rushmc 23 #51 February 17, 2009 I do not have a damned dime in Exxon that I know of. For certin not directly. But the evil profits corps make bs has to be called for what it is. So consider this http://seekingalpha.com/article/63131-exxon-s-2007-tax-bill-30-billion and by the way, the ROI earned over some years is way less than 37%"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #52 February 17, 2009 QuoteI do not have a damned dime in Exxon that I know of. For certin not directly. But the evil profits corps make bs has to be called for what it is. So consider this http://seekingalpha.com/article/63131-exxon-s-2007-tax-bill-30-billion and by the way, the ROI earned over some years is way less than 37% Sucks to be you Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,116 #53 February 17, 2009 >I answered your misleading question in a truer fashion than you asked it. OK, so when you ask it it's an honest question. When I ask it it's a misleading question. The Rush Blinders are firmly in place tonight. >10 to 12% ROI OK. So you are opposed to their current ROI of 37%? I expect you'll be calling your congressman to ask him to tax Exxon down to an acceptable ROI then! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #54 February 17, 2009 QuoteI do not have a damned dime in Exxon that I know of. For certin not directly. Unless you have no retirement or investment assets to speak of, it's pretty hard not to have a chunk of Exxon. It's a tad over 5% of any cap weighted S&P500 funds, and a bit less if it's a total market index. The only way to avoid would be the social value funds, and those haven't paid out so well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Para_Frog 1 #55 February 17, 2009 Am I the only one who got side-tracked after reading this article by the SI.com swimsuit pics of Danica Patrick?- Harvey, BASE 1232 TAN-I, IAD-I, S&TA BLiNC Magazine Team Member Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 30 #56 February 17, 2009 This thread reads like a twilight zone episode...Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheBachelor 5 #57 February 19, 2009 QuoteAll we all need to remember is, Profit bad Government mandated price controls good. At least those that support billvons wind generator that is. Market forces be fucked.......... Exactly. What people don't seem to understand is THER'S NOTHING WRONG with making a profit, even if it was 100% ROI, or more. Say I'm selling gumballs, and they cost me 1 cent each. If I want to (try to) sell them for $1 each, then so be it. And if people actually buy them, then great for me. Now if I got all of the gumball sellers together, and we decided that we were all going to raise our prices to $1 per gumball, then that's collusion, which would be illegal. Now let's not split hairs here and say that we NEED oil, but we don't NEED gumballs. I was just looking for a simple illustration. Also, some may argue that we don't NEED oil and its products, we just choose to use them because of a lack of the lack of economically feasible alternatives. The higher the price of oil goes, the more feasible some of the alternatives are. /rantThere are battered women? I've been eating 'em plain all of these years... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,116 #58 February 19, 2009 >we just choose to use them because of a lack of the lack of economically >feasible alternatives. Exactly. And this is why alternatives are so important. What the environment haters often overlook is that the one thing that will _guarantee_ high prices on oil and gasoline forever is a lack of alternatives. The day that a guy can walk onto a car lot and choose a pure electric SUV over a gas SUV is the day that oil company executives will start to panic - and try to reduce prices to keep that customer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites