Matt Lauer interview with Exxon this morning

[Littlemotherhaywood]

Just thought this might be of interest to those of us who still use gas to fuel our cars

http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?g=ff00584c-2c8b-4956-a73d-42897bd23f2a&f=00&fg=copy

 

[goofyforlife]

yeah I saw that....

Talk about smug....

Matt asked him "Would Exxon consider giving some of their profits back to to customers so that prices wouldn't be so high?"

and the exec was like "No, we're in the money making business."

Jerks....

Maybe we all "should" boycott exxon like that e-mail circulating around suggests.

 

[bicker]

Matt asked a stupid question. What did he expect the exec to say? That he'd violate his fidicuary responsibility? That's idiocy.

It isn't up to oil companies to fix our country's economic problems -- it's the government's responsibility.

 

[WillCAD]

They keep saying that "supply and demand has driven up the price."

But the price has gone up almost 20% in a one month period of time. Did the supply dry up by 20% in a month? Did demand increase by 20% in a month? No way! They're all full of crap, and the whole country knows it.

If that weirdo in California who makes cars run on vegetable oil opened up a shop in Baltimore, I'd spend the money and have my vehicle converted!

 

[tmt martins]

If that weirdo in California who makes cars run on vegetable oil opened up a shop in Baltimore, I'd spend the money and have my vehicle converted!

I'd be right in line with you .

Between what DD and myself eat in french fries alone I never have to pay for fuel again.I know my local McD's would love me to take their grease off their hands.

 

[manning]

Matt asked a stupid question. What did he expect the exec to say? That he'd violate his fidicuary responsibility? That's idiocy.

It isn't up to oil companies to fix our country's economic problems -- it's the government's responsibility.

It's not even the government's.

 

[DISUNC]

It isn't up to oil companies to fix our country's economic problems -- it's the government's responsibility.

...And the difference between the 2 is????????????

UGH! All I can say is around here Exxon is by far the MOST EXPENSIVE GAS there is. 20cents more a gallon than Shell!

One of his reasons for not lowering the price is 'because peoples pension funds are tied into Exxons profits" Who has pension funds anymore???? I know myself & all my family & friends dont have any...and we work for some of the Fortune 50 companies!

CEO of Exxon & all the Gas companies are BIG FAT LIARs!!!!!

 

[stopgo]

Matt asked a stupid question. What did he expect the exec to say? That he'd violate his fidicuary responsibility? That's idiocy.

Amen! It frightens me that so many people seem to wish that our gov't would nationalize the petroleum industry just because they're upset at $3/gallon gasoline. We're paying less per galllon in real dollars today than we were 30 years ago. China, India and other emerging nations are increasingly more thirsty for oil and we all know that when supply is down and demand is up prices are higher. The enviro-kooks have made it impossible for the US to build additional refineries or to drill in the ANWAR or the coast off southwest Florida (while Russia and Chile are allowed to drill there).

Let Exxon charge whatever they know we'll pay. It's called the "free market" for a reason. Any vitriol should be directed at OPEC, which sets the price of crude, and the NIMBYs who vehemently opppose building new refineries and exploring domestic oil fields. In fact, for anyone so upset at the cost of a gallon of gas your first question should be "how much of the price consists of taxes my city/state/county have levied per gallon?"

 

[DISUNC]

...... We're paying less per galllon in real dollars today than we were 30 years ago.

And MOST peoples take home dollars today are less than they were 40 years ago!

So, Do you work from home or do you work for the oil industry?

 

[stopgo]

And MOST peoples take home dollars today are less than they were 40 years ago!

So, Do you work from home or do you work for the oil industry?

LOL... neither. I'm a true road-warrior and spend a lot of time (and money) at the pumps.

And (no disrespect) but I'm highly skeptical that wages are lower today than they were 40 years ago, even adjusting for inflation.

 

[bicker]

...And the difference between the 2 is????????????

One is chartered "of the people, by the people, for the people" and the other is chartered to serve the best interests of its owners. People shouldn't be angry with Exxon Mobil for doing what it is supposed to do.

UGH! All I can say is around here Exxon is by far the MOST EXPENSIVE GAS there is. 20cents more a gallon than Shell!

And we all have a choice where to purchase our fuel from.

One of his reasons for not lowering the price is 'because peoples pension funds are tied into Exxons profits" Who has pension funds anymore????

You may be too young to know any of the people he's talking about. However, it's more than pension funds that are affected by Exxon's profits -- tens of thousands of people invest their retirement funds in mutual funds that invest, at least in part, in Exxon Mobil. I haven't checked recently, but I know that in the past Exxon was one of the major holdings of at least one of my retirement funds.

CEO of Exxon & all the Gas companies are BIG FAT LIARs!!!!!

