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 - Page 2

post #41 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by msantti View Post

Would be nice to be able to fire Washington DC.

I would not let any of them run a lemonade stand.

Hey, thanks for quoting (twice) the entire post by Patranus.
post #42 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.

LOL... Good one. ;-) Is it just me or are a vast majority on this forum liberal yips??
post #43 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

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."

I don't ever remember hearing a Tea Party politician or activist say that it was their wet dream to let homeless people die in the streets. Then again, there have been plenty of ignoramuses who make absurd statements against that grass roots movement, and they always end up eating crow.

Welfare programs used to be about temporary relief, and that is exactly what is wrong with your misguided progressive mindset: that our government is somehow responsible for permanently propping up able-bodied individuals.

Libertarians quite simply believe that the government should run within its own means and much more efficiently, the same as its responsible taxpayers have to.
post #44 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smurfman View Post

LOL... Good one. ;-) Is it just me or are a vast majority on this forum liberal yips??

The majority of mac users usually lean a bit to the left so it stands to reason that the people on this board probably do as well:-)
post #45 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapf Brannigan View Post

I don't ever remember hearing a Tea Party politician or activist say that it was their wet dream to let homeless people die in the streets. Then again, there have been plenty of ignoramuses who make absurd statements against that grass roots movement, and they always end up eating crow.

Welfare programs used to be about temporary relief, and that is exactly what is wrong with your misguided progressive mindset: that our government is somehow responsible for permanently propping up able-bodied individuals.

Libertarians quite simply believe that the government should run within its own means and much more efficiently, the same as its responsible taxpayers have to.

Yup. We are paying people to do nothing while the country falls apart.

Same thing goes with prisons. These people violated the social contract and now they get to sit around and do nothing all day. There was a day when these criminals had to contribute back to society even if to meant they were simply breaking rocks.
post #46 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericblr View Post

The majority of mac users usually lean a bit to the left so it stands to reason that the people on this board probably do as well:-)

I'm afraid that sounds like a pretty baseless statement.

I could just as well say that the majority of Mac users are content creators... that would definitely have been true a decade ago, but since Apple has had a major resurgence in the consumer market, I kind of doubt it.

Still, if you have a recent point of reference I'd be interested to see it.
post #47 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

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.

First off, this is ridiculous. "Poor" can happen for a variety of reasons: if you lose your job, you go on unemployment and, by the Heritage Foundation, are listed as "poor" in this list. So... you should sell all your belongings? Come on.

What is this war against poverty in our country? "Look! Poor people have *refrigerators* and *television*!?!" My hard earned income pays taxes to subsidize them!?!" Ridiculous. Would you be happy if they all had drug problems and lived on the streets? DOESN'T THIS SHOW PRECISELY HOW OUR BENEFITS WORK?? I mean, look at this list and tell me how many things costs more than $50. Clothes washer? Refrigerator? Personal Computer? Some video games? Dishwasher? Jacuzzi? 3 of those are might essential, and the rest less than 1/3 even have them.

What about the 1.6 million people who checked into homeless shelters in the last year? What about America having the widest income disparity among developed nations?

You know why the top earners pay such a high percentage of US taxes? Because they make that much of US income. We have a rapidly rising wealthy class, and a rapidly rising poor class, historically a classic recipe for national collapse.
post #48 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patranus View Post

Yup. We are paying people to do nothing while the country falls apart.

Yep, they're called CEOs.

Quote:
Same thing goes with prisons. These people violated the social contract and now they get to sit around and do nothing all day.

Wow! Sounds great! Want to go?

Quote:
There was a day when these criminals had to contribute back to society even if to meant they were simply breaking rocks.

You realize that a) we have the highest percentage of our population in jail of any developed nation and b) criminal forced labor significantly harms economies? There's a reason REPUBLICANS largely put an end to hard prison labor.

