Tag Archives: Fiscal Policy

Furman Appointed to Manalapan Township Finance Committee

Lawrence J. Furman, MBA, co-founder of Popular Logistics, has been appointed to the Manalapan Township Finance Committee (Township here,  news article here). The Finance Committee reviews  expenditures, projects tax receipts, and submits the budget to the Township Committee. Back in 2007 Furman suggested that the Township Committee look into deploying solar energy systems on municipal properties. He was appointed to the Manalapan Township Environmental Commission in 2007, served for two years. In 2008, he ran for School Board with a platform built around solar energy for the schools.  While he lost the election, and Manalapan does not yet have solar energy systems on municipal properties or schools (are these related?) people are talking about it. He earned his MBA in Managing for Sustainability from Marlboro College in December, 2010.

He has delivered various iterations of a talk entitled “Beyond Fuel: Energy in the 21st Century,”  at the June meeting of the NYC Business Sustainability Action Round-Table, NYC B Smart, and in September, 2011 at the Space Coast Green Living Festival, Cocoa Beach, Florida.

Furman has been thinking about energy and what we now call sustainability since 1976, when, as a student intern with the New York Public Interest Research Group, Inc., NYPIRG, at Rachel Carson College, then at the State University of New York University of Buffalo, he helped develop a case for offshore wind power. His testimony, delivered to the “NY State Legislative Committee on Energy, the Economy, and the Environment” stated:

We could power the New York City Subway System with a battery of wind driven electric turbines, located off the shores of Long Island. It would burn no fuel, and, therefore, unlike coal, oil, gas, and nuclear power, create no waste.

When you factor in the life cycle of the fuel, and the pollution and health costs of the wastes, this would be less expensive than the fuel based alternatives.

Reflecting on this today, he said,

“My colleagues and I knew what we were talking about, but the Committee members didn’t get it. Sadly, it seems that the Committee’s name – Energy, the Economy, and the Environment – indicated it’s priorities.”

“If the cheapest unit of energy, the ‘negawatt,’ is the unit of energy that you don’t need, then the next cheapest is the ‘nega-fuel-watt,’ the unit of enegy you obtain without consuming fuel.”

On this committee I intend to look at our energy expenses and see where we can save money in the long term with PV Solar, LED lighting, insulation, micro-hydro, etc.

The Crash of 2011

US Capitol Follow LJF97 on Twitter  Tweet I thought the market would crash in the wake of the Earthquake / Tsunami / Nuclear Meltdowns at Fukushima. It didn’t. However, something much less serious may be bringing the market – and the economy – to it’s knees. Politics. The Voice of America reported here that Standard & Poors downgraded US debt from AAA to AA+. Click here for the S&P’s Special Report and here for the full report.

S&P’s analysts wrote:

The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government’s medium-term debt dynamics.

John BoehnerIt is clear that the emphasis on cutting government spending, eliminating government jobs, eliminating benefits to unemployed citizens, rather than raising revenues and developing infrastructure is not in the long term or short term interests of the United States. As the 512 point drop in the Dow Jones Average, and the downgrade of US debt indicate, Republicans and the Tea Party should be careful for what they wish for – they just might get it.

In the discussions over the debt ceiling, John Boehner said something to the effect that if a family or a business is borrowing too much it simply must tighten it’s belt. Continue reading

Roughing It

Interior of Pilatus PC 12.  Follow LJF97 on Twitter  Tweet A s they struggle to pay their bills, forced to work, the wealthy cope as only they can. By sending their children to summer camp in private jets. In  “To Reach Simple Life of Summer Camp, Lining Up for Private Jets” Christine Haughney, in the New York Times,  July 24, 2011, wrote:

 “A turboprop Pilatus PC-12 carrying Melissa T., her daughter, her daughter’s friend and a pile of lacrosse equipment took off for their home in Connecticut, following the girls’ three-week stay at Camp All-Star in nearby Kents Hill, Me. Shortly after, a Cessna Citation Excel arrived, and a mother, a father and their 13-year-old daughter emerged carrying a pink sleeping bag and two large duffel bags, all headed to Camp Vega in Fayette. … as the economy limps along, more of the nation’s wealthier families are cutting out the car ride and chartering planes to fly to summer camps. One private jet broker, Todd Rome of Blue Star Jets, BlueStarJets.com, said his summer-camp business had jumped 30 percent over the last year.”

A quick check on the Camp All Star web site’s “Dates & Rates” page suggests that 3 weeks will cost about $4500.  Trips, horseback riding and hockey are extra. Getting there on a private jet, would add $6,318 to  $15,240 per party, $2,106 to $5,080 per camper for a camper, his or her mom, and a friend.  As I tell people, it’s the trip, not only the destination.

Tell me again, Mr. Boehner, why the wealthy can’t afford to pay taxes?