No they're not. You owe them a big fat apology for your accusations in abstentia.

 

[DISUNC]

LOL... neither. I'm a true road-warrior and spend a lot of time (and money) at the pumps.

And (no disrespect) but I'm highly skeptical that wages are lower today than they were 40 years ago, even adjusting for inflation.

I will find you the article...its been driving (gasless) me nuts looking for it! I have been googing this for awhile now. It mentioned what a family of 4 could do with a 10,000 yearly income in 1966! And in 2006, the family would need a income of about $200,000 a year. They did mention things like in 1966 the avg telephone bill was 8.00 a month and today (inc cell/cable/dsl) its 250.00 a month. Things like that!

It may be off a bit....BUT NOT BY MUCH!

 

[bicker]

I believe there has been a significant decline in personal income since 9/11, but that has nothing to do with this thread. It isn't a company's fault that the government has made a mess of the economy. It's the government's fault, and therefore it is the fault of us, the people. Folks love to find scapegoats to avoid their own personal responsibility. However, that doesn't help anything. We need to step up and take responsibility for the people we send to Washington, and stop trying to blame others for our own bad choices.

 

[DISUNC]

One is chartered "of the people, by the people, for the people" and the other is chartered to serve the best interests of its owners. People shouldn't be angry with Exxon Mobil for doing what it is supposed to do.

I dont believe raping the American public is what they are suppose to do! I firmly believe ALL the OIL companies are in (for lack of a better term) KAOOOTZ with each other.

And we all have a choice where to purchase our fuel from..

Yes, 20 cents here, 20 cents there! Sad, but since our US Transportation Infastructure is specifically designed for the use of OIL, and has been very strongly supported since the Eisenhower admin...we have NO other choice but OIL! Square milage, this is a HUGE country and lots of ground to travel. So really... No there is no real choice.

You may be too young to know any of the people he's talking about. However, it's more than pension funds that are affected by Exxon's profits -- tens of thousands of people invest their retirement funds in mutual funds that invest, at least in part, in Exxon Mobil. I haven't checked recently, but I know that in the past Exxon was one of the major holdings of at least one of my retirement funds...

First off, Thanks! But I am not that young...46. I worked in the Mutual Fund industry for 16 years, most likely designing some of those nifty computerized statements you now get. In fact I worked for the #1 largest retirement service outside of Soc Sec in the country. However like most 50 year old & under in this country...we will not be privy to the same company paid for pension funds that so many of today's retirees are now getting, along with Social Security. We either pay into a 401K plan...with our own money. And HOPE your job is not shipped to India, and you MUST take your meager savings to use for living...cause if you do...Uncle Sam takes your employers portion all back for himself. Many MANY companies have stopped offering there own sponserd pension...since they MUST pay for meager health benefits! Most of us under 50 will only be getting Soc Sec! Its a cold hard fact.

No they're not. You owe them a big fat apology for your accusations in abstentia.

Like Hell I do! So a 400 million dollar retirement package for a few years work...is OK by you?

 

[DISUNC]

I believe there has been a significant decline in personal income since 9/11, but that has nothing to do with this thread. It isn't a company's fault that the government has made a mess of the economy. It's the government's fault, and therefore it is the fault of us, the people. Folks love to find scapegoats to avoid their own personal responsibility. However, that doesn't help anything. We need to step up and take responsibility for the people we send to Washington, and stop trying to blame others for our own bad choices.

OK bicker.....This one you got right! I WHOLE HEARTEDLY AGREE 100% with everything you said!

WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT! It is easy for me to complain about the current government...since I had nothing to do with their "so called" victory!

I just want to add, people should NOT vote based on their learnings from a 30 second paid commericial!!!! Pick up a REAL legitimate newspaper, or a magazine or watch a REAL legitimate News program...or just ask me I will tell you who to vote for!

 

[bicker]

I dont believe raping the American public is what they are suppose to do!

And they're not. You're simply wrong. Sounds like to me that you're upset and frustrated and just lashing out without any real substance, or foundation for the caustic aspersions you're casually throwing out.

I firmly believe ALL the OIL companies are in (for lack of a better term) KAOOOTZ with each other.

It is irresponsible to make such egrigious accusations, even in abstencia, without hard evidence.

Yes, 20 cents here, 20 cents there! Sad, but since our US Transportation Infastructure is specifically designed for the use of OIL, and has been very strongly supported since the Eisenhower admin...we have NO other choice but OIL!

Your choice came back in November 2004, when we voted the Energy President back into office, and before than in November 2000 when we put him there in the first place. We don't get to make irrepsonsible decisions about our leadership and then blame others for the mistakes we've made.

