5 ms·
As mentioned by several comments, while one can argue that Big Pharma should spend more on R&D, the title of the article is not so relevant. From Apple financi
by mfiguiere 3y ago
As mentioned by several comments, while one can argue that Big Pharma should spend more on R&D, the title of the article is not so relevant.
From Apple financial statement for 2023 [1]:
- Spent on R&D: $29.9B
- Spent on stockholders (dividends + buybacks): $92.6B
[1] https://www.apple.com/newsroom/pdfs/fy2023-q4/FY23_Q4_Consolidated_Financial_Statements.pdf https://www.apple.com/newsroom/pdfs/fy2023-q4/FY23_Q4_Consol...
- gitaarik 3y agoYes, but Apple sells mosrly overpriced luxury products that needs rich executives for the customers to identify with. We don't want our medicine makers to have the same attitude.
- mplewis 3y agoWe aren’t spending public money on Apple.
- victorbjorklund 3y agoAre you sure govts never bought an Iphone?
- maronato 3y agoGovernments buy iPhones to use. The US government gives bigpharma money and tax benefits as a way to encourage R&D. Those are not the same
- victorbjorklund 3y agoSo you think your phone has zero tech that originally came from govt funded R&D such as the military?
- twoodfin 3y agoThe iPhone doesn’t exist without mobile networks that telecommunications companies used government subsidies to build. (The same subsidies, by the way, that some like to complain weren’t spent on FTTH. Personally, I think mobile was the right call.)
- bart_spoon 3y agoApple’s products are almost entirely dependent on the internet and telecommunications networks and tech, all of which was funded and researched by the government.
- nitwit005 3y agoWe're spending public money on every corporation. Who built the roads their goods travel on? Who educated their workers? We're spending the money less directly perhaps.
- verteu 3y agoAgreed. I'm sympathetic to the article's cause, but Pfizer/JNJ shareholders haven't done particularly well in the past couple decades. Since 2000, the CAGR for (PFI, JNJ, SPY, IWM) was (1.56%, 7.68%, 7.79%, 7.63%) respectively. (Per portfoliovisualizer.com. 2000 is the earliest date with data for IWM.)
- insane_dreamer 3y agoPoor comparison. - Apple doesn't make critical products that people must have or they will be sick or die. - While Apple certainly benefits from some tax-payer funded basic scientific research done at universities (like all tech companies) that pales in comparison with the amount of NIH-funded research that Big Pharma relies on (to be clear, I don't have a problem with taxpayer funded research).