Exxon Mobil Sets highest annual profit in US history (1 Viewer)

[jfuh]

This is a proud day for oil bought senators, congressman, and president. They helped to secure the most lucrative profit for an oil company this year. I wonder how much kick back these corrupt officials will recieve in terms of travel packages or "gifts"?
Disgusting.

 

[Australianlibertarian]

Exxon Mobil are a corporation. If they make a record profit, good for them. That is what they are mandated to do by law.

Why shouldn't corporations be allowed to make profits, when by law that is what they are specifically designed to do?

If anything these record profits are a good thing. Exxon Mobil will be able to invest this money in either increased refining capacity, increased oil exploration, or to upgrade their exisiting refineries. And give back some of this profit to their investors.

I just love it that there are people that think that capitalism shouldn't apply to oil companies... Strange.

It's all about supply and demand.:mrgreen:

 

[ngdawg]

Exxon Mobil are a corporation. If they make a record profit, good for them. That is what they are mandated to do by law.

Why shouldn't corporations be allowed to make profits, when by law that is what they are specifically designed to do?

If anything these record profits are a good thing. Exxon Mobil will be able to invest this money in either increased refining capacity, increased oil exploration, or to upgrade their exisiting refineries. And give back some of this profit to their investors.

I just love it that there are people that think that capitalism shouldn't apply to oil companies... Strange.

It's all about supply and demand.:mrgreen:

Only thing is, increased capacity, exploration and upgrade will more than likely NOT be heavily invested in and instead, there will be some investing in very large homes, big boats, shiny fast cars and bimbos.:mrgreen:
Never underestimate the greed of the profiteer. It's not capitalism shouldn't apply to oil companies-I think it's more their tight-fisted control wielded on that supply/demand; on the one hand we are told 'conserve, conserve, conserve', so they hold back production, then as the prices escalate daily, suddenly production is 'back to normal', but the prices don't drop accordingly.
There's quite a bit of cynicism here about their business practices.

 

[BWG]

Yeah and it don't hurt to have a couple of buddies in Congress either.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/29/AR2005072901128.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A63958-2005Apr18.html

 

[Befuddled_Stoner]

So, just how much of this record profit was possible because of government subsidies?

I just love it that there are people that think that capitalism shouldn't apply to oil companies... Strange.

That's exactly the problem, AL, if the taxpayers are footing the bill for record profits, this ain't capitalism, now is it?

 

[debate_junkie]

So, just how much of this record profit was possible because of government subsidies?

That's exactly the problem, AL, if the taxpayers are footing the bill for record profits, this ain't capitalism, now is it?

And now what is it, 4 or 5 oil company CEO's won't appear before the Senate to testify this week. Hmmm are they afraid they'll "inadvertantly" pull a Rafael Palmero?

 

[jfuh]

And now what is it, 4 or 5 oil company CEO's won't appear before the Senate to testify this week. Hmmm are they afraid they'll "inadvertantly" pull a Rafael Palmero?

How is it that these cooperate heads are allowed to do what they please when they please?
Seriously, I think that aside from seperation of church and state we need seperation of cooperations and state.

 

[The Real McCoy]

Only thing is, increased capacity, exploration and upgrade will more than likely NOT be heavily invested in and instead, there will be some investing in very large homes, big boats, shiny fast cars and bimbos.:mrgreen:

Hardly. Those types of "investments" would be foolish. It is in the companies profitable interest to invest in refining capacity, upgrades, deep-sea drilling, etc.

 

[The Real McCoy]

Seriously, I think that aside from seperation of church and state we need seperation of cooperations and state.

We're in agreement there.

 

[danarhea]

Only thing is, increased capacity, exploration and upgrade will more than likely NOT be heavily invested in and instead, there will be some investing in very large homes, big boats, shiny fast cars and bimbos.:mrgreen:
Never underestimate the greed of the profiteer. It's not capitalism shouldn't apply to oil companies-I think it's more their tight-fisted control wielded on that supply/demand; on the one hand we are told 'conserve, conserve, conserve', so they hold back production, then as the prices escalate daily, suddenly production is 'back to normal', but the prices don't drop accordingly.
There's quite a bit of cynicism here about their business practices.

Actually, AustralianLibertarian is correct, and your own obervations are really irrelevant here. By the very definition of the corporation as an artificial person, it is made a very special kind of artificial person which, by law, is not allowed to have morals, or even ethics, but whose only loyalty is to its own profitability. This is not because corporate entities are either moral or immoral. The concept just does not apply in any way, according to the law.

 

[ngdawg]

Hardly. Those types of "investments" would be foolish. It is in the companies profitable interest to invest in refining capacity, upgrades, deep-sea drilling, etc.

Well, I did have Mr. Green there showing I wasn't totally serious....but given the billions in PROFIT made, I truly doubt more than a third would go back to those type of investments.
It would also seem to me, naive though it may be, that, despite the supply and demand argument, if THAT much was made in profit, prices at the pump 'could have' dropped more than they did-to under $2- after the hurricane scares and they would have still had more money than God. "Greed is good". But....there are plenty of people who see that and go elsewhere just to make their own little point. ( I don't use Exxon, it's more expensive than the others here).
Now to see how the rest fared....

 

[Deegan]

Actually, AustralianLibertarian is correct, and your own obervations are really irrelevant here. By the very definition of the corporation as an artificial person, it is made a very special kind of artificial person which, by law, is not allowed to have morals, or even ethics, but whose only loyalty is to its own profitability. This is not because corporate entities are either moral or immoral. The concept just does not apply in any way, according to the law.

Be happy you have successful companies in your country, if not, you would probably not be talking with us here, especially in a state like Texas!

I hate to be so simplistic, but that is the truth, if not us, someone else, as shown in every tanker that sails from China, we compete, we have to!:shock:

 

[Befuddled_Stoner]

How is it that these cooperate heads are allowed to do what they please when they please?

Lots and lots of campaign contributions, ain't it grand?

Seriously, I think that aside from seperation of church and state we need seperation of cooperations and state.

I'm not sure if this is feasible, or even a good idea. Cooperations need to be regulated, otherwise they'll exploit the **** out of their workers, and plunder every available natural resource needed to turn a profit. Because nobody can agree just how much regulation is needed, there's always going to be a tug-of-war in government between those who get rich from lax regulation, and those who think driving frogs to extinction might be a bad thing. As nice as it would be to extirpate the source of most government coruption, I think its a necessary evil in exchange for nifty things, like plasma screen tvs, and delaying the necessity of living in city sized bio-domes.

 

[jfuh]

I'm not sure if this is feasible, or even a good idea. Cooperations need to be regulated, otherwise they'll exploit the **** out of their workers, and plunder every available natural resource needed to turn a profit. Because nobody can agree just how much regulation is needed, there's always going to be a tug-of-war in government between those who get rich from lax regulation, and those who think driving frogs to extinction might be a bad thing. As nice as it would be to extirpate the source of most government coruption, I think its a necessary evil in exchange for nifty things, like plasma screen tvs, and delaying the necessity of living in city sized bio-domes.

You're absolutely right, I completely forgot that it works two ways.... ok, let it be like this then, a complete seperation of cooperate funds and state..... yeah that's pretty unfeasable too.
The problem is that the only ppl that regulate where this money is coming from is the government itself. There's no independent branch of government that regulates where contribution money is coming from.
It seems that no matter which country in the world you look there is always corruption.
Damn it, can't there be some methodology to limit this money? To keep a watch on these corrupt politicians?