Romney's tax plan: a comparison

I am the primary breadwinner of a middle class family. We live in a comfortable home in a nice neighborhood, and we paid for that home with a mortgage. We have two vehicles that each have over 100,000 miles on them. My wife works part time to supplement the household income.

Let's say I have a friend who is also the primary breadwinner of what on the surface most would assume is a middle class family. He lives in a nice house in a nice neighborhood, but he does not have a mortgage. The vehicles he and his wife drive are similar to ours. Neither he nor his wife has to work because they have amassed a fortune in the multiple millions of dollars and therefore have more than enough money to live on for several lifetimes.

Just for fun, let's examine how the Romney tax plan would affect each of us.

1. Across the board reduction in tax rates by 20%.

Impact on me: I would save at best a few thousand dollars a year, only because my income is above the median household income in the US. Those closer to the median would see little if any benefit.

Impact on my hypothetical friend: saving a lot more than a few thousand dollars a year.

2. Maintain current tax rates on interest, dividends, and capital gains.

Impact on me: none. I don't exactly make a lot in interest or capital gains.

Impact on my hypothetical friend: none, until you factor in item 3.

3. Eliminate taxes for taxpayers with Adjusted Gross Income below $200,000 a year on interest, dividends, and capital gains.

Impact on me: none, per comment on 2.

Impact on my hypothetical friend: depending on how he manages his portfolio, he could quite easily eliminate all tax liability. Since he has no income from wages and can live on less than $200,000 a year, he could buy and hold securities or sell losers to offset enough of his capital gains such that his AGI never gets above $200,000 a year. Since all his income comes from interest, dividends, and capital gains, despite his significant net worth, he may pay zero dollars in income tax.

4. Eliminate estate tax.

Assuming we were both to die under the Romney plan, Impact on me would be zero, since I'm not worth enough that it matters.

Impact on my hypothetical friend would potentially be significant, though I'm sure he has already reduced the potential for estate taxes through careful planning.

5. Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax.

Impact on me: none.

Impact on my hypothetical friend: it would keep him from having to pay taxes even though he would have otherwise escaped liability through management of his interest, dividends, and capital gains. The AMT would prevent the situation from arising in #3 where someone of significant means has avoided tax liability. Repealing it would allow a lot of wealthy people to avoid more tax than they do already.

Closing comments: lest anyone think that putting more money in my hypothetical friend's pocket will lead to more jobs, let me disabuse you of that notion right away: it won't. He has made his money but isn't looking to start or grow a new business. He's content to just manage his portfolio. Anything less he pays in taxes will just result in a larger number on the statements that his brokerage firm sends each quarter.

Since there is no such thing as a free lunch, the revenue the government would lose by eliminating my hypothetical friend's tax liability would have to be made up for somewhere else, either by raising my taxes (perhaps eliminating the mortgage interest deduction, which would cost me more than a 20% marginal rate reduction saves me) or by cutting programs, perhaps the programs that helped me get through school and become a contributor to the economy in the first place.

Don't let Romney's naked assertions that he knows how the economy works and that you should trust him to solve the problems fool you. He's solving problems alright, he's solving the problem of having to pay taxes for people who are already wealthy. He does nothing to help the working middle class.

Campaign Spokesman

I was invited to be the campaign spokesman for Mitt Romney at a conference on women in aerospace. I think it turned out just as I hoped.

Abstinence only

The Utah legislature passed, among other (whacky) things, a bill defining sex education as abstinence-only. Clearly, abstinence only sex education works, because abstinence only states have the lowest rates of teen pregnancy. This is because teens who have been taught that abstinence is the best method of birth control would never consider having sex outside of marriage.

Abstinence only states have the highest rates of teen pregnancy. Because guess what: people have sex. Not just adult married people, but adolescent people who, although perhaps not mature enough to successfully care for a child, are physically mature enough to bear one.

The irony here is that those of us who will teach our kids the realities of sex and how to protect themselves from unwanted pregnancy and disease, including the fact that the only certain protection is abstinence, aren't the ones who are concerned about having our children receive this instruction in schools. We already talk to our kids about the realities of sex and make sure they understand the risks and consequences of sexual activity.

The kids I'm more concerned about are those that receive no sex education at all other than abstinence (and perhaps the occasional Sunday school lesson in which someone licks the frosting off a cupcake). Because when these kids find themselves in a situation where their partner says something ridiculous such as that floating is OK, they won't know better. And I'd rather see these kids stop by Planned Parenthood before than after.

Observations

Super Bowl: I thought for sure Gronkowski was going to scoop up the tipped Hail Mary pass to give the Pats the win. Six inches out of position. How many cases of a couple inches this way or that led to this result? The Ravens missed field goal in the AFC championship game, the 49er's punt returner brushing the ball with his knee, Mario Manningham's catch on what turned out to be the game winning drive. The list goes on. A game of inches.

Here's what I know from watching Eli Manning: the dude is cool under pressure. I guess he's used to it. Archie's son, Peyton's kid brother. If he didn't get used to pressure early on, he never would have made it. As good as Peyton, Aaron Rodgers, and Tom Brady are, I don't think there's anyone I'd rather have throwing the ball with the game on the line than Eli*.

*Unless Jesus is helping Tim Tebow, then Tim gets the rock.

Lance: Investigation dropped. Meh. Couldn't make anything stick because the statute of limitations had expired. I think that's why we have the statute of limitations. Do I think he cheated? Of course. At this point does it really matter? Not much.

Contador: Two year ban handed down two years after the fact. Perhaps this would have been appropriate two years ago. But a full sanction at this point is a little absurd, especially given the minimal amount of clenbuterol in his system. His results from 2010 and 2011 are relegated, but at least he's eligible to compete in August of this year. Had CAS started the clock ticking on the ban now, it would have been more of a kangaroo court than it has been already.

I'm glad to see that cycling is at least acting like it takes doping seriously. I was going to say I would hate to live in a society that had a police force as draconian as the WADA, but then I thought about the Patriot act, border fences, billions of dollars and thousands of lives lost in retaliation for one tragedy, full body imaging at the airport, and the fact that I can't even carry a bottle of water onto a plane. Killing flies with cannons.

