point :rolleyes: . They assemble cars in Mexico and Brazil too, for dirt pay and without unions, is that something they should be happy about?

Put away the pom-poms, Leonard, the kikes up top are already dilligently Third Worldifying America. And like you, they are constantly looking for ways to undercut smart and productive white working men who simply demand a wage that will put a roof over their heads and feed their families.

The only reason they get away with it in those states is due to the people's desperation. Exploiting desperation... T.J.B.


Yeah, because management wants to go out of business. What are you smoking?

No, it's more so the God-complex of the egghead traitors up top. They all think they're John Galt, and they all actually think that the world revolves around them. If they fail, however, then its everyone else's fault. They'd rather their businesses go under, then consult and pay their workers more at the expense of one of their self-given bonuses.



Yeah, this poor lad died for heroin:

http://mccurrysworld.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/fechter.jpg

http://mccurrysworld.wordpress.com/2013/04/16/the-killing-zone/

No, you don't look like a piece of union shit for claiming it.


what is your point?

I've stressed it before, I am anti-Bolshevik AND anti-capitalist. That doesn't mean I'm going to buy into patriotard cold war propaganda. Life in West Germany was awful for different reasons than East Germany, but equally awful. If you look at first hand accounts of living in East Germany from people who aren't paid propagandists, you'll see that the biggest complaints are lack of strawberries off-season, a short period of a coffee shortage, difficulty obtaining blue jeans, and the fact that the East German government banned soulless Juden-kultur like the Beatles.

Yet most East Germans had summer vacation houses, did not have to worry about violent marauding turks in their major cities, did not have any 60's cultural marxist "revolution", nor a whole generation of heroin junkies. While East Germany did not have flashy discos where white women got to fuck Africans or queers had orgies, or *insert superfluous breeding grounds of Jewish decay*, it was still remarkably sophisticated in many realms that matter. The East German government, for example, gave generous financial incentives for white Germans to produce kids, hence in the 70's and 80's East Germany had a significantly higher birth rate than West Germany. East Germans also had more free time away from work, which they spent bonding with their families and friends, creating a country of national solidarity, even if not explicitly racial. It was, in retrospect, the lesser of two evils. Today under "free-dumb", Germany has one of the lowest birth rates in the world and is on the fast-track towards being a multi-cultural slum, with every jewish moral and intellectual abomination being at the forefront. While fags paraded freely and strutted their filth before the eyes of children in West Berlin, East German authorities classified it as a mental sickness. Countless anecdotes like these exist.

Refugees from Michigan, northern Ohio and western PA and New York would be moving to Ontario if they were merely escaping niggers, but Canada is even more socialist than those failed states.

Internal migration is far easier than external. More apples and oranges. Why aren't all those Canadians fleeing to America then?

BTW, neither Canada nor America are socialist states, they are jewish controlled pragmatic states, like turrets being pointed inwards. It's socialism for the rich and racially destructive, and capitalism for everyone else.


Delta is ready when you are, Joe. You can probably transfer in Paris to Pyongyang.

What would a capitalist state of equivalent size to North Korea look like if it were blockaded from virtually the whole world? The fact that North Korea has held on as a state for this long is a testament to the socialist state's ability to successfully bring Autarky (which Aryans will need if we seek to break free from the Jews and their empire).

Fact of the matter is that North Koreans will racially exist as a majority in their nation by 2050, while Frenchmen in Paris or White Americans in general will not. North Korea, by the way, is essentially a social-nationalist state, it is Marxist only out of historical convenient, not in practice (it has overt racial laws in its constitution).


You want White niggers, the kind who think screwing his neighbor out of his own property is the highest aspiration of mankind. I want White men, the kind who conquer continents and fly to the moon, who compose beautiful music and who respect other people's property. You want press gangs and I want freedom.

Socialist, union-joining, government employed white niggers
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1GQXxhHpMPs/0.jpg

Leonards space-traveling Aryan God-men
http://images.publicradio.org/content/2012/10/23/20121023_2010-tea-party-rally_33.jpg



You covet other people's possessions and project your own character deficiencies onto your victims.

I don't care about material possessions. I live an austere life, by and large, with few luxuries. I consider my wealth to be my family, friends, and being a fighter for my race, while never forgetting my honor. I get my inner-satisfaction from a worldview that is above today's consumerist novelty.

