or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple's $76B in cash reserves surpass US government operating balance
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's $76B in cash reserves surpass US government operating balance

post #1 of 81
Thread Starter 
New figures from the U.S. Treasury Department indicate that the government has a total operating cash balance of $73.768 billion, less than Apple's own war chest of $75.876 billion.

As noted by Matt Hartley of the Financial Post, the news comes even as Republican and Democrat lawmakers debate over the federal budget and debt ceiling. The government's $73 billion number actually represents the "financial headroom" that lawmakers have before reaching an arbitrary debt ceiling, according to the report.

Apple reported having nearly $76 billion in cash on hand as of June 25, 2011. That's an impressive increase of $10 billion from the previous quarter, when the Cupertino, Calif., company had $65.8 billion in cash reserves.

Apple's war chest has grown quickly since 2005, when it had just $9 billion in reserves. As of the end of 2010, Apple's $60 billion stockpile gave it more cash than any other non-financial company in the U.S.

Shares of Apple closed above $400 for the first time earlier this week, before settling down some, eventually closing at $391.82 on Thursday. The company's market capitalization stands at $363.25 billion, behind only Exxon Mobil, which boasts a market cap of $403.93 billion.



As Apple's cash reserves have soared, several analysts and investors have called for a dividend that would redistribute some of the company's profits to shareholders.

However, Apple CEO Steve Jobs has said that the company's cash hoard is being saved for big moves. "We don't let the cash burn a hole in the pocket or make stupid acquisitions," he said last year. "We'd like to continue to keep our powder dry because we think there are one or more strategic opportunities in the future."

Patent acquisition may be one such strategic opportunity for Apple. The company recently paid $2.6 billion to outbid rival Google, which had $39.1 billion in cash reserves at the end of June, for a collection of more than 6,000 patents from Canadian telecom equipment maker Nortel. Apple teamed up with a consortium that included Microsoft, Research in Motion and Sony, pooling the group's resources in order to place the $4.5 billion winning bid.

Apple is also said to be weighing a bid for Interdigital, a company with a portfolio of 8,800 patents. InterDigital CEO William Merritt claims his company's patents are "deeper and stronger" than Nortel's collection.
post #2 of 81
This is a funny thought, but pretty inaccurate given how different the numbers are. The 76 billion Apple has is debt-free (mostly) cash, the 73 billion the Govt has is the amount remaining on its credit card, and it owes a lot more than that. All the political stuff aside, and although these numbers are kindof a cutesy comparison, it really is an Apples to oranges thing.
post #3 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by REC View Post

it really is an Apples to oranges thing.

:-)

or maybe it's an Apple to Apple-Pie thing

ken
post #4 of 81
Wait, the government actually has credit?

Clearly the uber-rich need another tax cut.
post #5 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleZilla View Post

Wait, the government actually has credit?

Clearly the uber-rich need another tax cut.

They prefer to called (if you watch FOXNews) "job creators"

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #6 of 81
That because Apple spends its money efficiently and wisely.
post #7 of 81
Hmmmm . . . Seems like more than Apple is doomed???
post #8 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleZilla View Post

Wait, the government actually has credit?

Clearly the uber-rich need another tax cut.

The top 50% pay 97.3% of all taxes.
The bottom 50% pay 2.7% of all taxes.
47% pay *nothing*.

On a side note, 80% of "poor" households can afford cable/satellite TV.
On another side note the average "poor" family in America has the same living space as the *average* family in Europe.

Its sad that liberals like to think that we have people dying in the streets and we need to raise taxes when in fact we (taxpayers) are subsidizing luxury items for a population that has an unparalleled quality of life.
post #9 of 81
Ah, but the US government can print it. Apple actually has to make stuff.
post #10 of 81
Anyone think that Apple is saving enough cash to purchase Microsoft in a few year???
post #11 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleZilla View Post

Wait, the government actually has credit?

Clearly the uber-rich need another tax cut.

I am always happy to have my taxes cut, regardless of reason or season.

Oh, I am not uber-rich, by any means.
post #12 of 81
So if the US Gov took the 76bill, which is a law away, it would fund 20 days of just "our" borrowing. I say go after Big Apple. Big Oil only nets 9 percent profit, not 30 percent.
post #13 of 81
Obviously... there are no Tea baggers at Apple.
post #14 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patranus View Post

The top 50% pay 97.3% of all taxes.
The bottom 50% pay 2.7% of all taxes.
47% pay *nothing*.

Oh, you must mean those families with less than $33k of yearly income?

Macintosh 512Ke.......

Reply

Macintosh 512Ke.......

Reply
post #15 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by JONOROM View Post

Oh, you must mean those families with less than $33k of yearly income?

Yep! The ones getting tax rebates on taxes they never paid. Those guys...
post #16 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patranus View Post

The top 50% pay 97.3% of all taxes.
The bottom 50% pay 2.7% of all taxes.
47% pay *nothing*.

On a side note, 80% of "poor" households can afford cable/satellite TV.
On another side note the average "poor" family in America has the same living space as the *average* family in Europe.

Its sad that liberals like to think that we have people dying in the streets and we need to raise taxes when in fact we (taxpayers) are subsidizing luxury items for a population that has an unparalleled quality of life.

That is purely bullshit. While the poor do not generally pay Federal Income Tax, the still pay Social Security tax, which is capped at $106,800 so the wealthy pay a far smaller percentage of their income in that tax. They also receive a larger portion of their earnings from capital gains which are only 15%. The poor are also subject to sales tax, registration taxes, phone taxes and a myriad of other taxes and fees that eat up a far greater percentage of their net worth than the rich are subjected to. There is NO ONE in this country who does not pay some sort of tax unless they never buy anything. The wealthy pay at a far lower rate than they have since the Great Depression although they use are far greater portion of the government services than anyone else. Does the average citizen ever use the courts, the patent office, oil leases, the services of the FBI, SEC, Secret Service or any other government department except maybe the Transportation Department and the Park Service?

And don't get me started on the average family in Europe. At least they have government provided health care.
post #17 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by halhiker View Post

That is purely bullshit. While the poor do not generally pay Federal Income Tax, the still pay Social Security tax, which is capped at $106,800 so the wealthy pay a far smaller percentage of their income in that tax. They also receive a larger portion of their earnings from capital gains which are only 15%. The poor are also subject to sales tax, registration taxes, phone taxes and a myriad of other taxes and fees that eat up a far greater percentage of their net worth than the rich are subjected to. There is NO ONE in this country who does not pay some sort of tax unless they never buy anything. The wealthy pay at a far lower rate than they have since the Great Depression although they use are far greater portion of the government services than anyone else. Does the average citizen ever use the courts, the patent office, oil leases, the services of the FBI, SEC, Secret Service or any other government department except maybe the Transportation Department and the Park Service?

And don't get me started on the average family in Europe. At least they have government provided health care.

It might be worth noting that the "enormous" income taxes paid by that top 50% of earners only covers about 30% of what it costs to run the country, and it looks like the poor, retired and sick are being targeted to make up the difference.

Macintosh 512Ke.......

Reply

Macintosh 512Ke.......

Reply
post #18 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by halhiker View Post

That is purely bullshit. While the poor do not generally pay Federal Income Tax, the still pay Social Security tax, which is capped at $106,800 so the wealthy pay a far smaller percentage of their income in that tax. They also receive a larger portion of their earnings from capital gains which are only 15%. The poor are also subject to sales tax, registration taxes, phone taxes and a myriad of other taxes and fees that eat up a far greater percentage of their net worth than the rich are subjected to. There is NO ONE in this country who does not pay some sort of tax unless they never buy anything. The wealthy pay at a far lower rate than they have since the Great Depression although they use are far greater portion of the government services than anyone else. Does the average citizen ever use the courts, the patent office, oil leases, the services of the FBI, SEC, Secret Service or any other government department except maybe the Transportation Department and the Park Service?

And don't get me started on the average family in Europe. At least they have government provided health care.

I read this and it's changed my view. Mexico can have CA back. Betting they can run it better.
post #19 of 81
This thread is destined for PO...
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #20 of 81
Does this mean that Apple can take over the US government?

iPod nano 5th Gen 8GB Orange, iPad 3rd Gen WiFi 32GB White
MacBook Pro 15" Core i7 2.66GHz 8GB RAM 120GB Intel 320M
Mac mini Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz 8GB RAM, iPhone 5 32GB Black

Reply

iPod nano 5th Gen 8GB Orange, iPad 3rd Gen WiFi 32GB White
MacBook Pro 15" Core i7 2.66GHz 8GB RAM 120GB Intel 320M
Mac mini Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz 8GB RAM, iPhone 5 32GB Black

Reply
post #21 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

They prefer to called (if you watch FOXNews) "job creators"

I've never been hired by a poor person. In fact I am currently employed by a very generous wealthy man, and I hold no grudges against him. Nor do I constantly envy any of his wealth or property.
post #22 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by halhiker View Post

That is purely bullshit. While the poor do not generally pay Federal Income Tax, the still pay Social Security tax, which is capped at $106,800 so the wealthy pay a far smaller percentage of their income in that tax. They also receive a larger portion of their earnings from capital gains which are only 15%. The poor are also subject to sales tax, registration taxes, phone taxes and a myriad of other taxes and fees that eat up a far greater percentage of their net worth than the rich are subjected to. There is NO ONE in this country who does not pay some sort of tax unless they never buy anything. The wealthy pay at a far lower rate than they have since the Great Depression although they use are far greater portion of the government services than anyone else. Does the average citizen ever use the courts, the patent office, oil leases, the services of the FBI, SEC, Secret Service or any other government department except maybe the Transportation Department and the Park Service?

And don't get me started on the average family in Europe. At least they have government provided health care.

You really aren't very smart, are you?
post #23 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by halhiker View Post

That is purely bullshit. While the poor do not generally pay Federal Income Tax, the still pay Social Security tax, which is capped at $106,800 so the wealthy pay a far smaller percentage of their income in that tax. They also receive a larger portion of their earnings from capital gains which are only 15%. The poor are also subject to sales tax, registration taxes, phone taxes and a myriad of other taxes and fees that eat up a far greater percentage of their net worth than the rich are subjected to. There is NO ONE in this country who does not pay some sort of tax unless they never buy anything. The wealthy pay at a far lower rate than they have since the Great Depression although they use are far greater portion of the government services than anyone else. Does the average citizen ever use the courts, the patent office, oil leases, the services of the FBI, SEC, Secret Service or any other government department except maybe the Transportation Department and the Park Service?

And don't get me started on the average family in Europe. At least they have government provided health care.

The amount paid into Social Security tax is tied to later in life social security payments. That money isn't supposed to be used for anything else. If you remove the cap, the wealthy will get huge retirement checks. I'm sure there would be outrage over that.
post #24 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by JONOROM View Post

Oh, you must mean those families with less than $33k of yearly income?

It was those Bush tax cuts (seriously) that resulted in so many lower-income households not paying income taxes. Under Clinton, the lowest tax bracket was 15%. Bush lowered it to 10% and raised the income limit where taxes start.

The larger point of the story, however, is that this whole episode reveals just how massive spending has gotten. The entire cash and investment balances of the 2nd most valuable company in the US would fund our new borrowing for less than one month. Everyone wants someone else's taxes raised (e.g. "the rich"), but "the rich" don't have enough money by themselves. This will eventually hit all of us.
post #25 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aizmov View Post

Does this mean that Apple can take over the US government?

No, I think Steve has something else in mind.
Designed by Apple in the Peoples Republic of California.
Assembled in our wholly owned subsidiary, Mexico.
post #26 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patranus View Post

Its sad that liberals like to think that we have people dying in the streets and we need to raise taxes when in fact we (taxpayers) are subsidizing luxury items for a population that has an unparalleled quality of life.

Don't worry, people dying in the streets is the Tea Party wet dream of what America should be. "If the homeless are too lazy to work, why should we support them. Let them die in the streets, it's their choice."
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #27 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patranus View Post

The top 50% pay 97.3% of all taxes.

Yes, but how much does the top 10% pay? That is the more germane stat since it is they that are being targeted with a tax increase, not the 50% through 90% group.
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #28 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by JONOROM View Post

It might be worth noting that the "enormous" income taxes paid by that top 50% of earners only covers about 30% of what it costs to run the country, and it looks like the poor, retired and sick are being targeted to make up the difference.

What a disconnect from the actual problem! Since, as you assert, this only covers "30% of what it costs to run the country" you have identified what MUST change. The limited government desired by our founding fathers, not additional tax increases to justify ever expanding entitlement programs is the only answer. You can either tax the people to death (rich or poor) and kill jobs, or this country can start to live within it's means which is simply common sense. Given the determination of many liberals and atheists to drive any mention of God from the public square, one can't help feeling that they want to instead elevate big government to god status - where no one can buy, sell, or even breath air without being beholden to some faceless bureaucracy.
post #29 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChristophB View Post

I read this and it's changed my view. Mexico can have CA back. Betting they can run it better.