Beechcraft 350, exteriorI did some checking. Went to Blue Star‘s website, priced a charter for three (3) from Allaire Airport in Monmouth County, New Jersey to Augsta State in Maine. I was surprised at how affordable it is. Blue Star offered 5 alternatives, all turboprops:

  • A Ratheon Super King BE 350, a 9-passenger aircraft, $6,318, which is $2,106 per passenger,
  • The BE-C90, a 6 passenger turboprop, $11,270, or $3,757 per passenger,
  • The BE-100, an 8 passenger turboprop: $12,151 for the trip, $4,050 per passenger.
  • The BE 200, in a 9-passenger configuration, for $13,043, $4,348 per passenger, and
  • The BE-200 in an 8-passenger configuration: $15,240, $5,080 per passenger.

These data are summarized in the table below.

Plane Trip Per Passenger, 3 passengers Per Passenger If Full
Ratheon Super King BE 3509 Passenger Turboprop $6,318 $2,106 per person. $702 per person for 9.
BE-C90, 6 passenger Turboprop $11,270 $3,757 per person. $1,878 per person for 6.
BE-100, 8 passenger Turboprop $12,151 $4,050 per person. $1,519 per person for 8.
BE-200 9 Passenger Turboprop $13,043 $4,348 per person. $1,630 per person for 9.
BE-200 8 Passenger Turboprop $15,240 $5,080 per person. $1,905 per person for 8.

I don’t know if the airline serves food, drinks, or offers in-flight movies. But caviar is only $115 per oz (Russian Sevruga, Caviar Express, Glendale, CA).

President's Remarks on Fiscal Responsibilty

President Obama Follow LJF97 on Twitter President Obama’s speech on Fiscal Policy was summarized by Hans Nichols and Roger Runningen on Bloomberg.com here.”

“President Barack Obama vowed to cut $4 trillion in cumulative deficits within 12 years through a combination of spending cuts and tax increases, setting the stage for a fight with congressional Republicans over the nation’s priorities.

“In presenting his long-term plan for closing the federal budget shortfall, Obama set a target of reducing the annual U.S. deficit to 2.5 percent of gross domestic product by 2015, compared with 10.9 percent of GDP projected for this year. He reiterated his support for overhauling the tax code to lower rates while closing loopholes and ending some breaks to increase revenue.

“We have to live within our means, reduce our deficit, and get back on a path that will allow us to pay down our debt,” Obama said in a speech today at George Washington University in the capital. “And we have to do it in a way that protects the recovery.”

The full text can be found at Whitehouse.gov.

Extract of Remarks by the President on Fiscal Policy, George Washington University, April 13, 2011.

“One vision has been championed by Republicans in the House of Representatives and embraced by several of their party’s presidential candidates.  It’s a plan that aims to reduce our deficit by $4 trillion over the next ten years, and one that addresses the challenge of Medicare and Medicaid in the years after that.

“Those are both worthy goals for us to achieve.  But the way this plan achieves those goals would lead to a fundamentally different America than the one we’ve known throughout most of our history.

“A 70% cut to clean energy.  A 25% cut in education.  A 30% cut in transportation.  Cuts in college Pell Grants that will grow to more than $1,000 per year.  That’s what they’re proposing.  These aren’t the kind of cuts you make when you’re trying to get rid of some waste or find extra savings in the budget.  These aren’t the kind of cuts that Republicans and Democrats on the Fiscal Commission proposed.  These are the kind of cuts that tell us we can’t afford the America we believe in.  And they paint a vision of our future that’s deeply pessimistic.

“It’s a vision that says if our roads crumble and our bridges collapse, we can’t afford to fix them.  If there are bright young Americans who have the drive and the will but not the money to go to college, we can’t afford to send them.  Go to China and you’ll see businesses opening research labs and solar facilities.  South Korean children are outpacing our kids in math and science.  Brazil is investing billions in new infrastructure and can run half their cars not on high-priced gasoline, but biofuels.  And yet, we are presented with a vision that says the United States of America – the greatest nation on Earth – can’t afford any of this.

“This is a vision that says up to 50 million Americans have to lose their health insurance in order for us to reduce the deficit.  And who are those 50 million Americans?  Many are someone’s grandparents who wouldn’t be able afford nursing home care without Medicaid.  Many are poor children.  Some are middle-class families who have children with autism or Down’s syndrome.  Some are kids with disabilities so severe that they require 24-hour care.  These are the Americans we’d be telling to fend for themselves.

“Worst of all, this is a vision that says even though America can’t afford to invest in education or clean energy; even though we can’t afford to care for seniors and poor children, we can somehow afford more than $1 trillion in new tax breaks for the wealthy.  Think about it.  In the last decade, the average income of the bottom 90% of all working Americans actually declined.  The top 1% saw their income rise by an average of more than a quarter of a million dollars each.  And that’s who needs to pay less taxes?  They want to give people like me a two hundred thousand dollar tax cut that’s paid for by asking thirty three seniors to each pay six thousand dollars more in health costs?   That’s not right, and it’s not going to happen as long as I’m President.

“The fact is, their vision is less about reducing the deficit than it is about changing the basic social compact in America.  As Ronald Reagan’s own budget director said, there’s nothing “serious” or “courageous” about this plan.  There’s nothing serious about a plan that claims to reduce the deficit by spending a trillion dollars on tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires.  There’s nothing courageous about asking for sacrifice from those who can least afford it and don’t have any clout on Capitol Hill.  And this is not a vision of the America I know.”