Exxon Posts Record Profits

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
101

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Exxon should make MORE money. Just think, you get to drive 20 or 30 MILES for a lousy $2 or so. They give us this great gift, ask for chump change (no matter how many billions they make), and they are villified.

Capitalism, the first system to do any one any damned good, is under attack. The American people ought to literally run out of town any politician who attacks these men, the foundation of our society.

Do you want the Politburo or Exxon? Make your choice; and your time is running out.[/quote]

So complaining about ridiculously high prices makes you a communist?
Retard.
‘Yoy’re either with us, or you’re with the communists…When you complain about high prices, the communists win’- hmmm, sounds familar.

Making a profit is cool, it’s essential for capitalism to work, but gouging your customers is surely not only bad business practice long-term, but also unethical. Companies should show some social responsibility, be in it for more than just the money, to make the world a better place. Ethics- a word being forgotten by most big businesses today.

102

[quote]ZEB wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:

I wasn’t trying to insult you anymore than you were trying to insult me. There is nothing wrong with being successful.

I’ll go one better: There is a lot right about being successful!

People are a sum of their experiences. Thus so am I.

Exactly my point! And when you get older and have even more experiences you will indeed have a more valuable opinion. That is not to say your opinion is not now valuable. Do you know what I mean? However, how much credence do you give a 12 year olds opinion? Not that the kid may not have a point.

If I thought just like you, we would not be having any discussion at all.

Sure we would, but it would be on a different level.

However, from the things I have read in literature, much of which has been written over the last thousand years or so, the nature of men does not change.

Agreed!

Greed corrupts even the best men. I am saying that without a government to keep these things in check, enforced by the mob as a whole, a fortunate few will control everything.

I just want to make sure that you don’t walk down that well trodden liberal path. The one that states “all corporations are bad. All who are rich are evil.” Get the idea?

[/quote]

I understand what you are saying. But I absolutely do not agree with the fact that what I am saying is not as credible as what you say because you are older.

Age does not mean too much as far as knowledge goes. It would not be on a different level at all. Comparing my opinion to that of a 12 year old is nice, its good to know that being a semester away from having an English B.A. equates me with a sixth grader.

Youth obviously discounts all the great writers, for the majority of them wrote their best things before way before age 50. But if Keats had lived past 26, his poetry would have been better right? yea. sure.

Secondly, big corporations are fucking evil. I am not saying small business, I am not saying entrepeneurs. But if you are going to try to convince me that any massive corporation really gives a flying fuck about civil rights, environmentalism, pregressiveness, and the good of the common worker, you are wrong. They care about the bottom line, and the bottom line is money. It is you who is being too idealistic now.

103

Question:

Was anyone proposing a bail out of the oil companies several years ago when oil was at $15 a barrel and they were losing money hand over fist?

If the prices fall again, will anyone want the government to step in and help the poor oil companies that are losing money?

Demand and speculation in the markets has pushed the price up for oil; restrictions in supply and stupid regulations have done the same for refined gasoline products. If the oil companies’ costs don’t rise, which they don’t seem to have done, then their profit margins will rise.

Besides, isn’t this what all the environmentalists wanted? Higher gas prices to discourage driving and encourage fuel efficiency (which is what has been happening in the market) – or is that only OK when it’s accomplished by higher taxes and not by market forces?

BTW, any raise in price on any item hurts more when you have less money, as it leaves you with less disposable income. Higher rents hurt the poor. Higher gas prices hurt the poor. Higher milk prices hurt the poor. Etc. THe key is to help people earn more money, not wring our hands over increased commodity prices.

104

[quote]deanosumo wrote:
…
Making a profit is cool, it’s essential for capitalism to work, but gouging your customers is surely not only bad business practice long-term, but also unethical. Companies should show some social responsibility, be in it for more than just the money, to make the world a better place. Ethics- a word being forgotten by most big businesses today.
[/quote]

I would love for someone to define for me, with some degree of specificity, what “gouging” entails.

Usually (I’m not talking short-term state-of-emergency situations here, though those often aren’t much better w/r/t definitions), I get the sense that what people mean when they say it is that they think the prices are too high.

