I must have missed the memo: when did the word "profit" take on the persona of a 'four-letter' word? To hear the Democrats and the President, companies are not supposed to earn a profit unless they give it all to the government so that they can "share the wealth". By now, I'm sure that most people who are interested have heard the President talk about the villainous CEO's and other executives who make millions in bonuses, and those companies who post high profits. But there is never any mention of actual "profit margins", which is what the company has to actually use to pay out 'dividends' to share holders, and use for exploration and R&D. Most of the oil and gas companies, as of the last quarter posted, have profit margins of under 10%. And they pay huge amounts in taxes to our government every year,such as the amount deferred for this year for 1st and 2nd quarter of 2010, from BP oil company of $20,156,000 in March, and $11,049,000 in June, according to Forbe's.com. That isn't chicken feed, folks, and right now we can use every bit of the extraordinarily large amounts of money from big oil going into the U.S. coffers, since we have such a huge debt accumulating minute by minute.
However, regardless of all of the figures, we are a Capitalist economy folks. Why should any company have to practically grovel if they post a profit? That's what Capitalism is all about, profit and loss. The government should not have bailed out any company...failure is what clears out the riff-raff, people! GM should have been allowed to declare bankruptcy. At least the stockholders would have been paid what they were due before any other entity. As it is, they got shafted, big time. Those stockholders included retirement funds for teachers and firemen,police, etc., and their people took a very large hit, even forcing some to have to go back to work. But the Unions got their money, didn't they? Funny how large donations to Obama's election coffers translates to bonus points for the Unions, and GE, among others. Has the CEO of GE been called on the carpet? No, but Jeffery Imalt has been a frequent guest of the White House. Go figure!
But back to my original question, just when did the word 'profit' become such a bad word? Although they have been influencing what is taught to our children, most of which don't even get any economics classes, I think it really began when the Dems took over control of the House and Senate, then really hit a peak when Obama took office and they knew that they had a free rein to monopolize the 'conversation' of economics. Then the Recession hit, and everyone was looking for someone to blame. Rich Executives are always a good bet, because of the wealth-envy that has been used by the Dems for decades. And it didn't help that most of the so-called 'Czars' of Obama's Cabinet are anti-capitalism.especially his Regulatory Czar, Cass Sunstein. But that's a column for another day.
This Nation is a Capitalist country, folks. It has allowed us to become the business owners that we dream of being, or allowing someone to work their way up in a company because they have the work ethic that the company is looking for. It allows hundreds or thousands of people to keep their jobs making limousines and yachts, and installing new technology in houses, or building those houses. Don't you realize all of the people who will be out of work if the wealthy in America pick up and move? These people can live anywhere they want, and still do what they want. Obama keeps referring to the "millionaires, and billionaires" who would be affected if they let the Bush tax rates expire for those making $250,000 or more per year. But those business owners who declare their taxes from the business on their personal income tax are not in any way millionaires and billionaires. They are our neighbors and cousins, or friends. They own the pizza shop down the road, or the small gas and grocery store on the highway. In New York City, buying a tiny apartment might cost you $250,000, so how can that be considered a lot of money in NYC?? Rents on studio apartments can be upwards of $800 or more per month, so I think that the amount of money considered a lot, or enough, to warrant paying a much larger amount of taxes every year ought to be reconfigured. And I think we need to stop vilifying companies and people who make a 'profit' and congratulate them for catching the American Dream. And lets hope they continue to hang on, and maybe they will eventually have some jobs for some of those unemployed who believed that Obama meant it when he said the Stimulus money would keep unemployment to "below 8%". Profit is what has fueled the growth and prominence of America for all these years. Maybe we should embrace it again.