Also, whatever happened to prison being about admitting that our country failed these people, and bearing some social responsibility? Of course not, they're just fringe nuts who violate social contracts.
post #49 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapf Brannigan View Post

Welfare programs used to be about temporary relief, and that is exactly what is wrong with your misguided progressive mindset: that our government is somehow responsible for permanently propping up able-bodied individuals.

You might be interested to know that welfare is only good for 2 years, and is only available for those who have hardships.

"Eligibility is determined using gross and net income, size of the family, and any crisis situation such as medical emergencies, pregnancy, homelessness or unemployment. A case worker is assigned to those applying for aid. They will gather all the necessary information to determine the amount and type of benefits that an individual is eligible for. It requires that all recipients of welfare aid must find work within two years of receiving aid, including single parents who are required to work at least 30 hours per week opposed to 35 or 55 required by two parent families. Failure to comply with work requirements will result in loss of benefits."

Who said anything about permanently propping up lazy bums? What is this weird obsessions with taking the 1% case and turning into the 99%? As a person who has worked with welfare families for years, I can say hands down that the number of them that I've encountered that are simply lazy is exactly 1. Out of hundreds. So let's not deceive everyone into thinking that somehow there are a bunch of moochers off the welfare system.

The entire welfare system costs 15% of the bush tax cuts per year. THE ENTIRE SYSTEM. 10% per year of the war in Afghanistan. Don't even pretend our financial crisis is because of welfare.
post #50 of 81
i think they should get rid of all tax deductions across the board. Mortgage, child, everything.

secondly I think if you have a kid you should pay a huge extra tax to cover the teachers that basically have to raise them. Maybe then parents might participate a little more in raising their kids. I'm sick of paying to have some gangster wannabe get free daycare and making life miserable for kids that want to learn. Especially irratating since I don't have kids.

Just continuing the randomness of this thread.

PS: we need to drop out of the UN, bring all the troops home, make congress pay for their healthcare and stop giving them any pension, build some nuclear reactors, restart the yucca mtn. disposal site, disband congress and just have majority vote since we are a internet connected country now.
post #51 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

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

But are you happy to have the services cut too? Buh-bye police, courts, roads, airports...

This is the problem a lot of people had with the tea party, particularly when it came out that a good number of the tea party leaders were receiving medicare, social security, or unemployment.

You can't have it both ways. I'm not trying to say government spending should go up, it shouldn't! Bush increased our budget over 100% from Clinton, the most any president in the last 60 years has increased our US budget. I was outraged then too, especially since 50% of the increase went to wars that I didn't believe in. So I strongly believe in government accountability and responsible spending. But this idea that we can just magically cut things and have this not ripple down is ridiculous. Spending cuts happen best when the economy is good and they happen gradually over time.

Look, if all the people here who don't want to pay taxes want to start their own country, fine. We can have anarchy country where you're in charge of doing and building everything on your own. Cowboy and whatnot. Private industry will fund their own systems, and things will be great roads will go from where businesses want to where they want, and they'll build more—for a hefty fee—for users in high frequency areas. Sorry, small towns, no roads for you. Not enough profit. Environment? Regulation? Bah, who needs 'em.

And the rest of us will keep living in our country, where we believe a society of people can build a better future for all of us by working together and creating a unifying system (hint: that's what a government is). We'll fight to keep our government accountable while you fight to figure out how to get water in Phoenix without government-subsidies canals.
post #52 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by kozchris View Post

just have majority vote

Careful with that: We're a republic, not a democracy. There's a big difference. Our founding fathers were very clear that majority rule = mob rule, and is just as oppressive as any tyrannical leader. This is why they very clearly created the United States as a Republic, not a democracy.
post #53 of 81
Maybe with Apple running the country, the $14.5 trillion U.S. national debt will be paid off. By the year... 5,000!

Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

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.
post #54 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by landoke View Post

You might be interested to know that welfare is only good for 2 years, and is only available for those who have hardships.

