Aftermath of rightfully submitting a solo paper without my advisor's name After reading this question and this I haven't find my answer.

My advisor hasn't contributed to my work and I know that my work isn't significant and it won't publish in top journals. But I want to publish it without my advisor's name in a conference.

So my question is not about automatically coauthor my advisor or having high hopes on my individual work.

The Problem arise from here. We have to enroll in some seminar classes before starting to work on our thesis.
In one of those classes our teacher said:


"No matter what you do, you have to enlist your advisor's name in your papers because unless it would considered as a work with no supervisor and it can not be trusted." 
"In interview we have for PhD students, if the person who is applying hasn't written the name of his suprevisor we doubt him. Either he is a genius or he is hiding something or he is too active in his field."
"In some companies and research labs everyone add the name of their fundraiser to show him their gratitude, so should we.".


So based on what I heard I'm going to face serious problems if I publish my work individually as a student. The question is:


Apart from being unethical including a name of person who didn't contribute to work as a coauthor, does it have any academic weight? I mean, does it value my work if I say I did it alone or it does not have any different until coauthor isn't a student.
Is it true that I am going to be accused as a not genuine person if I don't add my advisor's name? Because our teacher told us that he and his colleagues don't consider these kind of submitted papers trustworthy and genuine, so don't look at them carefully and mostly reject them on sight.


Edit: 

Conclusion: Thank you all. I think my vision is more clear now. The right way is not the opposite of the wrong way. It means despite "spoon-fed" "a very distorted view", the right thing to do is not doing the opposite.

I decided to do my best to play as a team, because of its mentioned benefits, especially for my first paper. But if working as a team doesn't go well, there is no harm in solo publishing or getting some new advisers.
I don't think your problem is with your advisor. Your real problem is with teachers in classes who say things like:


  
  No matter what you do, you have to enlist your advisor's name in your
  papers because unless it would considered as a work with no supervisor
  and it can not be trusted."
  "In interview we have for PhD students, if the person who is applying
  hasn't written the name of his suprevisor we doubt him. Either he is a
  genius or he is hiding something or he is too active in his field."
  "In some companies and research labs everyone add the name of their
  fundraiser to show him their gratitude, so should we.".
  


In light of all the recent debate about whether we are too idealized and rosy in our views of academia, let me at least say this: 

Whether or not this is common practice in the areas you work in, the problem here is the rationale being used to justify author inclusion. In no way is the decision being made based on some notion of contribution by the advisor (either financial or moral, or in any form). It's being based purely on a notion of patronage or bias. 

The person making these claims has either a very distorted view of how authorship works, or is misleading new students in a terrible way.