Just heard Mark Levin mention this point on his show tonight.

The item he referred to is from Mark Perry at istockanalyst.com, who commented on CNNMoney.com’s coverage of Exxon Mobil’s profit report today.

According to CNN, Exxon Mobil once again reported the largest quarterly profit in U.S. history Thursday, posting net income of $11.68 billion on revenue of $138 billion in the second quarter.

That profit works out to $1,485.55 a second.

Buried in the story we also find that “In addition to making hefty profits, Exxon also had a hefty tax bill. Worldwide, the company paid $10.5 billion in income taxes in the second quarter, $9.5 billion in sales taxes, and over $12 billion in what it called ‘other taxes.’”

….. In other words, Exxon Mobil paid $32.361 billion in taxes in the second quarter, which works out to $4,114 in taxes per second.

Go to his site to see the graph Perry put up.

Looking at it from another perspective, Exxon Mobil’s profit of about 8.4% of sales, while the taxes paid represented over 23% of sales. (August 1 AM Note: This was originally said to be 32%, but has been corrected. The transposition zombies have been appropriately tracked down and punished.)

It’s remarkable that CNN even reported the taxes paid, as they were the clear exception:

• This UK Guardian article about the Democrats’ objections to Exxon’s profits didn’t.
• Kristen Hays at the Houston Chronicle didn’t.
• Bloomberg didn’t.
• The Associated Press ….. you’re kidding, right?

The word “tax” does not appear in the Guardian, Chronicle, or AP articles. Bloomberg only used the word in connection with the after-tax effect of the company’s Exxon Valdez settlement.

So who are the greedy ones — Exxon shareholders who want a return on their investment, or the myriad government entities who insist that their grubby fingers be in the pie?

Oh, and would it be impolite to point out that Uncle Sam alone is currently spending $2.9 trillion a year, or $91,958 per second?

Cross-posted at NewsBusters.org.

It’s here.

It would be useful to read this in advance of tomorrow’s Employment Situation Report.

While the Associated Press’s Jeannine Aversa has referred to employers “slashing jobs” and handing out “stacks of pink slips during the past five consecutive months as the economy has lost over 350,000 jobs on a seasonally adjusted basis, the fact remains that the economy has added (on a not seasonally adjusted basis — i.e., what’s actually happening) over 2.7 million jobs.

While this number sound large, it is not acceptable, and is not as high the last several years. But in terms of Aversa’s reporting, it’s the direct opposite of the “stack of pink slips” she has written up as reality for the nation’s news consumers.

Aversa’s “slashing” and “pink slip” assertions are not merely exaggerated. They are false.

If this isn’t journalistic malpractice, I don’t know what is.

I will post the column with slight modifications at BizzyBlog on Saturday (link won’t work until then) under the title “AP’s 3-Million Job Gap.”

The post on troop deaths in Iraq during July took longer than expected, so the runup will be rushed:

• Consensus from the AP’s Joe Bel Bruno, as reported on Monday, was that 2nd quarter GDP growth will come in at an annualized 2.4%.
• The Wall Street Journal’s Mark Gongloff reports a consensus of 2.3% this morning, and also notes that revisions to prior years are going to be reported today. Those also bear watching.
• Expert economic analyst and Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is presumably expecting a negative number, based on his comment a couple of weeks ago that there is “little doubt we’ve moved into recession.”

The envelope, please, from the Bureau of Economic Analysis:

Real gross domestic product — the output of goods and services produced by labor and property located in the United States — increased at an annual rate of 1.9 percent in the second quarter of 2008 (that is, from the first quarter to the second quarter), according to advance estimates released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. In the first quarter, real GDP increased 0.9 percent.

The Bureau emphasized that the second-quarter “advance” estimates are based on source data that are incomplete or subject to further revision by the source agency (see the box on page 3). The second-quarter “preliminary” estimates, based on more comprehensive data, will be released on August 28, 2008.

There will also be a final report near the end of September.

