Matt's Tumblr

It’s been a long campaign season, but it is just 1 week to the 2016 United States Presidential Election, as well as numerous Gubernatorial elections, elections for Senate Seats, elections for seats in the House of Representatives, and other local elections. 

NH Governor: Colin Van Ostern (Democrat). If anyone's shocked at this suggestion to for the "liberal," Mr. Van Ostern isn’t really that liberal. Mr. Van Ostern has essentially run on a pro-jobs, pro-growth platform and pledged not impose an income or sales tax in New Hampshire.

NH Senate, House District 1, and House District 2: Kelly Ayotte (Republican), Jim Lawrence (Republican), and Frank Guinta (Republican). Hillary Clinton is likely to end up President and keeping the Senate balance of power in favor of the Party of Lincoln and Reagan (the Republican Party) will prevent imposition of any egregious new regulation that would stifle innovation, prevent job growth, or hurt the economy.

Massachusetts Ballot Initiatives:

Question 1 (Additional Slots Parlor): YES. As a business idea, this is likely bad since the suggested location of Revere will be close to Wynn Boston Harbor and there is no way a slots parlor can compete effectively with what Wynn will offer, but ultimately the free market can sort this out. If a company wants to come in and build a slots parlor, let them do it. If they fail, they fail, but at a minimum that creates some jobs in the short-run. 

Question 2 (Lift Cap on Charter Schools): YES. There are many schools in Massachusetts that are not up to par and unfortunately these are often in areas where parents cannot afford to just send their kids off to private school so they have a chance to get into good colleges and get decent jobs. The charter schools provide greater opportunity for the children.

Question 3 (Farm Animal Containment): NO. Again, this is one where the free market should be able to operate. People can already buy meat where the animals are not contained in small spaces and eggs where the hens are not caged.

Question 4 (Legalize Marijuana): YES. This will add revenue, create jobs, and is actually a curbing of regulation as it removes a government prohibition on business transactions.

I will be supporting Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-Vermont) in the first in the nation Presidential Primary in New Hampshire. Many will be surprised that a fiscal conservative is supporting Mr. Sanders, who is the furthest to the left viable candidate in this Presidential election. This reflects the poor candidacy of former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. While I do not agree with much of Mr. Sanders’ liberal agenda or his ideas that would have no positive impact (or even will be detrimental) with regard to the economy, Mr. Sanders is a superior candidate to Ms. Clinton. Ms. Clinton is not a trustworthy candidate, and she fails to bring new ideas to the table. The United States of America needs new ideas. The policies of the last 16 years under Presidents Barack Hussein Obama and George Walker Bush clearly have not worked out very well.

Disclaimer: Unlike many travel bloggers, I get no revenue or bonus from any links or recommendations. Additionally, at time of publishing, I had no stock/option positions in any of the companies mentioned in this post.

I often get asked a lot of questions from friends on matters related to personal finance and travel due to my expertise in those two areas. I have a system in place that allows me to maximize rewards and return from normal, everyday spending. Many people want to earn rewards that they can use for travel, but they don’t have the patience to develop a system that will maximize return and really just want to have one good credit card.

Only having one credit card, though, is a huge mistake. I always suggest people have two cards, from different banks and on different networks, for a couple reasons:

Loss/Theft: If you have to credit cards, it’s not as big a problem if one is stolen because while you wait on a replacement you still have one card to use. If traveling, it can often be a good idea to keep some cards & cash separate (ie. lock in the hotel safe while going out).

Frozen Cards: With all the hacking these days, there’s a decent chance you’ll end up with a credit card that gets frozen for possible fraud. You really don’t want to be on vacation and have no way to pay for things, especially since you need a credit card for some travel-related items: making flight changes via phone/online, holding hotel rooms or checking in, and getting a rental car are some examples.

Acceptance: You’ll occasionally run across a scenario where one card brand is not accepted. There are still some places that take only MasterCard, don’t take American Express, only take American Express, etc.

Bank Problems: In the rare event that an entire bank has issues approving credit cards, you want an alternative to use.

The top credit card I suggest people get is the Sapphire Preferred card from JPMorgan Chase. This credit card offers some strong benefits:

Reimbursement for some expenses, such as a hotel room and meals, caused by a travel delay that is overnight or 12+ hours.

Primary rental car collision damage coverage, meaning you can decline the overpriced insurance the rental car company offers that can be upwards of $15/day.

No foreign transaction fee, meaning when you travel abroad you aren’t ripped off by fees of 2% or 3% per transaction.