Sign the petition

Talisker Corporation, parent company of The Canyons ski area, is trying to make an end run around the public approval process for ski area expansion with the support of Utah's congressional delegation. Please click the link and sign the petition to tell Congress to stop.

If you want a little more in-depth about what's going on, Andrew McLean has a thoughtful description. Save our Canyons have also offered their perspective.

Monday greetings

Haven't stopped thinking of this all day for some reason.

Out of sync

I was about four paragraphs into a really terrible blog post when I realized that not only was it not going to be worth reading, it wasn’t even worth finishing.

Instead, may I direct your attention to what Matt B. has to say. Whether you live in a state governed by a backward legislature or not, his insights into the immigration “problem” are spot on. For a government that seems unafraid to invoke morality or even divine authority as a justification for certain policies, how they interpret the second great commandment and treat their fellow man seems a bit, shall we say, out of sync.

Happy Holidays…is what terrorists say

Happy Holidays…
…is what terrorists say.
Merry Christmas from Jack and Avery

So reads the Christmas card being sent by Jack Donaghy and Avery Jessop on 30 Rock. And in a season dominated by “Happy Holidays” and “Season’s Greetings,” it’s an unusual sentiment. The fictional Jack and Avery celebrate Christmas, and they don’t care who knows.

I celebrate Christmas. My view of it is somewhat nuanced and complex, though. I don’t believe the 25th is the calendar date on which an eight pound, six-ounce, newborn infant Jesus, with his golden fleece diapers, don’t even know a word yet, just a little infant and so cuddly, but still omnipotent, came into this world.

But I do celebrate the message of peace, tolerance, and compassion attributed to Jesus, even if I view the account in Luke 2 as more mythology and allegory than history. Nevertheless, if someone sends me a Christmas card depicting an infant in a manger on a winter night with shepherds and wise men standing watch, I don’t consider it cause to start an argument.

Moreover, if someone doesn’t celebrate Christmas at all but wishes me a happy Chanukah, Kwanzaa, Festivus, Winter solstice, or anything else, I’m happy to embrace the good in whatever message is associated with that celebration and wish the same upon them in return.


A free and open discussion of one another’s beliefs increases understanding and mutual respect and decreases the narrow-mindedness that leads to hate, bigotry, and violence. The irony is that we may publicly demur from using specific words for the sake of political corectness, while in private (or not) take actions that are in reality far more harmful.

A Christmas or other holiday card for many is the most public statement they make all year. It’s the vehicle for reaching out to distant friends and family to wish them well and to remind them that they are cared for. Such a gesture, regardless of whether the sentiment expressed is consistent with the recipient’s belief system, is no cause for offense. Instead, it’s an opportunity to share the good of whatever belief system we espouse, whether it’s divine or humanistic at its core. And as the recipient of such a message, it may prompt us to learn about others, what they believe, and what motivates them to be better people.

As we read, write, speak, and listen, may we use our words to open minds, to enhance understanding, and to foster mutual respect. And through our actions may we be merciful, comfort those who mourn, and be peacemakers. Merry Christmas.

Vote for justice

Just got back from Cyclocross Nationals yesterday. Raced lousy but had a great time. I’ll pull together a report shortly. Until then, here’s a thought-provoking video appropriate for this season when we celebrate compassion, mercy, and peace.

How email will lead to the demise of this country

People are stupid and will believe almost anything you tell them. For instance, in the last few months I’ve had people forward me emails telling me that if I eat cake made from expired mix* or answer my cell phone while it’s plugged in, I may die.

*Why you would want to eat anything made from a mix, especially cake, is beyond me. But that’s neither here nor there to my point.

And while people not answering their cell phones when plugged in or not eating expired cake mixes have no long-term consequences one way or another for the welfare of humanity, they’re symptomatic of endemic American gullibility that will result in significant long-term consequences, if it hasn’t already.

The problem is that people believe the garbage that they get in forwarded emails without checking the facts. There are a few of us fact-checkers out there, so email forwarders have started prefacing their messages with “Note that it's confirmed on Snopes.” The sender/propagandist is banking on the likelihood that the recipient won’t take the time to actually click over to Snopes and get the real story, because what’s on Snopes very likely differs from what’s actually in the email. But this supposed verification makes the message that much more believable.

Back in the days before Snopes and email, these rumors didn’t spread nearly so fast, but they were still around. I remember being told by a certain family member that buying Liz Claiborne clothing was bad because Liz Claiborne had made a deal with the devil. The person telling me this assured me it was true because she had been told this from a woman at church. Because nobody at church has ever lied or exaggerated about anything.

Today, however, the rumors spread faster because people can easily add dozens of friends to the recipient list of an email and forward it along. And when these emails are spreading a message of hate or misinformation, they’re truly dangerous.

I said at the beginning that people will believe almost anything you tell them. And while many will believe anything they read in a forwarded email, I said “almost anything” because too many of these same people dismiss what they hear from reputable journalists as “leftist propaganda.” This ridiculous gullibility and the abject ignorance it fosters will result in the election of incompetent policymakers and the eventual demise of this country.

What’s worse is that it’s not just the email forwards spreading the message of hate, but radio and television as well. As detailed in this must-read article in the New York Times, Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck drop “suggestions, hints, and notes that people are ‘questioning things.’” Their audience take this innuendo as gospel, and before you know it, 27 percent of the Republican party doesn’t believe the president is a citizen, even when ample evidence exists to the contrary. (The irony of this is that Limbaugh and Beck imply people are questioning things—actually using critical thinking skills.)

Further to this point, according to the Times article, 46 percent of the Republican party believe the lie that Obama is a Muslim, and a growing faction in the party is under the false impression that the TARP bailout for banks is an Obama deal when in fact we have his Republican predecessor, George W. Bush, to thank for that one.

At the root of this problem is a general lack of critical thinking skills. We’re all guilty of it: we’re told from a source we trust or at least want to trust that the world works a certain way, and we accept this as truth without questioning it. Many accept these so-called truths out of wishful thinking; they want the world to be a certain way, and so when they’re told so by someone who seems credible, they believe that’s the way it is.

