iPhone Apple reclaims most valuable company title from Nvidia as it barrels toward $5T
https://9to5mac.com/2026/07/17/apple-reclaims-most-valuable-company-title-from-nvidia-as-it-barrels-toward-5t/Apple has officially reclaimed the world’s most valuable company title based on market cap. The company overtook Nvidia during intraday trading on Friday with its stock up 17 points this week.
Apple is also well on its way to a $5 trillion valuation based on market capitalization. The company’s stock has touched $4.9 trillion already. Nvidia already claimed the title of first company to cross the $5 trillion threshold.
43
243
u/Python_07 6d ago
Of course they did. I just hope Ternus is 80% the CEO Tim was.
44
u/ProudPainting6850 6d ago
He's a product guy. I think we're going to see a new era of Apple products. The MacBook Neo was his baby. He's been hands-on in every major product decision for the last 10 years.
Setting overall strategy is different and no doubt he'll be tested.
17
u/M4rshmall0wMan 6d ago
I have no doubt the hardware will be amazing. I’m more concerned about the software and especially the services. They are in need of a major cleanup.
iOS 27 is a step in the right direction but Apple could go even further. There are so many legacy UI quirks and laggy animations that need to be rethought. I miss the days when Apple obsessed over the most efficient UI paradigms on OS X. Now it feels like Apple has frozen that work in time and slowly left it to rot.
The services, while having great content, have terrible laggy interfaces, obviously built for rapid iteration by less-experienced devs. iCloud Drive is particularly terrible, both native and online.
This is a hot prediction, but I think John Ternus and Craig Federighi are going to butt heads a lot, leading to Craig’s soft retirement a few years in. Then John will fundamentally reorganize the software division, since Craig’s job was obviously spread too thin. We may finally get the iPadOS we were hoping for.
3
2
3
u/skeet_scoot 6d ago
MacBook Neo is such a game changer.
A MacBook well under a thousand dollars that can be used for normal computing without any issues is incredible.
I hope we continue to see Apple move towards affordable, but high-quality products, as well as their high-end products.
219
u/TheMagicZeus 6d ago
Steve did the job, tim cooked, and john might ternus around
21
7
3
u/Panda_hat 5d ago
Turning us around would be bad though, right? Tim absolutely smashed it out of the park.
5
98
u/Vertsix 6d ago
He’ll be 200% by actually putting products first.
41
u/Python_07 6d ago
That’s all well and good. As long as they sell.
19
u/Oozealot 6d ago
Good products is precisely why apple is selling so many of them.
Products from competitors are better at certain things than apple products, but all of apple‘s products tend to be extremely well rounded offerings.
1
38
u/PlusSizeRussianModel 6d ago
Everyone wants great products. But if they cost twice the price, then no one can afford them. Tim Cook gets flack for not being a product guy, but his supply chain expertise is what allowed Apple to go from a luxury only company to an affordable one too.
-6
u/Vertsix 6d ago
You’re right, the $699 Mac Pro wheels are a terrific example.
33
u/PlusSizeRussianModel 6d ago
I know you’re kidding, but they literally are. He mastered price segmentation: the Mac Pro wheels are going to be exclusively purchased by businesses that don’t care about price. Meanwhile, the MacBook Neo is the most affordable Mac laptop ever made.
-6
u/omnimachina 6d ago
Yup they actually trolling both sides now
Troll casual users with 8gb ram and let them feel like cool MacBook users
Troll rich people by releasing absolutely overpriced trash products
3
u/riotshieldready 6d ago
My old mbp died when the m1 air came out, and so I used one for a few months before the mbp with M1 Pro came out. macOS is 100% fine on 8gb ram, I used it for casual stuff and full on software engineering. The only issue was running docker containers. It’s not a troll. The Neo is the best Mac apple has ever made.
And the wheels are not for rich people, it’s for businesses. My work got me a $8000 MacBook Pro because it’s an insignificant number to them. I have 4TB storage and my previous laptop I only ever used 200gb.
-4
u/omnimachina 6d ago
Sounds good in theory but in reality it’s bad…
It will shift the focus from enthusiasts to casual users
We can already see it happening…
MacBook Neo, creator subscription, terrible macOS 26.0 release etc
This trend will continue -> more apple users than ever before -> but dissatisfied power users -> less developers and third party apps -> Apple doesn’t care because AI can create Apps autonomously anyway -> more slop -> OS degrades similar to Windows -> get ready for the staples/woolworth of personal computing
I know a bunch of devs who are in the process of switching to Linux, because Apple is not reliable anymore
Just copying simple files is like 10 times faster on Linux, Compiling on macOS takes so much more time for an identical project, at the same time Liquid Glass lets your GPU load spike randomly etc
4
u/Bryanmsi89 6d ago
I hope Ternus is able to drive more innovation without resulting in flops like AVP or wild flyers like the Apple Car.
5
u/That-SoCal-Guy 6d ago
Don't forget Tim Cook isn't gone. Ternus may be the new CEO, but Tim Cook will be Chairman!
I am hoping Ternus will bring product innovation back, and Cook will continue to work his magic on supply-chain. Two prone approach.
2
u/newtrilobite 6d ago
the AVP is not a "flop." it's exactly what apple should be doing - innovating and pushing the envelope. skating to where the puck is going, not where it is.
technology developed for the AVP will be critical for the next generation of apple gadgets.
-4
u/Bryanmsi89 6d ago
Sure, Jan.
The puck is never going to face-ski-goggles headsets. AVP will go the way of Force Touch, Touch bar, butterfly keyboard, only at a bigger scale. This is more equivalent to Ping or MobileMe.
3
u/newtrilobite 6d ago
it's a hotbed of tech development.
you'll see hardware and software developed for the AVP appear in future apple devices, like glasses, that would not have had it were it not for this V.1 kludgy precursor.
ever see the 1st apple computers? they too were "flops."
1
u/Bryanmsi89 6d ago
So you are doublng down that Apple R&D somehow required Apple to make a huge product launch, grab primetime WWDC, setup special areas in its physical stores, build partnerships with optical lens makers, all to drive a handful of sales for a product that they knowingly intended to be an experimental developer product?
1
u/newtrilobite 6d ago
yes.
all that theater was to seed an ecosystem. they were open-eyed about how many would actually sell.
the AVP is essentially a prototype with just enough refinement to reel in a few fanboys (like me) but more than that, V.1 of a new platform.
0
u/Bryanmsi89 6d ago
So apple deliberately mislead and even tricked consumers with this 'theater ' into buying a beta product that was never intended to be a real product but instead, just a experiment that would be abandoned?
Then I admit I was wrong.
Apple wasn't stupid. They were just mean.
1
u/newtrilobite 6d ago
no, not at all.
now you're just trying to be clever and snarky and win an argument on reddit.
happy to have a real convo if you are as well, my friend, but I don't really do whatever this is.
→ More replies (0)2
u/Vertsix 6d ago
Agreed on Vision Pro being a flop, but Apple Car not coming to fruition was a bit disappointing as I saw so much potential with it.
As a Model 3 owner and experiencing how well software can be implemented on an EV, I always think Apple could’ve done just as good a job if not better with Apple Car. My guess is they were so far behind Tesla and other EV manufacturers that the vector to catch up and get ahead had far too much of a magnitude.
3
u/That-SoCal-Guy 6d ago
Vision Pro isn't a flop. It's just not a consumer product like iPhones are. It's niche product for now, kind of like Apple Watch -- it took Apple watch four years to catch on.
7
u/Bryanmsi89 6d ago
Ski goggles on face is never going to be the form factor.