The reward system with Sapphire Preferred is valuable because you are not tied to single brand’s rewards program like you would be with airline or hotel credit cards such as Chase’s United MileagePlus Explorer card or Marriott Rewards card. With Sapphire Preferred you get Ultimate Rewards points, which are flexible in their use. You earn 2 points per dollar spent on travel and dining (including fast-casual / fast-food) and 1 point per dollar on everything else. The best use of Ultimate Rewards points is transfer to programs where you can book flights or hotel rooms, because you can get very strong value out of your points this way. I have been able to redeem points at upwards of 6 cents per point, which would be the equivalent of getting 6% or 12% cash back on purchases! At a bare minimum, you can redeem your points towards flights, hotels, and rental cars via Chase’s Ultimate Rewards portal at a 1.25 cents per point value, which is the equivalent of getting 1.25% or 2.50% cash back.

Another reason to get Sapphire Preferred is the significant sign-up bonus Chase is offering. If you are approved for the card and spend $4,000 in the first 3 months, you’ll get 50,000 Ultimate Reward points. That’s a minimum of $625 in value right there, but you can do much better with smart redemption. Additionally, adding an authorized user card will get you 5,000 more points ($62.50 in value, at a minimum).

For a second credit card, I recommend getting an American Express or MasterCard that is not issued by JPMorgan Chase. There are many options out there, and the best one to get is going to depend on what you spend money on the most and the benefits that the card offers that you’ll actually use. If you do grocery shopping and buy gas, the American Express Everyday Preferred card can be valuable because you’ll get Membership Rewards points, which are transferable / flexible similar to Chase’s Ultimate Rewards points and you earn triple points at supermarkets and double at gas stations. If you want no annual fee and cash back, you can’t beat the Citi Double Cash card, which will earn you 2% in cash back on everything. If you fly on American Airlines frequently, but not enough to earn elite status, then one of the Citi AAdvantage cards could benefit you since you will get priority boarding, a free checked bag, and earn more AAdvantage miles, plus these cards have decent sign-up bonuses.

On the 13th of November, 2015, Islamic State carried out its most high-profile and deadly attack against Western interests yet, with attacks in Paris, France that killed more than 100 people and wounded/injured over 200 more. These attacks are a tragedy and a terrible loss of life. This was no act of war, but rather should be considered a war crime and a crime against humanity: Islamic State willfully and intentionally targeted civilians for massacre.

With 17 Republican candidates participating in the first two debates held this week, it would take too much time for people to read through a full analysis of every individual candidate’s performance in the debates. Thus, here are my 2 sentence thoughts on debate performance from each of them.

Happy Hour Debate

Former Governor Rick Perry (R-Texas): Mr. Perry’s performance was clearly better than last election cycle when he disastrously could not name three agencies of government to eliminate. He pushed his work and successes in Texas, but didn’t stand out as someone who deserved to be in the top 10.

Governor Bobby Jindal (R-Louisana): Mr. Jindal put forth a weak performance at the Happy Hour Debate and couldn’t even give a direct answer when asked about polls showing him losing his own State to Hillary Clinton. He should probably consider dropping out of the race and focus on improving Louisiana.

Former Senator Rick Santorum (R-Pennsylvania): Mr. Santorum also put forth a weak debate performance, but was smart to put blame on both sides of the aisle for the problem of unlawful immigration and did so without coming across as insulting the way Donald J. Trump had. However, Mr. Santorum’s time probably has passed and he is unelectable in most of the country and should consider saving money and dropping out of this race.

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina): Mr. Graham was smart to take aim at Hillary Clinton in the debate rather than other Republicans and presented that Ms. Clinton “represents a third term of a failed Presidency” and would not change the policies of President Barack Obama that have curbed economic growth. However to Mr. Graham’s detriment he came across as a boring, unenthusiastic candidate and these aren’t the type of people who win elections.

Former HP CEO Carly Fiorina: The sole non-politician of the Happy Hour debate, Ms. Fiorina took on the frontrunners from both parties (Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump) eloquently and had good answers to the tougher questions asked. She was the clear winner of the Happy Hour debate, and it would’ve been very interesting if Ms. Fiorina had been on stage for the prime time debate and could go directly against Mr. Trump and other Republican candidates directly.

Former Governor Jim Gilmore (R-Virginia): Mr. Gilmore played up the risk of attack by terrorists on the United States and tried to argue he would be prepared to combat this due to his time as governor in a State that came under attack on September 11th. Unfortunately for Mr. Gilmore, people are tired of 9/11 being played up and care much more about the economy, finding good jobs, and being able to afford a decent life.

Former Governor George Pataki (R-New York): Mr. Pataki wasn’t very strong and stressed that he was able to beat Mario Cuomo, a Democrat before in the “deep blue” State of New York. Well, New York State isn’t exactly deep blue, having many Republican counties, and defeating Mario Cuomo isn’t exactly the same as defeating Hillary Clinton.

Prime Time FOX News / Facebook Debate

Dr. Ben Carson: Dr. Carson was too quiet in the first 90 minutes of the debate, barely speaking or getting into the conversation. When Dr. Carson spoke, he spoke quite well and he addressed the topic of race relations by comparing it to his acclaimed work in neurosurgery.

Former Governor Jeb Bush (R-Florida): Mr. Bush early on acknowledged that he might have to work harder in order to overcome his family name and show that he is his own person and has his own positions that are not the same as his brother and father. However, Mr. Bush came across as nervous and did little to position himself as not being “too liberal” as many in the GOP have claimed.

Former Governor Mike Huckabee (R-Arkansas): Mr. Huckabee made a good argument on Social Security arguing against Governor Chris Christie (R-New Jersey) that reducing benefits would be dishonest to the Americans who had been forced to pay into the program since they started working. Unfortunately, his idea that entitlement programs could be saved by collecting taxes from drug dealers, prostitutes, and pimps makes him and his campaign for the Presidency seem like a joke.

Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas): Mr. Cruz’s strongest moment in the debate was on the topic of Islamic State where he called for the revocation of U.S. citizenship for Americans who joined up with the terrorists and said that people who join ISIS are signing their own death warrants. Cruz was also very smart to remind voters that he has taken on those in his own party who failed to honor commitments.

Governor Scott Walker (R-Wisconsin): Mr. Walker’s debate performance was mediocre. He positioned himself as a conservative and backed it up with his record, but didn’t do enough to argue that he’s better suited for the White House than the other 9 people on stage.

Trump Organization CEO Donald Trump: Mr. Trump continued to eschew political correctness and even his own party, refusing to commit to supporting the eventual nominee, pointing out that single payer healthcare worked well in Canada and Scotland, and even justifying donations to liberals. As expected, Mr. Trump as usual took on anyone who didn’t agree with him and called out America’s leaders out on their poor negotiation skills and for being “stupid,” but when he was asked to back up statements on illegal immigration with actual evidence he completely fell short.

Governor John Kasich (R-Ohio): Mr. Kasich tried to connect with the middle class in the debate, and he did a decent job of it. However, Mr. Kasich definitely used the hometown debate crowd to his advantage, so it remains to be seen how he’ll do with a non-Ohio audience.

Governor Chris Christie (R-New Jersey): This debate was disastrous for Mr. Christie. His back and forth with Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) on NSA surveillance of Americans positioned him as a candidate with no respect for the Constitution and civil liberties, and that’s not going to go over well with conservative voters.

Senator Marco Rubio (R-Florida): Mr. Rubio did very well in this debate and when the topic of immigration came up, he relied upon the facts and pointed out to Donald Trump that the evidence showed Mexico was not the source of most of the unlawful entry to the United States. Mr. Rubio also did a good job positioning himself as someone who can take on Hillary Clinton, saying “If I'm our nominee, how is Hillary Clinton going to lecture me about living paycheck to paycheck? How is she going to lecture me about student loans? I owed over $100,000 just four years ago. If I'm our nominee, we will be the party of the future.”

Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky): Mr. Paul overall was too quiet and the lack of speaking time likely hurts him. Mr. Paul however came out the winner in a back and forth against Governor Christie, showing he is the candidate who truly cares about Americans privacy, civil rights, and the Constitution.

In the prime-time debate, there was no clear winner. Post-debate polls have indicated Mr. Trump as a winner, however. It will be interesting to see what the polls look like next week, as there could be significant moves up or down for candidates based on this first debate, which was viewed by 24 million people, a record for a U.S. Presidential primary debate. It will also be interesting to see if any candidates drop out before the next two debates.

Looking Forward

The next debate is September 16th at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and Museum in California and will be aired on CNN. On October 28th, CNBC will air a debate taking place at the University of Colorado Boulder that will focus on economic topics. The American people overwhelmingly say that the economic is the most important topic to them, so the CNBC debate could be a very crucial debate for the GOP field.

It looks like the people in Greece voted “Oxi” (no) on the referendum to accept the deal proposed by the European Central Bank [ECB], International Monetary Fund [IMF], and European Commission / European Union. What a shame. This will only lead to more fiscal woes for the people of Greece as their banks are probably going to remain closed with capital controls in place preventing people in Greece from getting more than €60 per day, sending money abroad, and even being able to use their credit cards.

After record snowfalls in the Boston, Massachusetts area, many have expressed their outrage at the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority [MBTA], which is the agency that runs or oversees the subways, buses, commuter rails, and ferries in the Boston area. Much of this outrage comes from the MBTA's excessive delays and cancelled trains. Then, late in the afternoon on February 9, 2015, the MBTA suddenly announced they would stop running commuter rail trains into Boston and not run any outbound trains after 7:00 PM. The next day, the MBTA ran no subways or commuter rail.

