Giants beat Bills in bounce-back win
The winning drive was kept alive by two pass interference penalties on cornerback Drayton Florence in coverage against wide receiver Hakeem Nicks.Giants quarterback Eli Manning completed 21-of-32 passes for 292 yards, while Bradshaw gained 104 yards rushing on 26 carries.The victory improved New York’s record to 4-2 and dropped the Bills to 4-2. Both teams have byes next week.After a 17-17 tie at intermission, the Giants took the lead with a touchdown on their first possession of the second half when Bradshaw capped a 75-yard drive with his third short yardage touchdown plunge to make it 24-17.New York tried to add to the lead after Webster intercepted a Fitzpatrick pass but Alex Carrington blocked a 51-yard field goal try by Tynes.After taking over at the 40-yard line, Buffalo converted a fourth-and-one from midfield on a quarterback sneak by Fitzpatrick to keep the drive alive.An off-sides penalty against defensive end Jason Pierre-Paul on a third-and-four provided another first down and Fitzpatrick took advantage by connecting with Stevie Johnson on a nine-yard touchdown pass to tie it at 24-24 midway through the fourth quarter.
UPDATE 1-Canada factory sales surge for second month
* Data reinforce likelihood of modest Q3 GDP growthOTTAWA, Oct 14 (Reuters) - Canadian manufacturing sales
grew at nearly three times the pace expected in August as large
aerospace production outweighed a decline in the auto sector,
according to Statistics Canada data on Friday.Factory sales jumped 1.4 percent from July, compared with
market expectations of a 0.5 percent gain, to reach C$47.6
billion ($46.7 billion), the highest level since October 2008.It was the second straight month of unexpectedly strong
sales following three declines, providing further proof a
third-quarter recession is out of the question. Statscan
revised upward its estimate of July manufacturing sales to 3
percent from 2.7 percent.August sales in constant dollars, used to calculate gross
domestic product, rose 1.1 percent and shipments outside the
auto sector were up 1.8 percent.Sales rose in 11 of 21 industries representing 70 percent
of total manufacturing. The aerospace sector, which fluctuates
more than other industries from month to month, registered
growth of 47.8 percent and also influenced the overall figures
for inventories, new orders and unfilled orders.For aerospace and shipbuilding, Statscan measures
production rather than final sales to get a more accurate
picture of their economic impact on a monthly basis through the
unusually long production period.Sales of transportation equipment overall rose 7 percent,
even though sales of motor vehicles and parts fell. The food
and petroleum and coal products industry also registered
increases, offset by declines in fabricated metal product and
primary meals industries.New orders in August climbed 0.8 percent, unfilled orders
rose 1.3 percent to their highest level since April 2009 and
inventories edged up 0.3 percent. The ratio of inventory to
sales fell to 1.33 from 1.35.
UPDATE 1-Power-One slashes Q3 outlook
Oct 11 (Reuters) - Power-One Inc , the world’s
second-biggest maker of inverters for the solar power market,
lowered its revenue outlook for the third quarter in response
to slower than anticipated demand.Power-One cut its third-quarter revenue forecast to a
range of $240 million to $245 million from $265 million to $280
million.Analysts on average expect the company to report $272.8
million in third-quarter revenue, according to Thomson Reuters
I/B/E/S.The company said power conversion revenue dropped 10
percent from the previous quarter while renewable energy
revenue “was modestly lower.”Italy, which accounted for about half of Power-One’s sales
in 2010, pared back its solar subsidies earlier this year —
cutting demand in that market.Power-One shares closed at $5.04 on Nasdaq on Tuesday.
Obama’s vague Buffett Rule a political ploy
A few thoughts on the economics and politics of President Obama’s tax-the-rich “Buffett Rule” and new debt reduction “plan”:
1) What problem does the Buffett Rule address (assuming it is something more than just a campaign talking point or vague guideline)? Rising inequality? Inequality has been rising globally for years due to globalization and technology. Higher taxes on the rich won’t help that. The biggest economic problem America faces right now is slow economic growth.
2) Would the Buffett Rule reduce the budget deficit at all? That’s far from clear. Higher taxes on small business and entrepreneurs would slow growth and reduce tax revenue. It would also encourage greater efforts at tax avoidance. The 1993 Clinton tax hikes, for instance, only generated a third of the revenue that CBO forecasted. And those increases were instituted when the economy was growing at a steady 3% clip, not stuck in slow-growth mode like the U.S. economy currently is. From Obama’s speech, the it seems to me that the Buffett Rule is probably a special capital gains tax rate of 28 percent for people making $1 million a year.
3) Obama still declines to release a long-term, multi-decade debt reduction plan of the sort Rep. Paul Ryan has put together. I think the reason is clear: If Obama were to do that, it would be crystal clear to voters that the only way Obamacrats can pay for permanently higher levels of government spending is through permanently higher levels of tax revenue, including higher taxes on the middle class. As I wrote a couple of months back:
Three liberal think tanks recently devised budgets to put the U.S. government on a sustainable fiscal path through 2035. Their plans, collectively, called for Washington to collect an average of 23.6 percent of GDP vs. the post-World War II average of 18.5 percent. To put that in further perspective, the highest level of tax revenue that Uncle Sam has ever taken is 20.9 percent in 1944.
And to reach such a stratospheric level of taxation, these groups are calling for unprecedented tax hikes via millionaire surtaxes, higher taxes on alcohol and tobacco, securities transaction taxes, higher taxes on capital gains, higher taxes on corporations, higher death taxes, carbon taxes, and gasoline taxes. None of which, supposedly, would hurt economic growth. Even worse, all those tax hikes would still fail to balance the budget. And when you move past 2035, taxes would almost certainly need to go even higher.
4) OK, the top 1% of US taxpayers make 20% of income and pay 40% of taxes. Isn’t the tax code already “progressive?”
5) The Solyndra scandal revealed Obamanomics to be mostly a clever, crony-capitalist scheme to launder taxpayer money through favored special interests and then back into Democrat campaign coffers. This new budget and tax plan reveals the other: a plan to redistribute rather than create wealth.