My demand is an ethical relationship between employer and employee, based on ethnic solidarity as well as mutual dependence. Profit sharing, higher incomes, and good work conditions have shown to increase productivity and loyalty amongst workers, and hence profits. But I'm sorry, jewboy Mark Zuckerberg sitting on god knows how many billions of dollars for inventing Facebook is wrong on numerous levels, and that is not because I want his gook wife, his GAP hoodies, or his swimming pool. That is because 1 man hording that much capital is an absurdity in and of itself.

But your sick kwan mentality would rather see 3.7 billion dollars in the hands of a useless kike plutocrat, than in the hands of Hadrian.

Worship of commerce is the real moral bankruptcy. You would've sided, due to ideology, with Carthiginian semites over the West in Roman times. Your economic views do nothing but retard nations.



Spartanburg:

http://www.careymoving.com/images/myimages/spartanburg.jpg

http://www.cityprofile.com/forum/attachments/south-carolina/18435-greer-bmw-zentrum.jpg

Toledo:

http://subwaynut.com/amtrak/toledo/toledo9.jpg

http://www.mnn.com/sites/default/files/Toledo_factory.jpg

Again, so what? The center of BMW manufacturing is in Southern Germany. Do you have any idea what kind of labor contract auto workers unions in Germany get? It would make you faint. Yet somehow, still, BMW is able to turn a profit.

Posting pictures of working factories means something?

I'll play your game:

General Motors in Brazil!

http://img.groundspeak.com/waymarking/large/ab6ec4ba-9539-43c5-af69-e438d810270c.jpg

BMW plant in China
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/attachement/jpg/site1/20110516/f04da2db11220f3ab2c919.jpg

When the same people investing in Feudal China and third world/developing Brazil show interest in Kentucky, that is a pattern, not something of pride. America is now "catching up" (down) to the third world, where the majority of our citizens are living paycheck to paycheck and through the credit card.


That's obviously not the only reason, or they'd have built in China instead of Kentucky.

But they build in China too.


You can't face facts: Unions and their sugar daddy, big government, have rendered Ohio a rusting, backward, economic basket case, while coal mining, tobacco picking, whiskey distilling, shit shoveling Kentucky now looks like Bavaria by comparison.

So you're going to compare Kentucky, a state where 1 in 10 people are missing their teeth and where Appalachian Kentuckian kids go to bed hungry to Bavaria, a place where workers have 1-2 months of government mandated paid vacation every year, social yet efficient health care, and one of the highest living standards, as well as powerful manufacturing bases, in the world?

How is Germany, which has retained many Nationalsocialist economic policies even after the usurping of their system by the Allies, able to be one of the world's top exporters if unions are the reason for why America sucks?



I'm not the one bitching. You are. You don't even have the sense to move to Cuba. It has as many covetous idiots as the Rust Belt, but the scenery is much nicer and the weather is a hell of a lot better.

It appears you missed my point...completely. You insist on comparing apples to oranges, while I try to make a pragmatic point.

You are still suffering from Conservatitis, you want to fight the Cold War all over again instead of taking objective lessons from it. This is why ex-Leftists like Joseph Goebbels make better racialists than ex-conservatives.


I've misjudged you, Joe. I thought you were a well-meaning, yet misinformed, union cheerleader. But what you've written above is pure Marxist horseshit, with the names changed from the Soviet Union to North Korea. I mean, you are a dyed in the wool commie hack.

I don't care what you call me, you'd call Hitler a commie too, and probably would have sanctimoniously emigrated to Jew York from Germany alongside the kike department store monopoly owners if you had lived in those times. If you search my past posts you will see me lambasting Marxism, the Judeo-Left and Bolshevism, but that doesn't mean I give Judeo-Capitalists a pass.


The judeo-academic scam purported for decades that their beloved judeo-Soviets were ahead of the US economically (easy to hide pre-internet and with a closed economy) until it became blatantly obvious by the 80s that Soviet GNP was less than that of California.

Very few Judeo-academics supported the Soviet Union in the 60's and 70's. Most of them were Trotskyists, Luxembourgists, Maoists, or other types of Communism that were hostile to the USSR. The communism that took hold in America that changed this society was made by Jewish radicals in Union Square, not in Moscow. Most American Jew academics support the Bolshevik revolution, but their favorable opinion of the USSR generally ends with Trotsky and Lenin (Two jews).

