EXXONMOBIL BREAKS RECORD--AND BACKS OF AMERICAN PEOPLE!!

So ExxonMobil has now broken its previous record, which was the all-time high for any company in history in quarterly profits:

By any measure, Exxon Mobil’s performance last year was a blowout.

The company reported Friday that it beat its own record for the highest profits ever recorded by any company, with net income rising 3 percent to $40.6 billion, thanks to surging oil prices. The company’s sales, more than $404 billion, exceeded the gross domestic product of 120 countries.

Exxon Mobil earned more than $1,287 of profit for every second of 2007.

The company also had its most profitable quarter ever. It said net income rose 14 percent, to $11.7 billion, or $2.13 a share, in the last three months of the year. The company handily beat analysts’ expectations of $1.95 a share, after missing targets in the last two quarters.

Like most oil companies, Exxon benefited from a near doubling of oil prices, as well as higher demand for gasoline last year. Crude oil prices rose from a low of around $50 a barrel in early 2007 to almost $100 by the end of the year — the biggest jump in oil prices in any one year.

It's simple, really. They made more because they charged us more for something we have to have. They didn't make the gas any better, they didn't serve us any better or anything. They just charged us more.

Why are we upset about this? I'll tell you why...

At the Hattiesburg American forum, a poster asked "Why are we upset that the big oil company makes record profits?" Here's my reply:

"Why are we upset that the big oil company makes record profits?"

1. We're upset because they charged us more for the same exact product and the same exact service.

2. We're upset because gas is something we must have.

3. We're upset because higher gas prices mean higher prices for everything. ("Diesel price rise has ripple effect on goods," LA Times)

4 We're upset because the value of the dollar keeps dropping while prices keep rising.

5. We're upset because of record credit card debt, negative savings, and declining wages. (An earlier post about all that can be found here)

6. We're upset because of record debts and unnecessary wars that threaten to collapse our economy.

7. We're upset because we're about to borrow from ourselves (or the Chinese) to "help" ourselves buy some more over-priced gas or goods made in China, which only fuels (no pun intended) #6 (and #5).

8. We're upset because we know the world is nowhere near to running out of oil--the supply is being suppressed while demand only increases, jacking up the price.

9. We're upset because the president makes out with oil-rich dictators who won't cut us a break on oil prices, so we agree to sell a dictatorial regime that maintains a state of war with Israel a bunch of weapons because we love democracy so much (which only fattens the bottom line of defense contractors who then have that much more money to lobby with, allowing the whole sick cycle to continue ad infinitum).

10. We're upset because we have very few alternatives to get us out of this mess--even if we buy hybrids, we still have to pay inflated prices for all the goods that are trucked to market because of high gas/oil prices.

11. We're upset because the "free market" has allowed many industries, including the oil industry, to consolidate in fewer and fewer hands (now only 6 "supermajor" oil companies), whiich reduces competition and the incentive to fix any of the problems mentioned above.

12. We're upset that none of the American oil companies, including ExxonMobil, would help out with discounted home heating oil for Americans. Luckily, Venezuela's Citgo stepped up to the plate to help out.

If I left anything out--and I'm sure I did--please add your reason we're upset to the list.

MORE GAS RECORDS? THIS IS GETTING OUT OF HAND!

Here's something I wrote today on the forum in response to this from a couple other posters regarding the topic of gas prices:

#1: I have said this before in the forums on here. The government should not step in at all when it comes to businesses.

#2: "In the end, it is the American consumer who is to blame. Oil companies will continue to push gas prices up. Right now the American consumer is telling the oil companies that we will stomach these types of prices for gas."

My response

Out of necessity, government is intimately involved in business and commerce. It's the government that issues money. It's the government that sets up the rules that create what many erroneously call "the free market." It's the government that maintains and manages the infrastructure (roads, rails, air travel, harbors, etc.) that allows business to be carried out.
It's the government that allows the creation and regulation of corporations.

Government should not unnecessarily impede commerce, but neither should it allow those engaged in commerce to indulge in rapacious practices. We should always seek a happy medium between government regulation and self-regulation (where business and commerce are concerned).

The price of gas is a special case because its price affects the price of literally everything else. The consumer is no more to blame for the price of gas than sick people are to blame for the price of medicine. That is to say, gas is a necessity--people cannot do without it. They must buy it.

In such cases, reasonable measures must be taken to ensure that the public is not being taken advantage of. Unfortunately, we either do not have such measures in place or they are not being enforced.

