Friday, January 27, 2012

Lockheed order backlog to cushion tough 2012 (Reuters)

WASHINGTON (Reuters) ? Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N), the Pentagon's largest supplier, forecast broadly flat sales and operating profit for 2012, with a record high order backlog helping it to cope with cuts in U.S. defense spending.

Bethesda-based Lockheed, which is developing the F-35 fighter jet for the U.S. military and eight international partners, reported on Thursday lower sales and earnings for the fourth quarter of 2011, but said it received $19.8 billion in orders that boosted its backlog to a record $80.7 billion.

Fourth-quarter sales dropped nearly five percent to $12.2 billion from $12.8 billion a year ago, said Lockheed, which also builds missiles, coastal warships, satellites and transport planes for the U.S. government.

Revenues for the full year rose nearly 2 percent to $46.5 billion from $45.7 billion a year earlier, It forecast revenues between $45 billion and $46 billion in 2012.

Chairman and Chief Executive Bob Stevens said the company had a strong year financially due to its continued focus on executing U.S. and international programs, but faced more uncertainty in 2012, given the U.S. government's plan to cut defense spending by $487 billion over the next decade.

U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta is expected to explain some of the major decisions in the fiscal 2013 defense budget later Thursday, including plans to put off production of 179 additional F-35 fighter jets over the next five years.

"We will need to remain agile in 2012 given the uncertainties ahead, but I am confident that our workforce and diversified portfolio will enable us to continue to deliver value to our customers and shareholders," Stevens said.

Net earnings from continuing operations dropped 15 percent to $698 million in the fourth quarter from $821 million a year earlier, edging up slightly to $2.67 billion for the full year from $2.61 billion. The results reflected higher pension expense adjustments, a decrease in research and development (R&D) tax credits, and premiums on the early extinguishments of debt.

Earnings on per share basis from continuing operations fell to $2.14 in the fourth quarter, down from $2.28 a year earlier, but still above analyst estimates of $1.94.

Operating profit fell slightly to $3.98 billion for the full year from $4.05 billion in 2010, and would likely fall in that same range in 2012, the company said.

Separately, U.S. defense contractor Raytheon said on Thursday it expected adjusted earnings to fall 5-8 percent this year, as it reported a 12 percent rise in adjusted fourth-quarter earnings per share.

(Reporting By Andrea Shalal-Esa, Editing by Mark Potter)

Corrects to show comparable estimate with earnings from continuing operations in second bullet point and 8th paragraph.

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/usmilitary/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20120126/bs_nm/us_lockheed_earnings

miss wisconsin law abiding citizen packers safe house golden globes 2012 miss america green bay packers

Thursday, January 26, 2012

The FTC's New Business Opportunity Rule and What It Means for You

?Make thousands stuffing envelopes!? Unique work at home business opportunity!?

stuffing envelopes

It?s statements like these which often lead to bogus business opportunities that have spurred the U.S. Federal Trade Commission into taking action to protect people who think they?re buying a legitimate business. Called the Business Opportunity Rule, this new requirement states that any individual who sells a business opportunity to another is required to disclose more information than in the past.

A business opportunity is simply a comprehensive business investment that lets the buyer start a business immediately. It?s ?out of the box,? so to speak. It?s different from a franchise.? A franchise is a business opportunity, but not all?business opportunities?are franchises, says Joel Libava, author of Become a Franchise Owner.

?Sometimes, people confuse a franchise business opportunity with a business opportunity, or bizopp. The major differences include upfront costs, (which are almost always significantly lower with a bizopp) support, and? the rules. In a business opportunity, there aren?t that many rules to follow as an owner. Business opportunities are generally looser in nature; you buy the opportunity, learn how to run the business, and then you?re pretty much free to market it and run it as you wish.?

What?s Required if You SELL Business Opportunities to Others

Anyone selling a business opportunity or bizopp must now provide information on a one-page disclosure document (PDF file)?at least seven days before the buyer pays money or signs a document. The seller must state the following:

  • Whether legal action has ever been taken against the seller
  • Whether there is a cancellation or refund policy for the business transaction
  • Any earnings claims that the buyer will earn a specific amount of money through the bizopp
  • References for the seller

Because of the rising number of business opportunity scams over the past few years, the FTC wanted to step up the measures taken to ensure the safety of buyers.

If you?re selling a business opportunity, understand that this new rule is meant to help you and the buyer perform a smooth transaction. Here are some tips to minimize the stress on your end:

  • Never make unsubstantiated claims. Be prepared to back up any income potential your business opportunity can provide.
  • Offer a refund or cancellation policy. It?s good business. Outline what the stipulations are for the buyer to be able to cancel.
  • Stay in contact with your buyers so you can use them for references down the road. Even if you don?t promise support in your contract, it?s good customer service to be available should your buyer have questions.

What You Need to Know if You Are BUYING a Business Opportunity

If you are buying or considering buying a business opportunity, then know that the Business Opportunity Rule is to designed to help protect you from potentially bogus deals. Armed with the information the seller is required to give you, you should be able to get a better sense of whether a deal is legitimate. If it?s not, you now have ammunition for legal proceedings.

Pay attention to the earnings claims. In the past, companies have claimed that you could retire off of what you make stuffing envelopes, or make thousands of dollars off a work from home opp. These claims must now be substantiated in writing, and the buyer must list how much other buyers have made, and where they were located (since results may vary depending on many factors).