I am not sure where you got the statistics regarding the Soviet GNP and California, but one thing is for sure, the USSR was by all accounts self-sufficient and hence independent, while the American economy has always been inter-dependent and hence globalist.

If you are a nationalist, self-determination is the most important factor when deciding whether your economy is good or bad. You are a nationalist, aren't you Leonard? Or are you just a Libertarian that simply doesn't like niggers?


Wait, I thought the Communist Bloc was doing so wonderfully. But they couldn't build East Germany to modern standards in. . .50 years?

How do you define modern standards? The rule of novelty?


Yeah, Joe. Dipshit White holdouts in Chicago are still waiting on the second coming of FDR for their salvation. So what?

So if the majority of East Germans preferred life and are nostalgic for the old system, then where does your they all wanted freeeeedumb, let freeedumb ring argument go?



You: White niggers.

http://www.gnosticliberationfront.com/1937-10.jpg



Me: White men.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_onQvIg4FVII/Sn3AXWll1LI/AAAAAAAAB5Y/FtotHWM6YJQ/s400/Moron.jpg

You're a religious fanatic, Joe, but more dangerous than the sacred kind. God can't actually be measured and scrutinized. You double-down on abject failure after the fact.

Chattanooga, TN:

http://www.chattanooganhotel.com/i/SITE_110217_14244288_8G1XN/content/CMS_02172011_152042090_C04NC/5A0D6109-188B-3B72-2E6F2ACCB4B1023B.JPG

http://www.chattanoogafun.com/media/top5-summer-640x303.jpg

(New Volkswagen Plant)
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2011/06/022-vw-chattanooga.jpg

http://wrcb.images.worldnow.com/images/22407929_BG1.jpg

Flint, MI:

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1058674/thumbs/r-FLINT-MICHIGAN-large570.jpg?6

http://wnem.images.worldnow.com/images/20971218_BG2.jpg

(Flint Buick Factory)
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-EtAjTPHOeJ4/TiGL9P23NOI/AAAAAAAAJY0/ZiPnxAqHVUQ/s1600/DeerBuick.JPG

http://s1.reutersmedia.net/resources/r/?m=02&d=20071005&t=2&i=1891825&w=460&fh=&fw=&ll=&pl=&r=2007-10-05T222358Z_01_N05217203_RTRUKOP_0_PICTURE0

http://frontburner.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Flint-sweepstakes.gif

http://dubsism.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/michigan-sucks-tom-hanks.jpg?w=510

The Michigan countryside is beautiful, and there are a lot of great people there--even a lot of union folks. ;)

Nucor Steel (no unions)

Charleston, South Carolina

http://redshirtfridays.org/images/troop_supporters/Cold-Mill-Nucor-Steel-Berkeley-SC.jpg

Kingman, Arizona

http://kingmanarizonanews.com/clients/kingmanarizonanews/7-4-2010-12-07-35-PM-8115441.jpg

Crawfordsville, IN
http://www.castrip.com/Nucor%20Facilities/Indiana/Plant%20Shot.jpg

In Youngstown We Made Steel -- visual documentary of the collapse of union steel in Youngstown, OH
http://www.allthingsyoungstown.net/articles/in_youngstown_we_made_steel/article.htm

Youngstown Steel, glory days
http://www.allthingsyoungstown.net/articles/in_youngstown_we_made_steel/YST_Campbell-postcard.jpg

1979, union agitators demand $100 million of other people's money.
http://www.allthingsyoungstown.net/articles/in_youngstown_we_made_steel/YST-Procession-031779.jpg

Youngstown Steel, today (note bridge from first photo)
http://www.allthingsyoungstown.net/articles/in_youngstown_we_made_steel/Walton-YST-2008s.jpg

=====================

Kingman, AZ
http://www.arizona-leisure.com/gfx/vacation-guide-kingman.jpg

Youngstown, OH
http://i.somethingawful.com/u/bobservo/ytown/sexypets.jpg

(Youngstown at right. Another union hellhole, Detroit, at left.)
http://4dtraveler.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/ed10-packard-youngstown.jpg?w=599

Leonard let me ask you a question, are you even a racial or ethnic nationalist?