Why don't you just secede already and leave the country to the rest of us who know what union means?
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #30 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

They prefer to called (if you watch FOXNews) "job creators"

So you're saying you were hired by a poor person? How are they gonna pay you?! From Obama's "Stash"?!
/
/
/

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #31 of 81
Was the author of this article so inept to not realize what kind of political debates would be made in this thread?
post #32 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by replicant View Post

Obviously... there are no Tea baggers at Apple.

You mean Socialist Liberal Leftists... You been watching MSLED and drinking their kool-aid. "Tea baggers" as you like to call them, protested government wasteful spending. That makes Apple FULL of TEA Party folk! If not, then AI's title to this post would be "Apple's negative $76B in the hole surpasses US government operating imbalance at the hands of Obama, they're both screwed!"
/
/
/

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #33 of 81
I predict iPhones and iPads will become the new global currency replacing the USD, Euro, £ and Gold!
post #34 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

Yes, but how much does the top 10% pay? That is the more germane stat since it is they that are being targeted with a tax increase, not the 50% through 90% group.

65% of income taxes are paid by the top 10% - less if you count payroll taxes, but I don't since that money is more than paid back (at least if you are a baby boomer and get in before it all goes bust).
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #35 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

Yes, but how much does the top 10% pay? That is the more germane stat since it is they that are being targeted with a tax increase, not the 50% through 90% group.


The top 10% pay 70% of all federal income tax receipts.
http://ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by halhiker View Post

That is purely bullshit. While the poor do not generally pay Federal Income Tax, the still pay Social Security tax, which is capped at $106,800 so the wealthy pay a far smaller percentage of their income in that tax. They also receive a larger portion of their earnings from capital gains which are only 15%. The poor are also subject to sales tax, registration taxes, phone taxes and a myriad of other taxes and fees that eat up a far greater percentage of their net worth than the rich are subjected to. There is NO ONE in this country who does not pay some sort of tax unless they never buy anything. The wealthy pay at a far lower rate than they have since the Great Depression although they use are far greater portion of the government services than anyone else. Does the average citizen ever use the courts, the patent office, oil leases, the services of the FBI, SEC, Secret Service or any other government department except maybe the Transportation Department and the Park Service?

And don't get me started on the average family in Europe. At least they have government provided health care.

It is laughable that you praise government run health care in europe when you cannot even get a procedure to save your life. Why do leaders from around the wold come to AMERICA for health care?
(hint: because no matter what the UN says America is #1)
Because


Social Security is capped because the payments are capped.
I pay in, i take out.

It was never intended to redistribute wealth like the progressive income tax.
There is no reason to remove the cap unless you also remove the cap for payments.

Not really sure how any taxpayer can defend a system where we spend a trillion dollars a year to subsidize cable TV for the "poor" or that 2nd TV/DVD player.


90% of those items are luxury items.


I am not arguing that we should get ride of taxes. Quite the contrary. Its just when people bitch about the "rich" they really do not understand the economics of it all.

If you really want to get into a tax debate we can do that.
99% of the spending problem in D.C. is because of the overreach by the federal government and the perversion of the commerce clause.

It would be much more effective to return the power to tax and spend to the states to let them decide what is in their best interest be it education or medical marijuana. Right now we send huge portions of out income to the federal government which is then returned to the states who are then told how to spend it. This is the opposite of how the country was setup. The problem now is that the federal government has grown so large that it limits the amount the states can tax.

Taxing (and spending) power must be returned to the states. It would end gridlock as each state would operate at its own pace while spurring competition between states.

When asking if the federal government should be doing something, it should first be determined if the state can do that role. If so, then that job should be delegated to the state. If it is something outlined in the constitution or something a state cannot do (like national defense) then it should be delegated to the federal government.

We then could lower taxes at the federal level to a flat tax, say 10% across the board - no deductions while increasing local taxes (if the state/county/city chooses).

Look at a state like California. For every dollar we send to D.C. for services we get less than 70 cents back and most of that is earmarked for pet projects like no child left behind.


/rant
post #36 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMacintosh View Post

Was the author of this article so inept to not realize what kind of political debates would be made in this thread?

What?! And let Washington have all the fun???

Left says to the Right and Right says to the Left:

"Idiot" - "Moron"
"Idiot" - "Moron"
"Idiot" - "Moron"
"Idiot" - "Moron"
"Idiot" - "Moron"
"Idiot" - "Moron"
"Idiot" - "Moron"

'It's getting late. I ask my distinguished colleague that we continue this in morning!"

'I concur with my good friend from where ever. I reserve the balance of my time (to insult).'

