Here is a story about Bee County, Texas where a local judge has issued a call for a county-wide boycott of Exxon-Mobil in the wake of one of their executives receiving a multi-million dollar retirement package and suspicion of price-gauging among the major oil companies.
Now, I am 100% in favor of capitalism. If a major oil company wants to give one of their executives a multi-million dollar retirement, so be it. They have that right. But, I, as a consumer also have the right to choose not to buy their product, which is what I choose to do.
Do I agree with boycotts? Sometimes. To me, a boycott is nothing more than a group of people making a similar choice. Will this hurt Exxon-Mobil? I doubt it. In fact, it will likely hurt local gas station owners more than the oil company, but the message is still there nonetheless.
Consumers are getting fed up. Something must be done. In my opinion, OPEC is much more to blame for high oil prices than the major oil companies, but when one of these companies gives an executive such an obscene amount of money in the face of current gas prices, it is somewhat of an insult. I defend their right to do it, but I also criticize the fact that they did it. It’s clear that Exxon-Mobil doesn’t really care that much about their consumers. Therefore, I don’t really care that much about their company.
So the next time I pull off of a highway exit ramp and see an Exxon-Mobil station next to, say, a BP or Texaco, I will choose the latter. That’s what makes capitalism great. You reap what you sow, some folks may say. Here’s to free will!
2 comments:
No I have not, but please don't tell me that Bush is involved in some conspiracy to raise oil prices on those who didn't vote for him.
R&D and Technology? I believe you said yourself that there aren't enough refineries in this country to keep prices down. Did he have something to do with that as well? Texas is sitting on 300 million barrels of crude oil that can't be extracted because of lack of technology, was that his doings? The western US and western Canada contain nearly 1 billion barrels of crude oil trapped within shale stone that the oil companies WON'T extract because it costs about $15 a barrel to do so, and when the Saudis are pumping at $1.50 a barrel it's too risky. Do we "owe" him for that decision as well? I'm all for capitalism, but that does not include collusion, which is exactly what the oil companies are involved in. And for this guy to walk away from 40 years of collusion with $400 million, it IS an insult. Especially when the average America, who CAN'T ride a bike to work is taking it in the pants with $3 a gallon gas that HE helped create. I don't OWE this guy jack, except for a swift kick in the jimmy.
Post a Comment