Unfortunately, just as wishful thinking won’t decrease the unemployment rate or clean up the oil in the gulf or end the traffic jam in China or rescue the Chilean miners, neither will it make a fairy tale come true. My daughter desperately wants to believe in fairies, but at some point she’s going to have to come to terms with the fact that Tinkerbell is only real in Disney films, and she’s never actually granted anyone a wish. Perhaps it’s time for the rest of us to start making sure the Tinkerbells we encounter are real before we forward the email Tinkerbell supposedly wrote to everyone we know.

My day in court

Well it turns out I don’t get to join the hallowed ranks of the misdemeans, dug, Elden, and Brandon. I got a ticket a few weeks ago for driving with revoked registration. Sounds worse than it is, though at its worst, I’m still not even sure it’s a misdemeanor. I hadn’t switched my auto insurance from Idaho to Utah, so even though I was insured, the Utah DMV didn’t think I was.

I was fortunate at the time I got the ticket not to have my car impounded—I had just enough valid paperwork to avoid getting impounded, but not enough to get out of the ticket. After a quick trip to the DMV where the clerk was amazingly kind and patient even though it was 10 minutes to six on a Friday, I had adequate paperwork and decided to take that to court in order to try and avoid the $70 fine.

When I called the courts in South Salt Lake, they told me to come in on the 25th at 8:30. When I arrived this morning for my appointment, I realized that “appointment” is a term they use pretty fast and loose, as I would actually be waiting in line with all these people.

And there were that many again more waiting on the other side of the room for their turn to see the judge. Or perhaps it was that I didn’t have an appointment at all and only thought I did because I’m used to a life of convenience and ease, not the hardships of being a criminal.

After passing through the metal detector and pretending to turn off my phone, I sat in the courtroom while the prosecutor read through all the cases and asked whether we would be pleading guilty or whether we wanted to talk with him before entering a not-guilty plea. I should have responded “not-guilty” just for dramatic effect, but when he called my name, I just said “I’d like to speak with you.”

Of course, I had to take my turn to speak with him, as I wasn’t the only one trying to get off with a reduced charge. So while I waited, I got to listen to all the other cases being heard.

The first thing I learned is that if you want to get to the front of the line, hire a lawyer. It turns out that the courts are respectful of the fact that lawyers get paid by the hour and that lawyers bill for the entire time that they’re in court, whether they’re arguing the case or twiddling their thumbs awaiting the chance to do so.

The kid in the dress shirt and tie with the lawyer at his side and his dad anxiously watching in the peanut gallery got to go first. And I’m guessing the $600+ he has to pay in fines for his drug possession charge are only the half of it, and that he’s got at least that much more to pay the attorney. But the attorney spared him jail time and perhaps greater fines, so in the end, everybody won.

I learned that the fine for driving without a license, a charge highly correlated with those who needed an interpreter when speaking to the judge, is much lower than the fine for driving with a suspended license. And that the judge has a lot less sympathy for the suspended license cases. I also learned that if you are charged with driving without a license, you ought not to drive yourself to court, as one of the morning’s defendants had chosen to do. He said he didn’t have any other way to get there, but the judge reminded him that he could walk. In his case, she had no sympathy.

When my turn came with the city attorney, I explained what had happened, showed him my insurance cards and valid registration, and waited, wondering what my fate would be and whether this was still going to cost me $70 as well as a wasted morning in court. He spent what was for me an anxious ten seconds looking things over and said “OK, we’ll dismiss the charges then.”

I still had to return to the courtroom and wait for the judge to actually tell me the charges were dismissed. So I sat down (this is when I heard the guy tell her he had driven to court without a license, so it was totally worth it) and waited.

As it happens, the judge is also respectful of those whose charges are dismissed, as she called my name next. I stood, and she said “charges are dismissed, you can go.” I never even turned towards the bench, I just said “thank you” and walked out of the room.

Before I left, I glanced back to notice that every single person there had a facial expression indicating they really wanted to be me at that moment. I was also relieved when I got to the parking lot to find that Elwood was not waiting for me in an old cop car, and I could just drive myself to work.

Oregon

Regular readers know that my writing is more regular than some of my readers. Except lately, I haven’t been so regular. No, I don’t need a suppository to loosen the sluices on some writer’s block. I’ve just been on vacation. But seeing as how I’ve posted where I live on this blog, and I don’t have a brother Ray with a vicious dog to house sit for me while I’m away, I figured I wouldn’t tip my hand to would-be criminals about my extended absence until after the fact.

And I suppose, since reading blogs is about voyeurism just as much as writing them is about exhibitionism, you’re perhaps wondering where I went. To Oregon, that’s where. Oregon, the state that Alex has so recently mentioned manages to land itself atop all those silly “places rated” lists. Turns out there are some pretty good reasons why.

Oregon’s kind of an odd, conflicted, place, because it’s divided into two distinct sections by the Cascade range, and this range divides the climate, both physically and politically. The West side of the range is wet and green and liberal. The East side, dry and brown and conservative. But somehow the policymakers manage to get along well enough (or more likely the liberals bully the conservatives sufficiently) to make some public policy decisions I think the rest of the country would do well to emulate.

