NY Times blasts "profit" and capitalism for success of foreign EVs

The leftist, Democrat-fellating rat-bastards at the NY Times absolutely HATE capitalism, and profit--if made by an American company.

Profits made by foreign companies don't bother 'em.  And there you see the telltale: it ain't that the bastards hate profits, just profits made by American companies.  What does that tell ya?

SO...yesterday the Times ran a LONG piece wailing about the U.S. auto industry.  The piece starts by wailing that U.S. companies are realizing that Americans aren't dazzled by doze faaaabulous 'lectric cars, so U.S. companies have been losing money on each one they sell.  As a result, they're bailing out.

"OMG, dis beez absolutely AWFUL!" wails the Times propagandist.

Hey cupcake, EVERY automaker outside of Chyna has been scrapping faaaabulous EV projects.  But you refuse to publish THAT, instead choosing to blame capitalism, and "duh crazy focus on profits."  Cuz profits beez eeeeebil!

Oh wait, only profits by American companies, eh?

Fuck you, you communist sons of whores.

Now, I'm not at ALL a fan of big corporations: Like ALL bureaucracies they're full of incompetent suck-ups who can barely spell "cat."  The execs are good at telling the boss whatever they think he wants to hear, so innovation is rare.

SO...starting around 1970 or so, Japanese car makers started making huge inroads into U.S. car sales.  Why?  Because they made great products that got good fuel economy and cost a bit less.  And the smaller size (4 passengers) matched the smaller size of younger American familes.

*No one saw that coming.*  Japan built small cars because Japanese families rarely had more than two children--which is why they've been below the "replacement rate" for decades.  They made what worked in Japan, and it happened to match an emerging U.S. trend that's now become almost universal.

[Ask AI "What was the first U.S. car-maker to make electric cars?"  AI answer:
   >>General Motors (GM) made the first modern, mass-produced electric vehicle (EV) from a major U.S. automaker. They released the two-seater GM EV1 in 1996. Drivers could only lease these cars in specific states. GM ended the EV1 program in 2003.]
[AI says Tesla sold its first EV five years later, in 2008.]

The NY Times quotes a communist "auto reporter" named Martin Padgett, about U.S. automakers cancelling EVs:  "We did a U-turn while the rest of the world was pushing forward.”  “It was blinkered thinking, of course. It was an attempt to maximize profits.”

There ya have it again: duh nutty U.S. companies wanted to make a profit!  How crazy, right?

Let's review: according to [propagandists], in 2025 a quarter of all cars sold around the world was electric.  Okay, fine.  But thanks to high union wages, U.S. carmakers can't make EVs as cheaply as foreign makers, including Chyna.  So as long as the imports are praised by "reporters"/reviewers, what do ya think happens, eh?

Of course: Americans buy the less-expensive imports.  Anyone shocked?  Yeah, didn't think so.

Now follow me here: "Be it ever thus!"  This is how everyone in the world benefits from innovation.  Excellent for the world, but challenging for high-skilled, high-cost societies like ours.

Imagine "auto reporter" Martin Padgett's employer emailing him: "Marty, baby, we're having to compete with foreign reporters, so we'd like you to take a ten percent pay cut to help out.  You're fine with that, right?"

Hahahahaha!  Of course not.  And U.S. carmakers are in the same situation: not only will the unions refuse to take a pay cut, they continue to demand annual raises.  Totally understandable.  And because they'll strike if they don't get their way, the employer caves--and all the others do too.

Where does this leave us?  Chyna's "BYD" carmaker makes tiny cars for far less than unionized U.S. companies can.  Those cars match the smaller U.S. family size (now averaging just 1.4 kids per white female over her lifetime).  Can anyone predict the outcome?

Yeah, thought ya could.  And yet the NY Times--and crack "auto reporter" Martin Padgett--blame capitalism and the profit motive.  Cuz duy Times won't blame rapacious unions, nor high taxes, nor absurd workplace rules.  Jus' "profits."

But just profits by *American companies.*

The Times quotes a "senior economist with a Washington-based nonprofit (Stephen Ezell) as estimating that as of 2024 only one-third of all new cars bought in the U.S. were built by the Big Three."  No surprise there.  But then the Times preaches this:
>>The EV revolution was seen as a way to reverse that trend--an opportunity for Detroit to rediscover its capacity for ingenuity and to re-establish credibility.>>

SEE, stupid capitalists?  Yew had dis faaabulous opportunity to "re-discover credibility," but instead yew cancelled yo' faaabulous EV projects!  Shame!

And then comes the predictable knife from the Times: They bleat that the cancellations come at a time "before the chaos in the Strait of Hormuz helped push the price of unleaded gasoline to a four-year high."

SEE, stupid U.S. car makers and voters?  It's all Trump's fault! 

The rest of the Times piece fellates Obozo and the Democrats for their fawning support for EVs--almost entirely driven by their goal of killing U.S. oil and gas production.  The Times credits the vegetable bribem for the $7,500 taxpayer-funded "credit" paid to EV makers to cut the sale price of their cars--meaning if you never buy an EV you still pay for the "credit" for those who do.

Are Democrats great or what?  See, it's perfectly fine for Democrats to subsidize (distort) markets to get what they want.  Conservatives aren't allowed to do that, of course, but dat perfekly fine wif Dems an' duh Media, eh?

Just another day ending in Y, eh citizen?

Source: shitty NY Times communists

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/15/magazine/electric-cars-american-evs.html