While the MBTA has a long list of excuses for the service shutdown, and the merits of these excuses can be debated, what is obviously clear is that customers who paid for MBTA services have not been getting the service they paid for. Customers have faced excessively late trains that did not arrive on time (or arrive at all) or have been unable to get the transportation they paid for. Many have been forced, at their own expense, to seek alternative transportation such as taking a taxi, Lyft, or Uber. Some who would normally park at a Commuter Rail station and take the train into Boston have had to drive in and pay tolls and parking (which in Boston can run upwards of $30/day.) Minimally, the MBTA owes refunds of fares paid and should pro-rate passes to refund for the days where services were not up to par.

Periodically, various media outlets report or groups of people begin complaining on social media about the Uber ridesharing service because of price hikes due to high-demand, known as surge pricing. Recently, the New York Daily News did a report about complaints stemming from surge pricing on New Year's Eve. With Uber, pricing dynamically adjusts in an area based on the demand for Uber rides and the supply of Uber drivers available to meet that demand. When there is high demand for Uber rides, the price will automatically rise unless increases in supply of drivers offset the demand. Similarly, if a surge pricing is in effect and demand falls off, then the cost declines. Uber’s pricing model is an efficient free market at work. The higher prices help to curb demand, as consumers are more likely to tolerate waiting longer for a taxi or public transportation if the alternative is to pay a higher price. Additionally, the higher prices encourage more Uber drivers to work to meet the demand, increasing supply. Meanwhile, those willing to pay more are able to get a ride faster, as opposed to having a long wait. Some consumers have claimed in the past that they were not aware of the Uber surge pricing model. To improve the customer experience, Uber now presents a screen to users indicating if surge pricing is in effect, and requires the consumers to acknowledge the surge price amount by typing it into their app before requesting an Uber ride. No longer should any consumer be able to legitimately claim they were unaware. Any person who has taken a basic course in Economics or read a basic book about Economics (such as “Economics for Dummies”) should be able to understand how the Uber pricing model works. The price adapts to help create an equilibrium between supply and demand, whereas a static price would lead to supply and demand imbalance.

Two of the big contests in New England, the New Hampshire Senate race and the Massachusetts Gubernatorial race, have such obvious choices that I'm keeping my endorsements brief.

Massachusetts Governor: Charlie Baker After 8 years under Deval Patrick (D), it's time for a change for Massachusetts. Charlie Baker (R) is a strong leader, and a moderate candidate who can help advance Massachusetts forward without raising taxes or enacting undue burdens on job-creating businesses. Martha Coakley (D) offers more of the same, and perhaps even weaker leadership that will lead to worse results than under Mr. Patrick. Additionally, Ms. Coakely's policies are too liberal even for "liberal Massachusetts" with her support for higher gas taxes and her support for allowing non-U.S. citizens to vote in elections in the Commonwealth.

1989, the fifth studio album from Taylor Allison Swift officially released on Monday. The album sells for $12.99 on Apple's iTunes, but the better deal is to be found at Target where you can get the 1989: Deluxe Edition for just $1 more. The Deluxe Edition adds 3 additional tracks, 3 voice memos from Ms. Swift, and a collector's set of Polaroid pictures.

1989 marks a new musical direction for Ms. Swift: it is her first full foray into pop music following record-breaking success in Country music. In moving into Pop music, Ms. Swift goes all-in, and the results are spectacular through a combination of excellent song writing, Ms. Swift's vocals, and great production. Despite the shift to Pop, Ms. Swift continues the tradition of releasing albums that people can identify with as they listen, too. Here's a track-by-track rundown, including the bonus tracks (14-16)

1. Welcome to New York: 1989 opens with the catchy tune "Welcome to New York." It's a strong track to open the album, and it's a clear indication that Ms. Swift's shed Country music. There's no fiddle in this song, but plenty of synth. Yet, the expected lines about love from Ms. Swift still make their way in and the song manages to tell the truth about New York City:

Welcome to New York: Like any great love, it keeps you guessing. Like any real love, it's ever-changing.

Score: 10 / 10

2. Blank Space: The second track on 1989 has a slightly slower tempo than "Welcome to New York," yet still has a catchiness to it. This is perhaps the album's best song.

So it's gonna be forever, or it's gonna go down in flames. You can tell me when it's over, if the high was worth the pain. Got a long list of ex-lovers, they'll tell you I'm insane, ‘cause you know I love the players, and you love the game.

Score: 10 / 10

3. Style: Perhaps the song that most directly refers to Ms. Swift's ex-boyfriend Harry Styles (of One Direction fame), "Style” sounds like it's about timeless fashion, but it's really about a relationship that keeps going on despite not being a good one.