• Lower speed limits. First thing you notice upon entering the state is that you better slow down if you don’t want to get a ticket. Interstates have a max speed of 65 versus 75 in neighboring states (or in some stretches of Utah, 80!?). Highways have a max speed of 55. Sure it takes you longer to get where you’re going, but it also helps you take in the lovely scenery and use less fuel. And unless you’re an over-the road trucker who can’t safely drive above 65 anyway, you’re likely not in that big of a hurry to get across the state that slowing down a bit is a big deal.
• Full-service fuel stations. The fuel you save costs ever-so-slightly more than in neighboring states, because a service station attendant is going to pump it for you; you can’t pump your own. This is intended to create jobs, but it’s also nice for travelers, as the attendants are usually helpful in providing route data, and they always cleaned our windshield.
• Concise road signs. Oregon road signs get right to the point: Speed 55; Elk; Rocks. They tell you what you need to know and don’t leave you wondering like you do with those picture signs whether the quadruped depicted is a deer, an elk, a pronghorn, or, in the case of several signs we saw in Nevada (and I’m not even kidding here—we actually saw them foraging near the road), a burro.
• No sales tax. Price marked is price paid. Sales taxes are regressive, and if anything, discourage commerce. Which, for all the genius policymakers out there, is not what you want to do if you’re trying to stimulate the economy.
• Pothole hotlines. If you notice a pothole in the road, the city of Portland has a hotline you can call, with the number posted on signs throughout the city, to have the street department come fix it. Nice.
• Slow vehicle pull-outs. It’s one thing to provide a pullout lane for slower vehicles. But the fact that slow vehicles actually use them is what makes them really terrific.
• State parks. Oregon state park campgrounds all have showers. We stayed at one that was a short walk from the campground to a lovely beach that never had more than 15 people on it, and that includes our family of five. Nevermind that while we were at this campground, a five-year-old boy also went missing. That part was a bit scary, but it ended well.
• Bike friendliness. Portland is a bike-friendly city. Duh. Lots of people ride there as a means of everyday transportation. Some of the traffic signals even have bike-specific signals to allow bikes to get from one bike lane to another. Anything that encourages people to ride where they could otherwise drive is a good thing. (Incidentally, I didn’t ride at all while on vacation—took the whole week off the bike. But I did walk rather than drive whenever I could.)
• Weird forest people. OK, this one’s not so much a public policy decision, but I thought I’d include it anyway, because I think some of the public policy fosters this culture. Or maybe the culture fosters the policy. But anyway, Oregon has some weird people. The fact that ghillie suits were displayed in shop windows in one town is evidence enough. I’ve even heard Portland described as where ambition goes to die. Free ridership is the major flaw in many liberal public policies, but anywhere you encounter self-described druids alongside off-the-grid militia types on a regular basis only adds to the charm if you ask me.

So anyway, we like Oregon, the mosquitoes that did their best to eat us alive at Crater Lake notwithstanding. Probably not enough to ever move there, but it was nice. Nice enough that we were talking about going back before we even got home. The scenery was pretty good, too.

Drawing the line

If you go fast, they accuse you of cheating. If you go slow, they say you’re not professional and you didn’t train hard enough.

-Fabian Cancellara, after winning Stage 1 TT at 2010 Tour de Suisse

I hate doping. I’ve made no secret of that. I was reminded of how much I hate doping while reading posts at Rabid Runner and by Mark T. via Church of the Big Ring today.

I made similar comments on both, the essence of which is that if performance enhancing drugs were legalized and therefore no longer cheating, as has been proposed in some circles, then they would make their way to the amateur ranks, as all things PRO tend to do. The decision would no longer be “do I dope so I can compete in Europe or go back to racing in the US?” but “do I dope so I can upgrade to the next category or resign myself to being a career Cat. X?”

I like to pretend to try to be competitive at the local amateur level, and I don't want to dope. I hate needles. I don't want to stick needles in my arm or butt before a race. I don't want to race knowing that I'm only as fast as I am because I put chemicals in my body. It would be hollow and not worthwhile and would take something I love to do and suck the joy and satisfaction out of it. I could not muster the passion to suffer as I do on and off the bike under such circumstances. (And really, what is bike racing without the suffering?)

But where do you draw the line? It’s fun to pretend that doping is cut and dry and you’re either doing it or you’re not. Is it really that simple?

The UCI has set bike weight limits at a minimum of 6.8kg. So if you’re riding a bike that weighs less than that in a local race that doesn’t weigh bikes, is that doping?

Caffeine has been shown to enhance performance, indeed exceeding certain levels constitutes a doping positive, so am I doping when I pop a Red Bull prior to a crit?

EPO and blood transfusions are used to increase hematocrit levels, the concentration of red cells in the blood, thus augmenting aerobic capacity. Sleeping in a hypobaric chamber (altitude tent) or at altitude stimulates a similar response (though not of the same magnitude). My house is at 6300 feet, and yes, I thought about the effect this would have on my hematocrit when I bought it. Is that doping?

Allessandro Petacchi missed Le Tour in 2007 for taking too many puffs on his albuterol inhaler. He had a therapeutic use exemption for the drug (as do something like 2/3 of the pro peloton—who knew asthma was so pervasive amongst endurance athletes); he just failed to use “utmost caution” and took too much. I have asthma and have had poor results when I forget to take albuterol before competition. Other times I’ve probably failed to use “utmost caution” and taken too much. Is this doping?

Power meters allow an athlete to test him or herself and know exactly what kind of power can be generated for a given duration, enabling pacing strategies that are much more precise, which is especially helpful in time trials or when climbing. Does using this technology to your advantage constitute doping?

In 1989 when Greg Lemond beat Laurent Fignon in the final time trial of Le Tour, Lemond was using aero bars, similar to a modern time trial setup, while Fignon rode old school in the drops. Lemond is a vocal critic of doping, but did his bike setup give him an unfair advantage?

The list goes on and on of course. One argument against performance enhancing drugs is that they’re dangerous. But they’re less dangerous than obesity, tobacco, alcohol abuse, or air pollution, each of which by itself is and always will be a far greater public health concern. Another argument is that it gives an unfair advantage. But could not the same be said if one competitor has power meter, carbon frame, and aero wheels when another can’t afford such equipment?

I’ll obviously utilize any legal advantage I have access to, and yet I hate doping and will go on hating doping. I hope there are some huge, visible busts that come out of the Landis allegations. I hope the riders roll on each other. I hope it becomes an out-of-control wildfire that burns down not just cycling, but the major sports like football, American football, baseball, and basketball. I hope it gets to the point that riders go beyond a silly two-minute delay or soft pedaling around finishing circuits and make a real protest, like refusing to line up and race against someone they know is dirty.

Problem is, can anyone can say definitively and precisely what “dirty” is?

Respect, dignity, and maybe just a bit of compassion

When I moved from Idaho to Utah, I didn’t think Utah politics would drive me crazy for the simple reason that there are so many right-wing nutjobs in Idaho that I didn’t think Utah could possibly be worse. Well I was wrong. Apparently it gets worse the further south you go, as Arizona has now become a full-on police state where you can now be guilty of trespassing for breathing in a public place.

In the immortal words of Jack White:

White Americans, what?
Nothing better to do?
Why don't you kick yourself out
you're an immigrant too.