"Eligibility is determined using gross and net income, size of the family, and any crisis situation such as medical emergencies, pregnancy, homelessness or unemployment. A case worker is assigned to those applying for aid. They will gather all the necessary information to determine the amount and type of benefits that an individual is eligible for. It requires that all recipients of welfare aid must find work within two years of receiving aid, including single parents who are required to work at least 30 hours per week opposed to 35 or 55 required by two parent families. Failure to comply with work requirements will result in loss of benefits."

Who said anything about permanently propping up lazy bums? What is this weird obsessions with taking the 1% case and turning into the 99%? As a person who has worked with welfare families for years, I can say hands down that the number of them that I've encountered that are simply lazy is exactly 1. Out of hundreds. So let's not deceive everyone into thinking that somehow there are a bunch of moochers off the welfare system.

The entire welfare system costs 15% of the bush tax cuts per year. THE ENTIRE SYSTEM. 10% per year of the war in Afghanistan. Don't even pretend our financial crisis is because of welfare.

Fist off, tax cost do not "cost" money. A cost is an expense. Letting people keep *their* money is not an expense by government.

Typical liberal assumption that the government is entitled to your wealth.

Sure looks like hardships right here

buying lobster on food stamps.

Great use of taxpayer dollars.
post #55 of 81
What a bunch of narrow minded people there is on here shame on you......some people are born into opportunity, some people are not, some people fight for opportunity but simply some people are genuinely stuck........just remember not everybody can be like you....and you should be grateful for what you have and don't pick on the people who can't have what you have.
post #56 of 81
Once Apple gets enough patents, perhaps rivals will finally stop suing them, out of fear. Then they can just get on with the business of making great products.
post #57 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patranus View Post

The top 50% pay 97.3% of all taxes.

Democracy kind of breaks down when you have so many people not paying taxes. It becomes like 3 foxes and a chicken voting on what to have for dinner.
post #58 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by landoke View Post

Careful with that: We're a republic, not a democracy. There's a big difference. Our founding fathers were very clear that majority rule = mob rule, and is just as oppressive as any tyrannical leader. This is why they very clearly created the United States as a Republic, not a democracy.

Representative Democracy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_democracy

Being a Republic doesn't mean there's no Democracy.
post #59 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.

You mean Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid? Is this what you call luxury items? And what about the simple idea of stopping Medicare for those that can actually afford it (eg, the upper 50% of the population). If richer half of the people complain about their taxes, they should equally accept to get no handouts from the government.
post #60 of 81
Is there a single purpose to this f'n thread other than to expose the dweebs on both extremes into a pissing contest?


I'll settle this crap once and for all.

Eliminate the Federal Income Tax and other Federal Taxes.

We'll go to a straight Transaction Tax System.

The US in 2010 saw $900 Trillion in transactions.

We'll put a 1% on every transaction for Goods and Services, across all systems. No more tax shelters, no more off-shoring pays zip in taxes crap, no more any of these deductions.

A single percent would generate $9 Trillion in Tax Revenues.

If you buy a house for $10,000,000 you send $100,000 to Uncle Sam. That's it.

However, the States are free to implement their own Tax structure [State Income Tax, sales tax, etc] all they want, on top of this Transaction Tax.

Will this shut up all the Teabaggers, Wannabe Libertarians, Fraudulent Contitutional Partyists who think the Constitution was an extension to Judeo-Christian Commandments, etc?

I doubt it, but it sure as hell would cover our debts and all these a-holes who can't handle helping someone in need while they flick a smoke at them and drive by in their Porsche can no longer game the system and bitch about paying $400,000 in Income Taxes while they rake in $50 Million a year in income/investments, etc.

Cry me a river.
post #61 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Is there a single purpose to this f'n thread other than to expose the dweebs on both extremes into a pissing contest?


I'll settle this crap once and for all.

Eliminate the Federal Income Tax and other Federal Taxes.

We'll go to a straight Transaction Tax System.

The US in 2010 saw $900 Trillion in transactions.

We'll put a 1% on every transaction for Goods and Services, across all systems. No more tax shelters, no more off-shoring pays zip in taxes crap, no more any of these deductions.

A single percent would generate $9 Trillion in Tax Revenues.