Say Goodnight Gracie... Goodnight Gracie!
/
/
/

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #37 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleZilla View Post

Wait, the government actually has credit?

Clearly the uber-rich need another tax cut.

Yep. Steal from the rich and give to the poor.

Or more like steal from the rich and just spend it.
post #38 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patranus View Post

The top 10% pay 70% of all federal income tax receipts.
http://ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html



It is laughable that you praise government run health care in europe when you cannot even get a procedure to save your life. Why do leaders from around the wold come to AMERICA for health care?
(hint: because no matter what the UN says America is #1)
Because


Social Security is capped because the payments are capped.
I pay in, i take out.

It was never intended to redistribute wealth like the progressive income tax.
There is no reason to remove the cap unless you also remove the cap for payments.

Not really sure how any taxpayer can defend a system where we spend a trillion dollars a year to subsidize cable TV for the "poor" or that 2nd TV/DVD player.


90% of those items are luxury items.


I am not arguing that we should get ride of taxes. Quite the contrary. Its just when people bitch about the "rich" they really do not understand the economics of it all.

If you really want to get into a tax debate we can do that.
99% of the spending problem in D.C. is because of the overreach by the federal government and the perversion of the commerce clause.

It would be much more effective to return the power to tax and spend to the states to let them decide what is in their best interest be it education or medical marijuana. Right now we send huge portions of out income to the federal government which is then returned to the states who are then told how to spend it. This is the opposite of how the country was setup. The problem now is that the federal government has grown so large that it limits the amount the states can tax.

Taxing (and spending) power must be returned to the states. It would end gridlock as each state would operate at its own pace while spurring competition between states.

When asking if the federal government should be doing something, it should first be determined if the state can do that role. If so, then that job should be delegated to the state. If it is something outlined in the constitution or something a state cannot do (like national defense) then it should be delegated to the federal government.

We then could lower taxes at the federal level to a flat tax, say 10% across the board - no deductions while increasing local taxes (if the state/county/city chooses).

Look at a state like California. For every dollar we send to D.C. for services we get less than 70 cents back and most of that is earmarked for pet projects like no child left behind.


/rant

Would be nice to be able to fire Washington DC.
post #39 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patranus View Post

The top 10% pay 70% of all federal income tax receipts.
http://ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html



It is laughable that you praise government run health care in europe when you cannot even get a procedure to save your life. Why do leaders from around the wold come to AMERICA for health care?
(hint: because no matter what the UN says America is #1)
Because


Social Security is capped because the payments are capped.
I pay in, i take out.

It was never intended to redistribute wealth like the progressive income tax.
There is no reason to remove the cap unless you also remove the cap for payments.

Not really sure how any taxpayer can defend a system where we spend a trillion dollars a year to subsidize cable TV for the "poor" or that 2nd TV/DVD player.


90% of those items are luxury items.


I am not arguing that we should get ride of taxes. Quite the contrary. Its just when people bitch about the "rich" they really do not understand the economics of it all.

If you really want to get into a tax debate we can do that.
99% of the spending problem in D.C. is because of the overreach by the federal government and the perversion of the commerce clause.

It would be much more effective to return the power to tax and spend to the states to let them decide what is in their best interest be it education or medical marijuana. Right now we send huge portions of out income to the federal government which is then returned to the states who are then told how to spend it. This is the opposite of how the country was setup. The problem now is that the federal government has grown so large that it limits the amount the states can tax.

Taxing (and spending) power must be returned to the states. It would end gridlock as each state would operate at its own pace while spurring competition between states.

When asking if the federal government should be doing something, it should first be determined if the state can do that role. If so, then that job should be delegated to the state. If it is something outlined in the constitution or something a state cannot do (like national defense) then it should be delegated to the federal government.

We then could lower taxes at the federal level to a flat tax, say 10% across the board - no deductions while increasing local taxes (if the state/county/city chooses).

Look at a state like California. For every dollar we send to D.C. for services we get less than 70 cents back and most of that is earmarked for pet projects like no child left behind.


/rant

Would be nice to be able to fire Washington DC.

I would not let any of them run a lemonade stand.
post #40 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by ijordan View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by halhiker

And don't get me started on the average family in Europe. At least they have government provided health care.


You really aren't very smart, are you?

+1

As much as George Soros would love our country to become a Socialist welfare state like Greece, thankfully we're not quite there yet. But there are certain fools who believe so strongly in their entitlements that they're willing to sink the whole ship for a handful of free band-aids.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple's $76B in cash reserves surpass US government operating balance