Joined: 06 Jul 2003
Posts: 7090
Location: Central CA
| Posted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 10:51 pm Post subject: Surprise Surprise | |||||||||||||
|
Coming on the heels of Exxon/Mobil's announcement of it's biggest ever profit which followed last quarter's announcement of its THEN biggest ever profit, we have this.
Chevron Reports Huge Profit
If all these flipping price increases have been due solely to increases in their costs of doing business, why do their profits keep growing by these inexplicable, and to me indefensible amounts?
Fears which they themselves do their utmost to help create. These bastards raise fuel prices every time one of them farts.
Yeah we saw the political outrage a few months ago when Ted Stevens wouldn't put them under oath and softpedalled the public outrage over what was THEN the biggest industrial ripoff in history. Now they're back three months later stuffing even MORE money in their pockets.
When did this become a nation in service to flipping shareholders and Wall Street scumsuckers at the expense of the public and the general welfare, anyway? The preamble does say "to promote the GENERAL welfare", right? Not CORPORATE welfare? I thought so.
How about we just make the flipping government responsible to the PEOPLE once again instead of to the oil companies and other corporations? That should take care of most of the crap flying around these days.. This is the most blatant, in your face, F*** you ripoff in history and we can't even get their congressional bed partners to put them other oath when they toss their puffballs at them. 
|
|||||||||||||
Joined: 26 Aug 2005
Posts: 1456
| Posted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 11:14 pm Post subject: | |
|
Great rant, there Nofs. I couldn't agree more.
I was just reading through another thread by you... same topic. And we thought it was bad then... http://www.retail-worker.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4591 It's never going to stop until our politicians get out of the pockets of the oil companies. I hope it's getting clearer to the the average American that our politicians are part of the cause of this. Where are the politicians that support alternative resources? I only know of one... and his bill is being squashed by a congressman and a senator from another damn state.... Alaska!... where of course Exxon wants to drill. I can't wait to vote this November. |
|
Joined: 06 Jul 2003
Posts: 7090
Location: Central CA
| Posted: Sat Apr 29, 2006 3:02 am Post subject: | |||
Gee, that wouldn't be the aforementioned Senator Ted Stevens, R-Alaska would it? You know, the same one that voiced all that political outrage by turning the "hearings" on possible profiteering into a tiddlywinks tournament a few months back. The same Senator Stevens who vowed to defend his flipping bridges to nowhere with his dying breath when they were looking for bucks to rebuild the Gulf Coast? Wonder what those bridges will have to do with those new oil fields once he gets them drilling up there? Or is the other Alaskan senator trying not to be outdone now? |
|||
Joined: 26 Aug 2005
Posts: 1456
| Posted: Sun Apr 30, 2006 2:27 pm Post subject: | |
|
A very interesting debate on Meet The Press this morning, regarding our gas prices. Sam Bodman, Sec. of Energy, did nothing but dance. Others had concrete questions and discussions. They also discussed the possiblities of future alternative resources and how long it will realistically take to get our country out of the strangle hold of the petroleum companies.
I found it odd that the subject of political campaign contributions by the oil companies was never approached... by anyone. Is Senator Durbin running for President? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032608/ |
|
Joined: 06 Jul 2003
Posts: 7090
Location: Central CA
| Posted: Sun Apr 30, 2006 4:19 pm Post subject: | |||
I don't find it strange at all. Look at the lineup of guests. MY God, CRAMER? Russert needs to move his fat ass out of the studio and into the workplaces and onto the streets and try interviewing people who are having to choose between gas to get to work and food to eat when they get home. I'm pretty sure he would have a much better understanding of the "public outrage" than he gets by interviewing polticians with vested interests and Wall Street parasites on every issue that constitutes a kick in the teeth for the "ordinary" folks. And I wish they'd change that damned picture of Russert. I had it on screen and got up to go to the kitchen and the eyes followed me everywhere I went. Flipping spooky. 