If so, you are being intellectually dishonest. I don't even know why.

Demographics of Flint, Michigan:

The racial makeup of the city was 37.4% White, 56.6% African American, 0.5% Native American, 0.5% Asian, 1.1% from other races, and 3.9% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 3.9% of the population.

Demographics of Youngstown, Ohio:

The racial makeup of the city was 47.0% White, 45.2% African American, 0.4% Native American, 0.4% Asian, 0.02% Pacific Islander, 3.3& of some other race, and 3.7% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 9.3% of the population. Among the Hispanic population, 5.7% are Puerto Rican, 1.9% Mexican, 0.1% Cuban, and 0.7% some other Hispanic or Latino.


You're just another neo-con liar, blaming the white working class for urban negrofication. No taking into account harsher Southern policing of blacks, latent segregation of negroes away from whites in the South (compared to the Midwest where there is little precedent for such), or any other very important political and social differences between the regions.

Yeah, it's "unions" that are the problem in Detroit. Take another vicodin, rush limbaugh.

I have been in more plants than I can count. I have worked for BMW, Chrysler, Ford, General Motors, and Mercedes. The Japanese would never hire me or the companies I worked for.

The Americans companies always did go the extra mile to keep things as domestic as possible. The Germans always would do business in non-union states.

As far as the UAW goes it was not so much the wages and benefits. The UAW would try to do strategic strikes to bring down the "Just In Time" production method. Thus a small strike would stop production in most of the company. This is what Flint did in what I believe was the Axel plant.
The reaction from GM was to close a perfectly good plant to avoid the problem from happening again.

When the UAW tried to actually run the company by being highly destructive to the profit margins, they went too far.

Joe apparently is a classic communist - I never thought I'd see someone defending North Korea, Cuba and East Germany. The bottom line here is whites will never agree on this stuff. The only thing holding racialism together is race - which can be enough.

Some points - I spent a week in East Germany in 1987. Two years before wall fell. The air pollution was terrible. Worse than '70s Los Angeles, which I experienced many years of. Half the people on our tour, young, healthy, non-right-wing students, had breathing problems by the time the week ended. There was cheering when we finally got back into West Germany. There's nothing great about the cowed, stagnant, physically dirty nation that was jew-run East Germany.

The problem is, Joe, you want to kill what has been great about Anglo culture - its inventiveness and creativity and enterprise. It is clear you prefer socialist stagnation. You appear to suffer from Akins syndrome - real, heartfelt hatred and jealousy of anyone who gets ahead economically by working hard. There may be white societies where stricter laws work better, but America isn't one of them. We need the dictatorship on the racial stuff, competition and decentralization for the rest. The important thing is not to stifle global trade but to make it a capital crime to undermine the racial basis of the country. We don't want to create and subsidize white niggers, and that's what welfare and the rest does. It kills their initiative - that's what communism did. People sit around afraid to speak their minds, waiting to be told what to do. It never ceases to amaze me that you leftists blame the guy offering the poor man a job rather than the government taking away his money in taxes.

BTW, your boilterplate about Walmart is ideology, not reality. Some facts you evidently can't accept, but which are manifestly verifiable by anyone with eyes:

1) poor people love Walmart
2) Walmart is not visited for its low prices, at least in small towns, but for its selection
3) Walmart puts small shops out of business? That's left-wing say-so, not reality, purely based on their hatred of big business. If Walmart offers the lowest prices, and it drives others out of business, there wouldn't be, in my town, an Aldi succeeding just fine literally across the street from it. Walmart helps other businesses by bringing in people from the boonies, and some of them will go on to visit other shops, restaurants, etc. Again, this is obvious to anyone with eyes not blinded by socialist ideology.

The economic problems in America started when the Fed was created - within two decades it had produced a Great Depression, and set up the entire stinking failure that is the welfare state. The number-one thing not being discussed here is the debasing of money - that is the fundamental problem. That is the real curse and tax on working Americans. Jewish banksters created the Fed, which creates money out of thin air while everybody else has to work for it. The rest is peanuts compared to that - the debasing and dilution of the money. Downsize the federal government 99%, allow currency competition and/or tie the dollar to gold, inflation ends, the honest working man of sober habits can again get ahead. The white man doesn't need socialism, he needs ungamed money system and freedom of contract and freedom of association - like he used to have.

