Read + Write + Report
Home | Start a blog | About Orble | FAQ | Blogs | Writers | Paid | My Orble | Login

Exxon Mobil Does It Again - Take Note

January 30th 2009 19:40
The media reports are loaded with headlines screaming about Exxon Mobil's $45.2 BILLION in profits for calendar 2008. But, as reported here before, that is not the entire story.

In calendar 2008, Exxon Mobil paid a total of $116.3 BILLION in taxes. In other words, for every dollar in profits they paid almost three dollars in tax. That's roughly a 70% tax rate. But the politicians will yell about "obscene" profits and call for a windfall profits tax.


Look at it this way: Exxon Mobil collected $477.4 BILLION in revenue, so their profit was 9.4% for the year. Companies like Microsoft and Google earn more than double that. Why isn't there a call for "windfall profits taxes" on those companies?

This is all political posturing. We should understand that company profits are paid to shareholders - the pension funds and retirement accounts of all Americans. It's more important that political resources be put into national security and not into talking about what companies should or shouldn't be earning.
72
Vote
   


GM Gets Billion$; Lays Off Thousands

January 26th 2009 18:32
So, after going to Congress twice for a bailout and being approved for $13.4 BILLION taxpayer dollars, GM today announced that it will lay off 2,000 workers and halt production in several plants for weeks.

GM factory workers who get laid off typically get "sub pay," in which they receive unemployment benefits, and GM pays the difference, up to most of their salary, for 48 weeks.

After unemployment pay runs out, the laid-off workers would go into the jobs bank, where the company pays laid-off workers most of their pay and benefits while trying to find them jobs elsewhere.


Of course, GM is still required to report to Congress with a "viable" business plan on February 17th, but the question must be asked why the company gets to double-dip. If they are getting taxpayer dollars to keep running, why should taxpayers have to pay additional dollars for the unemployment and other benefits of GMs laid off employees? Shouldn't those costs be paid by GM out of the bailout they are receiving? And what about the economic consequences to the communities where GM is closing plants and reducing payroll? Will taxpayers be burdened with those costs, too?

It seems to me that the "trend" toward Socialism is becoming a slippery slope: As more company bailouts turn into "restructuring" including layoffs, the economic impact will be magnified, resulting in more calls for bailouts, etc. The government becomes not only the employer of last resort, but the investor of last resort, and the manager of last resort. The problem is that Congress has proven it cannot manage anything without tossing in a heaping handful of politics and pork-barrel priorities. So, will these bailouts really prove beneficial to the country? Doubtful.
45
Vote
   


Opher Banarie's Blogs

I have no other blogs :(
Moderated by Opher Banarie
Copyright © 2006 2007 2008 On Topic Media PTY LTD. All Rights Reserved. Design by Vimu.com.
On Topic Media ZPages: Sydney |  Melbourne |  Brisbane |  London |  Birmingham |  Leeds     [ Advertise ] [ Contact Us ] [ Privacy Policy ]