The toilets and floors in my office building get cleaned every night by a couple of people who don’t speak much English. They’re thoughtful, hard-working, and polite. I don’t know if they’re documented, and I don’t care. I don’t want that job. I don’t know any natural-born citizen who does. They aren’t committing any crimes, they’re just working hard to provide for their families. Why do people get so worked up about that?

And while Arizona takes the cake for draconian discrimination against “immigrants” (who look more like the native people of this continent than those making the stupid laws—wonder why?), Utah is itself far from saintly and Good Samaritanish in this regard either. First of all, Representative Stephen Sandstrom (R-Orem), has indicated he wants to draft his own law modeled after Arizona’s.

Sandstrom claims "I don't want anyone to be under the impression that this is targeting a specific group of people. That's an aspect I want to make sure has nothing to do with this bill." Well then what, precisely, is your intent? Racism obfuscated by rhetoric is still racism. Makes me want to move into his district just so I can vote against him. Or even run against him, which I’d never considered until just now—not that a pinko-commie liberal heretic earn-your-turns tree-hugging bike racer type could ever get elected in Orem, but I’d still be tempted to run just on principle, I’m so pissed off.

Rebecca Chavez-Houcke (D-Salt Lake City), apparently one of the few voices of reason in the legislature responded: "Despite the fact that most constitutional experts believe SB1070 is very constitutionally problematic, for some reason Utahns have to jump on the bandwagon, posthaste." Is anyone really all that surprised at the bandwagon jumping?

Even without an Arizona-style bill that would turn local police into the intermountain west’s own KGB, Utah nevertheless has turned getting a driver’s license into an exercise in proving one’s legal residency. That combined with requiring the written test only to be taken in English has proven a huge burden to immigrants, including those residing and working here legally. No wonder we’re all supposed to pack up and walk to Missouri for the second coming—Jesus doesn’t have papers, so even if he came to Utah first, he’d get harassed like all the other immigrants and would have to leave on foot, having been denied a driver’s license.

While we’re on the subject of treating our fellow man with class and dignity, how about Vinokourov getting booed as he crossed the line at Liege-Bastogne-Liege on Sunday? Tomika can snort all the coke he wants, and the Belgian fans turn a blind eye because “it’s not performance-enhancing.” Yet Vino can pass 30+ doping controls since returning from his suspension, and he gets booed for winning a race.

I’m not saying Vino is clean. I don’t know one way or another. But he can’t be any more dirty than Contador, Boonen, Armstrong, or the Schleck brothers. So how about respecting the great performances until we have reason not to? Vino is a great racer, and he’s as fun to watch as anyone who’s ever pedaled a bicycle. So respect that. It’s not like people are booing Dwyane Wade even though his shoulders are unnaturally large. Doping is an issue in all professional sports—it’s just that cycling actually takes real steps to try to control it. The big three leagues in the United States are too distracted counting their ticket sales, merchandising, and TV contract money to worry about who’s on HGH.

Finally, it’s not all rants today, though this last bit of news is not likely of interest to anyone but me. I got the following message in my inbox yesterday:

Dear [SkiBikeJunkie],
The following request to change your USCF category has been approved and processed by USA Cycling:
xxxxxxxx - 2010-04-26 13:21
Member: [SkiBikeJunkie]
License: Road Racer
Request to change category from Cat 4 to Cat 3

Coincidentally, I had 13 qualifying starts in five months of racing last year when I upgraded from Cat. 5 to Cat. 4. Since then, I’ve had 13 qualifying starts in five months of racing before upgrading from Cat. 4 to Cat. 3. Don’t think this is a trend, though—this is the last upgrade I am ever requesting. I’ve seen what the 1/2 guys can do, and I’ll have my hands plenty full getting spit out the back of the threes.

Addiction

I’m an addict. This confession is implicit in the name of the blog. I like to think that as addictions go, mine are pretty benign. But “healthy addiction” is probably an oxymoron.

Big news in celebrity gossip is that Jesse James has checked himself into rehab. Tiger did the same thing to deal with his addiction. What I’d like to know, though, is what man isn’t addicted to sex? Jesse and Tiger certainly have problems, but it’s not that they like sex too much. It’s that they have exceptionally poor taste. I mean they’ve respectively forsaken this:

 

For this?

 

Nasty. I hope the therapy they’re getting is to fix their sense of beauty. Because aside from being unbelievably stupid, that’s the only explanation I can come up with for choosing to get anywhere near either of those women without a hazmat suit.

Of course, there’s no accounting for taste when it comes to addiction. Case in point, a recent study suggests that people can become addicted to hostess ding dongs. And it’s not just that they like ding dongs. It’s a full on, chemical-based addiction, just like cocaine. Ding dongs cause a dopamine release. The body likes the dopamine but develops a tolerance to a certain level of ding dong consumption, so the user has to eat more and more ding dongs to get the same high. I’m not making this up.

I used to do a little but a little wouldn't do
So the little got more and more
I just keep tryin' to get a little better
Said the little better than before

Perhaps Dunford double chocolate donuts will take on a street name. Too bad Mr. Brownstone is taken.

I’ve got no problem if people like sweet, fatty foods. I like sweet, fatty foods. I like the stuff Rachel makes better than what comes in a package (and thankfully I’m the one that married her, because it would be a little weird if I were just hanging around in her kitchen waiting for a cookie with her husband watching). But there’s also some tasty stuff in a package. I’ve just learned, out of necessity, because I used to be incredibly fat, to enjoy them in moderation.

I get a little bugged, though, when people think fast food, soda, and candy are harmless, but other things that may be no more addictive are evil. Sure, alcoholism, lung cancer, and drug abuse are all public health issues, but so are type 2 diabetes, obesity, and heart disease. And while nobody I know would consider giving cigarettes to a baby, childhood obesity is a major concern.

Here in Utah, our lawmakers are fond of vice taxes targeting potentially-addictive substances. Just in the last legislative session, a $1 per pack addition to the cigarette tax was passed. The cigarette tax I’m sure was presented as a means of simultaneously discouraging people from smoking and raising money for education—both worthwhile objectives. But if they were really serious about making education a priority and improving public health, we’d see a tax on sugary foods, ice cream, and diet coke. Maybe then we could reduce class sizes and pay our teachers something approaching the type of compensation they deserve.

