Actually was being serious. Anyway, I think "Windfall" these days is different from when it was derived in the early 80's. Now I think its just a term widely used because the left and the media pushed it so hard and now they claim the term windfall only applies when considering gross profit in regards to oil companies only. Little do them dumbasses know Exxons profit MARGIN stands around 10% in 07' which is slightly above average. (Maybe they're just good at what they do, just like Wal-Mart) Now that the Anheuser-Busch Companies are sellouts maybe we should charge them a windfall tax as they're profit margins are close to 20%? Next time any of you buy beer just remember gas is a better value.OmahaBen wrote:I don't know if you're being serious or sarcastic, but it doesn't matter with regards to the question I'm about to ask:S33 wrote:Thatta boy, Ben. Ur the man. Also people, don't forget that these huge domestic oil companies and our demand are our only leverage on the world oil market. We do not want too weeken Exxon and friends at all. Keep in mind, these oil companies are getting screwed anyway as they are taxed 49cents on the dollar. It's not their fault they are making windfall profits. It just happens to be a commodity that is very profitable. On day the same will be said for corn and soy.
thanks again Ben for bringing logic into this thread.
What exactly is a "windfall profit"? At what point does a profit turn from "the reason a company does business" to "excessive"?
With all that said, yeah I guess I miss-used the term windfall.