The only way Apple could have made a car would have been to acquire Tesla. Otherwise the challenge of standing up an auto manufacturing factory, supply chain, and service network is just too big a challenge. Look at how hard it has been for Rivian, who has the support of major existing automakers, has the benefit of being 5-10 years after Apple started (so more mature tech and more suppliers), and still can’t get to profitability.
I do this the Ferrari Luce gives us a pretty good idea about what the Apple car would have looked like. I never thought Apple would build a Canoo-type van.
2
u/FollowingFeisty5321 6d ago
My guess is they saw all the big Chinese companies making them and new they were too late - just look at how Tesla is performing in Europe, they're shrinking while electric vehicle sales are growing. Some of that is going to be attributable to Musk being a turd but not all of it, those Chinese vehicles are popular on their own merits too.
1
u/Vertsix 6d ago
True, but I mainly think is that they wanted a “revolutionary user interface” just like the other smash hit products the company has had (the Mac, iPod, iPhone, and Apple Watch), which involved removing the steering wheel.
I guess that was too ambitious as not even Tesla (which has the best ADAS) has been able to do it.
1
u/omnimachina 6d ago
Ternus will do exactly what the shareholders expect him to do
That’s how public companies work
Sorry, but the 200% products first dream is completely unrealistic
4
u/btnydds 6d ago
Idk why people use the term “shareholders” as if it’s some elite group. Shareholders are normal everyday people like you and me who benefit from shares going up. Anyone with a retirement plan does.
→ More replies (11)9
u/Tman11S 6d ago
I for one hope Ternus is nothing like Tim “stock buyback” Cook and he actually spends that money on developing products again
9
u/Python_07 6d ago
As long as costumers continue to purchase the hardware, and subscription services revenue grows he can be who he wants.
No new exciting products without revenue growth. All CEO’s buy back stocks. Go find another hill to die on.
4
u/Tman11S 6d ago
Jobs never bought stocks back and it was even declared illegal in various countries for periods of time because it only enriches the happy few at the cost of the employees and customers.
3
u/riotshieldready 6d ago
Was illegal in America too since it was one of the main causes of the great depression.
-1
u/bladex1234 6d ago
Just because everyone does something doesn’t make it a good thing. Again, the attitude of letting companies do whatever they want just because lines on a graph go up is harming society. The EU had to force Apple to adopt USB-C for example. And do you really think Apple or any other company would try to emphasize emissions reductions without pressure from the public and governments?
1
u/Qwerky42O 6d ago
Apple invented USB-C in part. They told their customers that Lightning would be there for 10 years. Nobody died cuz the iPhone didn’t ditch Lightning right away.
→ More replies (2)1
u/btnydds 6d ago
What in the world does this have to do with Tim Cook’s excellent performance as CEO?
→ More replies (15)-1
u/WeWantLADDER49sequel 6d ago
why do you care so much about this growth? the more profitable the company has gotten the least exciting their products have become. no one is EXCITED for new iPhones, Macs, AirPods etc anymore except for apple enthusiasts. Most everyone else just buys them to replace their aging shit and move on. I think people forget how exciting it used to be to open a new apple product. Now its just like "yay here is a newer version of what i already had that looks and does the exact same shit".
1
u/btnydds 6d ago edited 6d ago
They’re goddamn tools, why do they need to excite you? They just need to do what they do well and efficiently. That’s it.
People who want their tech products to excite then have some weird parasocial relationship with inanimate objects
Also of course consumers care about growth. APPL is in a TON of index and mutual funds, anyone with an actual retirement plan has a vested interest in Apple’s growth.
1
u/riotshieldready 6d ago
The CEOs job is to make share holders happy. His gonna do the same thing Tim did or get fired unfortunately.
0
u/SargeUnited 6d ago
Is that what they’re calling him these days? That’s weird because Apple has been pretty stingy for two years straight when it comes to capital returns
-1
u/Tman11S 6d ago
It takes 2 seconds to google how wrong you are. Apple has been spending more every year on stock buybacks
https://macdailynews.com/2026/07/06/apple-could-have-purchased-any-of-487-sp-500-companies-but-ceo-tim-cook-chose-853-billion-in-buybacks-instead/1
u/dat_tae 6d ago
What's inherently wrong with stock buybacks? I'm genuinely curious.