But then again, the first step to recovery is admitting you have a problem.

Review of the Oscars (or ‘82nd Academy Awards,’ if you must)

Okay, so I really am going to blog about the Oscars. But that’s only because I need more time for a post that will do justice to the awesome skiing this weekend. Which really just means I need to download pictures before I post. Because this is going to end up being way longer than the skiing post anyway.

But before I get to the Oscar post, I wanted to mention the surreal experience I had while running at lunchtime today.

When I run during the workday, I run from my office towards City Creek canyon, where I can be on trails within 10 minutes. It’s nice to be on dirt and feel like I’m out of the city even though I’m really not.

My proximity to the city was apparent today when I heard carillon bells as I ran back towards downtown. This struck me as doubly ironic, not that I was hearing bells, but for what they were playing. You see, the first building one encounters at the mouth of City Creek canyon is the headquarters of the LDS church. Across from that is Temple Square, and across from that is the conference center. If one hears church bells in that area, one is naturally left to suppose they came from one of the several city blocks that is occupied by nothing but church-owned buildings.

I was left thinking that someone from the church really has a sense of humor, because the church bells were playing John Philip Sousa’s The Liberty Bell, better known as the theme song to Monty Python’s Flying Circus.

Obviously church bells playing the theme song to Monty Python’s Flying Circus is a tad ironic. But it becomes doubly ironic when one recalls the church bell sketch. I thought for a second that maybe I had taken the red pill after all.

OK, so that probably should have been its own post, but I still want to mention the Oscars. I realize that the Oscars don’t need me to validate them, but I watched the broadcast, so you get to hear what I thought of the program anyway. Or you can just skip this post entirely and go read something interesting or funny instead.

These are my thoughts. I’m laying my raw reactions on the table, but bear in mind I only saw two of the ten (?!) films nominated for best picture, so my reactions are based on the Oscar ceremony and my hardly objective assumptions more than the films and performances themselves.

Most preposterous acceptance speech goes to: Mo’Nique. The academy is fond of giving awards to films or performances that touch on sensitive political or social issues or that portray the dark underbelly of humanity. Among this year’s supporting actress nominees, Mo’Nique was the only one in such a film. So when she said her award was “about the performance and not the politics” I thought WTF?

I’ll concede that “politics” may have been referring to the active campaigning some nominees do for their awards, but that’s not the vibe I got when I looked at who else was nominated. Even if it was, by saying your award is about the performance, you’re basically rubbing the other nominees’ faces in it. Not my favorite moment.

Lifetime achievement awards go to: Jeff Bridges and Sandy Bullock. Like I said, I saw two of ten films nominated for best picture. So I didn’t actually see Crazy Heart or The Blind Side. I’m sure they are fine films. But best actor and actress in a leading role this year both really smelled more of lifetime achievement. In Jeff’s case, it’s probably legitimate. He’s done some good work, he’s a legacy case (which the academy loves), and this was probably a performance good enough that he could win when the other factors were also taken into consideration.

Bullock is a rom com actress who I think at one point even said regarding the academy awards something along the lines of “that’s not the sort of work I do.” The academy figured it was her one shot, and all the other nominees had either been there before, were likely to be there again, or were perhaps too likely to be a flash in the pan to deserve the win.

Pot calling the kettle black award goes to: ABC and the award ceremony producers. As I mentioned, the Academy doesn’t seem to shy away from social and political causes. So when the award for best documentary was presented to The Cove and director Louis Psihoyos was played off the stage and the camera immediately cut away after the film’s protagonist held up a sign saying “Text Dolphin to 44144,” I thought it was a bit odd.

Sure, the sign waving was a bit gauche, but documentary filmmakers take on these projects because they want to give voice to what they consider a worthwhile cause. And the only time the films get any meaningful voice at all (no, this blog is not a voice—it’s the rantings of a would-be village idiot that you just happen to be reading) is if they win awards. I thought the director should have at least been allowed his 45 seconds of fame before getting ushered off the stage.

How awesome does it feel when the underdog wins? award goes to: The Hurt Locker. Jim Caple perfectly summed up how I feel about this year’s best picture winner. I’ll also go on record saying that Kathryn Bigelow is the hottest winner of best director ever. She’s an attractive woman to be sure, but this has more to do with the fact that I’m not gay, so all the other winners never really did anything for me. Alec Baldwin seemed quite fond of her as well.

Of course it’s awesome that a woman won for best director. Even if she’s apparently eight feet tall. And even if I pissed in the bowl of glass-ceiling-shattering awesomeness that is a woman winning by mentioning that she’s also hot.

What I don’t get, though, is why there were 10 best picture nominees. I didn’t think either of the films I saw were best picture material. Or even close for that matter. Can’t imagine they were the worst two. Or why they needed ten if there weren’t ten in the running.

The Lazarus award goes to: Alec Baldwin. In ten years the guy has gone from Thomas and the Magic Railroad to hosting the Academy Awards. In fact, I would have liked to see more of Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin. I realize the ceremony always runs long, so they tried to keep it on time this year, but those guys were fantastic. I also missed the best original song performances like years past, but I really only wanted to see two of the five. (Of course I would have only watched two of five thanks to Tivo anyway. Not taking anything away from Ben, but Tivo is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.)

If I hadn’t already reaffirmed my status as a typical (with all the negative connotations that word has come to convey) white, chauvinistic male, my public admiration of Alec Baldwin has sealed it. (His character on 30 Rock is hilarious, BTW.)

So there you have it: my not very politically correct take on the Oscars. Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to check the mail, as my invitation to be part of the Academy for next year is sure to arrive any day now.

Arizona

Last Friday the Junkie family headed out for a long weekend in Arizona. If there’s anything our family could call our collective superpower, it’s our ability to tolerate long car trips. When we lived in Boise, we made frequent trips to Utah to see family, so five hours in the car became de rigueur for the kids. It’s about 12 hours to Phoenix, which is a little more to take on, but they handled it with aplomb.

Part of our success was based on a strategy of dividing the trip up into digestible chunks with stops for interesting things to see or tasty things to eat in between. For instance, on the way there, we stopped for dinner in Las Vegas then again at the Hoover dam.