?The revised Business Opportunity Rule is long overdue,? says Libava, ?The most positive change has to do with research. Business opportunity buyers will now have access to a list provided by the business opportunity seller of at least 10 people who have bought their business opportunity. And, if fewer than 10 people have bought the business opportunity, every person that?s bought it must be listed.?

Libava says that buyers should know that they will have to sign a document stating that the buyer can share their personal contact information with future buyers.

Here are more tips to ensure you find a trustworthy business opportunity from the Business Opportunity blog:

  • Ensure that the seller has filled out the disclosure document thoroughly, and has provided supporting documents.
  • Contact the references the seller lists and ask questions about their experiences with the business opportunity.
  • Look for bizopps that illustrate how you?ll make the money, rather than drawing you in with promises of ?big financial rewards.

You can read the complete Business Opportunity Rule document on the FTC website. The Rule will go into effect March 1, 2012.


Envelopes Photo via Shutterstock

Source: http://smallbiztrends.com/2012/01/ftc-business-opportunity-rule-what-it-means.html

halloween movies new york snow new york snow braxton miller braxton miller noreaster noreaster

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Egypt's bereaved demand justice on anniversary (Reuters)

CAIRO (Reuters) ? Walaa al-Din Hosni was shot dead a year ago in Cairo while protesting against Hosni Mubarak's rule. Shehab Ahmed Sayyed was shot dead 10 months later in the Egyptian capital while protesting against the military rulers who replaced him.

On the first anniversary of the January 25 uprising, their families came to Cairo's Tahrir Square to demand justice for the hundreds of Egyptians who died in pro-democracy protests last year and whose killers are still at large.

To date, no senior official has been held to account over the deaths, a failure seen by the bereaved as proof of a cover up all too reminiscent of the Mubarak era and a sign of how much has yet to change a year after he was removed from power.

Mubarak has himself been charged with ordering the killing. But his trial is not inspiring confidence among those who want to see him punished, the prosecution seeming weaker than they had hoped. His defense denies any such orders were given.

In Tahrir Square, "retribution for the martyrs" was one of the main demands of activists who rallied Wednesday.

"We have come down today because the rights of the martyrs have yet to be realized," said Magdi Eid Refai, whose nephew Hosni was killed on January 28, among the bloodiest of the 18 days of the revolt and one that became known as "The Friday of Anger."

"He was hit by a live bullet in the head."

Standing next to Refai, his brother held a portrait of their late nephew. They were taking part in a protest demanding justice for the dead.

"Retribution Retribution! They killed our children with bullets," they chanted as they weaved their way through a crowd of tens of thousands congregated in the square.

Though Egyptians are united in supporting the demand for justice, the crowd in Tahrir was split over whether Wednesday should be a day for celebration or a moment to launch a new uprising against army rule.

Among the bereaved, there is little doubt that the security forces were behind the killing: some of the violence was captured on camera and broadcast on television.

"There can be no festivities until there is retribution," Refai said.

After Mubarak stepped down, a state-appointed committee reported that police had used excessive force, including live ammunition and rubber bullets. Armored vehicles were also used to charge the crowd.

Yet in some cases that have been brought against members of the security forces, the charges have not stuck. In others, trials are still ongoing.

UNCOVERING THE TRUTH

The prosecution has sought the death sentence for Mubarak and his former interior minister on charges of ordering the killing of protesters.

But it has also complained that a lack of cooperation from the security services has hindered evidence collection. In the course of the Mubarak trial, senior officials and the Interior Ministry have denied there were orders to shoot.

Uncovering the truth is one of the top priorities of the newly elected parliament which sat this week for the first time. The chamber decided Tuesday to launch its own inquiry.

An MP whose son was wounded in the uprising broke down in tears as he demanded justice. The military-led government has offered financial compensation to the families of the dead, who number around 800 over the course of the year.

"My demand is that they don't buy us off with money, my demand is retribution and to know who killed them, who murdered them, who took them from us," said Mona Mohammed, the mother of Shehab Ahmed Sayyed, who was killed in November.

"He was shot by a live bullet. It went into his chest and came out the other side," she said, holding a portrait of her son as she spoke. "He was a young man who wanted to live in his country with dignity."

He was killed during protests against the military council led by Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, for two decades Mubarak's defense minister. The council has promised to hand power to an elected president by the end of June but is seen by pro-democracy activists as the obstacle to real reform in Egypt.

Mohammed described the council as Mubarak's "hidden hand" and said she had launched her own case against the army rulers. "God willing they will be put on trial," she said. "I want retribution. I've said it everywhere I go."

"Our blood is not cheap."

(Writing by Tom Perry; Editing by Alison Williams)

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/africa/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20120125/wl_nm/us_egypt_anniversary_retribution

powerball winner powerball winner narwhals narwhals gmail app gmail app phentermine

Rising wealth of Asians straining world fish stock (AP)

MANILA, Philippines ? Rising wealth in Asia and fishing subsidies are among factors driving overexploitation of the world's fish resources, while fish habitat is being destroyed by pollution and climate change, U.N. marine experts said Tuesday.

Up to 32 percent of the world's fish stocks are overexploited, depleted or recovering, they warned. Up to half of the world's mangrove forests and a fifth of coral reefs that are fish spawning grounds have been destroyed.