So it turns out that those who were calling for 1.5% - 2.0% before the end of June were closer to the mark than those who revised their estimates upward during July. Unless the next two revisions go way up (initial reax: doubtful), Brian Wesbury, who predicted 3.0% last week, overshot the mark by quite a bit for the second quarter in a row.

I think Wesbury and others who got overoptimistic (including moi) didn’t take the ISM Non Manufacturing Index’s June move into contraction seriously enough.

Further thoughts may or may not get noted after a further look and a review of the prior-year comprehensive revision.

Regardless, though it’s by no means acceptable, it’s miles away from Barack Obama’s “little doubt we’ve moved into recession.” He should acknowledge he was wrong. Don’t bet on it.

________________________________________________

UPDATE: Well, well. The press has its red meat, six months late (but they should be careful what they wish for — See Update 2).

BEA revised the fourth quarter of 2008 down to -0.2% from +0.6%, breaking the 24-quarter string of unbroken growth that began in the fourth quarter of 2001. Not that anyone in the press will pay attention, but that is the fourth-longest positive string on record (the others are 1Q-1961 to 1Q-1967, 25 quarters; 4Q-1982 to 2Q-1990, 31 quarters; 2Q-1991 to 2Q-2000, 37 quarters).

At the same time, it revised the 2nd quarter of 2007 up from +3.8% to +4.8%. So this is how the past seven quarters look now:

4Q 2006, +1.5%
1Q 2007, +0.1%
2Q 2007, +4.8%
3Q 2007, +4.8%
4Q 2007, -0.2%
1Q 2008, +0.9%
2Q 2008, +1.9%

I know the results are what they are, but seriously, does anyone remember the middle quarters of 2007 being that great (I mean, literally on fire) in comparison to the quarter that preceded it, or the two that followed?

UPDATE 2: Far be it from me to make any kind of political point (/sarc). But since the numbers are sitting there like a bunch of hanging curveballs screaming “Hit me! Hit Me!,” here goes:

• The Republican-controlled 109th Congress’s last budget, and therefore its partial accountability for the performance of the economy, ended on September 30, 2007, the fiscal year-end of the last budget it passed. Economic growth during their last four quarters of their partial accountability was 2.8%.
• The Democrat-controlled 110th Congress’s official budget and economy responsibility, and therefore its partial accountability for the performance of the economy, began on October 1, 2007, the effective date of the first budget it passed. That would be the first day of the fourth quarter of 2007 — the quarter that broke the 24-month 24-quarter positive streak. Annualized economic growth during the past three quarters has been less than 1%.

Given that the president has been the same person throughout the entire period, it can’t be a coincidence.

Why shouldn’t I blame Pelosi and Reid?

Just, well, y’know, puttin’ it out there. :–>
____________________________________

UPDATE 3: All politicizing aside, there’s no guarantee that future GDP comprehensive revisions, of which there will be at least two more, won’t pull 4Q-2007 back into positive territory — or make 1Q07 negative. All other quarters back to early 2005 appear to be safe from going negative.

August 1 Note: The original post done yesterday has been updated to reflect July’s final death toll of 13 (8 hostile, 5 non-hostile).

____________________________________________

BizzyBlog readers should know that upcoming news reports about casualties in Iraq are probably going to understate how much US casualties relating to events that actually occurred during July declined.

AFP appears to be the only wire service reporting this at the moment, and it confirms my expectations. The report oddly acts as if the month is over in Iraq, even though roughly 11 hours remained (less than eight remain now) until July’s official conclusion when its brief report appeared.

Here is AFP’s beginning:

Eleven US soldiers were killed in Iraq in July, the lowest monthly toll since the US-led invasion of 2003, according to figures provided by the Pentagon.

The deadliest month was in November 2004, when 137 American troops were killed, an independent toll by icasualties.org showed. The previous low was in May when 19 soldiers were killed.

Iraq has seen a downward trend in violence since the middle of last year, although bloodshed spiked in March and April during clashes between Shiite militiamen and coalition security forces.