If you had a case, Joe, it would have been big business that was driving America's immigration policy, demanding open borders. But that wasn't what happened. It was jews, purely and only.

Point is, we don't have a country any longer, just a collection of consumer units. But business isn't to blame for that, it didn't create it.

As for unions creating a middle class, that's simply union propaganda, no different from the NEA claiming students who homeschool are poorly socialized compared to PS prisoners. What created a middle class -- what lifted the entire world -- was precisely the capitalism you despise. Today it's doing the same thing in Bangladesh that it did in America.

You correctly notice that wages have stagnated since the early '70s, but that's from all the socialism kicking in and ratcheting up, not because of capitalism. All you have to do is get rid of taxes and government and any white area will flourish. It's government that makes everybody but the government and the criminals it supports rich while impoverishing working whites of all classes. Hell, you ought to know that from Greece alone.

Your disdain for economic law, or experience, or whatever you want to call it is foolish. Men cannot be trusted. Incentives can be. There will no more be a New Aryan Man than there was a New Soviet Man. The second something like Golden Dawn takes power it will be overrun with Gianni-come-lately careerists who will in time, when the idealism burns off, recreate the same corruption Greece has pretty much always suffered from.

The only duty of the central government is to defend the collective racially. Now, it's true that's a little more complex than it sounds, in this age of globalized communications and transportation, but it's still definable enough compared to what we have now. The rest can be left up to private arrangements.

Unions today, what are they? As Leonard observed, they're public sector, not private. They are horribly anti-white too - they both support Mexican invasion, and they, the NEA in particular, are the 'change agents' ie lite communists pushing the NWO's anti-white ideology harder than anyone. It is obscene and outrageous that any white man with a real job - a private-sector - job is taxed to support the NEA regime criminals.

Our cause is about making it safe to be white, not featherbedding and cosseting white niggers. We don't just want dumb people with no enterprise, we want smart, creative people who can run their own lives, and simply need a political force defending their racial interests, not ripping off their more intelligent, harder-working white brethren to subsidize their laziness and stupidity.

http://viewfrommiddleclass.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/archie.jpg

The Leaves- Hey Joe - YouTube

I was waiting for someone to notice this.

Of course it is true.

Don't forget the information monopoly.

Leonard let me ask you a question, are you even a racial or ethnic nationalist?

If so, you are being intellectually dishonest. I don't even know why.

Demographics of Flint, Michigan:

The racial makeup of the city was 37.4% White, 56.6% African American, 0.5% Native American, 0.5% Asian, 1.1% from other races, and 3.9% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 3.9% of the population.

Demographics of Youngstown, Ohio:

The racial makeup of the city was 47.0% White, 45.2% African American, 0.4% Native American, 0.4% Asian, 0.02% Pacific Islander, 3.3& of some other race, and 3.7% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 9.3% of the population. Among the Hispanic population, 5.7% are Puerto Rican, 1.9% Mexican, 0.1% Cuban, and 0.7% some other Hispanic or Latino.


You're just another neo-con liar, blaming the white working class for urban negrofication. No taking into account harsher Southern policing of blacks, latent segregation of negroes away from whites in the South (compared to the Midwest where there is little precedent for such), or any other very important political and social differences between the regions.

Yeah, it's "unions" that are the problem in Detroit. Take another vicodin, rush limbaugh.

Your arguments are nonsensical.

Chattanooga (Volkswagen) is 35% nigger, according to Wikipedia. It's at least that.

North Charleston (Boeing) is 45% nigger.

Mobile (Airbus) is only 44% White.

Every one of these cities is a nicer place to live than Flint, Dayton, Detroit or Youngstown.

Whites in these areas can still relatively thrive, even with the nigger burden and bad jewmoney, because they have good non-union jobs and smaller (but not small) government. They have a massively higher quality of life. While in no way optimal, one can escape the non-Whites in the same city, for the time being. Whites in union states cannot do this because their high taxes and unions ran off the good jobs, while they're still heavily taxed to pay their public sector union 'brothers'. These Whites get screwed every which way.

