Seemed to work for Henry Ford.
Actually at low prices they lose money. Exxon made $23 billion in 2021 after losing $22 billion in 2020.
2 Likes
Much less controversial, though. You never see a āoil companies post record lossesā article when gas is $2/gallon.
2 Likes
Yep, nobody complains then.
Pretty bad example. Ford cut costs by selling a cheap entry level car and streamlining the manufacturing process. He didnāt sell them for cheap out of the kindness of his heart.
I guess that you missed my point.
Of course we are all asking for more supply, a.s.a.p.
Of course increased supply will help to lower prices.
Of course I donāt expect them to invest money in a losing proposition.
Do I really have to play Captain Obvious by pointing outā¦ the obvious?
Increased supply will be good for everyoneāincluding those like me who hold fairly large blocks of Exxon-Mobil stock. 
I guess you havenāt seen some of the more outrageous internet postings that I have seen.
Obviously, I did, Captain. 
I thought we was all aā complaininā bout dem big oil mans bein all greedy like.
Meā¦ complain about Big Oil?
I love being partially supported by my holdings in Exxon-Mobil, Chevron, and Marathon.
Nobody likes high gas prices, but those stock dividends are delectable, and they definitely offset the money that I spend for gas.
Sold off some xom, probably a bad time last year, but the loss helped avoid capitol gains. So hard to predict the future!
1 Like
I never buy individual stocks. I just do mutual funds and let other people make the bets. I learned my lesson years ago with Healthedutech and a couple others highly recommended. I did think that Shelldahl was a good deal at about 10 cents a share but I didnāt have any money then anyway. I knew one guy that only had P&G and nothing more. I suggested he should at least diversify a little but he wouldnāt have it. Everybody makes their own bed.
I do both. I hold Vanguard Energy in addition to my oil stock holdings, and even though there is some duplication, it has worked-out nicely for me.
Something that I think is significant in the long term is that Vanguard Energy began to diversify a few years ago, and is now invested in solar and wind-based energy sources, in addition to their traditional holdings in petroleum-based companies.
True enough. But the complaint Iāve heard about the common sense econ 101 explanation is that the true cost of fuel should also include the environmental damage using it causes. If a person could buy a tank of gas, drive until empty, and that only affects their own pocket book, thatās one thing. But if using that tank of gas has an adverse effect on others, should the otherās be compensated?
I just filled up. Did that have an adverse effect on you? Now what is having an adverse effect on me is California not allowing older trucks to pick up shipping containers at the dock. And the failure of the crane operators to not play favorites and slow the unloading. Then not even to mention the effect that the animal confinement requirements may have nation-wide on the supply and cost of meat. Thatās a lot of effect that one state in imposing on the other 300 million people in fly over country.
Something that had an adverse effect on a LOT of US residents had to do with a wrong-headed (and suddenly discontinued) Executive Order issued by the esteemed Governor of Texas:
Higher food pricesā¦ just what everyone needs.
NOT!
I guess everything has some adverse affect on somebody. Suggest to focus on whether Bingās recent fill up had any adverse effect on anybody else, other than Bingās wallet? What do you folks here think?
Hereās a Puzzler: What is the probability at least one atom in your next inhalation was also in Julius Ceasarās final exhalation?
Nope. I mean you release carbon just by living. And even dying! You know my thoughts on the climate change theory. But my thoughts aside, oil companies wouldnāt sell oil if we werenāt buying. So they donāt deserve a carbon tax or whatever any more than automakers, trucking companies, companies that ship by truck, or even the general population thatās filling up their tanks deserves an extra tax for using it. For the time being, we as a society need petroleum. I think thatās more evident now than it may have been a short time ago. I donāt see a reason to punish the companies that provide it. Should they pay more in taxes when profits are higher? Sure. But I imagine they probably already do. At least thatās how it should be structured.
2 Likes
Thatās a thoughtful analysis there SJ. Thanks for posting. Itās conundrum, thatās for sure.
I read a recent report of the income taxes paid by the top 400 billionaires. It was surprising. Sure some paid 3% but most were in the 18 to 30%. There is just so much crap narrative floating around you canāt believe any of it. Then in another lecture the earth is somewhere in 20,000 year cycles and we go back to 1940 and think the world is ending.
1 Like