Since the AFP report went to press, the official US troop death toll has risen to 12 13, according to icasualties.org. Though zero would of course be ideal, assuming the current figure holds until July officially ends, this is great news.

But there are at least three important points I expect media reporting to miss or to underemphasize about July’s results.

First, the official number of deaths from hostile enemy actions is tied for the lowest number ever, going all the way back to the first full calendar month after the fall of Baghdad (to replicate, go to this link at icasualties.org and select “hostile”):

Second, three of the July deaths from hostile action occurred as a result of events that occurred before July 2008. The Department of Defense reported yesterday that Marine Staff Sgt. Faoa L. Apineru, 31, of Yorba Linda, Calif. (RIP, soldier) , died July 2, 2007, from wounds sustained in combat support. It was originally thought that he had not died from injuries sustained during his deployment, but a subsequent investigation determined otherwise. Additionally, two soldiers who had been missing since May 2007 after being kidnapped, Army Sgt. Alex Jimenez, of Lawrence, Massachusetts, and Pvt. Byron W. Fouty, of Waterford, Michigan, (RIP, gentlemen), were found during July.

+++++++++++++++

(ADDED August 1) There was also one non-hostile death in July 2008 unrelated to current military operations. Aviation Boatswain Mate Third Class Petty officer Daniel R. Verbeke, 25, of Exton, Penn. (RIP, soldier), died July 14 in Paoli, Penn. of complications from injuries he suffered in a flight deck accident in December 2005.

+++++++++++++++

This means that there were actually just five US troop deaths relating to hostile enemy action during July, and that the total US troop death toll in July relating to current operations was really nine (five hostile and four non-hostile). July 2008 was without a doubt the safest month to be a soldier serving the USA in Iraq since hostilities began. Beyond that, the last US soldier’s death from any cause occurred at least two weeks ago.

Third, it isn’t just that July was the safest single month ever for US soldiers in Iraq. If the situation holds for another eight hours, the two-, three-, and six-month periods ending July 31 will also have been the safest ever, by far (the four prior-period deaths noted earlier, three hostile and one non-hostile, are included in these totals):

Iraqi Security Force and civilian deaths in July, currently at 393 per icasualties.org (the final count came in at 402), are also on track to come also came in at an all-time-low since the site began tracking these results in January 2006.

As noted earlier, I don’t expect Old Media reporting to pick up many, or even any, of these important points. That is why I have posted them here. They serve to further demonstrate the remarkable job our troops have done to stabilize Iraq, train Iraq’s own troops, and largely eliminate or marginalize the enemy.

But what about Afghanistan? I’m going to wait to see how the wire services and others cover July results before dealing with that.

Cross-posted at NewsBusters.org.

From Nashua, NH:

Motorcyclist crashed, fell four stories
July 13, 2008

The family of a motorcyclist says his helmet saved his life as he fell four stories after crashing into a parking garage wall this week.

Leon Belesca, 28, of Nashua, fell over the wall and to the pavement below after his motorcycle crashed on the top floor of a parking garage early Friday.

“If he didn’t have his helmet on, we wouldn’t have Leon,” his father, Larry Belesca, told The Telegraph.

Belesca was in serious condition at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston with multiple injuries, but doctors said his prospects for recovery look good, his family said.

“He’s definitely holding his own,” said his sister, Meredith Belesca. “He’s got broken bones from head to toe, but neurologically he’s in good shape. There’s no spinal damage right now, and there’s no brain damage.”

Police have said that Belesca was not drunk or speeding and that it is unclear what made him lose control.

Some witnesses told police that Belesca waved goodbye to friends as he was driving off, Lieutenant Bruce Hansen said. Friends told his family it appeared as though the motorcycle shot forward for no apparent reason, his sister said.

Larry Belesca said he and Belesca’s sister remembered being shocked by how much money Belesca paid for his helmet, $200. They have since learned that is relatively inexpensive as helmets go.

“It’s the difference between life and death,” said Meredith Belesca. “It’s because of that helmet that my brother didn’t sustain brain damage and isn’t dead.” …..

Go here for the rest of the story.