105

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
Question:

Was anyone proposing a bail out of the oil companies several years ago when oil was at $15 a barrel and they were losing money hand over fist?

If the prices fall again, will anyone want the government to step in and help the poor oil companies that are losing money?

Demand and speculation in the markets has pushed the price up for oil; restrictions in supply and stupid regulations have done the same for refined gasoline products. If the oil companies’ costs don’t rise, which they don’t seem to have done, then their profit margins will rise.

Besides, isn’t this what all the environmentalists wanted? Higher gas prices to discourage driving and encourage fuel efficiency (which is what has been happening in the market) – or is that only OK when it’s accomplished by higher taxes and not by market forces?

BTW, any raise in price on any item hurts more when you have less money, as it leaves you with less disposable income. Higher rents hurt the poor. Higher gas prices hurt the poor. Higher milk prices hurt the poor. Etc. THe key is to help people earn more money, not wring our hands over increased commodity prices.[/quote]

Well said BB.

106

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
deanosumo wrote:
…
Making a profit is cool, it’s essential for capitalism to work, but gouging your customers is surely not only bad business practice long-term, but also unethical. Companies should show some social responsibility, be in it for more than just the money, to make the world a better place. Ethics- a word being forgotten by most big businesses today.

In NJ, gouging by law means raising your prices more than once (I think once) during a day. Governor Cody actually went to a bunch of gas stations that raised them three times in the course of 12 hours. They are getting in trouble from the state for price gouging. I think the definition varies on the state. But NJ made it pretty clear.
I would love for someone to define for me, with some degree of specificity, what “gouging” entails.

Usually (I’m not talking short-term state-of-emergency situations here, though those often aren’t much better w/r/t definitions), I get the sense that what people mean when they say it is that they think the prices are too high.[/quote]

107

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
Question:

Was anyone proposing a bail out of the oil companies several years ago when oil was at $15 a barrel and they were losing money hand over fist?

If the prices fall again, will anyone want the government to step in and help the poor oil companies that are losing money?

Demand and speculation in the markets has pushed the price up for oil; restrictions in supply and stupid regulations have done the same for refined gasoline products. If the oil companies’ costs don’t rise, which they don’t seem to have done, then their profit margins will rise.

Besides, isn’t this what all the environmentalists wanted? Higher gas prices to discourage driving and encourage fuel efficiency (which is what has been happening in the market) – or is that only OK when it’s accomplished by higher taxes and not by market forces?

BTW, any raise in price on any item hurts more when you have less money, as it leaves you with less disposable income. Higher rents hurt the poor. Higher gas prices hurt the poor. Higher milk prices hurt the poor. Etc. THe key is to help people earn more money, not wring our hands over increased commodity prices.[/quote]

I’m not for propping up any company. Not the airlines or the rail companies or farmers or oil companies. I’m also not for most welfare or funding for NEA bullshit either.

You really have to draw a line regarding which items we feel are necessities that the government should help us to provide for ourselves (infrastructure, etc.) and which things should just be left to the open market. Oil is a gray area because both industry and individuals rely on it to be able to get to work and make a living.

As I said earlier, we should have been forcing more fuel conservation and alternative source plans a long time ago. However, in America, we put the dollar above all else. Fuck the environment if I can add another $100k to my billions, right? Fuck the minimum wage worker who has to drive an hour+ to get to his job. Poor dumb bastard should have tried harder in school, right?

108

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

Understood. My choice was to go to a bar and spend $6. I know I could have invested that $6 in Exxon, but methinks it wouldn’t have made that much of a difference…[/quote]

Ah, Therein lies some of the problem. You think of it as only $6, but through the magic of compounding interest those $6 today turn into possibly $100 in 10 years and maybe even $1,000 a few years after that.

I thought the same way when I was in college 20 years ago. Now, I kick myself (figuratively) for not starting my savings/retirement plan sooner.

The problem with the “poor” is that of making choices in their life.

Rhetorical question:

How is it that an immigrant can come to this country, with no money, only the clothes on them , not speak the language and in just a few years own a successful business, a house and probably several different investments?

What is it that he (or she) did that locally born and raised americans don’t or won’t do for themselves?

Usually it is the choices they make.

As a nation we are teaching our kids that they are entitled to things. Just look at how people in south florida are whining because the Feds didn’t show up fast enough with food, water and ice.

Since when is it the role of government (local,state or federal) to provide for our survival?

109

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:

Do you want the Politburo or Exxon? Make your choice; and your time is running out.

What’s the difference? They both run their countries. Free market capitalism is just government run by the massive corporations, instead of the the government itself. This is well documented and already proven. In the greatest country in the world, 10% of the population should not control 90% of the wealth. That’s a hell of an “American Dream”, getting the scraps off the tables of the super rich elite.[/quote]

I think that no matter what the political structure of any country, you will find that 10% (or so) will control the majority of the wealth.

And if by some chance all the wealth in the world was equally distributed to each individual, in a few years 90% of the wealth would end up in the hands of a small (10% perhaps) of the population.

Again, I think it will come back to the choices people make with that money.

Something to think about.

110

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
I would love for someone to define for me, with some degree of specificity, what “gouging” entails.

Usually (I’m not talking short-term state-of-emergency situations here, though those often aren’t much better w/r/t definitions), I get the sense that what people mean when they say it is that they think the prices are too high.[/quote]

Gas prices around here haven’t dropped…and as I said before, there are many days where there is no gas at gas stations. How does a company come out ahead farther than ever before when there is this much going on as far supply? They aren’t even meeting the demand. I am simply asking questions. I understand some seem to want to defend big business with every ounce of your being, but something about this just doesn’t sound right. Someone mentioned ethics above. Many of you would have a fit if your doctor’s office increased prices for an exam double or triple the current fee. I wonder how many would immediately log on after that office visit and say, “oh well, they are a business so they can do as they please and I hope they make more money!”.

Insurance costs rule the health field. they put caps on what doctors can do or choose to do in a procedure. In some cases, the procedure is specified for certain problems. Yet, not one person is running to stop the power of insurance agencies. It seems a little odd to me. Everyone cheering on gas companies for making top profits should also be against health insurance that takes so much control out of the hands of doctors. Hell, why do any of you need insurance? Why not just pay for your procedures out of your pocket? You all worked hard enough, right?

I’m just trying to understand the logic. Bear with me.

111

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Gas prices around here haven’t dropped…and as I said before, there are many days where there is no gas at gas stations. How does a company come out ahead farther than ever before when there is this much going on as far supply? They aren’t even meeting the demand. I am simply asking questions. [/quote]

I can’t answer for the oil companies, but just thinking about it makes me conclude that those profits didn’t come exclusively from the U.S. market.

So, it could be possible that speculation (futures trading) and profits in other (non-US) markets gave rise to these profits.

YMMV

112

[quote]Professor X wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
I would love for someone to define for me, with some degree of specificity, what “gouging” entails.

Usually (I’m not talking short-term state-of-emergency situations here, though those often aren’t much better w/r/t definitions), I get the sense that what people mean when they say it is that they think the prices are too high.

Gas prices around here haven’t dropped…and as I said before, there are many days where there is no gas at gas stations. How does a company come out ahead farther than ever before when there is this much going on as far supply? They aren’t even meeting the demand. I am simply asking questions. I understand some seem to want to defend big business with every ounce of your being, but something about this just doesn’t sound right. Someone mentioned ethics above. Many of you would have a fit if your doctor’s office increased prices for an exam double or triple the current fee. I wonder how many would immediately log on after that office visit and say, “oh well, they are a business so they can do as they please and I hope they make more money!”.

Insurance costs rule the health field. they put caps on what doctors can do or choose to do in a procedure. In some cases, the procedure is specified for certain problems. Yet, not one person is running to stop the power of insurance agencies. It seems a little odd to me. Everyone cheering on gas companies for making top profits should also be against health insurance that takes so much control out of the hands of doctors. Hell, why do any of you need insurance? Why not just pay for your procedures out of your pocket? You all worked hard enough, right?

I’m just trying to understand the logic. Bear with me.[/quote]

Excellent point Professor! All you people who think that if you just work hard and save your pennies that life will be easy, stop paying for all your insurance. You’ve worked hard and saved enough to cover your ass if your house burns down or you get in a car accident or you get cancer. Don’t get loans for houses or cars either, and definitely no credit cards. You pay in cash for everything, right, cause you’ve earned every penny you’ve made and you don’t need the government or anyone else’s help do you?