When I was 18 I made a road trip with some friends that took us across the Hoover dam in the middle of the night. We all stood on the edge of the guard rail and peed off. This time I stood behind the guard rail and looked down and can’t even imagine standing up on it today. Not to mention the Dept. of Homeland Security wouldn’t let me. Soon we won’t even be driving over the dam but over the massive bridge under construction to bypass it.

Just before arriving in Phoenix, we encountered a bunch of people running along the side of the road in the dark. It was the Ragnar relay. I’ve actually considered joining a team to do the Wasatch back sometime, but having now been reminded that you run at night, in the dark, I’m not so sure. Mountain biking in the dark I’ll do. Ski tours that start in the dark are fine. Running along a highway with traffic in the dark, not so much. Rachel’s friend Kate did it, though, and had a great time. So maybe there’s something to it.

Our purposes for traveling to Phoenix were two-fold. Rachel was there to visit her grandmother and other family members. I was there to ride my mountain bike. UTRider’s brother Paul lives in Scottsdale and is a way cool guy to hang out with (we've skied together in the past), so I was happy he agreed to be my tour guide on the local trails. I have a great network of trails adjacent to my neighborhood, but I think Paul has me beat.

Rachel had the camera, so I didn’t get any pictures of the ride, but I lifted these pictures (as well as the one at the top of the post) of the trails we rode from UTRider’s site to give you an idea of what it was like. I was geeking out big time about all the desert plants, but I don’t really know anything about them. Go check out Alex’s awesome series on the Sonoran Desert if you’d like to actually learn something.

After the ride, I hung out at the pool with the kids and really wanted to take a nap but let them coax me into the water instead. This was followed by pizza at Rachel’s aunt’s house. Sonoran singletrack, swimming, and pizza. My batteries were recharged in one day. Oh, did I mention Rachel’s aunt has an orchard in her backyard? Bringing home 50 lbs of fresh citrus was nice too. The kids had fun picking it.

Sunday afternoon we went shopping before driving up to the biggest ditch in the world, also known as the Grand Canyon. We got there in time to snap a few pics before the sun went down.

Monday was more Grand Canyon sightseeing.

We stopped to check out these ancient ruins, even though they were mostly covered with snow. The museum near the ruins was fascinating but small enough not to exceed my limited attention span.

Back in the car and back north towards home, with a quick stop at Glen Canyon dam on the way. I haven’t seen Glen Canyon dam since 1983, just three years after the dam that was completed in 1964 finally held back enough water to “fill” Lake Powell, and when the spillways were shooting water hundreds of feet out into the canyon because of the floods that year. Things are a little different now. Things are a lot different than the float trip Edward Abbey wrote about in Desert Solitaire. I wonder what exactly the Bureau of Reclamation is reclaiming and from whom.

We were always on the go packing what was really a week’s worth of travel and sightseeing into four days, but having the kids skip two days of school seemed a lot more reasonable than skipping five. Given the choice of staying home or a whirlwind long weekend trip, I’ll choose the trip.

Enough already

Today I’m featuring a guest post written by none other than my dad. It should be noted that my dad and I do not see eye to eye when it comes to politics. And yet, what he’s written here is all about politics, and I couldn’t agree more.

I begin each morning with a perusal of a number of web sites to get my fix of the morning's news. This morning one of the site's headlines was “Obama planning to build Brits a new billion dollar embassy.” Another site read, "new home sales at an all time low." Still another site talked about the Republicans having a banner quarter in fundraising and were blowing millions of dollars on limos, private jets, lavish parties, etc.

We are in an economic mess that is getting worse with each passing day. A new survey gives congress only a ten percent approval rating. W's approval rating was in the toilet and Barack's is going down hill faster than a gold medal winning Olympic skier.

We were fortunate to have had two reasonably fiscally responsible presidents in Reagan and Clinton. We even had a surplus with Clinton.

George Bush was fiscally irresponsible and Barack Obama is W on steroids. I remember Mark getting so angry at Bush for his reckless spending. He must be going nuts with our current Washington crew. (He’s right—it is driving me nuts.)

I grew up a poor farm boy and was taught that if you don't have the money, you don't spend it. My father borrowed $30K to buy the family farm. That amount of money kept both my parents awake at night until they finally paid it off.

My economic education is as follows: Income equals money coming in, spending equals money going out, extra money goes into a savings account. Money going out should not exceed money coming in. We only borrow when we have to and never borrow more than we can make the payments on. Credit cards are not used as a savings account and must be paid back within the month they are used. (Sometimes the payback time can exceed a month but should never be out of reason.)

Our government's economic education is as follows: Tax the folks as much as possible to increase the money coming in. Use the money that comes in for entitlement programs and earmarks so that the folks will vote you back into office. If there is not enough money to do what you want, spend it anyway. No need to balance the budget because we can increase taxes if we need more money. If we still need more money we can borrow it from China or print it. We can solve every problem by spending more money even if we don't have it.

Where is FDR who celebrated his inauguration with a few turkey sandwiches for a small group of people because the government did not have the money for a lavish celebration? All of this money has to be paid back. It will be paid back by my children and grandchildren. The day will come when your taxes will be more than one half of your income.

Why are George W. Bush and Barack Obama the way they are? Bush grew up enjoying the fruits of capitalism. There was enough money for everything. If you worked hard enough and were smart enough, you could have all of the money you would ever need. You could even buy a baseball team. When you become president the same scenario continues. The rich boys and their taxes will keep everything afloat. No need to tighten the belt even during tough times.

Obama had a very different experience. He started out life with very little. He was unhappy that there were haves and have nots. That wasn't fair. The rich should share their wealth with the poor. The only medium for this to be done is the government.

The government has lots of money. You can get an Ivy League education on government money. You can become a community organizer and use government grants. You can get things done by using groups such as Acorn. You can use the government to become a powerful person. When you are a powerful person you can take the money from the rich and give to the poor. Even when things are tough you can use government trickery to spend more money. It doesn't matter that there is no money to spend. You can just increase taxes and make up the difference. If you get enough people dependent on you they will always vote for you and you will remain in power. When you are a powerful government person you are special and can spend money on yourself. You can use your jet for photo ops and trips to wherever you want to go. You can decorate the West Wing with many pictures of yourself.

