Re-entering the Blog Atmosphere

Man, you leave town for a few days and next thing you know Bill Richardson is negotiating with space aliens on terms for alien control of the planet. Actually, I wasn't gone that long, and it seems Big Bill wasn't negotiating as much as walking alongside the space aliens. Which, of course, can mean only one thing. Big Bill is working out to lose weight. No, it actually means Big Bill is courting the space alien vote in a blatant grab for votes in the heavily alien-visited trailer parks of New Hampshire.

As for Burque Babble, we're going to attend to the stinky clothes and bags of half-eaten Cheez-Its (okay..confession..the Cheez-Its are down to the crumbs) in the luggage before making an "official" post to this humble, and erratic, blog.

Oh, and there's the work thing...almost forgot about that. It's serious Spring now...just about all the teachers and students have forgotten about school at this point.

Keep walking Big Bill, it looks like you're making in-roads toward that Presidential candidate sveltivity (invented word). And I'm digging those walking shoes, but you might need some moleskin. Alot of it.

Bloggin' is called on account of Gonzaga

Is Blogger back up? Had a few problems yesterday posting, some of which had to do with the blogger.com and others which had to do with Gonzaga, Syracuse and 30 other college basketball teams. Hopefully, website problems are at an end, but Burque Babble is looking at the calendar and it looks like Sunday night before another posting.

Unless there's a killer wireless connection in the woods of the White Mountains outside of Ruidoso. Check back then and we'll find out exactly how cold the mid-March camping was this weekend.

Your New Albuquerque Journal: Humor Meets Experimental Fiction

I don't whether this is illegal or not, but as a public service I'm going to post an entire article/column directly from today's Albuquerque Journal. As you know, the Journal is a paid site, and in copying an entire article and pasting it here, Burque Babble is arguably cheating as it circumvents the right for the Journal to generate revenue from its online presence.

Despite its recognition of possible unethical/illegal action in copying/pasting the Journal article, Burque Babble sees the article as of such vital importance that it cannot desist from doing so. This importance is threefold:

1. The article addresses the subject of possible tax liability initiated by the "Big Bill Winter Heating Rebate Check" , which is of importance to almost all New Mexico taxpayers.

2. Limiting access solely to Journal hard copy and/or online subscribers, daily purchasers, and those who find copies of the Journal crammed under "Redbook" and "Highlights for Children" magazines at the Dentist Office is unfair to those without Journal access, in particular those who do not have the financial means to afford the publication.

3. This Journal article/column is gut-bustingly funny. At least I think it is. I think it's a humor article/column...but read it first and we'll discuss...


So, here it is, today's Journal article/column written by UNM Accounting Professor James R. Hamill and entitled "A Final Word on N.M. Energy Rebates":