Seems like a bit of a tangiential rant, but hear me out. Most of you have far more in common with the poor lazy bastards you despise (cause if you’re poor, you must be lazy), than you do with the elite powerbrokers of this country. You are one little personal tragedy away from the poor house where you’ll get in line with those you despise to get some help from Uncle Sam.

When the rest of the jobs go to China and India and the corporate elite who you love have raped this country completely, we’ll see who the next poor lazy bastards are!

113

[quote]chadman wrote:

Excellent point Professor! All you people who think that if you just work hard and save your pennies that life will be easy, stop paying for all your insurance. You’ve worked hard and saved enough to cover your ass if your house burns down or you get in a car accident or you get cancer. Don’t get loans for houses or cars either, and definitely no credit cards. You pay in cash for everything, right, cause you’ve earned every penny you’ve made and you don’t need the government or anyone else’s help do you?

[/quote]

I think the point is that, this is the exact reason you DO buy insurance, and don’t expect the government to provide for our survival.

YMMV

114

[quote]chadman wrote:

When the rest of the jobs go to China and India and the corporate elite who you love have raped this country completely, we’ll see who the next poor lazy bastards are![/quote]

I believe that the people that are raping this country include those that are sucking at the public teat. Asking government to use force to take away property from one person to give to another.

The government doesn’t have any free money to give away. It all belonged to someone else, like you and me.

115

[quote]HardcoreHypnosis wrote:
chadman wrote:

Excellent point Professor! All you people who think that if you just work hard and save your pennies that life will be easy, stop paying for all your insurance. You’ve worked hard and saved enough to cover your ass if your house burns down or you get in a car accident or you get cancer. Don’t get loans for houses or cars either, and definitely no credit cards. You pay in cash for everything, right, cause you’ve earned every penny you’ve made and you don’t need the government or anyone else’s help do you?

I think the point is that, this is the exact reason you DO buy insurance, and don’t expect the government to provide for our survival.

YMMV[/quote]

Goober, The point is that insurance is the same damn thing as the government. What is the difference if you pay you’re insurance premiums and possibly collect on a claim or if you pay your taxes and possibly collect a government check from FEMA or whoever during a personal time of crisis?

The point is that if you buy into the pull yourself up by your bootstraps dogma, then you shouldn’t need insurance. Just save your money and if something bad happens, pay for it yourself. Most of us couldn’t. Thus the point that the vast majority of us have more in common with the poor than we do with the elite who could pay cash for whatever they wanted. Think Bill Gates or Oprah couldn’t pay for anything they wanted to?

I don’t want some kind of welfare state either, but there are cases where the poor, the sick, the displaced need help.

116

[quote]HardcoreHypnosis wrote:
chadman wrote:

When the rest of the jobs go to China and India and the corporate elite who you love have raped this country completely, we’ll see who the next poor lazy bastards are!

I believe that the people that are raping this country include those that are sucking at the public teat. Asking government to use force to take away property from one person to give to another.

The government doesn’t have any free money to give away. It all belonged to someone else, like you and me.

[/quote]

I agree with you there. Drives me crazy in California that non-citizens get treated for free at the hospital, but I can rack up enough of a bill to make me homeless.

However, if you think that poor people suck more money out of this country than corporate welfare, and various budgetary pork, you really are delusional.

117

<<Thunderbold 23
I want you to show me evidence that there was no reasonable basis to believe WMDs were in Iraq prior to the war.>>

“He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq…” Colon Powell 2/24/01

“But in terms of Saddam Hussein being there, let’s remember that his country is divided, in effect. He does not control the northern part of his country. We are able to keep arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt.” Condoleezza Rice 7/29/01

This is just too easy. You see Thunderbolt23, as an Independent I don’t blindly follow a political party and twist myself into a pretzel trying to defend the indefensible. I simply make judgments upon what I see without Republican and Democrat spin filters warping my perceptions. It is our duty as Americans to critically judge our elected officials and hold them accountable for their misdeeds.
You and those of your ilk have chosen not to do so and yet many of you have the nerve to call yourselves patriotic.
I’m done with you now, have a nice weekend.