If you buy a house for $10,000,000 you send $100,000 to Uncle Sam. That's it.

However, the States are free to implement their own Tax structure [State Income Tax, sales tax, etc] all they want, on top of this Transaction Tax.

Will this shut up all the Teabaggers, Wannabe Libertarians, Fraudulent Contitutional Partyists who think the Constitution was an extension to Judeo-Christian Commandments, etc?

I doubt it, but it sure as hell would cover our debts and all these a-holes who can't handle helping someone in need while they flick a smoke at them and drive by in their Porsche can no longer game the system and bitch about paying $400,000 in Income Taxes while they rake in $50 Million a year in income/investments, etc.

Cry me a river.

Well said!
post #62 of 81
So if you're left-leaning, shouldn't the obvious conclusion from this article be that Apple needs to pay more taxes?
post #63 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawnb View Post

So if you're left-leaning, shouldn't the obvious conclusion from this article be that Apple needs to pay more taxes?

We always hear that Apple has x billion in cash, but it is never stated where the cash is. What about all the money they have overseas? They don't bring that money back to the states because they don't want to pay taxes on it.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #64 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by landoke View Post

But are you happy to have the services cut too? Buh-bye police, courts, roads, airports...

Yes.

I think the police are largely fine (although, where I live, they have nothing to do except hand out traffic tickets for going 5 miles over the speed limit), but our court system is inefficient and wasteful and could be cut quite a bit, and we have too many uneconomical 'rural' airports.

I do, however, believe that the wrong time to cut is now -- that simply takes demand out of the economy when it's still teetering. We do need a credible long-term deficit reduction plan.
post #65 of 81
Makes sense. Steve Jobs for president!
A reputation is not built upon the restful domain of one's comfort zone; it is made out of stalwart exposition of your core beliefs, for all challenges to disprove them as irrelevant hubris.- Berp...
Reply
A reputation is not built upon the restful domain of one's comfort zone; it is made out of stalwart exposition of your core beliefs, for all challenges to disprove them as irrelevant hubris.- Berp...
Reply
post #66 of 81
Maybe Apple and Exxon should get together and buy out the U.S. government. iAmerica.
post #67 of 81
Hmm, could a balanced budget amendment be needed in D.C.?!

Just say NO to raising the US debt limit! The economy is in the toilet, the last thing we need is more government inflation -- read as HIDDEN TAXES EVERTIME THEY PRINT MONEY OR DIGITALLY ADD ZEROS TO THEIR BALANCE SHEET!
post #68 of 81
Did you know "democracy" does not appear even ONCE in the Constitution?! For a very good reason, the US is not now, and never has been a democracy. We merely democratically elect our representatives. The US is a republic, if we can keep it.



Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

Representative Democracy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_democracy

Being a Republic doesn't mean there's no Democracy.
post #69 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by libertyforall View Post

Did you know "democracy" does not appear even ONCE in the Constitution?! For a very good reason, the US is not now, and never has been a democracy. We merely democratically elect our representatives. The US is a republic, if we can keep it.

Don't pretend you think he stated pure democracy.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #70 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheops2006 View Post

What a bunch of narrow minded people there is on here shame on you......some people are born into opportunity, some people are not, some people fight for opportunity but simply some people are genuinely stuck........just remember not everybody can be like you....and you should be grateful for what you have and don't pick on the people who can't have what you have.

Common misunderstanding among liberals.

"rich" people create their opportunities while "poor" people wait for opportunities to be handed to them.

I know "poor" people who were born into "poor" families.
I know "poor" people who were born into "rich" families.

I know "rich" people who were born into "poor" families.
I know "rich" people who were born into "rich" families.

The starting position is fairly irrelevant. It is the mindset that dictates success.
post #71 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by noirdesir View Post

You mean Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid? Is this what you call luxury items? And what about the simple idea of stopping Medicare for those that can actually afford it (eg, the upper 50% of the population). If richer half of the people complain about their taxes, they should equally accept to get no handouts from the government.

Another liberal fallacy used to slander conservative ideas.

