Because, apparently, $12 billion in net, net, net profit just isn’t enough.

So these accounting and speculation junkies had a hissy. Well, screw ‘em.

I saw a flack on ABC yesterday trying to explain that ExxonMobil’s record quarterly profit was not, in fact, excessive. He claimed that the ratio of net profit to sales was below that of countless other sectors, so ExxonMobil was actually hurt! Screw him, too.

I’m not sure what the true definition of “excessive” is anymore. When one company racks up more than $30 billion in net profits for a year – after all the bills and taxes have been paid – my brain says that is excessive. When that company’s entire industry pulls down more than $150 billion in net profits, again, I’m thinking excessive. Put those net profits against the high-flying costs for gas and diesel and the negative impact it has had at every level of the economy and, well, excessive.

But apparently I’m wrong.

The tire industry isn’t doing so great, in large part because of the growing costs of raw materials (derived from oil) and energy costs (again, that oil stuff) and the impact of a worsening global economy (driven, of course, by high oil and fuel prices). Excessive costs that cannot be offset by sales.

The auto industry just reported their quarterlies. Guess what? Excessive losses. $15 billion by GM alone.

Like to see what ExxonMobil’s profits might be without cars and tires. Doubt it would be excessive.

If you have comments to share, send to me at [email protected].

– Jim Smith