Instead, we are witnessing and being subjected to an outrageous, unjustifiable transfer of wealth from the bottom to the top. The argument that the public should band together and do something about this situation (and other ones like it) is an enticing one. However, I would argue that we did that already when we created our system of government. The problem is not "the government," the problem is effective corporate control of our government and those who represent us, i.e., Thad "Poison Pill" Cochran.

What oil companies have and do (and don't have and don't do)

Renewable fuels must play a part in getting us out of this mess.

If you saw "Who Killed The Electric Car," you know that electric cars were a viable solution to the very problem we're facing right now. But oil companies don't sell electricity.

Biodiesel would be a great alternative. But oil companies don't sell vegetable oil.

Hemp fuel would be a great alternative. But oil companies wouldn't be able to keep the lid on hemp production and besides, hemp production is illegal.

But oil companies do have very good friends in the White House...

CAPITALISM'S GANGSTERS

The following two posts of mine are in response to these posts--

"Russ,

I don't owe you or anyone else one damn thing. I am currently in military and most of us, and I mean over 95% agree with the mission. You're just an angry hippie. It's ok man, we're fighting for you too."

"Remember, peace through strength. Just look at what is happening in Somalia, and I'm not talking about the strike we just carried out either..."

--in this thread at the Hattiesburg American forum.


Left-Handed Leftist Post 1

Not only that, troops in Iraq are not fighting for Russ or me or any other regular citizens. They're fighting for Exxon, BP, Shell, etc. Didja see this--"Western companies may get 75% of Iraqi oil profits":

"Iraq's massive oil reserves may be thrown open for large-scale exploitation by Western oil companies - which could end up grabbing up to 75% of the beleagured nation's oil profits - under a law seen coming before the Iraqi parliament within days, the Independent reported on its Web site Monday."

War is a racket. So said General Butler, who at the time of his death was the most decorated Marine in U.S. history.

If anything, this Iraq war is being used as an excuse to TAKE AWAY our freedoms. In the latest example, Bush just added a signing statement to a bill in which he claimed the right to open mail without a warrant.

I like the chant Cindy Sheehan and others shouted at the Democrats the other day "De-escalate, investigate--Troops home now!" Not one more American soldier should have to die or be wounded to protect George Bush's failed policies or to make money for corporations.

THAT'S what you call "supporting the troops," not calling for even more of them to be taken away from their newborns to kill or be killed so that Western oil companies--one of which recently had the highest quarterly profit of any corporation in the history of the world--can make even MORE money.

Left-Handed Leftist Post 2

Forget peace through strength. That's a load of malarkey that we've been sold for years. We were told all through the Cold War that we had to have all this firepower at the expense of everything else so we wouldn't be beaten by the Soviets.

Turns out the Soviet threat was greatly exaggerated and they collapsed under their own weight. But now we're stuck with the bill for the arms race and we still spend more than any other country on "defense".

We are the mightiest country on earth in terms of sheer firepower. So where's the peace?

As far as 95% of troops supporting the war, that's not true either. In February 2005, 72% wanted to come home by 2006. Then there was the recent Military Times Poll which showed that 42% of the troops don't support the President's Iraq policy compared with 35% who do support it.

The time for BS is over. We won the war but we're losing the occupation (and theoretically that shouldn't be possible). The American people have finally caught on to the fact that Bush lied about our reasons for going into Iraq and the "surge" will be his undoing.

AND YET MY MOTHER REFUSES TO GO TO A CITGO...

Read this story today from the AP wire:

"More American homes are getting discounted oil from Venezuela's state-owned oil company. The company's US subsidiary, Citgo, is expanding a program that's part of a promise by Venezuela's socialist leader to aid America's poor."

But the words of former Rep. Joseph Kennedy were what really brought it home for me:

"It is an unbelievable act of charity on the part of a major oil company," Kennedy said.
he told reporters he wrote to "every major American oil company and every member of OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) and asked them, as they have had enormous price increases that have brought untold billions into their hands, to give up a little bit, just a little bit to help the poor. Every single company said no. Every single one except one, and that was Citgo.
"So it is important that when a major company reaches out and does something like this, that we should acknowledge and celebrate the kind of action they are taking."
"Exxon made $10 billion in a quarter, in three months out of the year they made $10 billion. And they say, when it comes to helping the poor, sorry, there is no money in the till."
What other oil company besides Citgo, Kennedy asked, would come to a poor neighborhood in Providence and talk about the plight of the poor? There is no other oil company in the world that I know of that talks about these issues, that cares about these issues and actually gives money to help with these issues."