YOUR TAXES: Writing a newspaper column can be like sitting in a studio as a guest on a radio show— you wonder if anyone out there is listening.
After writing two columns on the tax treatment of the New Mexico energy tax rebate, I've learned that at least someone reads my column. So I decided to write one last (really) column clarifying my views.
The tax law, like all laws, is not always clear. Courts exist to decide how the law applies to a given fact pattern, and even courts can disagree on the "right" treatment.
I find tax law interesting precisely because there are so many issues that do not have a definitive answer. Debating the correct treatment is fun provided neither side stoops to using four letter words to make their point. Unfortunately, the IRS is punctuating its side of the debate with a four-letter word— "must."
New Mexico tax instructions say you "must" include the rebate as other income on your federal tax return. The IRS has said you can be penalized for not doing so. Both of these statements should be ruled out of order in this debate.
Contrary to some quotes attributed to me, I never said the rebate is absolutely not income; I said it probably is not. Let me explain.
Satchel Paige was a great pitcher. He made the ball move so much that he was often accused of throwing illegal pitches.
Satchel replied: "I never threw an illegal pitch. The trouble is, once in a while I toss one that ain't never been seen by this generation."
Such things confuse us. The rules don't say if they're legal or not.
If you want to quote me on this issue, quote me as saying that the trouble is, the energy rebate has never before been seen by this generation. As a result, no one, including the IRS, really knows if it's income.
The IRS says we have seen it— it's the same as the Alaska permanent dividend fund. I have previously written why I think this analogy is deeply flawed. I believe there is authority in the principles of tax law that it's a reduction of non-deductible energy taxes and is not taxable.
However, the argument that it's taxable is not ridiculous.
The four-letter word "must" is an incorrect way to precede "include in income" when addressing the energy rebate. I could live with "may have to" as the proper language, but such language could be replaced with "may not have to include in income." Either one works.
Two final, and important, points need to be made.
First, the IRS does not write tax law and can't say "must" unless the law quite clearly supports its view. The IRS view on the energy rebate is by analogy to the Alaska dividends, not by reference to the Internal Revenue Code.
Second, the IRS is allowed to penalize an understatement of tax due to "negligence or intentional disregard of rules or regulations."
The penalty is 20 percent of the tax understatement caused by this negligence or intentional disregard.
The worst team in baseball in 2005 was the Kansas City Royals— 56 wins and 106 losses. There was a lot of shame in root, root, rooting for the home team in Kansas City, but they still won 34.5 percent of their games.
The tax law says there is no negligence or intentional disregard if the taxpayer's position has a realistic possibility of being sustained on its merits, even if contrary to an official IRS position (which is neither a "rule" nor a "regulation."
A "realistic possibility" means a one-third chance that your interpretation is correct. So you can expect to lose two-thirds of the time without penalty risk. This is worse than the Royals, and you still avoid a penalty.
Competent tax advisers have different views on the tax treatment of the energy rebate. However, I believe that excluding the rebate from income has a better chance of winning than the Kansas City Royals did last year, and that's all you need to avoid a penalty.
You decide what to do; but penalty talk is silly.

-------------

Now I'll drop the legalistic jargon bit and we can reflect on whether this column is the Journal's entree into the world of Onion-style Post-Modern slacker ironic stream-of-consciousness humor writing. Or something. Something utterly unlike anything the Journal has ever written. Something like William S. Burroughs, but involving tax accountancy instead of heroin & wife shootings.

Because, let's face it, as a NM taxpayer here is the article/column we're looking for on the tax liability of the "Big Bill Winter Heating Rebate Check":


"A Final Word on N.M. Energy Rebates"
by Dr. James R. Hamill

Yeah, you gotta pay tax on that money.

James R. Hamill, CPA, Ph.D., is KPMG Professor of Accounting in the Anderson Schools of Management, University of New Mexico. He can be reached at hamill@mgt.unm.edu

or

"A Final Word on N.M. Energy Rebates"
by Dr. James R. Hamill


Hell no, don't pay tax on that money.

James R. Hamill, CPA, Ph.D., is KPMG Professor of Accounting in the Anderson Schools of Management, University of New Mexico. He can be reached at hamill@mgt.unm.edu


Preferably, of course, the second one. Instead, we get Satchel Paige & Kansas City Royals references, a bit about some Alaska dividends we've never heard of, and then some paragraphs that sound as if they came directly from the U.S. Tax Code, if that code was cut into little pieces, William S. Burroughs style, and recomposed into something like the following:

"The four-letter word "must" is an incorrect way to precede "include in income" when addressing the energy rebate. I could live with "may have to" as the proper language, but such language could be replaced with "may not have to include in income." Either one works."

What the hell does that mean? I mean, really, what the HELL does that mean? I admit it. I'm not a tax accountant, an accountant of any kind, or anything more than a guy who throws data into Turbo Tax online every Spring, but I spent ten solid minutes on the paragraph above, and not only does it not help me do my taxes, it confuses me more than the most bewilderingly obtuse paragraph in any William S. Burroughs cut-n-fold novel. "The Soft Machine" is like reading "Ziggy" compared with "A Final Word on N.M. Energy Rebates".

