Posts Tagged ‘economics’

Iran war brings massive price and profit gouging

April 19, 2026

Nick Beams, WSWS, 16 April 2026

    Elevenlabs AudioNative Player

    As workers around the world are hit with the ever-worsening consequences of the US war on Iran—crippling rises in petrol and gas prices, food price hikes and the growing threat of food shortages in poorer countries—major corporations and banks are raking in increased profits to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars.

    First in line to benefit from the profit bonanza, as could be expected, are the oil companies. But the flow of increased money extends across the board.

    The price of diesel is advertised at a gas station Thursday, March 19, 2026, in Hyattsville, Md. [AP Photo/Stephanie Scarbrough]

    According to an investigation by the Guardian, the results of which were published on Wednesday, with oil at around $100 per barrel the major oil conglomerates in Saudi Arabia, Russia, the United States, Britain and Europe will collect an additional $234 billion in profit for 2026, an extra inflow of $30 million an hour for the rest of the year.

    The biggest winner is Saudi Arabia’s Aramco, which is expected to make a war profit of $25.5 billion, with the Russian petro-giants set to make an additional $23.9 billion.

    The US firm ExxonMobil will take in an additional $11 billion. Shell’s revenue will rise by $6.8 billion, and Chevron stands to make an additional $9.2 billion.

    The additional profits are on top of the $1 trillion the oil industry takes in every year while receiving explicit subsidies which totalled $1.3 trillion in 2022, according to calculations by the International Monetary Fund.

    There are other benefits as well flowing from the rise in share prices. The market value of ExxonMobil has increased by $118 billion, while that of Shell is up $34 billion.

    Apart from the oil producers, trading firms which deal in oil, food, metals and other necessary commodities, largely dominating global markets, are already cashing in. The Wall Street Journal reported that the Swiss commodities trader Gunvor said it had already made as much money in the first quarter of this year as it did in all of 2025 when it made a profit of $1.6 billion. Others will be experiencing a similar boost.

    Also not surprisingly, US arms manufacturers have been cashing in. On the first day of the US attack on Iran major firms recorded a rise in their total market value of up to $30 billion.

    The profit and price gouging extends across the US economy under conditions where, according to a recent article in the New York Times, corporate profits “have reached a record share of the US economy.” Corporate America intends to keep it that way.

    Sonu Varghese, the global macro strategist at the Carson group, a financial firm, told the Times that many companies viewed inflation from “outside shocks,” such as war, “as an opportunity to raise prices and boost margins” and that there was going to be some “margin expansion.”

    This points to a repeat of the experience of the inflation surge of 2022 when, as the Times reported, data from the US Producer Price Index “showed that wholesalers and retailers generally expanded the margin between their sales prices and their cost of acquiring goods.”

    Major US banks have also been cashing in on the opportunities generated by the war. The six major US banks reported collective profits of $47.6 billion for the first quarter, much of it generated because market volatility provided conditions for significantly profitable trading.

    Reporting on the profit hike, the Financial Times noted that the first quarter was marked by geopolitical shocks—the military operation in Venezuela and the Iran war—triggering volatility, which is “good for investment banks which make money from financing and facilitating client trades.”

    JPMorgan led the way in absolute terms with a 13 percent increase in profits, over the same period last year, to $16.5 billion, with market jitters being characterised as a “gift to trading desks.” Goldman Sachs reported a 19 percent increase in profits to $5.6 billion. Citigroup reported a 42 percent profit surge and Morgan Stanley’s profits rose 29 percent.

    The combined increase in the profits from the trading desks of the major banks is estimated to be the highest in 12 years.

    Much of this money is being used to finance share buybacks to boost the portfolios of the banks’ senior executives and big investors. The largest US banks spent a record $33 billion on buybacks in the first quarter, with JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs and Citigroup making their largest ever repurchases.

    The banks have benefited from the relaxation of regulations under Trump. Bank of America chief financial officer Alastair Borthwick said the bank was “encouraged by the work the administration is doing,” as it bought back $7.2 billion of its own stock in the quarter, the highest level in four years. The Trump regime is moving to reduce the amount of capital the banks must hold as a reserve, freeing up money for trading and buybacks.

