Friday, October 5, 2012

Employment report for September and unemployment rate

http://bloomberg.econoday.com/byshoweventfull.asp?fid=451284&cust=bloomberg-us&year=2012&lid=0#top

Released On 10/5/2012 8:30:00 AM For Sep, 2012
PriorPrior RevisedConsensusConsensus RangeActual
Nonfarm Payrolls - M/M change96,000 142,000 113,000 75,000  to 162,000 114,000 
Unemployment Rate - Level8.1 %8.1 %8.0 % to 8.3 %7.8 %
Average Hourly Earnings - M/M change0.0 %0.2 %0.1 % to 0.3 %0.3 %
Av Workweek - All Employees34.4 hrs34.4 hrs34.4 hrs to 34.5 hrs34.5 hrs
Private Payrolls - M/M change103,000 97,000 130,000 100,000  to 165,000 104,000 




=================

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-05/u-s-jobless-rate-unexpectedly-falls-to-7-8-114-000-jobs-added.html

The unemployment rate in the U.S. unexpectedly fell to 7.8 percent in September, the lowest since President Barack Obama took office in January 2009, as employers took on more part-time workers.


The economy added 114,000 workers last month after a revised 142,000 gain in August that was more than initially estimated, Labor Department figures showed today inWashington. The median estimate of 92 economists surveyed by Bloomberg called for an advance of 115,000. The jobless rate dropped from 8.1 percent and hourly earnings climbed more than forecast.
Improving employment prospects that lead to stronger wage growth provide workers with the wherewithal to boost their spending, helping cushion the economy from a global slowdown. Today’s employment report is the penultimate before the November elections as Obama and challenger Mitt Romney debate whose policies would best spur job growth.
“The labor market is slowly regaining footing,” Eric Green, global head of rates and foreign-exchange research at TD Securities Inc. in New York, said before the report. “The Federal Reserve wants to see traction, faster growth.”
The unemployment rate, derived from a survey of households, was forecast to rise to 8.2 percent, according to the survey median. Estimates ranged from 8 percent to 8.3 percent.
Stock-index futures climbed after the figures. The contract on the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index expiring in December rose 0.4 percent to 1,462.2 at 8:39 a.m. in New York.

Part-Time Workers

The household survey showed an 873,000 increase in employment, the biggest since June 1983, excluding the annual Census population adjustments. Some 582,000 Americans took part- time positions because of slack business conditions or those jobs were the only work they could find.
Joblessness fell most among teenagers, declining to 23.7 percent last month from 24.6 percent.
Payrolls projections in the Bloomberg survey ranged from increases of 60,000 to 165,000 following an initially reported 96,000 gain in August. Revisions to July and August added a total of 86,000 jobs to payrolls in the previous two months.
Private payrolls, which exclude government agencies, rose by 104,000 in September. They were projected to advance by 130,000, the survey showed.
Factories eliminated 16,000 positions, compared with the survey forecast of no change and following a 22,000 decrease in the previous month.

Construction Jobs

Employment at private service-providers increased 114,000. Construction companies added 5,000 workers, and retailers hired 9,400 more employees.
Government payrolls increased by 10,000 after a 45,000 jump the month before.
Average hourly earnings climbed 0.3 percent to $23.58, today’s report showed.
The so-called underemployment rate -- which includes part- time workers who’d prefer a full-time position and people who want work but have given up looking -- held at 14.7 percent.
Economic issues play a central role in the race for commander-in-chief. Only one president, Ronald Reagan, has been re-elected since World War II with unemployment above 6 percent. On Election Day 1984, the rate was at 7.2 percent, having fallen almost three percentage points in the previous 18 months.