The U.N. Environment Programme says less-destructive ways of fishing that use more labor and less energy are needed to help restore the health of the world's oceans and coasts.

The agency is leading a five-day conference in Manila of experts and officials from 70 governments.

Jacqueline Alder, head of UNEP's marine, coastal and freshwater office, said the increasing ranks of rich Asians are driving demand for better quality fish that are often not abundant, adding pressure to their supply.

"People don't want to eat the little anchovies anymore when they can eat a nice snapper or grouper ? much nicer fish, shows much more of your wealth," she told reporters.

Alder said booming population, more awareness of health benefits from eating fish, fuel and boat-building subsidies in industrial fisheries, weak management and limited understanding of ecosystems' values are also driving fish overexploitation.

She said subidies should be reduced or eliminated, fishing gears should be less destructive, and the number of boats and fishers reduced. Habitat management should also be strengthened and marine protected areas established.

Fish is the main source of protein for up to 20 percent of the of world's population and some 180 million people are directly or indirectly employed by the fishing industry, she added.

Vincent Sweeney, UNEP's coordinator for the Global Program of Action to prevent marine environment degradation from land-based pollutants, said up to 90 percent of sewage in developing countries is discharged untreated into rivers, lakes and oceans, posing one of the most serious threats to water resources.

Other pollutants from land including nitrogen and phosphorous from fertilizers and detergents result in hypoxia or "dead zones" where too many nutrients cause an undesirable growth of plants that compete with coral reef and other marine life for oxygen.

Jerker Tamelander, head of UNEP's coral reef unit, said healthy coral reefs can produce up to 35 tons of fish per square kilometer each year while there is a catch reduction of 67 tons for every square kilometer of clear-cut mangrove forest.

The global market value of marine and coastal resources and industries is estimated at $3 trillion per year or about 5 percent of the global economy, he said. Non-market value such as climate, water, nutrients and carbon regulation is estimated at $22 trillion a year.

"We've lost a fifth of the world's coral reefs and 60 percent are under direct and immediate threat and climate change plays an additional role in driving reef loss," he said.

Tamelander said the decline in coastal ecosystems' health and productivity can be reversed by shifting to greener and more sustainable strategies, addressing threats and better management that involves all stakeholders.

"The sooner we act, the easier it will be and the longer we wait the harder it will be," he warned.

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/science/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20120124/ap_on_re_as/as_philippines_un_protecting_seas

safe house golden globes 2012 miss america green bay packers lana del rey saturday night live focus on the family giants score

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

Roe v. Wade Hits 39, but Republicans Still Hate Women's Rights (ContributorNetwork)

COMMENTARY | Today marks 39 years since the landmark Roe v. Wade decision was handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court. NARAL, the largest and oldest organization dedicated to protecting the rights of American women, says that in the last year it has had to combat more attacks on these rights than ever before, according to the Washington Post. If the women's-rights-hating republican candidates have their way it won't last much past year 40.

Ron Paul's campaign site clearly states he is a "life begins at conception" candidate. He would pass a "Sanctity of Life Act," making his belief law, given the chance. It makes me wonder if his "life is sacred" stance would apply to death row inmates as well. It also makes me wonder, since Paul is a gynecologist, if he is aware that such a measure would outlaw many current forms of birth control, such as "the pill."

Rick Santorum's site takes it further. Santorum wants to make sure you have a hard time getting your health insurer to cough up a referral for an abortion, much less pay for one. Health insurers are known for their altruism and commitment to patients before profits -- oh, wait, no they aren't. They're for-profit entities and could well use Santorum's legislation to find another way to avoid paying for patient care so they can fatten their profit margins.

Newt Gingrich's site says he will defund Planned Parenthood. He also wants to ensure medical and insurance personnel can place their personal views ahead of contractual obligations to female patients. I guess he doesn't care about the health of lower-income women.

Mitt Romney's site is silent on this issue. True to form he has flip-flopped on the matter from pro-choice to pro-life, according to NPR.

If you are pro-choice and want to see Roe v. Wade survive past the 2013 inauguration your best bet is to vote for Obama. The right-wing candidates have promised to abort your right to choose. These misogynistic men should never be given the chance to legislate women's freedom away.

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/gop/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ac/20120123/pl_ac/10869855_roe_v_wade_hits_39_but_republicans_still_hate_womens_rights

the secret life of bees kyle orton kyle orton diners drive ins and dives lebron james engaged hangover cure auld lang syne

No. 24 Saint Mary's holds off Santa Clara 93-77 (AP)

SANTA CLARA, Calif. ? Santa Clara outshot and outran No. 24 Saint Mary's most of the night and held a slim lead in the second half.

What the Broncos couldn't do was outmuscle the Gaels.

That ? and another big night from Matthew Dellavedova ? was too much to overcome.

Dellavedova had 26 points and seven assists, Rob Jones added 14 points and 15 rebounds and No. 24 Saint Mary's held off Santa Clara 93-77 on Saturday.

"We had a chance to get some stops and didn't come up with the finished product with some rebounds and that hurt us," Broncos coach Kerry Keating said. "Even the chances that we had to get those rebounds, after we didn't finish the play we were fouling."