118

The primary problem right now is a lack of refining capacity. For years oil companies refused to build excess capacity because the global price of oil was so low. Low prices, low margins. There was no incentive to boost capacity in this environment.

With the increased global demand it is now possible for the oil companies to increase capacity and if nothing else maintain pre-oil boom profit margins. In order for this to happen we need a more unified national standard for emissions, and we need to insure that these standards aren’t constantly changing so that refineries have to be retrofitted all the time.

We can tax profits from the oil copmpanies if we want to, but that will not help us lower prices. Oil will still be purchased at higher prices, which the U.S. as a net oil importer will have to pay. The poor can be shielded in this scenario through some sort of subsidy, but ultimately the US Gov. will foot the bill, and one day that bill will have to be paid with reduced Gov. services.

I think it’s a better idea to take steps to ease the refining shortage while also pursuing alternative energy resources, particularly nuclear.

119

[quote]Robobrewer wrote:
This is just too easy. You see Thunderbolt23, as an Independent I don’t blindly follow a political party and twist myself into a pretzel trying to defend the indefensible. I simply make judgments upon what I see without Republican and Democrat spin filters warping my perceptions. It is our duty as Americans to critically judge our elected officials and hold them accountable for their misdeeds.[/quote]

Oh? But where are these misdeeds? Are we talking BJ’s and lying under oath here? Oh… you think that Bush lied, people died… no that’s not democratic liberal spin at all, you free thinker you… a couple of quotes from 2001 are not damning, BTW.

I am not a repugnant or a demosplat either, bro, but you need to reevaluate your critical thinking skills if you think that Bush went to Iraq under false pretenses. We never stopped Gulf War I, remember? Saddam was (with the EU’s and UN’s help) flagrantly violating – repeatedly – the sanctions we placed against him in the 90’s. That’s all the reason we needed for MY support of this military action…

Nevermind the fact that the sanctions did nothing but hurt the innocent and poor populace of Iraq because Saddam had cronies who helped him pull off the OFF scandal. WE SHOULD HAVE GONE IN SOONER. I wish we still had the “Cheestastics Anonymous” thread alive on this site, because its exploration of this issue opened my eyes to a lot of the BS that is floating around out there in the MSM.

Nevermind also that Saddam and his sons got away with murder (literally and figuratively) for WAY too long. He used his control of electricity and water supply to hold his population hostage. His thug sons would kill and rape whoever they wanted to at any time. I don’t believe in the idea of “evil” myself, but if there’s anyone who could come close, it was the assholes of the Saddam Hussein family.

[quote] You and those of your ilk have chosen not to do so and yet many of you have the nerve to call yourselves patriotic.
I’m done with you now, have a nice weekend.
[/quote]

If you aren’t careful, it is easy to get twisted around in politics. Let go of the Bush-hate for a second (even though it’s fun) and look into this yourself. Don’t let someone else do your thinking for you. There’s a lot of good info in the net… you could do this right now. Google some stuff about Pre-war Iraq. Look at what Saddam did to his people under the auspices of the Oil For Food program. Check out who Saddam’s sons were. Research the sanctions he violated over and over. Think for yourself.

120

[quote]Professor X wrote:
…Insurance costs rule the health field. they put caps on what doctors can do or choose to do in a procedure. In some cases, the procedure is specified for certain problems. Yet, not one person is running to stop the power of insurance agencies. It seems a little odd to me. Everyone cheering on gas companies for making top profits should also be against health insurance that takes so much control out of the hands of doctors. Hell, why do any of you need insurance? Why not just pay for your procedures out of your pocket? You all worked hard enough, right?

I’m just trying to understand the logic. Bear with me.[/quote]

Prof X, I think insurance companies are a huge part of the problem. Once again there is no free market. The insurance companies set prices with doctors and have control as you said.

I suspect that if people paid for their health care directly costs would go down for most (except the catastrophically ill.)

The oil companies do not operate in the free market either. If there is evidence of collusion they should be punished.

If the prices are legitimate then we will have to bite the bullet and deal with it.