And that gets me back to the Post-Modern humor idea. My guess is that the Journal has admired the work of The Onion forever, and has tried to work some Onion-esque schtick into their paper for some time, but has never found the proper subject for that brand of humor. The "Big Bill Winter Heating Rebate Check" offered the perfect combination of innocuousness (I mean how much tax can there be on $84?...hang on a second, let me plug it into Turbo Tax Online) and the inherent universal humor of doing one's taxes and being confused about the perplexity.

So, a "Professor" is invented, and using what must have been powerful hallucinogens, Journal writers bang out a faux column that would make the most jaded Onion groupie smirk in snarky, post-ironic smirkiness. For those hip to The Onion lingo, that makes "Professor James R. Hamill" the Journal's own "Herbert Kornfeld". And that's about the highest praise I've ever laid upon the Journal. Ever.

I say long live "Professor James R. Hamill" and his ruminations on the wacky world of tax accountancy. I can hardly wait until the next installment.

Unless, of course, I'm wrong on this Post-Modern humor thing and the article was an actual attempt to help New Mexicans make sense of the "Big Bill Winter Heating Rebate Check" thing. In which case, I'm pretty much at a loss for words and at a loss for what to do with this $84 Big Bill gave me last Fall.



P.S.: Yes, this column resulted in part from the welling up of the deep subconscious resulting from the use of a William S. Burroughs' reading in last night's The Sopranos. Boy, did that bring up some obtuse memories.

Winter Weather Roulette

Update II, Sunday 10:15 A.M.: Two pictures taken two hours apart. Two hours. Does it even count when it goes from pic #1 to pic #2 in two hours? Time to threaten my wife again that we're moving to Buffalo. Or does it even snow in Buffalo in these days of (alleged) Global Warming?


Update, Sunday 7:52 A.M.: I was wrong! Yeah! Snow, even here in the Valley! Of course it was all part of my purely scientific Mother Nature reverse psychology strategy to make it snow, and it obviously worked and the snow is obviously the direct result of this strategy.

I am that powerful you know. And often powerfully wrong.


---------And here's what I was wrong about (anything but a rare occurrence), writing Saturday morning (temperature at the time roughly 55 degrees)------------


Here's where I wish we could wager on weather forecasts. The National Weather Service (NWS) has put ABQ in a "Winter Storm Watch", with 1-3 inches of snow later today and early tomorrow in the foothills. We snow-lovers in the Valley always see "foothills" and start cursing, but seriously...does anybody really think we're gonna get any snow today, foothills or Valley?

Wouldn't it be great if we could bet on this one...personally I smell NWS desperation, similar to the roulette addict down to their last $100 putting everything on 22 for a last roll before they shuffle out of the casino muttering to themselves and looking for a windswept refrigerator box to sleep in. This Mid-March weekend wind festival is the closest thing these meteorological pros have had to real weather in so long they're grasping for wind-blown straws.

And as a weather junkie myself I understand the desperation, understand it enough to smell it from miles away, and if some off-shore on-line gambling outfit would just put "Will Snow in Albuquerque Today and/or Tomorrow?" on the betting sheet, I would be at the pawn shop hocking everything from my MLB Satchel Paige statuette to my impressive, yet disorganized microbeer bottle collection in a heartbeat.

Instead, betting on the weather doesn't happen, and the closest we weather gamblers can come is seeing the "Breaking News" reports on the weekend local news tonight. Weekend local news is already a combination of fall-down funny and empathetic embarrassment, but I can hardly wait for the 11-minute "story" about the impending "storm", complete with the obligatory report from the side of I-40 in Tijeras Canyon where some barely legal reporter with kooky wind-carved hair breathlessly announces:

"I can see a snow flake, Bob!...I saw one just a minute ago. And wait, there's another one! Oh. No, that was a plastic bag. But I saw one, really. Just a minute ago. Now let's go to some interviews we conducted at the truck stop in Moriarty, where we stood waiting to accost truck drivers and ask them how tough it is to drive semis in this wind. And snow. Don't forget the snow. I've already seen a flake. Really."