Imagine if Whites in non-union states had honest money and no non-White burden. There would be refugee camps to handle the tidal wave of Whites from the New East Berlins and New Volgograds of Joe's rusting utopia.

You'd also see more home grown industry instead of relying on foreign investment. One can't open a hamburger stand today without a loan, since the jewish money matrix is designed to penalize savers. This is far worse than the artificial costs imposed by all the bogus government regulations that get press, which are bad enough, but minor compared to the fraudulent jewish Federal Reserve effect.

Joe apparently is a classic communist - I never thought I'd see someone defending North Korea, Cuba and East Germany. The bottom line here is whites will never agree on this stuff. The only thing holding racialism together is race - which can be enough.

Noting a few positives of those nations, particularly when in regards to race, values, and nationalism, does not make me a communist. That is an absurd smear considering I post just as much against communism as I do against capitalism. Doesn't mean I don't think small scale free enterprise is good, or that planned economies can be extremely successful and useful for managing heavy industry and economic Autarky.

I'm not taking sides here, you are. So is Leonard Rouse, who obviously hasn't gotten the John Birch Society out from under his fingernails yet, talking about "freedom" in West Germany. No matter what you say, the Red Army Choir's music was objectively more beautiful and inspiring than Right Said Fred, even if it's for the wrong ideology. At the end of the day, both systems put racialists and jew-namers in prison.

The person blinded by ideology here is you, not me. I wish Bolshevism had never existed, but my criticisms of it are the numerous tenets it shares with capitalism. Both systems operate on a frequency that is alien to Western people, and all too familiar to Kikes (as they invented them!).

By and large, the Cold War wasn't for nothing. Many of those "welfare reforms" were done out of fear of the economic powerhouse that was the 1960's Soviet Union. The victory of Plutocracy over Bolshevism was Pyrrhic. But at least the Commies had a center and fostered a sense of community (even if in theory it was globalist). By the 1950's and 60's Jews abandoned Soviet-style communism, even George Lincoln Rockwell noted this.


Some points - I spent a week in East Germany in 1987. Two years before wall fell. The air pollution was terrible. Worse than '70s Los Angeles, which I experienced many years of. Half the people on our tour, young, healthy, non-right-wing students, had breathing problems by the time the week ended. There was cheering when we finally got back into West Germany. There's nothing great about the cowed, stagnant, physically dirty nation that was jew-run East Germany.

I've known East Germans, and according to them the pollution was limited to one region due to a high concentration of heavy industries and coal plants, as well as the spread of effects from the Chernobyl disaster. According to this person , the rest of East Germany outside of Saxony was not affected by this.

Los Angeles was, is and always will be smoggy and shitty. Oh did I mention its dangerous, full of muds, and bankrupt a hundred times over? Give me a little dirty air over boisterous mexican parties that go until 5 AM on a tuesday and stray bullets whizzing through my window.

West Germany was wealthier, in terms of access to novelties like off-season strawberries, black cock, or finding Israeli-made designer drugs, and East Germany was a shithole in numerous ways, but out of the two evils, most racialists would've preferred the comparatively homogenous and Conservative DDR.

The problem is, Joe, you want to kill what has been great about Anglo culture - its inventiveness and creativity and enterprise. It is clear you prefer socialist stagnation.

Socialist Germans invented the computer, the rocket, the automobile and truck, the electric train, metal aircraft and about a billion other things...


You appear to suffer from Akins syndrome - real, heartfelt hatred and jealousy of anyone who gets ahead economically by working hard.

Akins was a welfare queen and useless retard. I work physically taxing manual labor and pull my weight ten fold. If someone in my field gets a promotion I pat them on a back if they deserve it, I am many things but not even close to jealous of material things, they simply don't satisfy me aside from a very short list of material comforts (a good smoke, a hard drink, that's about it). Most real men who know a purpose aren't, that is the realm of earthly entities like jews and women. If the bourgeois philosophy was even remotely satisfying to me, I wouldn't be here.

That said, yes, I do resent having a boss that does nothing, or worse a boss working for a bigger kike boss that has never worked in his life, yet sits in an office and manipulates real estate from his office.

I don't like the Akins' of the world, but I don't like the Kike and kike-alike capitalists who have no ethical relationship to labor either. Both are parasites who take, on different scales, and never contribute but always reap the rewards of other people's work.