Saint Mary's, which moved into the Top 25 this week, outrebounded Santa Clara 53-38 and shot 45 free throws, 30 in the second half. Even on a night when Kevin Foster passed Steve Nash on the Broncos career scoring list, that was a hurdle Santa Clara couldn't get past.

Niyi Harrison had 23 points and nine rebounds for Santa Clara (8-10, 0-5 West Coast Conference). Foster added 22 but the Broncos couldn't sustain their early momentum and lost their sixth straight.

Playing in front of the first sellout crowd at the Leavey Center in nearly two years seemed to give Santa Clara a spark. So did Foster.

The Broncos' junior had eight points in the first 5 minutes and later made his third 3-pointer to put Santa Clara up 29-23 midway through the first half. Santa Clara ran into some foul trouble, which allowed Saint Mary's to make a brief run and take a 44-42 lead before Foster hit another 3.

Robert Garrett then blocked a shot by the Gaels' Tim Williams under the basket. Brandon Clark grabbed the rebound and threw a long pass to Evan Roquemore, who raced down the court for the easy layup to make it 47-44.

"We did what we wanted to do," Keating said. "We played really well in that first half. But typical of a young team, we're trying to figure out how to carry that over."

The Gaels were outhustled for most of the game and trailed midway through the second half before going on a 15-2 run to pull away for their ninth consecutive win. Saint Mary's (19-2, 9-0) is off to its best start under 11th-year coach Randy Bennett.

Jorden Page scored a career-high 19 points and Brad Waldow had 14 points and a career-best 16 rebounds for Saint Mary's, which has won six straight in the series.

Jones, who nearly had a double-double before halftime with 11 points and eight rebounds, scored on a layup to pull Saint Mary's within one at the break.

Santa Clara opened the second half as well as it ended the first, getting six points from Harrison.

Knocked out of the game earlier after crashing to the floor going for a rebound, Harrison came back and gave the Broncos a 56-52 lead with his second dunk in a 57-second span.

Bennett called a timeout to try to calm his team but it took some time for the Gaels to recover. They missed seven of 11 free throw attempts after the timeout and trailed 64-63 before going on their 15-2 run.

"They had a little run early in the second half but after that I thought we did a good job on them defensively," Bennett said. "It didn't seem like a 16-point win."

Keating, frustrated at seeing his team's shot at an upset slip away, was called for a technical foul with 4:47 left and the Gaels up 79-68.

Saint Mary's continued to pull away and went up by 14 following Stephen Holt's driving layup with just over 2 minutes remaining.

Foster, who finished 6 of 16, moved into fourth place on the Broncos career scoring list. He passed Dennis Awtry and Nash, now an NBA star with the Phoenix Suns.

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/sports/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20120122/ap_on_sp_co_ga_su/bkc_t25_santa_clara

san francisco earthquake nextdoor premier fitness dan uggla kryptos student loan forgiveness amy winehouse cause of death

Monday, January 23, 2012

NYT: Why 'Made in the USA' is so hard to do

When Barack Obama joined Silicon Valley?s top luminaries for dinner in California last February, each guest was asked to come with a question for the president.

But as Steven P. Jobs of Apple spoke, President Obama interrupted with an inquiry of his own: what would it take to make iPhones in the United States?

Not long ago, Apple boasted that its products were made in America. Today, few are. Almost all of the 70 million iPhones, 30 million iPads and 59 million other products Apple sold last year were manufactured overseas.

Why can?t that work come home? Mr. Obama asked.

Mr. Jobs?s reply was unambiguous. ?Those jobs aren?t coming back,? he said, according to another dinner guest.

The president?s question touched upon a central conviction at Apple. It isn?t just that workers are cheaper abroad. Rather, Apple?s executives believe the vast scale of overseas factories as well as the flexibility, diligence and industrial skills of foreign workers have so outpaced their American counterparts that ?Made in the U.S.A.? is no longer a viable option for most Apple products.

Apple has become one of the best-known, most admired and most imitated companies on earth, in part through an unrelenting mastery of global operations. Last year, it earned over $400,000 in profit per employee, more than Goldman Sachs, Exxon Mobil or Google.

However, what has vexed Mr. Obama as well as economists and policy makers is that Apple ? and many of its high-technology peers ? are not nearly as avid in creating American jobs as other famous companies were in their heydays.

Apple employs 43,000 people in the United States and 20,000 overseas, a small fraction of the over 400,000 American workers at General Motors in the 1950s, or the hundreds of thousands at General Electric in the 1980s. Many more people work for Apple?s contractors: an additional 700,000 people engineer, build and assemble iPads, iPhones and Apple?s other products. But almost none of them work in the United States. Instead, they work for foreign companies in Asia, Europe and elsewhere, at factories that almost all electronics designers rely upon to build their wares.

?Apple?s an example of why it?s so hard to create middle-class jobs in the U.S. now,? said Jared Bernstein, who until last year was an economic adviser to the White House.

?If it?s the pinnacle of capitalism, we should be worried.?

Apple executives say that going overseas, at this point, is their only option. One former executive described how the company relied upon a Chinese factory to revamp iPhone manufacturing just weeks before the device was due on shelves. Apple had redesigned the iPhone?s screen at the last minute, forcing an assembly line overhaul. New screens began arriving at the plant near midnight.