Then we'll go back to the Goofy Weekend Weather Guy, who we haven't paid any attention to in three months because there has been absolutely "no weather", and this Guy will suddenly be the center of attention and give a Obie/Oscar/Emmy-level performance in which the viewer will almost be convinced that today's is a "perfect storm", combining the power of Katrina with the snowfall of an entire winter at the Mount Rainier reporting station.

Then nothing will happen. Except it will be windy. Irritatingly windy. All weekend.

Ya wanna bet?

Is This Mic On?

I'm sure you're already aware that a high school teacher up in Denver is under investigation/on leave for leading a classroom lecture/discussion in which he posited that President W's State of the Union speech could be compared with speeches by Hitler. One of the students recorded the lecture/discussion, a parent said this, a school administration said that and the episode has now been thrust into the on-going, in-depth, and oh-so-thorough national dialogue this country embraces when such stories reverberate throughout the public consciousness.

In other words, ridiculously uninformed people on radio/tv/blogs are incessantly blabbing about it. Well, you can call me anything you like, but don't call me late to a chance to chime in on something in which I am ridiculously uninformed. Especially one on a topic near and dear to my professional heart: saying stupid things to a class full of students.

As you probably know, I'm a middle school Humanities teacher, and I'll let you in on a little secret: it's our job to say stupid things to a class full of students on a fairly regular basis. Now, by "stupid" in this case I mean the utterance of sentiments that segments of the population (often large, majority segments) totally, absolutely, unmitigatingly, categorically disagree with. Disagree with passionately. Disagree with enough to get riled up and involved in provocative debates. We professional educators call these provocative debates "discussion" and they're, uh, kinda the whole basis of teaching Humanities.

Well, at least one way. They're is another way and perhaps you had "Social Studies" (i.e. old school Humanities) in this other way. In this other way, students are taught history, public institutions, current events and such like this:

• The class has a "textbook"
• The textbook has been chosen after a rigorous screening by the State Department of Education, the local School District, and the "Social Studies" department at the school in question.
  
• The "Social Studies" teacher uses the "textbook" as a strong authoritative guide, with students reading from it on a daily basis, answering litle questions in the back of the chapter and having a "test" after three or so chapters of the book have been covered.
• All facts, ideas, concepts and controversies are handled by the properly screened "textbook".
  
• Especially "facts". Especially, especially the facts with names and numbers attached, like "The Louisiana Purchase was masterminded by President Thomas Jefferson in 1803".
  
• The "textbook" typically handles deeper ideas/concepts/controversies by largely avoiding them or saying "On the one hand/on the other hand" over and over.
• One reason the textbook largely avoids controversy is so it will be approved by the rigorous screening process.
• Another reason the textbook avoids controversy is because of testing, especially standardized testing: controversies don't easily translate into multiple choice test questions.
• "What year did President Thomas Jefferson mastermind the Lousiana Purchase?" makes a great multiple choice test question.
• It is also a great "fact" that not only shows students have "learned" Social Studies/Humanities, but can become contributing members of society, especially if that contribution relies on a knowledge of what year the Louisiana Purchase took place.
• Two main areas in which knowledge like this can really contribute to society is in drunken bar wagers and playing "Trivial Pursuit".
  
• I'm thinking, but I can't really come up with another contributory application of this knowledge.
  
• Well, except for standardized testing.

Many of us who are a bit older than school age now, say 44 years old, remember having Social Studies taught in the way described above year after year. Remember those classes? My personal favorite was my high school Government class, which was taught "zero" hour (i.e. before school). The rather depressed guy who taught it exemplified the method outlined above. Not only was the textbook the ONLY source of information in class, every single early morning hour ended with him finding his bookmark, carefully placing it in the Teacher's Edition of the textbook, closing the book and waiting for the bell to First Period. Or waiting for us to finish the questions at the end of Chapter Seven.

Now, class, let's get back to our "discussion" of the high school teacher in Denver. I've noticed that many of the people outraged about the teacher comparing Prez W and Hitler are not only Republican, but also somewhere around 44 years of age. Some a few years older than 44. And, as part of their encoded academic DNA, they are thinking back to their own old school "Social Studies" classes in which teachers didn't raise controversial subjects because the teacher was too busy looking for the bookmark to their rigorously screened "textbook".