Obama, Romney

To boost employment, Obama last September proposed the American Jobs Act, which would cut payroll taxes for workers and employers, provide aid to states and increase spending on public-works projects. Romney has vowed to create 12 million new jobs as part of a plan that includes developing the energy sector and reducing taxes. The two debated this week.
Companies, nonetheless, may hold back on hiring plans amid concern over Europe’s weakening economy and the so-called fiscal cliff, a combination of tax increases and government spending cuts that will occur next year if Congress doesn’t act.
The share of U.S. chief executive officers planning to add employees or invest more in the next six months declined last quarter, and a bigger share said they’d cut jobs and spending, according to a Business Roundtable survey last month. The group’s economic-outlook index slumped to the lowest since 2009.
“Over the past several months, we’ve seen the economy lose some of the momentum it had generated coming into the year,” Carl Camden, president and chief executive officer at temporary- staff provider Kelly Services Inc. (KELYA), said during a Sept. 13 conference. About a year ago, “we were seeing good signs of a fairly solid recovery. But all of that is definitely slowed and you see that in staffing volumes around the world.”

Finding Work

Still, the labor market has finally become brighter for Jennifer Arnold. The 39-year-old started her job as an assistant grant writer at United Way in Columbus, Ohio, this month after being unemployed for a year and a half. She relied on networking and career counseling to help secure the new position.
“It wasn’t easy,” said Arnold, who has a master’s degree in public administration. “Sometimes I just couldn’t even do it because it was just too much.”
Lenovo Group Ltd. (992) is among those companies hiring. The Beijing-based computer maker said this week that it’s starting a production line in Whitsett, North Carolina, that will create 115 jobs.
Signaling that it can’t combat a slowdown in growth caused by stricter fiscal policy, the Fed last month said it would hold its target interest rate near zero until at least mid-2015 to stimulate more hiring. The central bank also began a third round of stimulus, buying $40 billion in mortgage bonds a month. The S&P 500 rose the next day to its highest close since December 2007.
“We’re looking for ongoing, sustained improvement in the labor market,” Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke told reporters following the announcement on Sept. 13. “What we’ve seen in the last six months isn’t it.”
To contact the reporter on this story: Alex Kowalski in Washington atakowalski13@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Christopher Wellisz at cwellisz@bloomberg.net

Thursday, October 4, 2012

Romney's economic plan

http://www.businessinsider.com/romney-debate-economic-plan-2012-10

FACT CHECK for presidential debate

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/oct/03/fact-checking-denver-presidential-debate/

http://factcheck.org/2012/10/dubious-denver-debate-declarations/

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/10/03/14207584-truth-squad-the-debate

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/10/03/162263539/romney-goes-on-offense-pays-for-it-in-first-wave-of-fact-checks?ft=1&f=1014

Romney Health Care Debate Claim Gets Corrected By His Own Staff
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012/10/06/162404662/romney-health-care-debate-claim-gets-corrected-by-his-own-staff?ft=1&f=1014