There may be white societies where stricter laws work better, but America isn't one of them. We need the dictatorship on the racial stuff, competition and decentralization for the rest. The important thing is not to stifle global trade but to make it a capital crime to undermine the racial basis of the country.

I never proposed my solutions for America. Trying to talk about America in its current form at this point would be precisely the same as talking about turning the Soviet Union into a racialist society. Just like Jacob Schiff funded Trotsky and Lenin, so did yids fund Jefferson and Washington. Why? Because those folks were spreading their poison, the reason the faces of 1917 had nickel noses is because a few years of your capitalist system had made room for them.

The Jew, with some notable exceptions, eats rats in filthy ghettos in a society that is alien to them. That is why he is constantly working to change it to something more to his understanding, like capitalism, and eventually communism. Karl Marx's economic determinism and historical materialism (slavery--->feudalism--->capitalism----> communism) is no coincidence, it is a veiled confession of the Jewish master plan: weaken the goyim's state with capitalism, then create your own state to enslave them .




We don't want to create and subsidize white niggers, and that's what welfare and the rest does. It kills their initiative - that's what communism did. People sit around afraid to speak their minds, waiting to be told what to do.

How is this different from capitalism?

It never ceases to amaze me that you leftists blame the guy offering the poor man a job rather than the government taking away his money in taxes

I love this mentality that somehow, the worker owes the boss just for giving him a job. Where would the capitalist be without the people creating surplus value for him? White workers can function without the boss, the reverse isn't true.


BTW, your boilterplate about Walmart is ideology, not reality. Some facts you evidently can't accept, but which are manifestly verifiable by anyone with eyes:

No it isn't, it's the tragic de-volution of American workers from productive labor to 9 dollar an hour servitude.


1) poor people love Walmart

Except the ones who have to work for them. Not to mention the fact that poor people like a lot of things that are bad for them: Republicans, Jewish movies, a lot of poor white kids even like rap. That means nothing, especially now in this current racial and spiritual dark age.


2) Walmart is not visited for its low prices, at least in small towns, but for its selection

The generally cited reason for going to Wal-Mart is the prices.


3) Walmart puts small shops out of business? That's left-wing say-so, not reality, purely based on their hatred of big business. If Walmart offers the lowest prices, and it drives others out of business, there wouldn't be, in my town, an Aldi succeeding just fine literally across the street from it. Walmart helps other businesses by bringing in people from the boonies, and some of them will go on to visit other shops, restaurants, etc. Again, this is obvious to anyone with eyes not blinded by socialist ideology.

Multiple studies have shown that Wal-Marts and Home Depots are an atom bomb for small businesses nearby. This means a reduction of jobs and the diverting of revenues.


The economic problems in America started when the Fed was created - within two decades it had produced a Great Depression, and set up the entire stinking failure that is the welfare state. The number-one thing not being discussed here is the debasing of money - that is the fundamental problem. That is the real curse and tax on working Americans. Jewish banksters created the Fed, which creates money out of thin air while everybody else has to work for it. The rest is peanuts compared to that - the debasing and dilution of the money. Downsize the federal government 99%, allow currency competition and/or tie the dollar to gold, inflation ends, the honest working man of sober habits can again get ahead. The white man doesn't need socialism, he needs ungamed money system and freedom of contract and freedom of association - like he used to have.

I am not going to argue with you regarding the federal reserve and jewish manipulation of currency, I agree with you on that completely. Problem is Jews were powerful before that, that is how they got enough influence in the inner circles of power to begin with.

Where we change paths is on failed theories like the gold standard.

If you had a case, Joe, it would have been big business that was driving America's immigration policy, demanding open borders. But that wasn't what happened. It was jews, purely and only.

Jews and big business overlap considerably. What big corporation has come out against illegal immigration? Or even "gay rights"? Big business benefits from the torrent of low IQ third world drones that have no intellectual capacity to organize themselves, yet buy all kinds of stupid shit. They're the perfect citizen in a capitalist society.

What goyish big business elites want is a nice safe gated community for their own family. They don't give a shit if everything outside of that is a cesspool, in fact it's better for them since it means they can get away with all kinds of abuses unchallenged, as happens in South American countries like Peru with their jewish minority. Big business benefits from the extermination of white people, for many of the same reason the Jews are benefiting from it. It's working class people that have an actual stake in their nation as as nation.