    The overall sentiment on Wall Street is that the profit bonanza will continue, at least for now, with the S&P 500 passing the 7,000 mark for the first time on Wednesday. Inflation profiteering fuelled by the war is one factor. Another is the wave of mass layoffs, hitting tens of thousands of workers in many cases, especially in the high-tech industries.

    Commenting on what it called a new era of mega-layoffs, the Wall Street Journal noted that “employers are seizing on the potential financial upsides of severing swaths of their workforces at once.”

    In the past, mass layoffs by a company may have signalled troubles or mismanagement. “Now, such a company is more likely to get a big stock bump and praise from investors for acting boldly.”

    Giant corporations and banks are feeding on death, destruction and the impoverishment of the working class the world over. This makes it urgently necessary for workers and youth to draw the sharpest political conclusions.

    The war on Iran itself is not the product of the individual Donald Trump, but is driven by the historic crisis of imperialism, of which he is the most grotesque personification.

    Likewise, the obscenity expressed in the present day economic and financial system is not the product of the individual greed of the ruling oligarchs, though that exists in abundance. It is a product of the capitalist system itself, the objective logic of which, as Marx explained 150 years ago, is the creation of fabulous wealth at one pole of society and poverty, misery and degradation at the other.

    Today the necessity for its overthrow and the establishment of socialism is not confined to the pages of Das Kapital but is being written large in the language of daily life.

    Marx and Darwin: Two great revolutionary thinkers of the nineteenth century

    November 10, 2009

    Part 1

    By Chris Talbot, WSWS.og, June 17, 2009

    This is the first of a three-part series comprising a lecture by WSWS correspondent Chris Talbot to meetings of the International Students for Social Equality in Britain. Part 2 was posted on June 18 and Part 3 on June 19.

    We have organised these meetings of the International Students for Social Equality in honour of Charles Darwin from a different standpoint from the many other bicentenary events. We want to bring out the connection between Darwin and that other great thinker of the mid-19th century, Karl Marx.

    Darwin
    Charles Darwin

    The importance of Marx hits you when you take in the events of the last few months. We are now in a world economic crisis comparable to, if not more severe than, that of the 1930s, which will have a major effect on all of our futures. Current economic theory completely failed to predict this crisis. The economists cannot explain how it happened and have no answer to it [1]. In contrast, Karl Marx spent much of his life developing an economic analysis that explains the inherent instability of capitalism and provides a scientific basis for the development of the socialist working class movement.

    Continues >>

    Socialism has failed. Now capitalism is bankrupt. So what comes next?

    April 11, 2009

    Whatever ideological logo we adopt, the shift from free market to public action needs to be bigger than politicians grasp

    The 20th century is well behind us, but we have not yet learned to live in the 21st, or at least to think in a way that fits it. That should not be as difficult as it seems, because the basic idea that dominated economics and politics in the last century has patently disappeared down the plughole of history. This was the way of thinking about modern industrial economies, or for that matter any economies, in terms of two mutually exclusive opposites: capitalism or socialism.

    We have lived through two practical attempts to realise these in their pure form: the centrally state-planned economies of the Soviet type and the totally unrestricted and uncontrolled free-market capitalist economy. The first broke down in the 1980s, and the European communist political systems with it. The second is breaking down before our eyes in the greatest crisis of global capitalism since the 1930s. In some ways it is a greater crisis than in the 1930s, because the globalisation of the economy was not then as far advanced as it is today, and the crisis did not affect the planned economy of the Soviet Union. We don’t yet know how grave and lasting the consequences of the present world crisis will be, but they certainly mark the end of the sort of free-market capitalism that captured the world and its governments in the years since Margaret Thatcher and President Reagan.

    Impotence therefore faces both those who believe in what amounts to a pure, stateless, market capitalism, a sort of international bourgeois anarchism, and those who believe in a planned socialism uncontaminated by private profit-seeking. Both are bankrupt. The future, like the present and the past, belongs to mixed economies in which public and private are braided together in one way or another. But how? That is the problem for everybody today, but especially for people on the left.