|
|||
Joined: 18 Mar 2005
Posts: 245
Location: 3rd coast
| Posted: Mon May 01, 2006 1:57 am Post subject: | |
Just for  -
http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/shared-blogs/ajc/luckovich/entries/2006/04/25/his_masters_voi.html . . . and . . . http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/shared-blogs/ajc/luckovich/entries/2006/04/28/in_bed_with_oil.html . . . because sometimes, you just gotta 
|
|
Joined: 18 Mar 2005
Posts: 245
Location: 3rd coast
| Posted: Mon May 01, 2006 2:21 am Post subject: | |
|
This one (Exxon Bonus Supreme) is my very favorite -
http://www.ucomics.com/patoliphant/2006/04/19/ Hope you guys enjoy these. 
|
|
Joined: 06 Jul 2003
Posts: 7090
Location: Central CA
| Posted: Mon May 01, 2006 2:30 am Post subject: | |
| Thanks for the links HC. I've been an Oliphant fan for a long time but hadn't seen that one. | |
Joined: 18 Mar 2005
Posts: 245
Location: 3rd coast
| Posted: Mon May 01, 2006 2:45 am Post subject: | |||||
|
I'm a HUGE Oliphant fan. I have almost all of his books, going back to 1983.
Back on message, have you heard of the proposed boycott of Exxon stations in Beeville, TX? http://template.statesman.com/news/content/gen/ap/TX_Fuel_Boycott.html Here's what blows my mind:
Now, I ask you, when a station owner makes this claim, and on another forum someone states the following -
- then how can Exxon's CEO filler-up on "Bonus Supreme?" 
|
|||||
Joined: 06 Jul 2003
Posts: 7090
Location: Central CA
| Posted: Mon May 01, 2006 3:27 am Post subject: | |||
|
Methinks they derive at least some of their current profit from the tax breaks and other incentives that they receive from the government in order supposedly to entice them to increase production and keep prices under control, along with a lot of cost cutting and bottom line manipulations, similar to what we see with SHC. Since they have however, stated that they don't need those incentives, you have to wonder why they're still getting them then, eh?.
Also, I haven't read the post on the other forum but that 7 to 9 cents doesn't appear to mean much. Was this just for gasoline or were heating oil, diesel, aircraft fuels and other petroleum products included? Were there sources cited for these figures or was this just an unsupported statement? Whatever the case take it with a grain of salt along with the following referenced information: Record profit for any U.S. company
That's the highest profit ever for any American company and comes when everyone else is having to make do with less of everyTHING else. it's the figure I use in forming my opinion. You don't shrug off a statement like that with something about 7 to 9 cents a gallon and pretend that this normal and you don't pay your CEO $38 million bonuses if you can't damned well afford it.. Other American oil companies posted proportionate figures. |
|||
Joined: 18 Mar 2005
Posts: 245
Location: 3rd coast
| Posted: Mon May 01, 2006 12:19 pm Post subject: | |||
Unsupported, Nofs, though he made the claim that Big Oil makes 7 to 9 cents per gallon of gas sold. That's the only distinction he gave. Here's the link - http://www.meetretailworkers.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2326 Still doesn't add up. The woman owns three Exxon stations and she claims that she has trouble making money selling gas. |
|||
Joined: 26 Aug 2005
Posts: 1456
| Posted: Mon May 01, 2006 2:31 pm Post subject: | |||
This too from 'over there'.....
IMO this is the most profound bit of the statement. "A multitude of factors" ... Factor #1. Who is willing to sleep with the oil companies. Factor #2. Who wants the most in campaign contritutions. The rest is hogwash. |
|||
Joined: 06 Jul 2003
Posts: 7090
Location: Central CA
| Posted: Mon May 01, 2006 2:39 pm Post subject: | |
|
You know, there's one thing that never gets mentioned by these station owners, who I admit are caught between a rock and a hard place. When a tanker comes to the station and pumps a load of fuel into the tanks, it costs the station operator X amount per gallon. Before that tanker load of fuel is sold, the price may increase 3 or 4 0r 5 times given that it rises daily here in CA sometimes more than once a day and sometimes by as much as 7 or 8 cents starting often on the very day of delivery.