Say what you want about Chavez, but he puts his money where his mouth is when it comes to helping the poor. Think of it--not a single American oil company would help its own customers. Every other OPEC nation, even the one led by Bush's boyfriends, declined to help out our citizens.

The only person willing to help was Hugo Chavez, a man who recently called our president "the devil." And yet those on the American right would demonize this man? And those on the American left try to distance themselves from him?

Is there anybody in a position of power in this country with any goddamn sense? If so, they sure aren't acting like it. Chavez deserves our admiration and our gratitude, not our scorn and derision.

Limbaugh and his cohort shouldn't be telling people to boycott Citgo, they should be boycotting Exxon and Shell...

WHY CAN'T THEY JUST COME OUT AND SAY IT?

And by "they" and "it" I mean, respectively, the neocon corporatists and the fact that they don't want Russia to trade oil in rubles. Just like they didn't like the fact that Iraq traded oil in euros (consequently invaded), and they don't want Iran to trade oil in euros (much talk of bombing or invasion).

This whole spy-poisoning story is debunked pretty well by Raimondo at Antiwar.com, and I want to quote him here, as he cites all the reasons (except the one above) why the "powers that be" want to mix it up with Russia:

"The attempt to portray the Russians as mad poisoners intent on assassinating their political opponents no matter where they try to find refuge is a powerful propagandistic theme that, although unsupported by any facts, winds its way through the media narrative on the wings of pure supposition. These people don't care about facts: it's all speculation, unsupported by evidence that passes the most perfunctory smell test...

Here is yet another link in the long chain of manufactured incidents meant to provoke a confrontation with Russia. An aggressive propaganda campaign aimed at the Russians has been in high gear for quite some time, and it appears to be reaching a crescendo with this Litvinenko nonsense...

U.S. intervention in Russia's internal affairs is deeply resented by most Russians, i.e., those not on the American payroll, but this matters little to the Russia-haters in our midst. Their message is not directed at the Russian people, who support Putin and his policies overwhelmingly: it is aimed at Western elites, who can be prodded into taking a harder line against those resurgent Russkies, flush with oil money and failing to toe the American line when it comes to Iran and Syria."

Achilles Heel of the U.S.

Our dependence on the dollar as the reserve currency of the world because the dollar is the international standard for oil purchases is our Achilles heel. All oil-producing countries--i.e., Iraq, Iran, Venezuela, Russia, etc.--have to do is set up their own oil bourses and exchange their precious natural resources for their own (or a non-U.S.) currency, and suddenly the U.S. is in a world of hurt--just look at the news today--"US fears spark dollar sell-off":

"The dollar suffered a steep sell-off this week amid expectations of a further slowdown in the US economy.

The greenback fell most sharply against the euro as the prospect of rising European interest rates contrasted with forecasts of easing US monetary policy...

'The current euro rally/dollar sell-off . . . is unlikely to end in the short term as the fundamentals and market flows are increasingly stacked up against the US currency,' said Ashraf Laidi, analyst at CMC Markets US."

The corporatists and the neocons would say that the answer to this problem is to "Bomb Iran" and to bring "peace and stability" (read as "death and domination") to the Middle East.

And speaking of oil and dollars, this AP story was a real shocker--"AP Analysis: Firms Crimping Oil Supplies." But the headline chosen by my local paper for the same story is, in my view, more accurate: "Study: Oil companies drive up gas prices."

And this is how they manipulate prices:

"Whatever the truth in Bakersfield, an Associated Press analysis suggests that big oil companies have been crimping supplies in subtler ways across the country for years. And tighter supplies tend to drive up prices.

The analysis, based on data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, indicates that the industry slacked off supplying oil and gasoline during the prolonged price boom between early 1999 and last summer, when prices began to fall."

They close down refineries or don't build new ones under the pretense that "market pressures" and "business judgments" are causing them to do so. Whether or not the companies' intentions are to manipulate prices (and you'd have to be a fool to believe otherwise), the effect is, as the story says, that "tighter supplies tend to drive up prices."

Oh, and another neat by-product of closing down refineries or only using existing ones no matter the volume of demand--when the huge profits from the supply "crimp" come rolling in, they're not reduced by having to pay for facilities that might allow the supply to increase to meet the demand and thereby reduce monstrous profits.

Good night and good show, jolly good show!