And is managed by a CEO who is choosing not to lay off workers. Are you saying that Apple is wrong to not do layoffs? You can go express that with your votes in the investor meeting, that you don’t want Apple to be the star in these PR pieces about being a great employer who doesn’t lay off employees.

I think you’re both seeing this discussion as way too adversarial and/or political, as well as assuming the GP was insinuating some underlying point you disagree with rather than just being pedantic.

I read their comment as implying that Apple should distribute that cash pile to investors through buybacks or dividends.

I don't know what about their comment implies they want layoffs.

I'm implying that Apple's cash pile belongs to investors and shareholders. Part of that money is used to pay employees. However, that cash pile is not a charity for employing workers that is no longer needed at the company.

There’s another possibility, which is that the group of executives who built the largest money printing machine in human history have a better understanding of how to maximize long term value than whoever wrote the Forbes article complaining about Apple’s cash reserves.

And what specific employees are unnecessary, which you feel qualified to fire?

I don't feel qualified to fire anyone. I'm just stating how public corporations work.

You think Tim Cook is retaining unnecessary workers out of charity? On what grounds?

So does Apple, it’s all the same.

Most Apple employees are shareholders.

I don't get the point that the money should belong to the customers. They gave it to Apple freely upon exchange for a product. Your argument kind of sounds that products should be sold at cost.

Well, cost plus a reasonable markup, but yes. None of this "charge as much as the market will bear" bullshit.

And does Apple offer stock to its retail employees?

How do you decide how much to charge your employer/customers?

Apple has ESPP for everyone at least.

yes