the wheels of bureaucracy grind on

I was out of it yesterday (more on that later), so catching up on e-mail today included an unpleasant surprise. But first, a bit of backstory.

Apparently, around the middle of June, there was a teleconference on FBAR:

http://www.abanet.org/intlaw/committees/Tax.FBAR.6.12.09.mp3

The idea was to "clarify" who had to file what on td f 90-22.1 by June 30. And by "file" they mean, "on our fucking desks" not "postmarked by".

Basically, some IRS folk, some lawyers, some CPAs. And one of the IRS guys (no, I _did not_ listen to the whole thing; I'm relying on secondary reporting. However, I did supply the link if you want to listen to that whole thing) supplied some "guidance" (wow, that's a lot of inappropriately used quotes) to the effect that offshore accounts included hedge funds. Needless to say, this surprised a lot of people who then attempted to get further "clarification" out of the IRS. On or around the 24th (getting suspiciously close to that by "file" we mean "on our fucking desks" deadline, right?), some "relief" was offered to people who didn't know they had to file (like, children whose names are on their parents accounts, say, accounts which happen to have >$10K in an offshore hedge fund). Those people (assuming they had reported and paid taxes on all their 2008 income) could send their form to a different address, _with their 2008 return_, a letter explaining why they hadn't filed it in a timely fashion and a few other odds and ends altho not, apparently, their firstborn.

At this point, it became apparent that, no, the IRS wasn't going to "clarify" this problem out of existence and everyone was going to have to fill out these forms (which aren't too bad if you have one fund, but could get ugly after a while, and they want odd things like the fund's mailing address and you know overseas mailing addresses). Yesterday's e-mail thus included a heads up to this effect. Which I received today, which is, of course, the filing deadline.

Hey, it's postmarked today. I'm going to assume they have enough trouble without wasting their time on me.

In Which We Are Sick

Monday I was feeling a little queasy, and after breakfast, kinda crampy and miserably. By 2 o'clock, I was calling R. saying I think you should come home because I don't think I can take care of A. after she wakes up from her nap. And by 6ish, I had external symptoms. Blech. I went to bed early with A. (no bicycling yesterday. At all.) and got up around 10 p.m. to try some pedialyte which I asked R. to get me from CVS. I was only slightly dehydrated; it tasted slightly icky. When I'm in bad shape, that stuff tastes great. If you're healthy, it tastes foul beyond belief.

R. and I discussed what might have happened. Bad leftovers from the party? The kids had had some loose stool which we had attributed to too-much-OJ, but maybe they'd picked something up from a kid at the party. Well, today, T. has it (canceled that shot appointment. What is it with my kids getting sick just in time for shots?). Which makes me wonder if A. is next.

Today is toast-and-cereal day. T. and I did go for a bike ride, tho.

Sunday's activities included: horse! baskets!

I wasn't there, but T. [ETA: Hey, I wish!. _R._ ] says they had T. shooting hoops from horseback (small horse; short hoop a few feet away). He got 3 out of 4, thus surprising the women who lead and walk by the horse. He also reached up and unsnapped his helmet, which _really_ got their attention. On the one hand, this is why I don't think he has fine motor skills problems. On the other hand, I watched him practice that about 50 times on Friday and Saturday.

We also rode bikes twice and I think R. took him swimming, but it has now been a couple days and I was really out of it Monday so I'm not sure.

I wish I didn't want to bludgeon the activists on my team

And yet, it happens a lot.

This time, it's _Pedaling Revolution_, by Jeff Mapes, which at least some media coverage indicated would be available on the kindle, but I grew tired of waiting and bought in paper, figuring I'd donate it when I was done with it. R. and I have done a lot of talking about what the hell happened with bicycling culture in the US and this here's the timeline we have for our lives:

white people move to suburbs (post WW2)
in 'burbs, 1 car per family, so other adult (usually, but not always, wife) rides bike
bike is often an English 3 speed (Raleigh) with a Brooks saddle
kids get Schwinns
wife gets job, wife gets used car (possibly husband's car doesn't get traded in one cycle)
Reagan era cheap gas + high cost of new expected standard of living = no more adults cycling
kids lust after 10 speeds with drop handles
kids get a license at 16
[ETA mountain biking as a sport is invented]
parenting standards change (moving into the Clinton era here): car seats required by law, chauffeuring kids around, helmets, blah, blah, bleeping, blah
mountain biking [ETA: er, mountain bikes as a consumer item] becomes uber popular
Schwinns all but forgotten, adults and kids no longer ride, except when they ride the mysterious hybrid (because still, no one can cope with those drop handle bars IRL)
kids grow up, move to the cities, import bike culture from elsewhere (mountain biking, the Netherlands, etc.)

In my driveway last Saturday, the saddle on the Townie was noted and admired, and C. wanted to know what a "Brooks saddle" was. There was a brief pause, as everyone contemplated how to explain to R.'s mom what a "Brooks saddle" was and why it was special. I pointed out that she almost certainly had _had_ one and after discussion, concluded yup, she had -- and she had put a sheepskin on to make sure it stayed dry. This, of course, will never explain to C. why a Brooks Saddle is a lustworthy object to folk of her children's generation -- but then, try to explain Lady Ga-Ga to me. Unlikely to work, and even if it did, probably not worth the effort.

Where the bludgeoning comes in is here:

"But not since the Great Depression or the gas rationing of World War II have most people expected to do much of a utilitarian nature with their bike, at least as adults."

Because women don't count? Really? Clearly someone pointed out that as teenagers, they all expected to do something of a utilitarian nature with their bikes, hence the last clause. But no one of C.'s generation was consulted. And women's history, once again, was ignored and forgotten.