Wednesday, November 09, 2005

How much profit is too much when you're talking about oil companies

SayAnything (and INDC Journal) make some great points about the current Senate hearings. Listening to the blowhards in the MSM you'd think these oil execs were (or ought to be) under indictment.

First Rob quotes INDC:

For example, “Exxon earned its biggest-ever profit, $9.9 billion, on revenue of more than $100 billion in the third quarter.”

I’m no economist, but that seems to mean that Exxon is actually making just under ten cents for every dollar they bring in (I’m not sure whether that is pre-tax or post-tax). That doesn’t strike me as a “windfall.” It just seems like a decent return.


And Rob eleborates:

Does anyone really thinking that levying new and heavy taxes on the oil industry is going to solve the problem with high gas prices? Like I’ve said before, more taxes and regulation lead to higher prices, not lower prices. The only guaranteed way to lower oil prices is to increase supply, yet most of the Senators (my own Senator Byron Dorgan included) who are asking some of the most pointed questions of these oil executives have voted against measures that would allow for the development of more domestic petroleum reserves.


I guess the basic principles of economics/supply and demand are only on the "suggested reading" list for Senators. Can anyone say ANWR?

UPDATE: Business Week is the latest to rip the Senate hearings with the Oil Company CEOs. How's this for a title/subtitle: Why Energy Prices Are Losing Steam; Angry U.S. senators may not want to hear it, but simple supply-and-demand dynamics are reasserting themselves after the hurricane-induced spikes. Ouch.