Exxon Profit surges 55%.... And gas prices are up.

Status
Not open for further replies.
So why blame the oil companies for that? It's like blaming the manufacturers of forks for Rosie O'Donnell being fat.

If someone will not get up from the table, be it the energy table, or the dinner table, then why blame the suppliers for the condition of the one making the choices?

Actually, the consumer WILL begin to make those choices when fuel prices rise. We've seen that before, and I suspect we'll see it again if prices rise to the same levels as we saw before.
 
Originally Posted By: javacontour
So why blame the oil companies for that? It's like blaming the manufacturers of forks for Rosie O'Donnell being fat.

If someone will not get up from the table, be it the energy table, or the dinner table, then why blame the suppliers for the condition of the one making the choices?

Actually, the consumer WILL begin to make those choices when fuel prices rise. We've seen that before, and I suspect we'll see it again if prices rise to the same levels as we saw before.


Does it really matter what consumers do? Even if all of America cut consumption in half, the oil companies would just roll back supply to keep it equal with damand so they could keep prices high. Point is, we need to get away from fossil fuels and move on to cleaner, renewable energy sources.
 
I say BRAVO to XOM! Keep up the good, hard work keeping us supplied with relatively low cost energy here in America.

When you make that kind of profit, the numbers can boggle some people's minds, but at a 10% margin it speaks more to their market share than anything else. And when juxtaposed against the even larger revenues raised for the government by taxing XOM's hard work. It seems silly to vilify XOM while giving the revenue men a pass.

Think about it, the government makes more than the company that has to explore, produce, transport, refine, transport again and then market the stuff. It's the same thing with the States, they make more on every car sold than the manufacturers...first it's the sales tax, then the registration...then yearly registration and the fuel use taxes. The State gets rich off others peoples labor yet again...NICE!
 
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: javacontour
So why blame the oil companies for that? It's like blaming the manufacturers of forks for Rosie O'Donnell being fat.

If someone will not get up from the table, be it the energy table, or the dinner table, then why blame the suppliers for the condition of the one making the choices?

Actually, the consumer WILL begin to make those choices when fuel prices rise. We've seen that before, and I suspect we'll see it again if prices rise to the same levels as we saw before.


Does it really matter what consumers do? Even if all of America cut consumption in half, the oil companies would just roll back supply to keep it equal with damand so they could keep prices high. Point is, we need to get away from fossil fuels and move on to cleaner, renewable energy sources.


That won't happen as long as fossil fuels are relatively cheap. So to see what you suggest needs to happen, the price of fossil fuels has to exceed the price of the alternatives you suggest.
 
I don't have a problem with EOM's profit margin or any company's per se. What I wonder about is how they report it. This is their profit margin after they pay their CEO and executives millions. When you pay your executive staff millions and pay for private jets and what have you then you can report a "profit" that seems reasonable. The executives can squeeze everything out of their workforce and customers then claim that their net income is low, too low for lower prices or higher wages. This comes out of everyone's pocket since everyone just about has to buy oil.
 
Originally Posted By: javacontour
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: javacontour
So why blame the oil companies for that? It's like blaming the manufacturers of forks for Rosie O'Donnell being fat.

If someone will not get up from the table, be it the energy table, or the dinner table, then why blame the suppliers for the condition of the one making the choices?

Actually, the consumer WILL begin to make those choices when fuel prices rise. We've seen that before, and I suspect we'll see it again if prices rise to the same levels as we saw before.


Does it really matter what consumers do? Even if all of America cut consumption in half, the oil companies would just roll back supply to keep it equal with damand so they could keep prices high. Point is, we need to get away from fossil fuels and move on to cleaner, renewable energy sources.


That won't happen as long as fossil fuels are relatively cheap. So to see what you suggest needs to happen, the price of fossil fuels has to exceed the price of the alternatives you suggest.


We as a society cannot afford to sit back and wait until gas becomes $5, $6, or $7 a gallon before we pursue alternative energy sources more aggressively. The time is now. Alternatives need to be developed to the point of bringing their price down to that of fossil fuels and below, not the other way around. The longer we wait to develop alternatives, the more pain we as a society will have to endure when the time comes to make the switch, and that time will come.
 
I have no problem with profit if it is reasonable.

On this type of thing show us why you made so much and why.

Are you just paying out more to your stock holders? Do you need it for more exploration? Did you pump alot more oil? Did speculators jack the price way up for no reason so you profited from it?
 
Originally Posted By: ZZman
I have no problem with profit if it is reasonable.

What's reasonable? Who determines that? You? The Government?
 
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: ZZman
I have no problem with profit if it is reasonable.

What's reasonable? Who determines that? You? The Government?


Well since consumers have little influence over the price of oil, and workers have little influence over wages I guess it's up to the executives. If it was a commodity people didn't have to buy and the labor market was stronger it'd be different.
 