Point is, we don't have a country any longer, just a collection of consumer units. But business isn't to blame for that, it didn't create it.

Well they sure benefit from it, handsomely. Makes you wonder, why would soulless materialists not want people who exist for no other reason than to put money in their pockets?


As for unions creating a middle class, that's simply union propaganda, no different from the NEA claiming students who homeschool are poorly socialized compared to PS prisoners. What created a middle class -- what lifted the entire world -- was precisely the capitalism you despise. Today it's doing the same thing in Bangladesh that it did in America.

I would recommend you look at what life was like for workers in Industrial age Britain compared to Socialist Germany.



You correctly notice that wages have stagnated since the early '70s, but that's from all the socialism kicking in and ratcheting up, not because of capitalism. All you have to do is get rid of taxes and government and any white area will flourish. It's government that makes everybody but the government and the criminals it supports rich while impoverishing working whites of all classes. Hell, you ought to know that from Greece alone.

America was never, nor is a socialist country. It's a plutocracy that occasionally uses the state on behalf of the Jews.


Your disdain for economic law, or experience, or whatever you want to call it is foolish. Men cannot be trusted. Incentives can be. There will no more be a New Aryan Man than there was a New Soviet Man. The second something like Golden Dawn takes power it will be overrun with Gianni-come-lately careerists who will in time, when the idealism burns off, recreate the same corruption Greece has pretty much always suffered from.

I think the purest test of manhood proves you dead wrong. The Waffen-SS fought battles outnumbered sometimes 10 to 1, and still won or barely lost. These weren't just Germans, there were divisions from other countries, including some known for their corruption or cowardice, like Spain, Walloonia, France, etc that were just as impressive. These men towered over the mechanical Soviets and Americans, and this was because of an ideology that merges perfectly with faustian man's deepest spiritual instincts. It's not idealism, it's our nature. The "New Aryan Man" isn't new, it's dormant, it just seems new because we have become utterly bastardized by world jewry. America's foundations are the same as the Soviet Unions.


The only duty of the central government is to defend the collective racially. Now, it's true that's a little more complex than it sounds, in this age of globalized communications and transportation, but it's still definable enough compared to what we have now. The rest can be left up to private arrangements.

If you think economics and politics won't overlap and even come at odds, you are frankly a fool.


Unions today, what are they? As Leonard observed, they're public sector, not private. They are horribly anti-white too - they both support Mexican invasion, and they, the NEA in particular, are the 'change agents' ie lite communists pushing the NWO's anti-white ideology harder than anyone. It is obscene and outrageous that any white man with a real job - a private-sector - job is taxed to support the NEA regime criminals.


There is no real reason for workers unions to support illegal immigration. All of your anecdotes do not demonstrate any flaw in worker's syndicates, only that Jews have taken them over and used them as another branch of their system.


Our cause is about making it safe to be white, not featherbedding and cosseting white niggers. We don't just want dumb people with no enterprise, we want smart, creative people who can run their own lives, and simply need a political force defending their racial interests, not ripping off their more intelligent, harder-working white brethren to subsidize their laziness and stupidity.

If you are a racialist, you are a collectivist and a socialist whether you like it or not. The idea that you can have classical liberalism combined with some kind of Hitler style racialist state is laughable. I give Linderstan a few decades until jews return victorious.

The capitalists on this forum have been duped first by British propaganda, then by Allied propaganda, and on top of that cold war teachings by all the ex-trotskyist liberals that created the post-buckley conservativism many Americans here come from.

George Orwell correctly noted that the German victory over France in 1940 was, in a grander scheme of things, a dramatic victory of the planned economy over capitalism. The unprovoked decision to declare war on Germany by Britain and the City Of London also was a testament to the fear of these jews of a planned economy that they don't control.

Of course, this does not mean dispossessing creative elements of their property or creating some gray, dull society where everyone is artificially kept the same. Innate differences in ability and creativity should be rewarded within a population, but as long as capital rules labor, there will always be chaos. When labor rules capital and liberalism is slowly and peacefully replaced, then we can get our race back on track.

Please name the most influential [to you] books on economics that you have read.

Please list the books with the most false ideas, and tell us what they are.