[sammyg2]

"Tax the rich, feed the poor, till there aint no, rich no more ...
I'd love to change the world, but I don't know what to do"

Companies are supposed to generate profit. If they generate lots of profit, they are doing their jobs well. If what they do is that profitable other companies will jump in and compete.

Exxonmobil is a good example, they generate a huge amount of profit but the percentage pf profit when compared to capitol employed is not that big when compared to other industries.

They made all the headlines recently, everyone was talking about XOM's HUGE record profit. I don't recall anyone in the media mentioning the fact that the record profit amounted to an 11.59% net profit margin.
If they did tell us that it would detract from the sensationalistic knee-jerk reactions they so desperately seek from their audience. They want people to get fired up and upset, and they selectively report the "news" to obtain that reaction. It helps their ratings. They are also supposed to be profitable, but not at the expense of deception or dishonesty.

Now, if a company ends up with excess capitol that is not needed for R&D, expansion, or re-investment, the company should use the money to buy back shares or distribute it to shareholders via dividends. They do that all the time. If the company ends up with too much money they aren't doing their jobs.

Corporate executives are not supposed to dole out handouts with the company's money, IT ISN'T THEIR MONEY TO GIVE AWAY! It belongs to the shareholders. The directors should give the money to the rightful owners (shareholders) and if they want to give it to the needy, it's their choice. I've contacted three different CEOs over the past two years, requesting that they stop giving my money away to charity. That's my responsibility, not theirs. I spoke to one CEO and one COO in person about this matter. I told him straight out that if a company's donating to charity does not increase a company's bottom line, it should never be done.

BTW, less than 2% of all exxonmobil shares are owned by individuals.
About 98% of all shares are owned by institutions:

Barclays Global Investors UK Holdings Ltd
STATE STREET CORPORATION
VANGUARD GROUP, INC. (THE)
FMR CORPORATION (FIDELITY MANAGEMENT & RESEARCH CORP)
Bank of New York Mellon Corporation
AXA
BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION
JP MORGAN CHASE & COMPANY
NORTHERN TRUST CORPORATION
CAPITAL RESEARCH AND MANAGEMENT COMPANY
Thgese insitutions own XOM shares so they can put them in investment funds for working people with 401Ks, IRAs, and a few bucks left over after the politicians rape their paychecks.
The people who invest in these funds are who the company is owned by and who the officers and directors work for.

Here's some of the funds:
Vanguard 500 index fund
Vanguard total stock fund
SPDR trust series 1
College retirement equities fund
Vanguard institutional index fund
Washington mutual investors fund
Fidelity contrafund
Fidelity equity-income fund
Spartan US equity index fund
Select sector SPDR fund-energy select

I have investments with fidelity, Vanguard, and B of A so I indirectly own shares of XOM. Most of you probably do too.
Now, if XOM is making so darn much money, how come we're all not getting rich off it?
Because of that 11%.