PPI - Radically Pragmatic
  • Donate
Skip to content
  • Home
  • About
    • About Us
    • Locations
    • Careers
  • People
  • Projects
  • Our Work
  • Events
  • Donate

Our Work

Betting On America: How Much Do Apple and Google Invest at Home?

  • July 14, 2012
  • The Progressive Policy Institute

The Atlantic recently published a piece on PPI’s most recent policy report Investment Heroes. The article provides analysis of the implications of Google and Apple’s investment and placement on Michael Mandel and Diana Carew’s list.

One of the more frustrating aspects of the thriving U.S. tech sector is that while its leading companies generate fabulous profits, they don’t actually employ that many American workers — especially compared to industrial titans of yore. At its 1970s peak, General Motors had more than 600,000 U.S. workers on its payroll. Apple, by comparison, claims just 47,000, most of whom are part of its retail operations. Google has about 18,500. They’ve perfected the low-employment, high-profit business model.

But measuring a tech company’s economic impact by its headcount alone is more than a bit misleading, in part for reasons I’ve written about previously. Michael Mandel of the Progressive Policy Institute, an occasional Atlantic contributor, has done some of the most interesting work on the topic, showing how California’s tech behemoths indirectly support hundreds of thousands of workers who produce and market mobile apps.

This week, Mandel and his PPI colleage Diana Carew, are out with a new report that illustrates another key way in which tech companies inject life into the economy: business investment, otherwise known as capital expenditures. That’s the money firms spend to upgrade and expand their operations, for instance by buying machinery, upgrading servers, or building new factories and offices. Google and Apple were numbers 24 and 25 on PPI’s list of companies investing most in the United States, right after Chrysler, and not far off from General Motors or Target (Their list excludes financial firms).

Read the entire article HERE.

Related Work

Op-Ed  |  January 16, 2026

Weinstein Jr. for Real Clear Markets: Stablecoin Rewards and Their Quiet Threat to Community Banking

  • Paul Weinstein Jr.
Publication  |  January 14, 2026

Building Trust Through Transparency: A New Federal Framework for Autonomous Vehicle Safety

  • Andrew Fung Alex Kilander Aidan Shannon
Press Release  |  January 13, 2026

Proposed Credit Card Rate Cap Risks Cutting Off Millions of Borrowers

  • Andrew Fung Alex Kilander Paul Weinstein Jr.
Press Release  |  December 11, 2025

New PPI Report Uncovers Billions in Hidden Costs from Federal Debit Fee Cap

  • Robert J. Shapiro Jerome Davis
Publication  |  December 11, 2025

The Unanticipated Costs and Consequences of Federal Reserve Regulation of Debit Card Interchange Fees

  • Robert J. Shapiro Jerome Davis
Blog  |  November 20, 2025

Stablecoins Could Hurt Local Economies. Voters Agree.

  • Paul Weinstein Jr.
  • Never miss an update:

  • Subscribe to our newsletter
PPI Logo
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Donate
  • Careers
  • © 2026 Progressive Policy Institute. All Rights Reserved.
  • |
  • Privacy Policy
  • |
  • Privacy Settings