And HOPE your job is not shipped to India

It already has been. I've been marginalized twice in my career, already. Yet, I'm not going to blame others without foundation.

So a 400 million dollar retirement package for a few years work...is OK by you?

If it is okay with the owners, yes. It's their business, not yours.

It is easy for me to complain about the current government...since I had nothing to do with their "so called" victory!

No, sorry. You're responsible, as am I, for the fact that (1) The other guy didn't win; and (2) Even better people didn't run. We cannot escape responsibility for our govenment by saying we wanted someone else to win. We have an obligation as citizens to work to get the best choices made, and we must take personal responsibility for our failures to do so.

 

[Littlemotherhaywood]

I'm sorry, but one vote doesn't make a difference in this country anymore. I cannot take responsibility for the votes of others. How exactly am I, as an individual, supposed to change who is running for office and what our choices are? First off, yes, we all need to take responsibility for the energy we use. We drive big cars and we live in super-size homes and we never stop going, going, going. Now that doesn't mean we don't deserve choices. Gas prices have risen at an astronomical rate over the last ten years. Ten years ago I could buy gas for less than a dollar a gallon and now it's over three times that in some places. Over history, I don't believe an increase such as this has happened so fast. I don't really care that other countries pay more for things than we do. I don't care if people think Americans are spoiled. The bottom line here is that prices for everything we buy are going up because of the price of fuel increasing and wages aren't. So now people who aren't in great positions (you know...the common man) are going to have to live a lower quality of life than just a few years ago. I have yet to upgrade to the SUV or even minivan, but I'm seriously feeling the pinch of the recent increases. My home energy costs have doubled in only a year and our grocery budget has gone up significantly as well. I've noticed that sale prices are closer to what regular prices were just a few years ago. If I'm personally supposed to change this, what do you propose I do?

 

[deltachi8]

Anyone who thinks if a darn bit of difference would be in place if the other guy won, is mistaken. It matters not waht republicrat or democan is in office, they are pretty much the same. For some time, both major parties have worried more and more about winning elections and less and less about ideology and governing. Politicians ar ein business for one thing, getting elected.

I have zero problem with any compkany that makes a profit, large, small or huge. Its what our system is built on. There are SEVERAL market factors effecting the price of gas - supply, world tensions, refinery capacity, political instability in oil producing regions, and so on. Also, demand has not leveled off with rising prices which tells anyone who took ECON 101, that gasoline is affordable as the switch to alternatives has not occoured in earnest.

In the long run, behaivors need to change to make it economically viable for companies to invest in alternate technologies. At $3/gal, its still not there. Does it suck to pay more at the pump, sure, but I still do it because theprice hasnt reached a level where I need to go to an alternative (finding a job closer to home, smaller car, public transportation, etc)/

 

[bicker]

I cannot take responsibility for the votes of others.

However, we can take responsibility for our failure to convince others that they should agree with us. Barring that, we should at least be conscientious enough not to try to shift blame onto others.

Now that doesn't mean we don't deserve choices.

We deserve all the choices our purchasing behaviors provide sufficient incentive for some supplier to provide. Nothing more.

Gas prices have risen at an astronomical rate over the last ten years. Ten years ago I could buy gas for less than a dollar a gallon and now it's over three times that in some places. Over history, I don't believe an increase such as this has happened so fast.

You'd be mistaken. Adjusted for inflation, gasoline prices increased at a faster rate three times in history: 1973 and 1979-1980, and, of course, in late 2005 (how soon we forget).

Furthermore, adjusted for inflation, prices were higher in the first quarter of both 1980 and 1981 than they are today. It should be noted that gasoline has been lower in price, adjusted for inflation, during the period 1986-2004 as compared to the period 1979-1985. (The BLS data I'm using only goes back as far as 1979. I believe the period actually extends back to 1973, during the OPEC embargo.) What that means is that during the late 1980s, throughout the 1990s, and up until the beginning of last year, gasoline was always less expensive as compared to the period before that.

[Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.]

So now people who aren't in great positions ... are going to have to live a lower quality of life than just a few years ago.

Granted. So say that. That's indisputable. However, just because things are bad doesn't mean there has to be blame. Sometimes "stuff" happens. In the absence of evidence of wrong-doing, we can either figure out a way to change it, or accept it.

 

[bicker]

Anyone who thinks if a darn bit of difference would be in place if the other guy won, is mistaken.

For the record, I substantially agree, with one proviso: The other guy six years ago would likely not have pissed off the rest of the world so thoroughly, and so some of the inflationary factors attributable to Dubya's Folly (the world tensions you mentioned) wouldn't have been actual. Still, I agree that that would have been a rather minor difference.

In the long run, behaivors need to change to make it economically viable for companies to invest in alternate technologies.

Precisely.