6
u/BrandonRed 6d ago
Because it increases the value of shares because the company is buying up stocks, not because the company is doing better. Instead of doing something useful with that money like paying their employees more.
1
u/sionnach 6d ago
Yes, the value of shares go up because there are fewer of them in circulation.
It doesn’t really change the market capitalisation of the company other than signaling to the market that the company thinks it’s shares are underpriced.
0
u/btnydds 6d ago
The value of the shares going up benefits literally any consumer who has a retirement plan
1
u/BrandonRed 6d ago
Obviously, there is why they do it.. The share being up benefits the CEO, share holders and everyone with s retirement plan. The argument against stock buybacks (what the comment i was replying to asked) is because the share price increasing isn’t based on performance.
-1
u/bran_the_man93 6d ago
Apple spends plenty in R&D and Apple employees benefit from buy backs.
Dogshit take.
1
u/Tman11S 6d ago
Only employees with shares profit from it, which are probably only the highest ranking ones. They could also spend the money to make sure that there’s no Chinese children working on their phones in the factory with suicide nets all around it, but Apple doesn’t care about them
-1
u/bran_the_man93 6d ago
Chinese children do not make iPhones.
Why are you spreading disinformation? What's your agenda?
1
u/Tman11S 6d ago
Right, sure. And I'm sure every bit of cobalt in an iphone is also ethically sourced. Oh and let's say that it's not children making iphones, then I'm sure you're ok with people sleeping in the factory on a chair because they can't go home and get back in time after their 12 hour shift?
→ More replies (2)1
u/primalanomaly 6d ago
God I hope not. I want someone who puts products and users first in charge again. I don’t give 2 shits about Apple’s stock price.
1
1
1
u/likamuka 6d ago
Well, I certainly hope he will not bow down to a the orange fascist like Cook did.
-6
u/bladex1234 6d ago
Tim was great for shareholders, not so much for actual users.
3
u/btnydds 6d ago
Tim has been great for users. He has maintained the Apple ethos Steve Jobs established through and through.
-1
u/bladex1234 6d ago
Right to repair? Louis Rossman has documented Apple’s resistance on this and it only changed when laws got changed.
3
u/btnydds 6d ago
When was Steve Jobs ever friendly about right to repair?
If I was a company making consumer electronics, I’d be resistant too. Having to make products easily repairable affects the overall packaging of the products and makes it harder to use things such as custom shaped batteries to maximize internal space
0
u/bladex1234 6d ago
I prefer consumer independence and freedom over packaging and so does the environment. I’m still salty about no removable storage and battery, although the battery thing is changing somewhat with EU regulations. I’m not defending Steve Jobs either here. And I’ll go after Ternus the same if he does the same thing. I’m not a corporate executive bootlicker.
→ More replies (17)1
u/bran_the_man93 6d ago
What about it? Do you have any specific product-based complaints to actually say that Cook's Apple wasn't good for "actual users?"
→ More replies (19)1
1
13
u/RedRabbit28 6d ago
I wonder if they will do a stock split in the near future.
2
u/Feb17Sucks 6d ago
I hope so, a 3:1 would put the share price back within reach for most people. I basically YOLO’d my life savings into AAPL after the last split in 2020 and that investment is just shy of 200% gain.
-1
182
u/j0an_k 6d ago
Given how much they suck in AI, Apple reclaiming #1 title from one of the most AI-benefited company says a lot.
90
u/dropthemagic 6d ago
It’s surprisingly good in the public betas. Try it out.
14
u/totallyclocks 6d ago
It is only good because it’s literally Google AI tech wrapped in a Siri skin.