When we come crashing down we come back every time. We never go out of style. We never go out of style.

Score: 7 / 10

4. Out of the Woods: Perhaps the most repetitive track on 1989, "Out of the Woods" features a chorus that asks the question "Are we out of the woods yet?" and "Are we in the clear yet?" If "Style" is about a relationship that keeps going, perhaps "Out of the Woods" is about escaping from one.

Score: 9 / 10

5. All You Had to Do Was Stay: This was a mediocre track on 1989, but on an album of this caliber it's still a good listen.

Hey, all you had to do was stay. Had me in the palm of your hand. Then, why'd you had to go and lock me out when I let you in. Stay, hey, now you say you want it back now that it's just too late. All you had to do was stay.

Plus, the song is about the feeling that many people have had where someone tries to fix a relationship they gave up on after it's just too late.

Score: 6 / 10

6. Shake It Off: The first single from 1989 was released in August. Great beat, extremely catchy, and an amazing song about shaking off the haters. I spent the majority of a long transcontinental flight listening to this song and still didn't tire of it.

And the haters gonna hate, hate, hate, hate, hate baby. I'm just gonna shake, shake, shake, shake, shake, I shake it off, shake it off.

While the music video has no bearing on this review of the album, it's also a must-see.

Score: 10 / 10

7. I Wish You Would: This was my least favorite track on 1989, excluding the bonus tracks. The song is about someone who wishes someone would come back to them. In a sense, the music seems too complex, with too fast a tempo, and it doesn't quite fit the song.

Score: 5 / 10

8. Bad Blood: Allegedly about fellow Pop artist Katy Perry, "Bad Blood" tells the story of two friends who now have become enemies and have bad blood between them.

Hey, now we got problems; and I don't think we can solve them. You made a really deep cut, and baby now we got bad blood.

The song once again is catchy and the music pairs well with the lyrics on this one.

Score: 9 / 10

9. Wildest Dreams: This track has a bit of creepiness to it. It's about someone who wishes that their ex will remember them – but remember them at the peak of their game.

Say you'll remember me, standing in a nice dress, staring at the sun set babe. Red lips and rosy cheeks. Say you'll see me again even if it's just in your wildest dreams.

Yet, the song works and the music comes together very well with the vocals here.

Score: 9 / 10

10. How You Get The Girl: "How You Get The Girl" is your typical Pop music song which tells a story and then kicks into a faster tempo for a chorus. In this case, it's all about how to get the girl you like. The secret is to just tell her you want to be with her:

I want you, for worse or for better. I would wait forever and ever. Broke your heart, I'll put it back together. I would wait forever and ever. And that's how it works. That's how you get the girl, girl...

In real life, this might lead to rejection, but in a song from Ms. Swift it all works out and the song wraps with "That's how it works: That's how you got the girl."

Score: 8 / 10

11. This Love: This track features the slowest tempo on 1989. If a music video were made for this, it would have to be set on a beach or in the ocean. It's about a love that went away, yet comes back like a tide.

This love is good, this love is bad, this love is a life back from the dead. These hands had to let them go free, and this love came back to me.

Score: 7 / 10

12. I Know Places: The highest vocal notes from Ms. Swift on 1989 are found on this track. Ms. Swift sings about the idea of a secret place where she can go with her lover and not be seen by anyone. It's a song that speaks to the challenges of being a celebrity: the public wants to know about your life, and the media will try to deliver what the public wants to know by following you around everywhere always trying to get a photo (and of course, the more scandalous, the better, because scandal sells magazines and makes people click links.

Score: 7 / 10

13. Clean: The regular version of 1989 wraps with "Clean," a song about being washed free of negativity. As is typical with Ms. Swift, that negativity is a failed relationship. The song has a relatively slow tempo, but it fits the song perfectly.

It was months and months of back and forth. Ah, ah, you're still all over me like I wine-stained dress I can't wear anymore. On my head as I lost the war and the sky turned black like a perfect storm. Rain came pouring down when I was drowning, that's when I could finally breathe, and that morning, gone was any trace of you, I think I am finally clean.

Score: 9 / 10

14. Wonderland: It's immediately clear that this song is based on the idea of Wonderland from the Lewis Carroll children's book as Ms. Swift sings of taking a wrong turn that leads to a "fall down the rabbit hole." Overall, a good song.

Score: 7 / 10

15. You Are In Love: This track is all over the place with the lyrics. Parts of the song work well, but other parts just don't come together.

Score: 5 / 10

16. New Romantics: The final track on 1989: Deluxe Edition is incredibly catchy and upbeat. The song also makes reference to all the "haters" of Ms. Swift, with the line "'Cause baby I could build a castle out of all the bricks they threw at me." This is the best of the three bonus tracks.