These outraged commenters are to be commended for probably remembering that the Louisiana Purchase took place in 1803, but they seem to be forgetting one very important "concept" resulting from the old school "Social Studies" class:

Social Studies classes taught from a "textbook" were boring as shit.

In a way this legacy of boring is positive. Well, at least one way. One big reason I teach "Humanities" now is because of my Government class back in zero hour high school. After taking that class I figured there was no way in Hell I could teach a class as badly as Mr. Depressed Government Teacher Guy had, and somebody gave him a job teaching it...so, schools must be desperate to hire teachers. And I'm all about responding to other job providers desperation. To wit: I teach Middle School.

"On the other hand" the teaching of "textbook" Social Studies was overwhelmingly boring, causing most people to stop being passionate about politics/history/current events somewhere around Third Grade (resulting in things like low voter turnout), while a few other little boys and girls maintained their love despite the crushing boredom and can now be found ranting at each other on Fox News Channel.

Or teaching Humanities. Today's "Social Studies" typically eschews (with extreme prejudice) the "textbook" and relies instead on primary sources, varied historian opinions, introduction of fresh current events to compare/contrast with historically similar circumstances and in-class speakers of all political stripes. Okay, now I'm starting to sound like some "professional educator", so I'll stop...but it's designed to not be as boring as it sounds.

The idea is to put historical events into a context beyond multiple choice questions so that citizens can make sense of what happened before and what's happening now. And maybe maintain that passion for the subject long enough to vote more often; maybe even get involved in the process.

As a ridiculously uninformed participant in the "dialogue" surrounding the Denver-area high school teacher/class, I can't definitively say what exactly happened in that classroom. I can only say that in general we Humanities teachers understand that throwing the "textbook" into the garbage comes with responsibilities, the highest of which is to keep things balanced whenever possible.

But teaching Humanities isn't like teaching Math, where the concepts aren't inherently up to interpretation. Just the opposite: EVERYTHING in Humanities is up to interpretation. One of the biggest skills we focus on is developing the skill of students to formulate and express their own interpretations.

To do that, sometimes we say stupid things. Or things that some/many/almost all would interpret as stupid. Saying provocative things stimulates classes. Think back to your own "Social Studies" classes. What was stimulating about them?

In conclusion (to use one of those teacher phrases), I'd just like to reiterate to all those outraged commenters on the Prez W/Hitler comparison: we teachers are saying stupid things all the time. We're not gonna stop. I'm hoping to get some really juicy stupid things out tomorrow.

Bring your tape recorder.

Fort Sumter II: A Fusillade Against Northern Forces of Gourmet Foodstuffs

I don't want to start an Albuquerque Civil War, but those deep in the South Valley Confederacy have something to say to our Northern (north of I-40) brethren: nobody cares about your stupid Trader Joe's. This may come as a shock to Union readers anticipating the opening of ABQ's own "TJ's" the same way geeky teenage boys in Darth Vader costumes wait outside movie theaters two weeks before "Star Wars 3.14: Jar-Jar Battles the Sith Menace".

Perhaps the best evidence of “TJ's Fever” can be found from a "story" posted on "Duke City Fix"(DCF) a couple of weeks back. Now there is nothing wrong with DCF…hell, Chantal et. al. even post my deranged musings from time to time (and yes I rather enjoyed writing “Chantal, et. al.”. Far more than I should).

At the same time, many of you who are daily readers of DCF realize that the Fix could just as well be entitled “Albuquerque Convention and Visitors Bureau: Ultra-hip Annex” for all the retro-lounge pom-pom waving Albuquerque cheerleading seen there . A lot of the cheers led at DCF take the form of wishing/begging for certain store chains to move to ABQ, thereby ostensibly making ABQ even more hip than it already ostensibly is. As if the Smith’s Food and Drug at Yale and Coal doesn’t already make this town cooler than the Arcata, CA, Burlington, VT, and Ithaca, NY combined.

