Whenever I hear a company profit stated as a dollar amount rather than a percentage of sales or investment I know I'm being conned. Years ago the meda was fond of saying, "oil profits are up 100% this year." Yeah, they went from 3 or 4% of sales to 6 or 8% (I don't remember exactly). So we were being conned by the worst spin on the math.

I would ask your husband what the profits were as a percentage of cost at the gas pump and what the taxes from the Federal and State governments were as a percentage of cost at the pump. The criminals, in this case, and as usual, are politicians.

If the oil company is the one that I saw recently reported making $35 billion in a quarter, then that company made roughly 9% return on investment, and that was in a good quarter. Typical ROI's for oil companies is more like 6% over the long term. It was not that many years ago that people would have sneered negatively over having ONLY made 9%. Oil companies were out of favor for completely the opposite reason; they didn't make enough profit. Oil companies cannot win. I am teaching petroleum refining this summer for only the third time in 16 years. Why so infrequently you may ask? It is because oil refining just isn't that profitable compared to many endeavors that frankly require a lot more thought. The big picture problems in oil refining have been solved, and so most chemical engineers are on to more profitable endeavors.

Not at all. It really just comes down to supply and demand. Products that are in demand can make these types of profit. Please remember though that this is gross profit before any expenses are taken out. Besides, if someone (s) have invested money to start a business and hire people why should they NOT make a profit. Btw-your husband and you don't have to see eye to eye. Just know that you are better informed than he is Lol

Yes, "opposites attract"! LOL I am driven out of my mind by my alter ego wife who, like your mate who goes to the first obvious indicated citation for the pump price shock at the gas station. Never do they realize how much a single source energy product puts them at disadvantage to the provider. This is the ONLY evil of Capitalism and it is called CARTELIZATION. When the consumer has no place to vote with his feet, he is victim. This is why Obama wants single payer health insurance, why we have a central bank, why we have only three major American automobile manufactures, why we have mogul agriculture factory farms, wheat, corn, hogs, turkey, chicken, beef, lamb, and why there are only three major American airlines and ONE supposedly deregulated telephone company and prefer to use only Apple computers, Microsoft operating systems, and cell phone providers. It is my chief irritation in life that we consumers always choose cartelized interests, whether it be Socialism in government where few elites rule in the name of equality or where we consumers choose ONLY POPULAR brands and hence drive competition out. I am not saying this well because I am only a retired working stiff without PROPER CREDENTIALS and am breaking the accepted law of thinking without permission and worse writing without a license. I love living on the edge! I'm Dirty Little Johnnie and I reside with "The Fringe Opinion in The Wall" Gang. I believe in being as independent as a hog on ice.

What is discouraging to me is that the Government will make far higher profit than the oil companies ($0.40 per gallon), yet people complain about the profits of the oil companies, but not the outrageous greed of the government. I think you should ask your husband about that.

Let's look at it philosophically. I presume that your husband has a job that pays him a salary, or that he gets paid for his work by some means. Surely, some of his salary is needed to pay the basic bills, like food and shelter. Some, goes for his savings or toys. So, from the point of view of those that don't have the savings or toys, his profits are excessive. Furthermore, since he makes ends meet, should he be offered a raise, you should point out to him that it is his moral duty to decline it since that would be an excessive profit. And if he really wants to be honest, perhaps that last steak that he had is an example of an excessive profit. It is all a matter of perspective and honesty.

The problem with oil companies is that the government is already interfering. I agree with you that government interference is not the answer but profits as a result of crony capitalism are also wrong. Free market capitalism is the answer but I doubt we will see that in the oil industry.

The problem for the oil industry is government interference. People in the oil industry despise government and politics. They view lawyers other than patent lawyers with disdain, with politicians being the worst of the lawyers. People in the oil business tolerate lawyers who protect them from other lawyers. Patent lawyers, on the other hand, are definitely friends. When I lived in MI and IL in the early and mid 1990s, our professional society meeting dinner discussions often revolved about this compromise or that change that was required because of government interference.

A company earning $35B per quarter should be drawing competitors like flies. Increased competition will drive any excessive profit down towards what can be earned in other industries.

The problem is that there are way too many ways to keep competitors out:
- Government permissions required to operate
- License/permit costs that make building new plants uneconomical
- Overly-broad patents on things that aren't genuine inventions
- Regulations that require you to build a gigantic plant when you only need (and can only afford) a small one.
- Taxes on all producers in an industry that fund subsidies under various names to the large producers.
- The large producer can sue you indefinitely over minor matters (such as specious patent infringements) that you may end up winning, but doing so costs you legal fees and time.