A foreman immediately roused 8,000 workers inside the company?s dormitories, according to the executive. Each employee was given a biscuit and a cup of tea, guided to a workstation and within half an hour started a 12-hour shift fitting glass screens into beveled frames. Within 96 hours, the plant was producing over 10,000 iPhones a day.

?The speed and flexibility is breathtaking,? the executive said. ?There?s no American plant that can match that.?

Similar stories could be told about almost any electronics company ? and outsourcing has also become common in hundreds of industries, including accounting, legal services, banking, auto manufacturing and pharmaceuticals.

But while Apple is far from alone, it offers a window into why the success of some prominent companies has not translated into large numbers of domestic jobs. What?s more, the company?s decisions pose broader questions about what corporate America owes Americans as the global and national economies are increasingly intertwined.

?Companies once felt an obligation to support American workers, even when it wasn?t the best financial choice,? said Betsey Stevenson, the chief economist at the Labor Department until last September. ?That?s disappeared. Profits and efficiency have trumped generosity.?

Companies and other economists say that notion is na?ve. Though Americans are among the most educated workers in the world, the nation has stopped training enough people in the mid-level skills that factories need, executives say.

To thrive, companies argue they need to move work where it can generate enough profits to keep paying for innovation. Doing otherwise risks losing even more American jobs over time, as evidenced by the legions of once-proud domestic manufacturers ? including G.M. and others ? that have shrunk as nimble competitors have emerged.

Life Inc.: US employers say they can't find enough workers

Apple was provided with extensive summaries of The New York Times?s reporting for this article, but the company, which has a reputation for secrecy, declined to comment.

This article is based on interviews with more than three dozen current and former Apple employees and contractors ? many of whom requested anonymity to protect their jobs ? as well as economists, manufacturing experts, international trade specialists, technology analysts, academic researchers, employees at Apple?s suppliers, competitors and corporate partners, and government officials.

Privately, Apple executives say the world is now such a changed place that it is a mistake to measure a company?s contribution simply by tallying its employees ? though they note that Apple employs more workers in the United States than ever before.

They say Apple?s success has benefited the economy by empowering entrepreneurs and creating jobs at companies like cellular providers and businesses shipping Apple products. And, ultimately, they say curing unemployment is not their job.

?We sell iPhones in over a hundred countries,? a current Apple executive said. ?We don?t have an obligation to solve America?s problems. Our only obligation is making the best product possible.?

?I want a glass screen?
In 2007, a little over a month before the iPhone was scheduled to appear in stores, Mr. Jobs beckoned a handful of lieutenants into an office. For weeks, he had been carrying a prototype of the device in his pocket.

Mr. Jobs angrily held up his iPhone, angling it so everyone could see the dozens of tiny scratches marring its plastic screen, according to someone who attended the meeting. He then pulled his keys from his jeans.

People will carry this phone in their pocket, he said. People also carry their keys in their pocket. ?I won?t sell a product that gets scratched,? he said tensely. The only solution was using unscratchable glass instead. ?I want a glass screen, and I want it perfect in six weeks.?

After one executive left that meeting, he booked a flight to Shenzhen, China. If Mr. Jobs wanted perfect, there was nowhere else to go.

For over two years, the company had been working on a project ? code-named Purple 2 ? that presented the same questions at every turn: how do you completely reimagine the cellphone? And how do you design it at the highest quality ? with an unscratchable screen, for instance ? while also ensuring that millions can be manufactured quickly and inexpensively enough to earn a significant profit?

The answers, almost every time, were found outside the United States. Though components differ between versions, all iPhones contain hundreds of parts, an estimated 90 percent of which are manufactured abroad. Advanced semiconductors have come from Germany and Taiwan, memory from Korea and Japan, display panels and circuitry from Korea and Taiwan, chipsets from Europe and rare metals from Africa and Asia. And all of it is put together in China.

In its early days, Apple usually didn?t look beyond its own backyard for manufacturing solutions. A few years after Apple began building the Macintosh in 1983, for instance, Mr. Jobs bragged that it was ?a machine that is made in America.? In 1990, while Mr. Jobs was running NeXT, which was eventually bought by Apple, the executive told a reporter that ?I?m as proud of the factory as I am of the computer.? As late as 2002, top Apple executives occasionally drove two hours northeast of their headquarters to visit the company?s iMac plant in Elk Grove, Calif.

But by 2004, Apple had largely turned to foreign manufacturing. Guiding that decision was Apple?s operations expert, Timothy D. Cook, who replaced Mr. Jobs as chief executive last August, six weeks before Mr. Jobs?s death. Most other American electronics companies had already gone abroad, and Apple, which at the time was struggling, felt it had to grasp every advantage.

In part, Asia was attractive because the semiskilled workers there were cheaper. But that wasn?t driving Apple. For technology companies, the cost of labor is minimal compared with the expense of buying parts and managing supply chains that bring together components and services from hundreds of companies.

For Mr. Cook, the focus on Asia ?came down to two things,? said one former high-ranking Apple executive. Factories in Asia ?can scale up and down faster? and ?Asian supply chains have surpassed what?s in the U.S.? The result is that ?we can?t compete at this point,? the executive said.

The impact of such advantages became obvious as soon as Mr. Jobs demanded glass screens in 2007.