Score: 9 / 10

A average score based on averaging the individual track scores would be 8 / 10, but 1989 comes together as an album so well that it's deserving of much more. 1989 has been declared the best Pop album of the year by many, but it may very well be the best album of the year across any genre of music. After listening to 1989, you may very well want to put it on shuffle and repeat all day long.

In the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, voters will have the opportunity to vote on four ballot initiatives on November 4th. Here's a rundown of them and my endorsements:

Question 1: Eliminating Gas Tax Indexing Currently, the gas tax in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts from the State is 26.5 cents/gallon, and that tax will automatically be adjusted up by the Consumer Price Index every year with no vote of the legislature or input from the people. This ballot initiative seeks to eliminate this automatic tax hike, and require the legislature to take action and be held accountable by the people to increase the gas tax.

Endorsement: YES – Higher gas taxes are essentially a regressive tax that hurt the poor and middle class the most. When forced to pay more for gas, the poor and middle class must cut spending elsewhere or take on debt. This hurts the overall economy. Additionally, higher gas taxes in the Commonwealth will provide greater incentive for individuals to fuel up across the state line in New Hampshire where gas costs significantly less due to the lower taxation.

Question 2: Expanding the Beverage Container Deposit Law At present, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts requires a 5-cent per container deposit on some beverages. This ballot initiative would not only expand the bill to include any non-alcohol, non-carbonated beverage, but would increase the bottle deposit amount automatically every 5-years without any vote of the legislature. Additionally, people who recycle bottles/cans via curbside recycling or via recycling bins would not get back their deposit. The only way to get the deposit money back is by returning the bottles/cans to the store they were purchased at. 

Endorsement: NO – The bottle deposit system is an antiquated system that was intended to increase recycling and eliminate litter decades ago, before people had easy access to recycling at home, work, and via public recycling bins. The bottle deposit system again amounts to a regressive tax that hurts the lowest-income earners the most. A better initiative would be to expand curbside recycling availability in the Commonwealth. Additionally, expanded bottle deposits will make grocery shopping outside of the Commonwealth more attractive since states like New Hampshire do not have these deposit requirements.

Question 3: Expanding Prohibitions on Gaming The Commonwealth of Massachusetts, like Connecticut and Rhode Island, has legalized casino gaming and will open up three casinos across the State in the next few years. This ballot initiative would repeal the legalization of casino gaming and prevent the opening of casinos in the State.

Endorsement: NO – The Commonwealth has already granted licenses to open three casinos across the State and held public/open meetings where documentation was provided in advance and input taken from the people. The casinos that are planned will bring thousands of permanent new jobs to the Commonwealth, create temporary construction jobs, and add much-needed lodging space in the greater Boston area. Additionally, the Commonwealth will get more revenue to fund infrastructure improvements and education from having casinos, and businesses in the Commonwealth will see increased tourist traffic as the casinos will attract people from out of State and even out of the country.

Question 4: Earned Sick Time for Employees At present, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts does not require employers to provide paid sick leave for employees. Many employers offer paid sick leave as an employee benefit in their compensation packages, however. This ballot initiative would require employees to get 1 hour of paid sick time for every 30 hours worked.

In the Granite State, voters on November 4th will have the chance once again to choose their State’s top executive, the Governor. New Hampshire, in contrast to its neighbor to the South (Massachusetts), elects the Governor to 2-year terms similar to how members of the U.S. House of Representatives are elected to 2-year terms. This empowers the people of New Hampshire to get rid of failing leadership much faster than in other states.

The two leading candidates for Governor of New Hampshire are incumbent Margaret "Maggie" Hassan, a Democrat, and Republican Walt Havenstein.

Since taking office, Ms. Hassan has managed to bring forth positive results for the economy. Business has grown in New Hampshire, and the unemployment rate has fallen to 4.3% from over 5% when Ms. Hassan took office. In addition, Ms. Hassan worked with both sides of the aisle in order to pass a balanced budget. New Hampshire’s two major strengths over surrounding states are its lack of Income Tax and Sales Tax, and Ms. Hassan did not propose implementing either tax. Ms. Hassan has also sought to ensure taxpayer funds have greater accountability, and is the first Governor of New Hampshire to actively use social media to engage with the citizens of the state.

Where Ms. Hassan does fall weak is in her support for some new regulation which gives government more control instead of individual. Unfortunately for Mr. Havenstein, he is in favor of burdensome, job-killing regulation. In opposing casino gaming in New Hampshire, Mr. Havenstein is endorsing the continued flow of money out of New Hampshire to casinos in Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Maine, Quebec, and soon Massachusetts. Further, Mr. Havenstein effectively has taken a position against new jobs in New Hampshire.