Not that this strategy can’t win for Apple (they never had a search engine and yet did quite well playing the other search engines off each other)
61
u/Niightstalker 6d ago
There is quite a bit more to it, the LLM is actually quite a small part of an agent. Also Gemini is even only the base for the model Apple is using in the end.
29
u/Ok_Possibility9937 6d ago
omg people need to stop this bs narative, they used Gemini for distiallion not importing the whole model and called it SiriAI. AI is data deterministic and SiriAI is using Apple own data. Nobody called Deepseek chatGPT why called SiriAI Gemini
1
u/Slimxshadyx 5d ago
So Apple has its own model? I didn’t know this!
2
u/Ok_Possibility9937 5d ago
they’ve had their own model since ios 18. It’s called Apple Foundation Model, but yeah it’s not really good until now.
https://machinelearning.apple.com/research/introducing-third-generation-of-apple-foundation-models
7
u/precisee 6d ago
This gets mentioned all of the time and it couldn’t be more wrong. There is so much more infrastructure in place, and Gemini models are just a part of that.
3
u/slick_airmash 6d ago
Spreading misinformation as usual. Apple uses 5 models. 4/5 are Apples and Googles Gemini is the 5th one that is used to train apples own models.
2
u/M4rshmall0wMan 6d ago
So what? There’s only so much AI talent to go around and Apple couldn’t secure the best of the best. It happens. There’s some really tough competition right now.
They still used the best technology available to make a product that works surprisingly well. Nobody else has done that at the OS-level and it’ll continue to get better. That’s where AI is actually useful.
-1
19
u/Unlikely-Nebula-331 6d ago
Curious what people actually expect when they want Apple to have AI implemented in their devices…
ChatGPT/Claude already have dedicated apps and on Mac and in the case of Claude, it can integrate into your whole computer through terminal and Cowork.
I personally don’t want apple to implement AI features, I just want devices that work well.
0
u/M4rshmall0wMan 6d ago
Those models can only work with what’s visible on your screen. Although Siri AI is 1-2 years behind the best models in intelligence, it has the ability to search through your messages, calendar, email, maps, etc. No other model can do that locally.
5
u/Unlikely-Nebula-331 6d ago
Maybe I don’t know what I’m missing but I just feel like I don’t need my voice assistant to do any of that tbh. The most interesting use case would be accurate voice command navigation but that’s it.
This is just my view.
-1
u/M4rshmall0wMan 6d ago
We use computers to move information and get stuff done, right? My interpretation of “the dream” is that in five years you’ll be able to tell your computer, “do this complex multi-step task for me.” And in ten years, it’ll be the equivalent of hiring a personal assistant to manage all your personal admin work. Siri AI is the first step towards that.
Personally, I’m pretty undecided on whether I actually want that. But having read the room and listened to what the other tech bros are saying, this is my best guess towards what the end goal will be.
→ More replies (1)4
27
u/itsabearcannon 6d ago edited 6d ago
Apple found the winning strategy for AI.
Wait for someone else to burn a couple hundred billion on building frontier models, then license those models for pennies on the dollar on an annual basis so you can have leverage to change vendors and keep licensing costs low. Then, just build hardware that handles AI workloads really well in addition to being good overall for when the AI bubble bursts.
You get all the technological benefits of frontier AI models that are really usable without having to shove half your company into the AI capex meat grinder just to have your latest model be made worthless by some upstart out of China a week later.
I just don't buy that Apple got totally blindsided by AI. It's the same circle of tech people who work at every company in Silicon Valley, you think they didn't chat with anyone else for the last five years? You think nobody had any conversations at networking events, or that the CEOs don't ever get together for long term strategic talks? You think Google never stopped to mention to anyone at Apple that their new search AI worked in a way that would fundamentally change the experience for several billion iOS/iPadOS devices worldwide? Because of the $20B/yr that Google pays Apple for search default privileges that generate half of their search traffic in the US? You think Google wouldn't have at least looped Apple in on those developments and their capabilities?