First off, I am FORCED to pay into services like Social Security and as a result I am *entitled* to get a return on my money.

I would gladly give up Social Security in a heart beat.
Social Security gives a 0% return on investment. A smart person could easily get +4%
post #72 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.

Thank you, Mr. Beck.
post #73 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

You mean most of the poor have a 'luxury' like a refrigerator?

What 'lucky duckies.' I keep our perishables in our toilet tank to keep them cool.

That's right. We have the 'luxury' of a toilet. Lucky us.
post #74 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patranus View Post

Another liberal fallacy used to slander conservative ideas.

Conservatives don't have ideas. Ideas can lead to change and therefore they are a scary thing liberals do. Perhaps you meant conservative ideals.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #75 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by ijordan View Post

You really aren't very smart, are you?

What he said makes sense. What you said is a baseless dig. And you're in Kansas. So I'll side with him on this one.
post #76 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patranus View Post

Common misunderstanding among liberals.

"rich" people create their opportunities while "poor" people wait for opportunities to be handed to them.

I know "poor" people who were born into "poor" families.
I know "poor" people who were born into "rich" families.

I know "rich" people who were born into "poor" families.
I know "rich" people who were born into "rich" families.

The starting position is fairly irrelevant. It is the mindset that dictates success.

The abilities and mindset can help a poor person claw their way up. And can destroy a rich person who's given everything. However when a smart and dedicated person comes from, say, a single-parent working-class family in Appalachia, where his mother makes less per year than his college tuition, such that that person has to take out loans (which, thanks to the GOP now compound the interest annually) because goddess forbid we should all start life on an equal footing; and then that person also has to take out loans to go through grad school and law school -- all while his peers are getting tuition paid for by daddy, plus a car, and maybe even a nice condo during grad school so they don't have to worry about working for rent money -- such that one person graduates with $150,000 in debt, and the other person graduates with no debt and maybe a new car or house or nice trust fund...
then no, position is not irrelevant. I should know.
post #77 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I think the police are largely fine (although, where I live, they have nothing to do except hand out traffic tickets for going 5 miles over the speed limit), but our court system is inefficient and wasteful and could be cut quite a bit, and we have too many uneconomical 'rural' airports..

Which part of our overburdended, back-logged court system would you like to cut? The part where accused defendants sit in jails for months awaiting trials before they're found innocent? The part where victims of domestic abuse have to live in hiding for days or weeks just to get a TRO? Every court action has a plaintiff and a defendant, which means someone either seeking redress for a wrong, or seeking to prevent a wrong from happening to them. Which of these people should be told that your court system has no time for them?
post #78 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.

So if I get your statistics right, only the top 3% of the bottom 50% pay any taxes. Doing the math, that's about 1% of the taxes for each percent of the (48-50%) population. When we jump over to the top 50%, it averages out to about 2% of the taxes for each percent of the population.

According to the US Census -- http://www.census.gov/prod/2010pubs/acsbr09-2.pdf --

Real median household income in the United
States fell between the 2008 and 2009 ACS
decreasing by 2.9 percent from $51,726 to
$50,221.

So the top 3% of these not-so-wealthy folks ponied up about 1% of the total taxes for each of their 3%. And the 50% of folks making more than the median.

And the top 50% -- those making more than $50K come across with just about twice the tax bite.

Where do I misinterpret your figures?
post #79 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Conservatives don't have ideas. Ideas can lead to change and therefore they are a scary thing liberals do. Perhaps you meant conservative ideals.

It's really liberals that want the status quo these days (take the budget battle for example). The sides need to change designations!
post #80 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I do, however, believe that the wrong time to cut is now -- that simply takes demand out of the economy when it's still teetering. We do need a credible long-term deficit reduction plan.

I disagree with you on the previous point, but I strongly agree here. Our deficit is absolutely too large, and we need to address that. Budget cuts should happen, well-planned, over time, and best when the economy is good. Trying to cut out trillions of dollars overnight just drops everyone into a state of chaos.
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