Additionally, Mr. Havenstein has a weak record of leadership. Under his tenure as Chief Executive Officer of SAIC, he ran the company's stock price down by over 30%, killed thousands of jobs, failed to grow the company's revenue, and was in charge during the "Citytime scandal" in New York that cost taxpayers more than $400M.

The latest poll by The Economist found the U.S. Congress to have an abysmal approval rating of just 8%. A more favorable poll by NBC News and the Wall Street Journal recently found 14% approval. With poor numbers like this, change is needed this November. The American people deserve better, and the opportunity comes up in November to send men and women to Washington who can do a better job representing us and the interests of our fellow Americans. In the U.S. Senate, the person to do the job of representing the people of New Hampshire is Scott P. Brown and I encourage those voting in the Republican Primary on Tuesday to cast their vote for him. Partisan hacks in Congress, on both sides of the aisle, are not solving problems and helping move America forward. It was evident in the recent Granite State Debate that aired on WMUR-TV that both Bob Smith and Jim Rubens, with their unwillingness to compromise with U.S. President Obama, would simply help contribute to more of the same partisan bickering that leads to no solutions. The Republican Party should seek not to nominate the person who is furthest to the right, but a person who acts in the spirit of the party’s greatest modern leader, Ronald Wilson Reagan. Mr. Reagan, faced with a Congress led by the Democrats and Massachusetts liberal Thomas P. “Tip” O’Neil was able to get things done and the country’s economy benefited. New Hampshire deserves representation from a leader who, like Mr. Reagan, will be able to communicate across party lines to advance the interests of the American people. Additionally, if the GOP were to nominate Mr. Smith or Mr. Rubens over Mr. Brown, it’s likely to lead to a November victory for incumbent Senator Jeanne Shaheen. Ms. Shaheen has a poor record of simply toeing the party line. Does New Hampshire really want six more years of that?

Air travel has been in the news lately, and not for good reasons. 

On Sunday, United flight 1462 from Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR) bound for Denver International Airport (DEN) was diverted to Chicago O’Hare (ORD) after a dispute between passengers over the reclining of seats. One man used a plastic gadget known as the Knee Defender to prevent a woman from reclining her seat. The woman complained to the flight attendant, who asked the man to remove the gadget, and when the man refused the woman threw a cup of water at him. The flight was diverted and the two passengers removed from the plane by authorities, but the issue was determined to be “a customer service issue and not a treat to aviation security” so no charges were filed or arrests made. 

Last night, Sunwing flight 656 was forced to turn around en route to Manzanillo, Cuba (MZO) and divert back to Toronto Pearson International Airport (YYZ) under NORAD fighter escort after two women become grossly intoxicated from drinking liquor they obtained at the duty-free store, attempted to smoke in the lavatory (setting off the alarm), and then “proceeded to get into a physical altercation with each other and made a threat against the aircraft.”

Later last night, American Airlines flight 62, en route from Miami International Airport (MIA) to Paris Charles De Gaulle Airport (CDG) was forced to divert to Boston Logan International Airport (BOS). The diversion was caused after a man started a fight with a woman sitting in the row in front him because she reclined her seat. When confronted by the flight crew, the man continued to be disruptive and interferred with the flight crew member, leading to U.S. Federal Air Marshalls on board having to take action to subdue the man. Upon arrival in Boston, the man was arrested and was arraigned today on a change of “interfering with a flight crew.”

The topic of reclining an airline seat has been debated on cable news and the internet, with some believing it should be up to the person sitting in the seat to decide whether to recline or not and others believing reclining is poor etiquette. Having flown over 200 flights in the last few years, I have a strong opinion on this matter that the passenger sitting in a seat has a right to control that seat. The passenger sitting in a seat has paid for a ticket to sit in that seat. Reclining the seat is a function/feature of the seat. The only time a passenger does not have the right to recline their seat is during taxi, takeoff, or landing as mandated by regulation or during other times when ordered by the flight crew.

While the Knee Defender product is a legal product that is not prohibited by U.S. regulation, several airlines do not allow or permit its use. When told by the flight crew not to use the device, anyone who continues to do so is in violation of the law as regulations require the reasonable instructions of the flight crew to be obeyed.

In the United diversion on Sunday, the passenger who threw the cup of water at the non-compliant passenger was also in the wrong. Such violence is not an acceptable response. The right course of action in such a dispute between passengers is to request the flight crew mediate and/or make a decision.

In the American Airlines diversion last night, the passenger who acted aggressively towards the flight crew was in the wrong, and will have to answer to federal charges for it. 

In the Sungwing flight diversion yesterday, clearly the two passengers were out of line.