Originally Posted By: grampi

We as a society cannot afford to sit back and wait until gas becomes $5, $6, or $7 a gallon before we pursue alternative energy sources more aggressively. The time is now. Alternatives need to be developed to the point of bringing their price down to that of fossil fuels and below, not the other way around. The longer we wait to develop alternatives, the more pain we as a society will have to endure when the time comes to make the switch, and that time will come.

So how exactly do you want to accomplish that?

I assume that you are funding alternative research firms with your own money in order for "society" to benefit from the new fuel?
 
Originally Posted By: mechanicx

Well since consumers have little influence over the price of oil, and workers have little influence over wages I guess it's up to the executives. If it was a commodity people didn't have to buy and the labor market was stronger it'd be different.

Is there a point in that post?

Housing, food, water, clothing...all of these are more necessary than oil and consumers also have "little influence" over these things as well...by your logic. So what are you trying to say?
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Originally Posted By: mechanicx

Well since consumers have little influence over the price of oil, and workers have little influence over wages I guess it's up to the executives. If it was a commodity people didn't have to buy and the labor market was stronger it'd be different.

Is there a point in that post?

Housing, food, water, clothing...all of these are more necessary than oil and consumers also have "little influence" over these things as well...by your logic. So what are you trying to say?



Not the same thing. You are lumping food all together as if it is one product from one sector of the industry. There are many varieties of foods, and many stores with varying prices even for the same products. So what do you know, there is a lot of competition in the food industry. All of which is not the case with oil. Funny how every gas station in town seems to be able to instantly raise all their prices together.

Same thing with water, a lot of people get it free from wells, or get it from the city at about cost of production, or they can choose from bottled water at various price points. Clothing is not even a consumable but same thing applies about choice and etc etc. Housing is a rip off but is another matter.
 
Quote:
You are lumping food all together as if it is one product from one sector of the industry. There are many varieties of foods, and many stores with varying prices even for the same products.

Oil comes from a great many places:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petro...ent/import.html
And those are only the top 15.

And there is in fact a lot of oil companies in the US providing competition:
http://www.petrostrategies.org/Links/Biggest_US_Based_Oil_and_Gas_Companies.htm

But again I ask, what is your point?

And as stated above, government makes much more off of the labor of oil companies than do those "evil" CEO's you hate so much:
Figure1.jpg

http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/1139.html
 
I see you have twisted this into a gov and taxation debate when there wasn't one. First off I'm sure that graph is including fed and state tax that consumers pay at the pump so it has nothing to do with the base price of gas. Also if the government reported their income revenue the way a business does they could claim they were making "nothing" too. Not that I'm a fan of taxes and the gov, but those taxes are suppose to pay for the roadways. It's not like oil companies are going to do it with their profits.

I also notice how you throw in the strawman, "evil CEO's that you hate so much". No one has said that, but only they have too much free reign to squeeze workers and consumers.
 
I haven't "twisted" this thread into anything. I simply provided perspective and information on things that were already mentioned by others, including yourself.

And I was trying to figure out what the point you are trying to make is since I still haven't seen one.

Quote:
No one has said that, but only they have too much free reign to squeeze workers and consumers.

So what do you want to do about that?
Quote:
but those taxes are suppose to pay for the roadways

That would be just the gas taxes you pay at the pump. The income taxes paid by the companies goes to the general fund.
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Originally Posted By: grampi

We as a society cannot afford to sit back and wait until gas becomes $5, $6, or $7 a gallon before we pursue alternative energy sources more aggressively. The time is now. Alternatives need to be developed to the point of bringing their price down to that of fossil fuels and below, not the other way around. The longer we wait to develop alternatives, the more pain we as a society will have to endure when the time comes to make the switch, and that time will come.

So how exactly do you want to accomplish that?

I assume that you are funding alternative research firms with your own money in order for "society" to benefit from the new fuel?


Why are you asking me? I'm not in the business of providing energy. Didn't oil companies fund their own research when they started their gas/oil businesses? Why wouldn't companies fund their own development of alternative energies? Besides, it isn't like it's not a foregone conclusion that we will have to switch over the alternatives anyway. Either that, or society goes back to living in the stone age....
 
I asked you because you said: "The longer we wait to develop alternatives". "We" includes you, and since you believe there is a problem, I wanted to see what you were doing to remedy the "problem".
Quote:
Why wouldn't companies fund their own development of alternative energies?

There is no company without money. Companies need investment capital to start, especially tech oriented ones trying to do what has never been done before.

If you feel that "we" need to do something about our dependency on oil, I would encourage you to invest some of your own money into these start up firms trying to replace oil.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

wemay
"ExxonMobil, Shell, Chevron and Phillips 66 will raise prices by up to 12%."
2
Replies
28
Views
4K
PandaBear
supton
  • Locked
Vehicle resale values declining
2
Replies
24
Views
6K
Mr Nice
MolaKule
  • Locked
Synthetic Base Oils and Discussion
2 3
Replies
59
Views
27K
MolaKule
dave1251
  • Locked
Exxon Mobil
Replies
19
Views
14K
MolaKule
N
  • Locked
Will gas go back down- again?
2
Replies
25
Views
7K
mechanicx
Back
Top