So to make it simple, the operator gets that gas for $2.50 a gallon and by the time the last of it it is sold, it may be going for up to $3.15 a gallon. I used to worry about the station owners in all this but I'm pretty sure they get their cut and in the scenario I just described they're doing fine by jumping on the daily price increases even though the gas they're selling is gas they bought at last week's wholesale price. When I worked in a gas station back in the 70s, the margin was only 3-4 cents a gallon at the station level and we relied on service to make the major profit. Today they don't provide any service but rely on their donuts and hot dogs to make the profit plus what they can make by tanking up just before a major round of price increases. They know that no matter what they pay for gas on the day it's delivered, their prices are going to increase, often drastically, before they need another load. Now simply apply the same math to the oil companies themselves only on a vastly bigger scale. The oil companies are basing price increases on oil futures, not on the actual cost of production of the fuel they're selling today. In other words again, you're paying a difference based on what they think or at least claim it will cost to replace that gas they sold you this morning, not on what that gas actually cost them and they're allowed to be the sole arbiters when it comes to divining the future. So the fuel they produced yesterday at Z dollars in cost, may undergo price increases of anywhere from 20-70 cents, at least here in CA, BEFORE it's sold. Couple that with the fact that their profits are increasing at totally unheard of amounts, outstripping those of any other industry, and it's not hard to see which side they "error" on in their totally internal estimations of their future costs. Then consider what their using the profit for: Consider a $38 million dollar incentive package for the CEO, untold numbers of similar packages for other execs, and a couple of generous little dividends for the shareholders and you can see why making those same "errors" quarter after quarter, and year after year has become the norm for them, Once they've tasted the milk, they just can't let go of the teat. And the administration warned us yesterday that we've got at LEAST three more years of this to look forward to. Kind of like saying, "As long as we're running things around here.". |
|
Joined: 06 Jul 2003
Posts: 7090
Location: Central CA
| Posted: Mon May 01, 2006 3:09 pm Post subject: | |||||
Profit is profit. It doesn't matter what "factors" enter into it. Profit is simply the money a company (or in this case the execs and major shareholders of a company) puts in it's/their pockets after the costs of of producing and delivering it's commodity are deducted from gross income. What the hell would a "multitude of factors" have to do with the fact that these people are simply walking away with those massive profits instead of applying at least part of them to bring the situation under control? You can spout corporate razzle dazzle and blow administration smoke until the cows come home but you can't change that simple fact. There are two kinds of profit in one way, however; there's reasonable profit and there's gouging. I think most people are smart enough to figure out which kind we're dealing with here. This is just more of the the old Neocon bullshit claiming that the corporations have no moral responsibility to the society from which they derive their existence as well as their profits. That they're entitled somehow to simply keep taking without putting anything back. Anyone who subscribes to THAT little theory is free to volunteer his own ass as a willing sacrifice to the corporate gods. He's got no flipping business carping on the rest of us because we don't care to do so. |
|||||
Joined: 06 Jul 2003
Posts: 7090
Location: Central CA
| Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 4:09 pm Post subject: | |||
From Some "Liberal Rag"
Has anybody got any idea how much we'll have to humble ourselves to keep providing these dividends and $38 million dollar rewards for these fat bastards? |
|||
Joined: 18 Mar 2005
Posts: 245
Location: 3rd coast
| Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 3:32 am Post subject: | |||
Well, here's one stab at an answer - http://www.ucomics.com/patoliphant/2006/05/03/ - though I have a feeling people would be hard pressed to give up their gas guzzlers, no matter how "mad" they are at the $38 million dollar bonus babies. 
|
|||
Administrator
Joined: 30 Jun 2003
Posts: 1010
Location: over yonder
| Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 4:12 am Post subject: | |
|
I would like to believe, and I think it would make some sense, that the oil companies are gouging and hoarding in part because the inevitable shift away from fossil fuels is getting closer.
A last ditch effort of sorts to milk the consumer and top up the coffers with enough cash to finance and/or survive a fundamental change in the industry. Granted that I'm not an economist thus there's a very good chance that I'm talking out my ass but... I have not seen nor heard any logical explanations for the rising price of oil. On its face the oft-touted "tensions in the middle-east" excuse doesn't appear to hold So, I suspect it's all preparation for a peak oil inevitability. Yet, even if my suspicion is correct, it still doesn't justify the current circumstances. Consumers should not be extorted or otherwise held responsible for the oil corporations bad business decisions/preparations. |
|
Joined: 04 Jul 2003
Posts: 1965
| Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 7:46 am Post subject: | |
| slek, the Middle East has been in turmoil since Day 1 and will always be in turmoil. It goes back to Israel and the Jews being God's chosen people. For some insane reason, some folks don't like that. But, that's another thread. | |