Some who argue against recline believe that a passenger deserves the full space in front of them. This argument is baloney. While a passenger is entitled to the space in front of them, that space is not necessarily a fixed amount of space because the seats on most aircraft are designed to recline a few inches and the control of the recline is up to the passenger sitting in the seat.  

Some argue that using laptops is too hard when a seat is reclined. I’ve flown with a 15” MacBook Pro and been able to fit it on a tray table in a normal economy seat when a passenger reclined. If this is really a problem, consider getting a smaller laptop or using a tablet instead. What you should absolutely not do, however, is get into an argument or fight over the reclining of seats, especially not to the point where it causes a flight diversion and grossly inconveniences every passenger on the flight, then wastes taxpayer dollars while the authorities deal with you on the ground.

A few things that are acceptable:

Ask the passenger in front of you if they are willing to not recline, or only recline partially. If they agree, that’s great. If they don’t agree, then remember they control the seat and they’re the decider.

Pay someone off to not recline their seat. This guy did it on a flight, and it worked well for both parties. 

Fly on an airline that does not have reclining seats. Monarch, Spirit, and RyanAir all have fixed-position seats that do not recline.

Pick a seat with no seat in front of it. There are some seats that do not have a seat directly in front due to emergency exits. Other seats are in front of bulkheads (ie. the front row on an aircraft).

When it comes to air travel, consumers are used to getting nickel and dimed. Checked bags on most domestic flights carry a fee. Changing your flight carries a fee. Standing by carries a fee. The list goes on and on.

There is one airline that goes above and beyond on the charging of extra fees, though. That airline is Spirit Airlines. While many airlines (US Airways, United, American Airlines, Delta) charge $25-$35 for a checked bag, Spirit Airlines charges $45. To make matters worse, they even charge for carrying your bag on the plane, and it's $50. In comparison, if you flew JetBlue or Southwest, you would pay no extra fees for this, and Delta/United/US/American you would not have to pay for a carry-on bag.

Spirit Airlines makes things even worse by adding fees for things that you would expect are included with a ticket. It's $10 to have a boarding pass printed at the airport. There are no complimentary snacks or beverages included during the flight, too. FOX News (rightfully) called Sprit Airline's fees "outrageous" in an article, mentioning that the airline has even done away with having a toll-free number for customer service.

Perhaps one of the worst fees at Spirit Airlines is the seat assignment fee. This isn't a fee for premium seats with extra legroom or amenities - it's a fee to simply have a choice of an assigned seat. Spirit Airlines charges up to $50 for this. If you don't pay the fee, they assign you a seat at random on the aircraft. This is different from Southwest, where you select any open seat upon boarding. On Spirit, you'll be given a seat row/number, but it's picked randomly and they don't group travelers on the same reservation together.

There are many forms of securities fraud that exist. The one that's talked about the most is insider trading, when someone makes trades using an advantage gained from having material non-public information. Insider trading made big news in 2011 when former Galleon Group hedge fund manager Raj Rajaratnam was sentenced to 11 years behind bars, the longest sentence ever handed down by a U.S. Federal Judge for insider trading.

Another form of securities fraud that exists is the "pump and dump." In this stock scheme, a person or a group of people buy a stock and they drive the price higher. This is accomplished by marketing or promoting (pumping) the stock to others, often using false promises. This manipulation leads to the stock price moving higher. The fraudsters often use the growth in the stock price to convince others to buy, driving the price even higher. Sometimes, the fraudsters use spam emails or social media to spread the message. In the olden days, they often would make phone call to investors. Eventually, though fraudsters then sell (dump) their shares and the selling leads to the price falling. Those who bought the stock near the top end up losing money, while the fraudsters make a lot of money.

The "pump and dump" scheme typically takes place on a stock that has a small market capitalization, and is not listed with an exchange such as the New York Stock Exchange or the NASDAQ. Often "penny stocks" that trade for under $1/share are targeted for a "pump and dump" scheme. When a stock rises in value for $0.05/share to just $0.50/share, that's a 1000% gain. If someone is able to manipulate the price even further, say to $3/share, that gain is 6000%.

It is unlawful in the United States to engage in manipulation of the value of a security. The United States Securities and Exchange Commission is tasked with enforcing regulations that prohibit manipulating the market prices of securities. Those convicted on charges can face fines and jail time. Earlier this year, David Levy was sentenced to 9 years in jail for running a "pump and dump" scheme. Jordan Belfort, who was portrayed by Leonardo DiCaprio in the film The Wolf of Wall Street was sentenced to almost two years in jail as a part of a plea agreement for running a "pump and dump." In some cases, those convinced will have to pay restitution to victims. Unfortunately, in many cases the fraudsters have spent the proceeds and the victims never are made whole.