===================

http://news.yahoo.com/fact-check-presidential-debate-missteps-015421565.html


WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama and Republican rival Mitt Romney spun one-sided stories in their first presidential debate, not necessarily bogus, but not the whole truth.
They made some flat-out flubs, too. The rise in health insurance premiums has not been the slowest in 50 years, as Obama stated. Far from it. And there are not 23 million unemployed, as Romney asserted.
Here's a look at some of their claims and how they stack up with the facts:
OBAMA: "I've proposed a specific $4 trillion deficit reduction plan. ... The way we do it is $2.50 for every cut, we ask for $1 in additional revenue."
THE FACTS: In promising $4 trillion, Obama is already banking more than $2 trillion from legislation enacted along with Republicans last year that cut agency operating budgets and capped them for 10 years. He also claims more than $800 billion in war savings that would occur anyway. And he uses creative bookkeeping to hide spending on Medicare reimbursements to doctors. Take those "cuts" away and Obama's $2.50/$1 ratio of spending cuts to tax increases shifts significantly more in the direction of tax increases.
Obama's February budget offered proposals that would cut deficits over the coming decade by $2 trillion instead of $4 trillion. Of that deficit reduction, tax increases accounted for $1.6 trillion. He promises relatively small spending cuts of $597 billion from big federal benefit programs like Medicare and Medicaid. He also proposed higher spending on infrastructure projects.
___
ROMNEY: Obama's health care plan "puts in place an unelected board that's going to tell people ultimately what kind of treatments they can have. I don't like that idea."
THE FACTS: Romney is referring to the Independent Payment Advisory Board, a panel of experts that would have the power to force Medicare cuts if costs rise beyond certain levels and Congress fails to act. But Obama's health care law explicitly prohibits the board from rationing care, shifting costs to retirees, restricting benefits or raising the Medicare eligibility age. So the board doesn't have the power to dictate to doctors what treatments they can prescribe.
Romney seems to be resurrecting the assertion that Obama's law would lead to rationing, made famous by former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's widely debunked allegation that it would create "death panels."
The board has yet to be named, and its members would ultimately have to be confirmed by the Senate. Health care inflation has been modest in the last few years, so cuts would be unlikely for most of the rest of this decade.
___
OBAMA: "Over the last two years, health care premiums have gone up — it's true — but they've gone up slower than any time in the last 50 years. So we're already beginning to see progress. In the meantime, folks out there with insurance, you're already getting a rebate."
THE FACTS: Not so, concerning premiums. Obama is mixing overall health care spending, which has been growing at historically low levels, and health insurance premiums, which have continued to rise faster than wages and overall economic growth. Premiums for job-based family coverage have risen by nearly $2,400 since 2009 when Obama took office, according to the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation. In 2011, premiums jumped by 9 percent. This year's 4 percent increase was more manageable, but the price tag for family coverage stands at $15,745, with employees paying more than $4,300 of that.
When it comes to insurance rebates under Obama's health care law, less than 10 percent of people with private health insurance are benefiting.
More than 160 million Americans under 65 have private insurance through their jobs and by buying their own policies. According to the administration, about 13 million people will benefit from rebates. And nearly two-thirds of that number will only be entitled to a share of it, since they are covered under job-based plans where their employer pays most of the premium and will get most of the rebate.
___
ROMNEY on the failure of Obama's economic policy: "And the proof of that is 23 million people out of work. The proof of that is 1 out of 6 people in poverty. The proof of that is we've gone from 32 million on food stamps to 47 million on food stamps. The proof of that is that 50 percent of college graduates this year can't find work."
THE FACTS: The number of unemployed is 12.5 million, not 23 million. Romney was also counting 8 million people who are working part time but would like a full-time job and 2.6 million who have stopped looking for work, either because they are discouraged or because they are going back to school or for other reasons.
He got the figure closer to right earlier in the debate, leaving out only the part-timers when he said the U.S. has "23 million people out of work or stopped looking for work." But he was wrong in asserting that Obama came into office "facing 23 million people out of work." At the start of Obama's presidency, 12 million were out of work.
His claim that half of college graduates can't find work now also was problematic. A Northeastern University analysis for The Associated Press found that a quarter of graduates were probably unemployed and another quarter were underemployed, which means working in jobs that didn't make full use of their skills or experience.
___
OBAMA: It's important "that we take some of the money that we're saving as we wind down two wars to rebuild America."
THE FACTS: This oft-repeated claim is based on a fiscal fiction. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were paid for mostly with borrowed money, so stopping them doesn't create a new pool of available cash that can be used for something else, like rebuilding America. It just slows down the government's borrowing.
___
ROMNEY: "At the same time, gasoline prices have doubled under the president. Electric rates are up."
THE FACTS: He's right that the average price has doubled, and a little more, since Obama was sworn in. But presidents have almost no influence on gasoline prices, and certainly not in the near term. Gasoline prices are set on financial exchanges around the world and are based on a host of factors, most importantly the price of crude oil used to make gasoline, the amount of finished gasoline ready to be shipped and the capacity of refiners to make enough to meet market demand.