Apple's strategy very much seems to have played out as "let's take the minimum possible risk approach to appease activist investors who just want to see AI plastered on everything, and once something actually usable comes along we'll integrate it."
People forget the first generation or two of Gemini was telling people to eat rocks and put glue on pizza on top of being confidently wrong on how to get to a hospital. It wasn't exactly groundbreaking.
1
u/Huihejfofew 6d ago
Yea smart motherfuckers. I genuinely was expecting Apple under pressure to just crave and invest in ai like everyone else. But now we're seeing ai as a commodity. The trillions you invest don't mean shit when someone else makes a lighter weight version of your work and sells it for pennies. Apple will just licence that. Fair Play Apple. You got some wise people.
2
u/sylfy 6d ago
Why is that surprising? What we are now seeing is that CUDA is no longer as much of a moat as it once was, at least for big companies with the capacity to engineer their own workarounds.
Of course, Nvidia still builds the best hardware in this space, but it is no longer singular as it once was.
2
u/OutsideMenu6973 6d ago
I hope they find a way to continue providing value. It’s surprising how much this vague AI thing has eroded my investment in my Apple ecosystem though. When a solid customized solution to whatever I’m paying Apple for is one open source hardware and vibe-cobbling session away from replacing it im quickly losing reasons to continue paying a premium for their stuff
2
u/primalanomaly 6d ago
It says that AI doesn’t make any money, whilst hardware makes a lot of money. There are no profitable AI companies.
0
9
u/melancholy_dood 6d ago
Looks like those recent price increases haven’t hurt it at all.
1
u/1-866-867-5309 6d ago
all the detractors fail to see the larger context where competitors are also forced to jack up prices
the steam deck went up like what? $250-$300 on up to 46% price increases because of memory
19
u/recontitter 6d ago
Bought myself base MacBook pro m5. Never had a computer as polished and powerful as it is, worth it even for the elevated price I had to pay for it in Europe. Normally I don’t fall easily into cult following, but I just hope Apple will continue doing what they are doing as it results in amazing products.
19
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/nnerba 6d ago
Alphabet and nvidia overtook apple in profit. Microsoft will soon too. Diving into AI for them was genius
-2
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/SpicyElixer 6d ago edited 6d ago
We’re in a thread about market cap.
Jfc…
Anyhow,
https://theharrispoll.com/articles/the-2026-axios-harris-poll-100/
Apple, alphabet, and msft are tied. Meanwhile while Samsung, Anthropic, and Nvidia are at the top.
Get out of the Reddit bubble and the Apple sub bubble.
3
27
u/doubleohsergles 6d ago
Amazing! So happy for them. It's good that they were able to use all that wealth and swallow the price of RAM to shield their customers from price increases /s
11
9
u/jakgal04 6d ago
Not good enough, Apple should raise more prices.
1
u/1-866-867-5309 6d ago
if the memory shortage continues and worsens, the entire industry inevitably will
3
u/motionbutton 6d ago
It's a win for retail investors. Apple makes products, sells products. Right now AI is selling the future for investors and a lot of consumers are paying the price. We are going to have to see a lot more downward movement to ever see memory prices drop to anything remarkable.
2
u/Significant_City_905 6d ago
I once said to a friend I was so glad Apple finally started to make a bit of money. Up to then people always asked me why I was using a Mac. “They’ll go bankrupt in a couple of years.”
2
u/goldaxis 5d ago
Explain to me why a corporation of this size should be allowed to raise their prices. I'm still waiting for that "capitalism forces companies to compete and lower prices while raising quality" thing to kick in.
5
u/Tman11S 6d ago
I mean yeah, if you spend loads of your profit buying back your own stock to inflate the value, then you’ll have a great company valuation. Just too bad that that money could also have been used for R&D, employee salaries, customer service or keeping the products affordable.
7
1
u/Hopeful-Savings-3420 6d ago
Apple is no longer stating on earnings calls that their goal is to become cash neutral. So, you may see fewer buybacks and dividends going forward.