What is happening now transcends political parties. Both parties are at fault. We have one hell of a mess on our hands and the lack of astute leadership is amazing.

Let us not be led by blind tradition. If the government was a corporation led by a board of directors, all of the current leaders, regardless of their political affiliation, would deserve employment termination.

This is my catharsis from reading the morning's headlines. Read it if you wish or not if you wish. It was written as therapy for me.

You’re not the only one who reads the news and feels like he needs therapy. In the immortal words of Donkey (from Shrek) “I just know, before this is over, I'm gonna need a whole lot of serious therapy. Look at my eye twitchin'.”

Thanks for sharing.

Friday soapbox filler post

Today’s post is so boring, I couldn’t even come up with a half-decent title for it. You could quit reading right now, except that what I am going to say actually matters, unlike my usual drivel.

I got a new little something from Smartwool that I’m dying to try out and blog about. Problem is that the snowpack is half of what it normally is this time of year, and mustering the motivation to get up and ski in the dark is difficult under those circumstances. The motivation to get up at 4:30 in the morning is even harder to come by when you think your intestines are going to explode the night before and don’t expect to get much sleep. So instead of making something up about the crappy skiing that I didn’t actually do yesterday or today, I’m going to get up on my soapbox.

Soapbox item #1: texting and giving.

We’re all aware that there was a nasty earthquake in Haiti. As if that country didn’t have it bad enough already. In the past there have been causes I wanted to give to, but actually stuffing a check in an envelope or even going online was just enough of a barrier that I didn’t get around to it.

That excuse is valid no more. Yele Haiti and the Red Cross have both set up systems so that you can donate by sending a text. To donate $5 to Yele Haiti, text “Yele” to 501501. To donate $10 to the Red Cross, text “Haiti” to 90999. Super easy. No more excuses—unless you’re driving. Don’t text while driving cuz you might hit a cyclist. Or a runner. Or another car. Or a fire hydrant and a tree.

Soapbox item #2: turn your key, be idle free.

Hands down the worst part of winter in the Salt Lake or Boise metro areas is inversion. We all complain about it. It may be cool to look at from above, but it’s never pleasant to be in it. When I run at lunchtime, I feel like I’ve exercised AND smoked a pack of cigarettes.

So do something about it—turn off your car if you’re not moving. Your car doesn’t need to be running while you’re at the ATM or getting a burrito. It doesn’t need to be running while you’re loading your skis. It doesn’t need to be running while you’re sitting in a parking lot waiting to pick somebody up. So don’t run it in those situations. You’ll use as much gas in ten seconds of idling as you’ll use to restart the motor. If you’ll be sitting for 30 seconds or more, by all means, shut it off.

A few weeks ago I took JunkieGirl to ballet. Her ballet class is an hour long, and I often just sit in the parking lot and read while she’s in class. Other parents do the same. On this occasion, the guy in the car next to me left his vehicle running FOR THE ENTIRE HOUR. I wanted to go tap on his window and say something, but by the time I was agitated enough to confront him, I was too agitated for it to be a civil encounter and knew it would have been the equivalent of throwing the dog crap in his open door rather than presenting it to him in a civil manner such that there was some chance of attitudes being changed.

Next time I may not be so restrained, so please, turn your vehicle off before it comes to that.

Final, non-soapbox item: new link in the sidebar.

I just added frequent commenter and super-fast marathoner RabidRunner to my links. If you haven’t checked out her blog, her PMS Avenger post is one of the funniest things I’ve ever read. Her other stuff is also refreshing and humorous. If I thought I could keep up and didn’t have a Y chromosome, I’d invite myself on one of her group runs to see if she’s as funny in person as she is in bloglandia.

Happy Friday. Seems like everybody but me has Monday off and is heading to St. George for the weekend. Have fun and travel safe.

Snow, burning books, and white horses

We’ve established that my neighborhood gets a lot of snow. The thing I don’t get, though, is that the most oft-cited reason for people moving out of the neighborhood is the snow. Did they think they’d like it and now they don’t? Or did they just not realize how much there would be?

If the first, that’s understandable. Sometimes things we thought we really liked can get old and grate on our nerves*.

*Like the Killers. I downloaded one of their albums and adored it the first three times I listened. Now whenever one of their songs comes up on a playlist, I shudder, cough, and quickly reach for the skip forward button. My apologies to fans of The Killers—I really did like them at first. I’m hoping I don’t come to feel this way about Band of Horses, because right now I’m really digging their stuff.

But if the second, I don’t get it. Salt Lake City gets a lot of snow to begin with. The ski resorts get way, way more snow than Salt Lake City. The elevation of our neighborhood is closer to that of the ski resorts than the valley below. Did they come look at the house in the summer and think “oh, it’s nice and cool in the summertime at this elevation—I bet the winters are equally mild”?

I’m assuming they had to have looked at the house in the summer, because for six months of the year, the yard would have been covered in snow, and they’d have no excuse not to notice it. Of course, I shouldn’t complain too much about people not thinking the “cool in the summer” thing through to its logical conclusion—I come from a family of seven kids, and if my parents had thought things through during those sacred snooze sessions, it’s likely that I and/or several of my siblings would not exist.

It’s not like I’m shedding tears over most of the people that move out of the neighborhood. Because the people I like also seem to enjoy the snow. And though we’re not a majority, if it’s not obvious that I’m not in the majority and don’t care to be, you haven’t been paying attention.

Speaking of the local majority, I recently checked out an audiobook from the library that I daresay many of these folks probably wouldn’t agree with. As I pulled the first CD out of the jacket, I thought “it really wouldn’t surprise me if one of these CDs were intentionally scratched by some nutjob who thinks he’s doing the world a favor.”

I put the first disc in and pretty much immediately it started skipping. I popped it out and saw a scratch running hole to edge. It looked like it was put there with a car key. I haven’t seen any announcements, but I can’t help but assume these folks have got a book burning scheduled for the coming weeks.

We should be thanking them for their activism, however, because we’re all clearly doomed. In case you haven’t heard, the Constitution is dangling by a thread. A silken one. And it’s about to snap. But the wannabe governor of Idaho is going to get on his white horse and save it, thereby ushering in a new era of illegal wiretaps and foreign invasions made under false pretenses civil liberties.