Retail electricity prices have risen since Obama took office — barely. They've grown by an average of less than 1 percent per year, less than the rate of inflation and slower than the historical growth in electricity prices. The unexpectedly modest rise in electricity prices is because of the plummeting cost of natural gas, which is used to generate electricity.
___
OBAMA: "Gov. Romney's central economic plan calls for a $5 trillion tax cut — on top of the extension of the Bush tax cuts, that's another trillion dollars — and $2 trillion in additional military spending that the military hasn't asked for. That's $8 trillion. How we pay for that, reduce the deficit, and make the investments that we need to make, without dumping those costs onto middle-class Americans, I think is one of the central questions of this campaign."
THE FACTS: Obama's claim that Romney wants to cut taxes by $5 trillion doesn't add up. Presumably, Obama was talking about the effect of Romney's tax plan over 10 years, which is common in Washington. But Obama's math doesn't take into account Romney's entire plan.
Romney proposes to reduce income tax rates by 20 percent and eliminate the estate tax and the alternative minimum tax. The Tax Policy Center, a Washington research group, says that would reduce federal tax revenues by $465 billion in 2015, which would add up to about $5 trillion over 10 years.
However, Romney says he wants to pay for the tax cuts by reducing or eliminating tax credits, deductions and exemptions. The goal is a simpler tax code that raises the same amount of money as the current system but does it in a more efficient manner.
The knock on Romney's plan, which Obama accurately cited, is that Romney has refused to say which tax breaks he would eliminate to pay for the lower rates.
___
ROMNEY: What would I cut from spending? Well, first of all, I will eliminate all programs by this test, if they pass it: Is the program so critical it's worth borrowing money from China to pay for it?
THE FACTS: China continues to be portrayed by Romney and many other Republicans as the poster child for runaway federal deficits. It's true that China is the largest foreign holder of U.S. debt, but it only represents about an 8 percent stake. And China has recently been decreasing its holdings, according to the Treasury Department. Some two-thirds of the $16 trillion national debt is owed to the federal government, with the largest single stake the Federal Reserve, as well as American investors and the Social Security Trust Fund.
___
OBAMA: "Independent studies looking at this said the only way to meet Gov. Romney's pledge of not ... adding to the deficit is by burdening middle-class families. The average middle-class family with children would pay about $2,000 more."
THE FACTS: That's just one scenario. Obama's claim relies on a study by the Tax Policy Center, a Washington research group. The study, however, is more nuanced than Obama indicated.
The study concludes it would be impossible for Romney to meet all of his stated goals without shifting some of the tax burden from people who make more than $200,000 to people who make less.
In one scenario, the study says, Romney's proposal could result in a $2,000 tax increase for families who make less than $200,000 and have children.
Romney says his plan wouldn't raise taxes on anyone, and his campaign points to several studies by conservative think tanks that dispute the Tax Policy Center's findings. Most of the conservative studies argue that Romney's tax plan would stimulate economic growth, generating additional tax revenue without shifting any of the tax burden to the middle class. Congress, however, doesn't use those kinds of projections when it estimates the effect of tax legislation.
___
ROMNEY on cutting the deficit: "Obamacare's on my list. ... I'm going to stop the subsidy to PBS. ... I'll make government more efficient."
THE FACTS: Romney has promised to balance the budget in eight years to 10 years, but he hasn't offered a complete plan. Instead, he's promised a set of principles, some of which — like increasing Pentagon spending and restoring more than $700 billion in cuts that Democrats made in Medicare over the coming decade — work against his goal. He also has said he will not consider tax increases.
He pledges to shrink the government to 20 percent of the size of the economy, as opposed to more than 23 percent of gross domestic product now, by the end of his first term. The Romney campaign estimates that would require cuts of $500 billion from the 2016 budget alone. He also has pledged to cut tax rates by 20 percent, paying for them by eliminating tax breaks for the wealthiest and through economic growth.
To fulfill his promise, then, Romney would require cuts to other programs so deep — under one calculation requiring cutting many areas of the domestic budget by one-third within four years — that they could never get through Congress. Cuts to domestic agencies would have to be particularly deep.
But he's offered only a few modest examples of government programs he'd be willing to squeeze, like subsidies to PBS and Amtrak. He does want to repeal Obama's big health care law, but that law is actually forecast to reduce the deficit.
___
ROMNEY: "Simpson-Bowles, the president should have grabbed that."
OBAMA: "That's what we've done, made some adjustments to it, and we're putting it before Congress right now, a $4 trillion plan."
THE FACTS: At first, the president did largely ignore the recommendations made by his deficit commission headed by Democrat Erskine Bowles and Republican Alan Simpson. He later incorporated some of the proposals, largely the less controversial ones. He did not endorse some of the politically troublesome recommendations, such as trimming popular tax deductions like the one for home mortgage interest.
___
Associated Press writers Andrew Taylor, Stephen Ohlemacher, Jonathan Fahey, Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, Tom Raum and Christopher S. Rugaber contributed to this report.
EDITOR'S NOTE _ An occasional look at political claims that take shortcuts with the facts or don't tell the full story