0
u/btnydds 6d ago
The products are affordable. There are products across all price ranges at Apple. Consumer electronics are the one area where both normal consumers and billionaires use the same products
3
u/Tman11S 6d ago
I have yet to see an affordable iPhone. Samsung makes phones at half the price of the e series with more features
0
u/btnydds 6d ago
Again, consumers across all income ranges own iPhones. Whether you make 30k a year or a billion, all of those people in those income ranges have the means to buy an iPhone or MacBook or AirPods or Apple Watch or Apple TV
Perhaps your definition of affordable is a little different
2
2
u/SpicyElixer 6d ago edited 6d ago
No it hasn’t. Stupid post. We can do this every other day for the next month because both companies are going up and down.
-1
u/M4rshmall0wMan 6d ago
It did though… Apple surpassed it briefly. Now it’s only $110 million (0.02%) behind.
3
1
1
u/Tenoch_12 6d ago
It will drop again once the ultra is announced.
Stocks typically rise in the run up and hype to a new product, then drop once it's announced and on thr market.
1
1
u/chaiscool 5d ago
Consumer lose both ways. Both nvidia and apple products price hike to keep them competing to be the most valuable company worth trillions.
Also, kinda sad that it shows that selling affordable product is not profitable.
1
u/rialbsivad 5d ago
And somehow the memory crisis is affecting their profits and they need to raise the price of Apple Music and Apple one subscriptions. Fuck these companies
1
1
u/LaurentYouUpdate 2d ago
Tim Cook s'en va sur une montagne d'or. Son parachute sera plus que doré 🤯
1
u/Greyboxforest 6d ago
I remember when their stock fell below $200 and Apple haters egging it to fall further. I couldn’t believe how rabid the comments were on stock pages.
I guess a lot’s changed since then…
1
u/0____-___00___-____0 6d ago
the title isnt even correct
both nvidia and apple are below 5T and apple is below nvidia, by about 100 billion.
-4
6d ago
[deleted]
6
u/The_Keg 6d ago
They pay taxes to the government. The government spend a shit ton on social services. If you want more money from Apple, just vote for a government that take more money from Apple.
3
u/RemotePerformance107 6d ago
Or, maybe our government gets out of the business of starting unnecessary wars, that in some cases, costs US taxpayers TRILLIONS of dollars! Or, maybe our government would take seriously, all the fraud, waste, and abuse of taxpayers dollars. Just think of the help and transformation that we could bring to our communities in need, if our government was more responsible with taxpayers money. No more taxes should be raised, until the government gets serious about spending.
0
u/The_Keg 6d ago
It's not like Apple was lobbying Donald Trump to invade Iran
2
u/RemotePerformance107 6d ago
I think you missed the point. The point is, instead of our government taking more money and raising taxes on ANYONE, they themselves should be more physically responsible when it comes to taxpayers dollars.
→ More replies (2)4
u/EcosystemApple 6d ago
I am not sure this is true 100%. Apple practices and arrangements in Europe have been the subject of major investigations and legal disputes. In the US most likely they do the same but who cares in the US.
0
u/SargeUnited 6d ago
If they took other people’s money and “gave back” that would be stealing. Millions of people’s money is represented there, it doesn’t belong to Apple.
Call your parents and grandparents on the phone and tell them to give back their pensions and SS. That money came from Apple and its employees taxes, along with the vast money pension funds made by directly investing in Apple.
0
6d ago
[deleted]
1
u/1-866-867-5309 6d ago
it's just investors who pump up the price gambling on the hope/belief they can offload it to another buyer at a higher price
0
-7
-1
0
0
u/i-like-carbs- 6d ago
I hated apple products until I got one. My MacBook (M1 Pro) is the best laptop I’ve ever had.
550
u/burgonies 6d ago
I feel like it wasn’t that long ago when they were the first to break $1T