For years, cellphone makers had avoided using glass because it required precision in cutting and grinding that was extremely difficult to achieve. Apple had already selected an American company, Corning Inc., to manufacture large panes of strengthened glass. But figuring out how to cut those panes into millions of iPhone screens required finding an empty cutting plant, hundreds of pieces of glass to use in experiments and an army of midlevel engineers. It would cost a fortune simply to prepare.

Then a bid for the work arrived from a Chinese factory.

When an Apple team visited, the Chinese plant?s owners were already constructing a new wing. ?This is in case you give us the contract,? the manager said, according to a former Apple executive. The Chinese government had agreed to underwrite costs for numerous industries, and those subsidies had trickled down to the glass-cutting factory. It had a warehouse filled with glass samples available to Apple, free of charge. The owners made engineers available at almost no cost. They had built on-site dormitories so employees would be available 24 hours a day.

The Chinese plant got the job.

?The entire supply chain is in China now,? said another former high-ranking Apple executive. ?You need a thousand rubber gaskets? That?s the factory next door. You need a million screws? That factory is a block away. You need that screw made a little bit different? It will take three hours.?

In Foxconn City
An eight-hour drive from that glass factory is a complex, known informally as Foxconn City, where the iPhone is assembled. To Apple executives, Foxconn City was further evidence that China could deliver workers ? and diligence ? that outpaced their American counterparts.

That?s because nothing like Foxconn City exists in the United States.

The facility has 230,000 employees, many working six days a week, often spending up to 12 hours a day at the plant. Over a quarter of Foxconn?s work force lives in company barracks and many workers earn less than $17 a day. When one Apple executive arrived during a shift change, his car was stuck in a river of employees streaming past. ?The scale is unimaginable,? he said.

Foxconn employs nearly 300 guards to direct foot traffic so workers are not crushed in doorway bottlenecks. The facility?s central kitchen cooks an average of three tons of pork and 13 tons of rice a day. While factories are spotless, the air inside nearby teahouses is hazy with the smoke and stench of cigarettes.

Foxconn Technology has dozens of facilities in Asia and Eastern Europe, and in Mexico and Brazil, and it assembles an estimated 40 percent of the world?s consumer electronics for customers like Amazon, Dell, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola, Nintendo, Nokia, Samsung and Sony.

?They could hire 3,000 people overnight,? said Jennifer Rigoni, who was Apple?s worldwide supply demand manager until 2010, but declined to discuss specifics of her work. ?What U.S. plant can find 3,000 people overnight and convince them to live in dorms??

In mid-2007, after a month of experimentation, Apple?s engineers finally perfected a method for cutting strengthened glass so it could be used in the iPhone?s screen. The first truckloads of cut glass arrived at Foxconn City in the dead of night, according to the former Apple executive. That?s when managers woke thousands of workers, who crawled into their uniforms ? white and black shirts for men, red for women ? and quickly lined up to assemble, by hand, the phones. Within three months, Apple had sold one million iPhones. Since then, Foxconn has assembled over 200 million more.

Foxconn, in statements, declined to speak about specific clients.

?Any worker recruited by our firm is covered by a clear contract outlining terms and conditions and by Chinese government law that protects their rights,? the company wrote. Foxconn ?takes our responsibility to our employees very seriously and we work hard to give our more than one million employees a safe and positive environment.?

The company disputed some details of the former Apple executive?s account, and wrote that a midnight shift, such as the one described, was impossible ?because we have strict regulations regarding the working hours of our employees based on their designated shifts, and every employee has computerized timecards that would bar them from working at any facility at a time outside of their approved shift.? The company said that all shifts began at either 7 a.m. or 7 p.m., and that employees receive at least 12 hours? notice of any schedule changes.

Foxconn employees, in interviews, have challenged those assertions.

Another critical advantage for Apple was that China provided engineers at a scale the United States could not match. Apple?s executives had estimated that about 8,700 industrial engineers were needed to oversee and guide the 200,000 assembly-line workers eventually involved in manufacturing iPhones. The company?s analysts had forecast it would take as long as nine months to find that many qualified engineers in the United States.

In China, it took 15 days.

Companies like Apple ?say the challenge in setting up U.S. plants is finding a technical work force,? said Martin Schmidt, associate provost at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In particular, companies say they need engineers with more than high school, but not necessarily a bachelor?s degree. Americans at that skill level are hard to find, executives contend. ?They?re good jobs, but the country doesn?t have enough to feed the demand,? Mr. Schmidt said.

Some aspects of the iPhone are uniquely American. The device?s software, for instance, and its innovative marketing campaigns were largely created in the United States. Apple recently built a $500 million data center in North Carolina. Crucial semiconductors inside the iPhone 4 and 4S are manufactured in an Austin, Tex., factory by Samsung, of South Korea.

But even those facilities are not enormous sources of jobs. Apple?s North Carolina center, for instance, has only 100 full-time employees. The Samsung plant has an estimated 2,400 workers.

?If you scale up from selling one million phones to 30 million phones, you don?t really need more programmers,? said Jean-Louis Gass?e, who oversaw product development and marketing for Apple until he left in 1990. ?All these new companies ? Facebook, Google, Twitter ? benefit from this. They grow, but they don?t really need to hire much.?