Tuesday, October 2, 2012

Apple vs Samsung battle in smartphone market

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19800342


Samsung adds iPhone 5 to its patent battle with Apple

iPhone 5By the time Samsung's lawsuit is heard in court the iPhone 5 will have likely been superseded

Related Stories

Samsung has added Apple's latest handset to a US patent lawsuit claiming the iPhone 5 infringes eight of its technologies.
Samsung had already filed claims against earlier iPhones and iPads.
It coincides with calls from a judge for "major reforms" to US patent law.
Judge Richard Posner, who previously oversaw a legal dispute involving Apple and Google's Motorola unit, said that protection available to software patents was "excessive".
Patent wars
Samsung's legal move is the latest in a long running battle with Apple.
The US firm has claimed that the Galaxy device maker copied the look and iOS system software found on its tablets and handsets.
Although several of Apple's claims have been rejected, it recently scored a major victory when a California-based jury ruled Samsung should pay it over $1bn (£620m) in damages.
Samsung has had its own courtroom successes, including a ruling in August that Apple had infringed two of its wireless communication patents in South Korea. It resulted in an order for the iPhone maker to pay 40m won ($35,000; £22,000) in damages.
The US lawsuit involving the iPhone 5 dates back to April when a complaint about other devices was filed in the Northern District of California. The case is due to go to trial in March 2014.
It involves two so-called Frand patents - technologies Samsung has an obligation to licence on "fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory" terms because they are recognised as being essential to data transmission standards. In other words, if Apple agrees to pay what is deemed to be a fair rate then Samsung will be obliged to let it use the technologies.
Samsung phonesApple is trying to ban several Samsung handsets from sale in the US
The other six disputed innovations are feature patents, and in theory Samsung could force Apple's products off the shelves if it does not remove the functions from the devices.
Patent consultant Florian Mueller listed details of the disputed patents on his blog earlier this year, noting that Samsung owned about 30,000 US patents in total. Several of these include 4G LTE technologies which the Seoul-based company has hinted could be the basis of further lawsuits.
'Excessive protection'
HTC, Motorola, Microsoft, RIM and other tech firms are also involved in ongoing US lawsuits.
Legal experts have expressed concern at some of the tactics being used, including Judge Richard Posner who threw out a case involving Motorola and Apple in June, rebuking both firms.
He has now followed this up with a blog post in which he calls for anoverhaul of the law regarding software patents.
"Nowadays most software innovation is incremental, created by teams of software engineers at modest cost, and also ephemeral - most software innovations are quickly superseded," he wrote.
"Software innovation tends to be piecemeal - not entire devices, but components, so that a software device (a cellphone, a tablet, a laptop, etc) may have tens of thousands of separate components (bits of software code or bits of hardware), each one arguably patentable.
Judge PosnerUnlike most US judges, Richard Posner maintains a blog where he discusses the law
"The result is huge patent thickets, creating rich opportunities for trying to hamstring competitors by suing for infringement - and also for infringing, and then challenging the validity of the patent when the patentee sues you."
The judge said that 20-year-long patent protection made sense for pharmaceutical drugs which require development costs running to hundreds of millions of dollars, need extensive testing and subsequently remain on the market for decades.
He said such factors did not apply to software, adding that a firm that invented a new technology would benefit from being the first to use it and would also gain a reputation for innovation.
"My general sense... bolstered by an extensive academic literature, is that patent protection is on the whole excessive and that major reforms are necessary," he wrote.
The tech news site Ars Technica, which was first to report the blog, noted that Judge Posner did not have the power to shape US patent policy, but added that his views were likely to be discussed by 

