To borrow a quote from Winston Churchill, the only problem with capitalism is greedy capitalists. Yes, to everyone who answers that that's the capitalist way. But for the love of all that is moral, 400 Billion? At what point do we draw the line and say, ok that's enough money. Bill Gates, the wealthiest man in the world, has a net worth of 10 Billion. He makes 4 million each night, while he sleeps. If he takes the time to bends down to pick up a $100 dollar bill, it costs him money. Warren Buffet, the second richest man in the world, is worth 7 billion. A handful of other billionaires in the world. None of these people can spend all their money during their life times, even though they give hundreds of million away each year to charity. If the wealthiest men count their net worth in the 1 to 10 billion dollar range, what in the frack does Exxon need with a 400 billion profit?
2006-06-08 08:15:02
·
answer #1
·
answered by TechnoRat60 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Where? When? They barely have 400 billion in total sales.
If you cared for facts over hyterics, you would have found that Exxon in 2005 (2006 financials are not out yet) had about 330 Billion in total sales, paid 98 billion in taxes, and had profits of about 36 billion. Good profit but not that huge. Their profits had been down below 10% in the prior years.
Many businesses target 10% profit as a good year, 15% as a great year.
Are you justified making accusations not based on facts?
2006-06-08 08:15:29
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
First of all I think you're off a decimal point... they made about $35 billion in profits last year.
The Exxons of the world were out discovering oil and figuring out how to get it out of the ground when the market price was $20. Now that the price is $70, they are obviously reaping the benefits. While it may be painful for folks at the pump, the rise in market price is a supply (or worry about supply) and demand thing. Its $70 because Iran is running around enriching uranium, Venezuala is busy being obnoxiously anti-American and there's a civil war in Nigeria... all of which can and does lead to a disruption in supply. On the demand side, China's economy is going like crazy, and let's not forget our own fettish about SUV's.
Bottom line, oil companies took the risk and reaped the rewards. Fully justified.
2006-06-08 08:08:47
·
answer #3
·
answered by Nobody 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Of course. The oil price is set on the open market. Exxon has it's own price to produce oil and the difference is theirs to keep. Would you be asking this question if Rainbow bread started making 400mm a quarter because the price of a loaf went to $15? You're just another person throwing out the Bush-bashing-bait for all the imbeciles out there that think Bush and Cheney set the price of oil every morning. Go away already.
2006-06-08 08:16:16
·
answer #4
·
answered by obviously_you'renotagolfer 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, they're not "justified". They are entitled to it. If you look at their earnings reports, the profit they made is still on 10% or so based on their costs. Any business owner is entitled to profit in a free market society. The Disney Company made $35 billion dollars last year, where's the outrage there? Talk about high prices! Have you taken a family to Disney World lately?
2006-06-08 08:02:17
·
answer #5
·
answered by johngjordan 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
A company can make as much profit as they want as long as they abide the law. If it will be proven that they were involved in some pricing fixing scheme, they should be fined and some people charged. It is unlikely though, considering how many players are in the business of selling crude oil. Better look for Iran in how it attempts (successfully) to volatilize the market. I read an interesting (serious) article somewhere that if crude drops under 68$/barrel, Iran government would go bankrupt.
Anyway, the issue is not that simple.
2006-06-08 08:01:31
·
answer #6
·
answered by Milu 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Exxon is not justified in making billions in profit while americans pay 3.00 at the pump, that is capitalistic crime and should be punished. All oil should be owned and distributed by the state.
2006-06-08 08:37:51
·
answer #7
·
answered by Ludwig Wittgenstein 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Unfortunatly it's the way our society works. I understand that they love how much they are making, but with the billions they have made, they could help less fortunate people pay for gas. People are having to change the way the live just to buy gas, it sucks. We have sold our truck and bought a 500cc scooter which fills up completly on $9.00 worth of gas and that lasts almost 2 weeks.
2006-06-08 08:03:03
·
answer #8
·
answered by hobmommy 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
A. they earned $35 B.
B. ANYONE can share in that by buying their stock instead of wasting it on "the new ps3" or Ipod or whatever.
C. They lost billions when the price was bellow $20 pB.
2006-06-08 09:00:18
·
answer #9
·
answered by mymadsky 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
justified to who... it's morally wrong... pure greed at the harm of the American public... the poor struggle even more to pay for their gas, while the rich get billions more... yeah... that's what Jesus wanted...
But, the top 15 percent don't care because they only care about themselves, their own family and money... in other words they are very selfish...
2006-06-08 08:07:10
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