It is hard to estimate how much more it would cost to build iPhones in the United States. However, various academics and manufacturing analysts estimate that because labor is such a small part of technology manufacturing, paying American wages would add up to $65 to each iPhone?s expense. Since Apple?s profits are often hundreds of dollars per phone, building domestically, in theory, would still give the company a healthy reward.

But such calculations are, in many respects, meaningless because building the iPhone in the United States would demand much more than hiring Americans ? it would require transforming the national and global economies. Apple executives believe there simply aren?t enough American workers with the skills the company needs or factories with sufficient speed and flexibility. Other companies that work with Apple, like Corning, also say they must go abroad.

Manufacturing glass for the iPhone revived a Corning factory in Kentucky, and today, much of the glass in iPhones is still made there. After the iPhone became a success, Corning received a flood of orders from other companies hoping to imitate Apple?s designs. Its strengthened glass sales have grown to more than $700 million a year, and it has hired or continued employing about 1,000 Americans to support the emerging market.

But as that market has expanded, the bulk of Corning?s strengthened glass manufacturing has occurred at plants in Japan and Taiwan.

?Our customers are in Taiwan, Korea, Japan and China,? said James B. Flaws, Corning?s vice chairman and chief financial officer. ?We could make the glass here, and then ship it by boat, but that takes 35 days. Or, we could ship it by air, but that?s 10 times as expensive. So we build our glass factories next door to assembly factories, and those are overseas.?

Corning was founded in America 161 years ago and its headquarters are still in upstate New York. Theoretically, the company could manufacture all its glass domestically. But it would ?require a total overhaul in how the industry is structured,? Mr. Flaws said. ?The consumer electronics business has become an Asian business. As an American, I worry about that, but there?s nothing I can do to stop it. Asia has become what the U.S. was for the last 40 years.?

Middle-class jobs fade
The first time Eric Saragoza stepped into Apple?s manufacturing plant in Elk Grove, Calif., he felt as if he were entering an engineering wonderland.

It was 1995, and the facility near Sacramento employed more than 1,500 workers. It was a kaleidoscope of robotic arms, conveyor belts ferrying circuit boards and, eventually, candy-colored iMacs in various stages of assembly. Mr. Saragoza, an engineer, quickly moved up the plant?s ranks and joined an elite diagnostic team. His salary climbed to $50,000. He and his wife had three children. They bought a home with a pool.

?It felt like, finally, school was paying off,? he said. ?I knew the world needed people who can build things.?

At the same time, however, the electronics industry was changing, and Apple ? with products that were declining in popularity ? was struggling to remake itself. One focus was improving manufacturing. A few years after Mr. Saragoza started his job, his bosses explained how the California plant stacked up against overseas factories: the cost, excluding the materials, of building a $1,500 computer in Elk Grove was $22 a machine. In Singapore, it was $6. In Taiwan, $4.85. Wages weren?t the major reason for the disparities. Rather it was costs like inventory and how long it took workers to finish a task.

?We were told we would have to do 12-hour days, and come in on Saturdays,? Mr. Saragoza said. ?I had a family. I wanted to see my kids play soccer.?

Modernization has always caused some kinds of jobs to change or disappear. As the American economy transitioned from agriculture to manufacturing and then to other industries, farmers became steelworkers, and then salesmen and middle managers. These shifts have carried many economic benefits, and in general, with each progression, even unskilled workers received better wages and greater chances at upward mobility.

But in the last two decades, something more fundamental has changed, economists say. Midwage jobs started disappearing. Particularly among Americans without college degrees, today?s new jobs are disproportionately in service occupations ? at restaurants or call centers, or as hospital attendants or temporary workers ? that offer fewer opportunities for reaching the middle class.

Even Mr. Saragoza, with his college degree, was vulnerable to these trends. First, some of Elk Grove?s routine tasks were sent overseas. Mr. Saragoza didn?t mind. Then the robotics that made Apple a futuristic playground allowed executives to replace workers with machines. Some diagnostic engineering went to Singapore. Middle managers who oversaw the plant?s inventory were laid off because, suddenly, a few people with Internet connections were all that were needed.

Mr. Saragoza was too expensive for an unskilled position. He was also insufficiently credentialed for upper management. He was called into a small office in 2002 after a night shift, laid off and then escorted from the plant. He taught high school for a while, and then tried a return to technology. But Apple, which had helped anoint the region as ?Silicon Valley North,? had by then converted much of the Elk Grove plant into an AppleCare call center, where new employees often earn $12 an hour.

There were employment prospects in Silicon Valley, but none of them panned out. ?What they really want are 30-year-olds without children,? said Mr. Saragoza, who today is 48, and whose family now includes five of his own.

After a few months of looking for work, he started feeling desperate. Even teaching jobs had dried up. So he took a position with an electronics temp agency that had been hired by Apple to check returned iPhones and iPads before they were sent back to customers. Every day, Mr. Saragoza would drive to the building where he had once worked as an engineer, and for $10 an hour with no benefits, wipe thousands of glass screens and test audio ports by plugging in headphones.

Paydays for Apple
As Apple?s overseas operations and sales have expanded, its top employees have thrived. Last fiscal year, Apple?s revenue topped $108 billion, a sum larger than the combined state budgets of Michigan, New Jersey and Massachusetts. Since 2005, when the company?s stock split, share prices have risen from about $45 to more than $427.