====================

earlier this year ... 

Apple seeks to ban sale of eight Samsung phones in US

Apple Inc.

LAST UPDATED AT 13 NOV 2012, 16:00 ET*CHART SHOWS LOCAL TIMEApple Inc. intraday chart
pricechange%
542.90+
+0.07
+
+0.01

Related Stories

Apple has asked a court to ban eight Samsung mobile phones in the US.
The phones include the Galaxy S 4G, Galaxy S2 AT&T model, Galaxy S2 Skyrocket, Galaxy S2 T-Mobile model, Galaxy S2 Epic 4G, Galaxy S Showcase, Droid Charge and Galaxy Prevail.
It comes in the wake of Apple's US court victory over its rival, which saw the South Korean company ordered to pay $1.05bn (£655m) for copying patents.
Apple shares rose 1.88% to $675.68 in Monday trading on Wall Street.
The company has asked the US District Court in San Jose, California, for a preliminary injunction on the Samsung products, while a permanent injunction is sought.
At the same time, Samsung has also asked the court to delete an injunction on its Galaxy Tab 10.1, after the jury in the recent court case found it did not infringe Apple's design patent for the iPad tablet.
Judge Lucy Koh had issued an injunction on the tablet on 26 June.
Earlier on Monday, Samsung sent a memo to staff hitting out at what it called the "abuse of patent law".
Shares in Samsung fell 7% in Seoul trading, their biggest one-day fall in almost four years.
On 24 August, a US court ruled that Samsung had infringed Apple patents for mobile devices in one of the most significant rulings in a global intellectual property battle.
Samsung said it would be appealing against the verdict.
"We initially proposed to negotiate with Apple instead of going to court, as they had been one of our most important customers," the company saidits memo to staff.
"However, Apple pressed on with a lawsuit, and we have had little choice but to counter sue, so that we can protect our company."
It said that the US court's verdict contrasted "starkly" with decisions made in other countries, including the UK, the Netherlands and Germany.
"History has shown there has yet to be a company that has won the hearts and minds of consumers and achieved continuous growth, when its primary means to competition has been the outright abuse of patent law, not the pursuit of innovation," the memo said.
"We trust that the consumers and the market will side with those who prioritise innovation over litigation, and we will prove this beyond doubt."
Sales worries
Analysts said investors were worried that the ruling could see certain products taken off the market.
Frost and Sullivan says investors are worried the verdict could undermine the Android technology used in smartphones
"An adjustment in the next few days is unavoidable as the damage amount was much bigger than market expectations, and there are further uncertainties, such as the possibility of a sales ban," said John Park, from Daishin Securities.
In a separate move, the giant chipmaker ASML said Samsung would be investing $975m in its research programme into next-generation chipmaking technology and in buying a 3% share in the company.
Intel Corp and TSMC have both recently signed similar investment deals into the co-investment programme, whose aim is to tie in ASML's customers and develop new technology designed to lead to cheaper products.
Jury ruling
A nine-member jury in San Jose, California ruled on 24 August that Samsung had infringed Apple patents for mobile devices.
It was the the most closely-watched of many similar patent disputes being contested in courts around the world between electronics manufacturers.
In recent weeks, a court in South Korea ruled that both Apple and Samsung had copied each other, while a British court dismissed claims by the American company that Samsung had infringed its copyrights.

Economic news - CNNMoney.com