Now, truth be told, we in the South Valley Confederacy don't really cotton to newfangled technologies like blogs or retro-lounge or Podcasting or Pod People, whatever. Still, some of us couldn't help but notice that whereas most "stories" on DCF get about 12 comments max, a posting on Trader Joe's opening received approximately 2.5 million comments, or 10 for every Northern Albuquerque resident. And that was for a two-line “story” simply announcing the opening date of the store. We also noticed that many of these comments took the form of gushing salutations, greeting TJ’s like meth junkies responding to the rap on the door from their pusher.

One would get the impression that folks up North are confusing the opening of a trendy, upscale sorta-kinda grocery store with the combined reappearances of Jesus, Buddha and Jack's Lounge on Central. Meanwhile, us South Valley types just shake our heads and think the following:

1. These Northerners are getting apoplectic about yet another place to buy strange foreign cheeses when we down here wouldn't know an artisanal montchevre with chives from a Sardinian Capradoro. Hell, we wouldn’t even know they were cheeses.

2. These Northeners are frothing about another fancy place to shop/eat when we down here have to book airline flights to get Thai food. Even Starbucks won't come down here, and they have four locations in Oman. Oman! We Southerners don't even know where Oman is, or if it is, in fact, a made-up country.

3. Folks down here notice that many up North are conflicted about Trader Joe's because it is a store chain and not a locally-owned business. We down South don't quite understand such moral/ethical dilemmas. For instance, down here the recent opening of our first ultra-evil Walmart store was generally greeted as if the school Homecoming Queen had, for some reason, asked us out to the Prom. We couldn't believe it. "A Walmart? For pimply-faced 'ol us? Now we have to rent a tux and borrow Dad's car!"

4. One of our Confederates, namely me, just drove north of I-40 for the first time in months and can report that, given today's traffic density, the time it would take to get to a Trader Joe's at the corner of Paseo del Norte and Ventura is roughly three days. The chances of being either the victim or perpetrator of a "road rage" incident during this trek would be approximately 99%. Is three days and possible death and/or significant prison time really worth a high-quality artisanal goat cheese? Even one with chives?

From what I read in the DCF blog “story”, the new TJ's is scheduled to open on March 10th. To all those Northerners in a frenzy about the opening, we friendly folks down South wish nothing but the consumer best. We'll think of you fondly from afar as we shop at the corner El Mesquite Carniceria or dine out front of Kathy's Carry-Out or another of our 1,450 Mexican/New Mexican restaurants. Maybe if we have a three-day weekend we'll visit TJ's and stay at the new Sandia Casino Hotel. We'll be the ones staring tourist-like at you Northern types dressed up in your Darth Vader costumes and deciding between artisanal goat cheeses. Do you mind if we take your picture?

NM Green Party Update

Two days after saying I never get Green Party mailers, I get a Green Party mailer for the upcoming state conference. Serves me right to doubt the organizational capability of the Party...maybe I'll go just for the anarchy of it all. Or maybe I'll have some laundry to do that day. Something to think about.

Richardson Walks for President

The Journal this morning picks up the AP story that Bill Richardson is visiting New Hampshire to, among other things, participate in the Manchester N.H. St. Patrick's Day parade. For those who perfer executive summaries of things or just have ADD, let me help through a short poem:

Bill Richardson - New Hampshire.
Yes that New Hampshire.
The one with the 1st Presidential Primary
That one.

I'm linking to the Boston Globe version of the story because it has more meat about the whole President thing than the Journal version. Meanwhile, it's my humble opinion that Bill Richardson hasn't lost enough weight for a serious run for President. Some months back you might remember we constructed a Bill Richardson Weight Political Aspiration Matrix (WPAM) that scientifically analyzes the likelihood of a Richardson Presidential Run based on how flabby he is.

Reports so far seem to indicate that Richardson has only achieved "easy stroll for Governor" weight loss at this point, and is nowhere near the "Oprah-level mad-dash weight swing" necessary for a Presidential run. Right now, it's simply a St. Patrick's Day parade walk. He can handle that. Running for anything beyond reelection, or a doughnut, seems beyond him right now.