• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Exxon Mobil Sets highest annual profit in US history

jfuh

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2005
Messages
16,631
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Pacific Rim
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
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.
 
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
1,011
Reaction score
306
Location
Geelong, Australia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
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

conliberaservatarianist
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Messages
2,149
Reaction score
24
Location
trackside
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Australianlibertarian said:
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.
 
Joined
Sep 10, 2005
Messages
845
Reaction score
305
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
So, just how much of this record profit was possible because of government subsidies?
Australianlibertarian said:
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

Worst Nightmare
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
919
Reaction score
19
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Befuddled_Stoner said:
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

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2005
Messages
16,631
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Pacific Rim
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
debate_junkie said:
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.
 
T

The Real McCoy

ngdawg said:
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.
 
T

The Real McCoy

jfuh said:
Seriously, I think that aside from seperation of church and state we need seperation of cooperations and state.
We're in agreement there.
 

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,603
Reaction score
26,254
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
ngdawg said:
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

conliberaservatarianist
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Messages
2,149
Reaction score
24
Location
trackside
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The Real McCoy said:
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

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
danarhea said:
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:
 
Joined
Sep 10, 2005
Messages
845
Reaction score
305
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
jfuh said:
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?
jfuh said:
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

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2005
Messages
16,631
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Pacific Rim
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Befuddled_Stoner said:
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?
 
Top Bottom