Last year I wrote a story in support of Exxon's massive profits, arguing that they were not extraordinary given the company's size and that many other companies, large and small, had much higher profit margins. I could have re-posted the same story this year since Exxon Mobil (NYSE: XOM) reported similar results and the same short-sighted folks whined about it in the same knee-jerk reaction. The stock closed last Friday at $85.37 per share, up about 13% in a year, not including the 1.7% yield.

In last year's article I even commented on the difficulty XOM faced in dealing with Mr. Putin and Mr. Chavez, and I guess my words rang all too true given the current mess in Venezuela. In order to play on the world stage, you have to be big and this is particularly evident in the oil business.

So I'm on record that I do not mind Exxon's size or profits. Let me go further and state clearly that I also support its lawsuit to freeze Venezuelan assets until XOM is compensated for the theft of its investment. If it were not for Exxon's investment and technological know-how, the government and people of Venezuela would be a lot poorer.

After reviewing Wednesday's post, Bush administration pushing dollar down or allowing it to fall? IMF chief sounds alarm, I thought of one more point that is of paramount importance. Either many people are ignoring or do not understand how a devalued dollar facilitates our giving away the country wholesale, even if in the short term it appears to help with our trade deficit.

This concept does not seem to have resonated in Washington and, along with his advisers, our president is either ignorant or avoiding the issue altogether because he does not want to discuss the remedy: everyone tightening their belt financially and taking some economic pain.

Warren Buffett has sounded the alarm many times about this subject, and I will, too. When the dollar falls in value, say 30% (each currency varies), that gives foreign investors 30% more buying power here. Yes, it is true they buy more when our goods and services are "on sale" (and we buy less of theirs). However, what if instead of buying perishables, they buy income-producing property and companies. As long as this trend continues, they would be wise to buy more and more.

A simple example: They buy a company that makes widgets in the United States. They are able to sell (export) more widgets along with their American counterparts because of the devalued dollar. Who makes a higher return on invested capital? The foreign investor, of course, because they paid 30% less for the widget company!

My recent stories about American Idol inflamed reader passions from many perspectives. Sanjaya aside, the idea of American companies out-sourcing jobs to India or anywhere else offends many people. Some readers of American Idol: Are Indian call centers skewing the vote? thought I was singling out the people of India which they interpreted as hostile and racist. I thought I would set the record straight about my views on the subject.

1. The jobs we are sending overseas to India, or elsewhere, is not affecting the employment rate in the United States to any appreciable level. Last I read the unemployment rate stood at 4.5%. It has been hovering between 4% and 5% for several years. To me that is actually close to full employment in a market society as complex as ours. I have no expectation that we could sustain anything lower.
2. Our connection and developing relationship with India in particular is extremely valuable. I believe India has as much potential as any nation, and more than most, to help us expand our economy. It's size, value system, geographic location, history, English foundation, and more make it a great partner. There is much more to gain than to lose for both sides.
3. The fluidity of markets and the greatest transparency in business dealings should be our focus and the word globalization is sometimes a distraction. It is not specific and means different things to different people. Integration is a better word. International partnering is a better term. Since the market is becoming more and more fluid we have not only witnessed call-centers and software development moving overseas, but in some cases they are coming back as companies experiment and decide they function better with local talent and control.

One of the greatest ironies I find in this whole discussion is that the people that complain about the outsourcing of work to other countries are the same ones that complain if a foreign company comes to set up shop in the United States - bringing jobs here!