Low oil production means more profit for Exxon

Recently we told you about oil execs explaining to congress how $123 billion in profits should entitle them to an additional $18 billion in the form of subsidies. I realize many of you out there have a lot of sympathy for their position and have spent the intervening time hounding your Congresspersons on their behalf. I mean, this is America and that means energy corporations have the right to do whatever they want - and if we don't like it we can buy a bicycle (I recommend a bicycle regardless. They are great for your health). One of the reasons these companys' hands are out-stretched beggar-like is because (they claim) they need money for further exploration and development. I don't know why they didn't have this part of the equation in their business model to begin with but hey, everyone makes mistakes. Year after year after etc. etc..

How my eyebrows did raise then when reading this article about Exxon (XOM) not increasing oil production so as to keep their record profits high, on Business Week. It is common practice now for oil companies to simply trade any capitol invested in new projects for the equivalent in oil so the countries are paying them to drill directly from their oil reserves. So why do they need our money again?

I know this may sound like a direct quote from Captain Obvious but oil companies like Exxon don't really care if Americans are struggling to keep their houses and buy food because of their desire to see higher profits which is reason number 643 why I intend my next new car to be electric. End rant.

[Source: Business Week]