Some of that wealth has gone to shareholders. Apple is among the most widely held stocks, and the rising share price has benefited millions of individual investors, 401(k)?s and pension plans. The bounty has also enriched Apple workers. Last fiscal year, in addition to their salaries, Apple?s employees and directors received stock worth $2 billion and exercised or vested stock and options worth an added $1.4 billion.

The biggest rewards, however, have often gone to Apple?s top employees. Mr. Cook, Apple?s chief, last year received stock grants ? which vest over a 10-year period ? that, at today?s share price, would be worth $427 million, and his salary was raised to $1.4 million. In 2010, Mr. Cook?s compensation package was valued at $59 million, according to Apple?s security filings.

A person close to Apple argued that the compensation received by Apple?s employees was fair, in part because the company had brought so much value to the nation and world. As the company has grown, it has expanded its domestic work force, including manufacturing jobs. Last year, Apple?s American work force grew by 8,000 people.

While other companies have sent call centers abroad, Apple has kept its centers in the United States. One source estimated that sales of Apple?s products have caused other companies to hire tens of thousands of Americans. FedEx and United Parcel Service, for instance, both say they have created American jobs because of the volume of Apple?s shipments, though neither would provide specific figures without permission from Apple, which the company declined to provide.

?We shouldn?t be criticized for using Chinese workers,? a current Apple executive said. ?The U.S. has stopped producing people with the skills we need.?

What?s more, Apple sources say the company has created plenty of good American jobs inside its retail stores and among entrepreneurs selling iPhone and iPad applications.

After two months of testing iPads, Mr. Saragoza quit. The pay was so low that he was better off, he figured, spending those hours applying for other jobs. On a recent October evening, while Mr. Saragoza sat at his MacBook and submitted another round of r?sum?s online, halfway around the world a woman arrived at her office. The worker, Lina Lin, is a project manager in Shenzhen, China, at PCH International, which contracts with Apple and other electronics companies to coordinate production of accessories, like the cases that protect the iPad?s glass screens. She is not an Apple employee. But Mrs. Lin is integral to Apple?s ability to deliver its products.

Mrs. Lin earns a bit less than what Mr. Saragoza was paid by Apple. She speaks fluent English, learned from watching television and in a Chinese university. She and her husband put a quarter of their salaries in the bank every month. They live in a 1,080-square-foot apartment, which they share with their in-laws and son.

?There are lots of jobs,? Mrs. Lin said. ?Especially in Shenzhen.?

Innovation?s losers
Toward the end of Mr. Obama?s dinner last year with Mr. Jobs and other Silicon Valley executives, as everyone stood to leave, a crowd of photo seekers formed around the president. A slightly smaller scrum gathered around Mr. Jobs. Rumors had spread that his illness had worsened, and some hoped for a photograph with him, perhaps for the last time.

Eventually, the orbits of the men overlapped. ?I?m not worried about the country?s long-term future,? Mr. Jobs told Mr. Obama, according to one observer. ?This country is insanely great. What I?m worried about is that we don?t talk enough about solutions.?

At dinner, for instance, the executives had suggested that the government should reform visa programs to help companies hire foreign engineers. Some had urged the president to give companies a ?tax holiday? so they could bring back overseas profits which, they argued, would be used to create work. Mr. Jobs even suggested it might be possible, someday, to locate some of Apple?s skilled manufacturing in the United States if the government helped train more American engineers.

Economists debate the usefulness of those and other efforts, and note that a struggling economy is sometimes transformed by unexpected developments. The last time analysts wrung their hands about prolonged American unemployment, for instance, in the early 1980s, the Internet hardly existed. Few at the time would have guessed that a degree in graphic design was rapidly becoming a smart bet, while studying telephone repair a dead end.

What remains unknown, however, is whether the United States will be able to leverage tomorrow?s innovations into millions of jobs.

In the last decade, technological leaps in solar and wind energy, semiconductor fabrication and display technologies have created thousands of jobs. But while many of those industries started in America, much of the employment has occurred abroad. Companies have closed major facilities in the United States to reopen in China. By way of explanation, executives say they are competing with Apple for shareholders. If they cannot rival Apple?s growth and profit margins, they won?t survive.

Life Inc.: US employers say they can't find enough workers

?New middle-class jobs will eventually emerge,? said Lawrence Katz, a Harvard economist. ?But will someone in his 40s have the skills for them? Or will he be bypassed for a new graduate and never find his way back into the middle class??

The pace of innovation, say executives from a variety of industries, has been quickened by businessmen like Mr. Jobs. G.M. went as long as half a decade between major automobile redesigns. Apple, by comparison, has released five iPhones in four years, doubling the devices? speed and memory while dropping the price that some consumers pay.

Before Mr. Obama and Mr. Jobs said goodbye, the Apple executive pulled an iPhone from his pocket to show off a new application ? a driving game ? with incredibly detailed graphics. The device reflected the soft glow of the room?s lights. The other executives, whose combined worth exceeded $69 billion, jostled for position to glance over his shoulder. The game, everyone agreed, was wonderful.

There wasn?t even a tiny scratch on the screen.

This story, "How U.S. Lost Out on iPhone Work," oringinally appeared in The New York Times.

Copyright ? 2012 The New York Times

Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46091572/ns/business-us_business/

intc cyclops cyclops zanesville google ice cream sandwich google ice cream sandwich soulja boy