    Continued >>

    How the Media Sold Their Souls to Wall Street

    October 3, 2008

    by Josh Silver

    If you are like me, the pundits, and 99.9% of the American public, you really don’t know much about economics. And despite Monday’s refreshing moment of rebellion in the Congress, in all likelihood the House and Senate will pass a modified version of the $700 billion handout this week to fat cat Wall Street financiers.

    The likely result, according to Nobel economist Joseph Stiglitz: “The unemployment rate will still increase, growth will remain anemic, house prices will continue to fall, the number of houses in foreclosure will continue to rise, credit will be harder to get, states and localities will remain in a fiscal crisis, and there will be cutbacks in basic public services. …. Our living standards in the future will be lower than they otherwise would have been. ”

    Here’s the problem: None of us really know that the hell is going on, and what the largest financial bailout in the history of our nation would actually achieve. Based on McCain and Obama’s hasty support of the bailout, it would seem they are both too far under the thumb of Wall Street to look at viable alternatives to an unprecedented handout to the same reckless bankers who got us into this mess.

    And like they did in the run-up to war in Iraq and the passage of the Patriot Act, the media are compounding the problem rather than helping it. While TV devotes 24/7 coverage to pretending that mudslinging Democrats and Republicans represent the full range of debate, while right-wing radio hosts scream socialism, and while pundits like Thomas Friedman implore Congress “to give them the capital and the flexibility to put out this fire,” the American people are getting virtually no hard economic analysis about what the bailout would achieve or what the range of options are.

    Why aren’t Luc Laeven and Fabian Valencia on television right now? They just submitted a comprehensive report to the International Monetary Fund after studying 42 banking crises over the past 37 years. Their conclusion: Bailouts often do not work, they often result in more bad practices, and they distort economies by transferring wealth from taxpayers to bankers and their customers.

    Why hasn’t economist Dean Baker been invited onto a single television program in the past week ? He is one of the guys who actually predicted the current crisis. He wrote this week: “There is no way that the failure to do a bailout will lead to more than a very brief failure of the financial system. The worst case scenario is that we have an extremely scary day in which the markets freeze for a few hours. Then the Fed steps in and takes over the major banks. The system of payments continues to operate exactly as before, but the bank executives are out of their jobs and the bank shareholders have likely lost most of their money. In other words, the banks have a gun pointed to their heads and are threatening to pull the trigger unless we hand them $700 billion.”

    Why isn’t New York University economist Nouriel Roubini all over the news right now? He says the claim that “spending $700 billion of public money is the best way to recapitalize banks has absolutely no factual basis or justification. This way of recapitalizing financial institutions is a total rip-off that will mostly benefit – at a huge expense for the U.S. taxpayer – the shareholders and even unsecured creditors of the banks. ….The pockets of reckless bankers and investors (will) have been made fatter under the fake argument that bailing out Wall Street was necessary to rescue Main Street from a severe recession.”

    Roubini continues, “Instead, the restoration of the financial health of distressed financial firms could have been achieved with a cheaper and better use of public money. It is pathetic that Congress did not consult any of the many professional economists that have presented alternative plans that were more fair and efficient and less costly ways to resolve this crisis. … and it is a scandal that even Congressional Democrats have fallen for this Treasury scam that does little to resolve the debt burden of millions of distressed home owners.”

    But turn on your television – the place where more than 60% of Americans get their primary news – turn on your radio, or open your local newspaper, and you’re not going to see what these top economists are saying. It’s a McCain quote, an Obama sound byte, and the same pundits who have proven their incompetence over and over. The result is an American public that is fundamentally uninformed about the issues that matter most – like economics, health care, and war – and over-informed about those that matter least: sports, celebrity, the latest campaign ad, and horserace analysis of elections.

    We have no reason to believe that the press — and along with it, most politicians — will ask the tough questions, expand the range of debate, and bring the facts to the American people. But until they do, our economy – and our democracy — will continue its race to the bottom.

    Josh Silver is the Executive Director of Free Press a national, nonpartisan organization that he co-founded with Robert McChesney and John Nichols in 2002 to engage citizens in media policy debates and create a more democratic and diverse media system.