So long as buying politicians is more profitable than investing in the stock market, this won't change.

I agree that companies have the right to all the honest profits they can make. I also agree that you have every reason to be baffled, desimarie23. Husbands can do that to a gal, but it comes with the territory. Mine tends to hit me with things like that for the shock value. When you get back into the discussion with yours, you might mention that the oil company profits (after tax and expenses) also go to not just the "company", but to stockholders like my hubby's pension fund. For some odd reason, I just can't make myself believe that we are some of those fat cat over-profiteers...

"We've never really seen eye-to-eye on matters that are political or philosophical in nature."
desi, you have more to worry about than a discussion on reining in oil profits...;)

Tell your husband to go look at the financial report for the company in question. All the major oil companies are publicly held and their quarterly financial statements are available to anyone via a quick search. Have him go through them and look at the P&L statement, which shows the amount they put away into future development, their R&D costs, production costs, salary costs, benefits costs, etc. Then look up the amount of taxes they pay and compute that as a percent of income. Compare that to what you pay as a percent of income.

Most people who complain about the profits of others have no idea what they are talking about. They see only how someone else is getting ahead and not how they got there in the first place. It's nice to remind them every now and then ;)

Fortunately for me, my wife and I are on the same page philosophically. However, I have several family and friends who are 3rd, and 4th generation libs. I love them dearly for many reasons but some of them have "given up" on me. Those that haven't at least provide me with lively discussion and keep my arguing skills well honed.

He's likely not thought it through, which is common.

Tell him to stop buying their product(s). If that means walking or riding a bike, so be it. It'll be a good way for him to reassess the value of his car. If he uses home heating oil, stop buying it, too.

If enough like "thinkers" would follow his lead, sales would decrease and profits would likely suffer. And that would make him happy?

I find a gallon of gasoline one of the greatest values on earth. Imagine what all has to occur to deliver a gallon to the pump! (Locating it, Drilling, Pumping/Transport, Refining, Delivery to the Merchant, etc.) I think it's remarkable. That gallon of gas then allows me to drive my truck 20 miles to work in air conditioned comfort (or warm and toasty) while carrying up to 1700 lbs of supplies/tools! I make the drive in 25 minutes. It would take me 7-8 hours to walk and I could carry very little.

I find it sickly ironic that the people that get worked up that the energy companies are raking in unreasonable profits have no problem with the government(s) taxing that same product at a many times higher level than the producer's actual profit.

Meanwhile the government takes all of that capital while providing absolutely NOTHING of positive value.

Don't be disappointed. Liberals have been well indoctrinated to parrot the old socialist talking points. Logic means nothing to them.

While your free market approach is one that I share, I can see how in this messed up country where lobbyists own most of congress and the administration bows to the highest bidder, your husband might arrive at that conclusion. (Not that I'm cynical or anything.) Does anyone really think there is a free market for oil in the US? Oil companies work to maximize profits within the framework government establishes, not in the market place.

We have corn in our gas because the corporate farm lobby wants it so. Which leads to a whole set of 'unintended consequences'.

It sounds like you need a new husband. Please post a picture of yourself. (Just kidding [maybe}) If I don't make some stupid comments once in a while I'll go crazy with some of the nonsensical speech we hear today. Ask him, how many dollars (not percentage or some other fact that might put it in perspective) does the government make per quarter on the same amount of production? What does the government do to earn that money, or do with that money, the dollars they make from this industry? They sure aren't fixing the potholes out here where I live in the Seattle area. You actually take your life in your hands when you drive on the streets here. (my last statement is actually meant to be rhetorical [or is it?]. It really has nothing to do with potholes [or does it?] but the implication might be there)...

Gross profit means nothing. How much was risked and what percentage was returned to the company. Would your economically challenged husband return money from the government in years when losses were incurred? The more they make the more goes to investors and reinvestment in New technology keeping prices steady and assuring future products. It is how we have gotten to be the best place on earth to live.

interesting to me the number of comments and no one addressed the obvious; I will reframe from publically expressing what I think and it has nothing to do with profit.

Your husband has fallen prey to a typical media slant on this subject. If that news was on one of the mainstream media outlets, imagine that same channel reporting the company had a mediocre quarter because a larger number of its projects had returned a loss. That would not get reported!
Media likes reporting stories that get people angry, and they use wording for that effect. Viewers getting angry keeps them watching through the commercial breaks! You only have to look at the way fracking is reported... could mean the "end of clean drinking water!!!"