[Beentheredonethat]

Oooh, mod 1, you are so moderate. I thought you would close this. The topic that won't die!

On topic--that chart seems way off to me. Seems a lot of stuff in horses costs way more, and I KNOW my healthcare costs almost $600 a month out of my paycheck.

[fish]

Oooh, mod 1, you are so moderate. I thought you would close this. The topic that won't die!

On topic--that chart seems way off to me. Seems a lot of stuff in horses costs way more, and I KNOW my healthcare costs almost $600 a month out of my paycheck.

And my health insurance was well over $1K/month for me only by the time medicare kicked in.

But let's get back on track/ horse related. I have hard working, salaried middle class clients who've lived on a shoestring to give horses who've prematurely gone lame comfortable long term (e.g. 20+ year) retirements. And yet the Romney's feel the need to unload a similarly compromised horse (Super Hit) to the tune of $125,000 rather than retire him. So dictates our tax code: Ann's "business" requires that she show a profit motive to qualify for write-offs. At this point, I have little to say/ask except "what's wrong with this picture?" A whole lot in my book, but I wish I had clearer ideas on how to approach the question.

Meantime, I personally don't like or want rich clients for my horse business. I much prefer middle class people for whom it is a clear ethical, and not particularly easy decision to keep their animals well cared for. To each his own (wanted to say it in French, but forgot the spelling ).

[TheHorseProblem]

Please rein things in closer to the main topic vs. getting into non-horse-related political discussion, etc.

Thanks,
Mod 1

Mod 1, the main topic IS a non-horse-related political discussion.

[fish]

Mod 1, the main topic IS a non-horse-related political discussion.

Not so-- it's a horse-related political discussion: "Romney HORSE in news."

[alicen]

To each his own (wanted to say it in French, but forgot the spelling ).

Chacun à son goût.

[Lord Helpus]

Excuse me, but aren't you forgetting those of us who are not salaried, but self-employed/working at their own businesses?

Do/did Tina Konyot, Hilda Gurney, Debbie McDonald, Jim Koford.... have "incomes" [by your definition] to "support their horse habit"?

I specifically excluded: "People who earn money at our sport in order to be able to afford it may not be rich, but generally have enough discretionary income that we are well above poverty levels.".

Yes I did use the word 'income', but prefaced it by the word 'discretionary'. That, to me, means perhaps money saved up that could be spent for something else, but, at our discretion, instead is used to support our horse habit. [i.e. I can go two 2 AA shows or take a lovely vacation.] Because I am a horse person, I choose the horse shows.

Owners of Olympic caliber horses (and that is what this thread is about) can have their horse and their vacation (and their summer house and private schools for their children). They do not have to give up anything else in order to own their horses.

I apologize for perhaps not being clear.

[fish]

I specifically excluded: "People who earn money at our sport in order to be able to afford it may not be rich, but generally have enough discretionary income that we are well above poverty levels.".

Yes I did use the word 'income', but prefaced it by the word 'discretionary'. That, to me, means perhaps money saved up that could be spent for something else, but, at our discretion, instead is used to support our horse habit. [i.e. I can go two 2 AA shows or take a lovely vacation.] Because I am a horse person, I choose the horse shows.

Owners of Olympic caliber horses (and that is what this thread is about) can have their horse and their vacation (and their summer house and private schools for their children). They do not have to give up anything else in order to own their horses.

I apologize for perhaps not being clear.

Me too-- perhaps my choice of examples (all from the horse business) confused matters.

The part of your post I was questioning is this:

"I suspect that most COTH'ers live off a salary rather than income. (A salary is money you get in exchange for work performed. Income is money you ger 24/7/365, whether or not you are working. ). People at the upper levels of horse sports have income to support their horse habit."

I don't think your definitions correct. Income is $ coming in regardless of source. That's what all of us live on. Lots of people get "money ... in exchange for work performed" who are not receiving "salaries." People who own their own businesses, whether horse, grocery or anything else (e.g. legal, medical or accounting practices), do not receive salaries. Neither do people working on hourly or piecework bases. I suspect that many COTHers fall in that category rather than working for a salary. People, like the Romneys, who don't have to work at all for their incomes because they derive from capital gains are in yet another group. Members of any and all of these groups can have "discretionary income," depending on many factors, starting with the amount of income they receive, the costs of living in their areas.... right on down to the choices some individuals make in pursuit of goals most people might consider entirely out of reach given their incomes.

Yes, most horse people are well above poverty levels, but I know some who aren't-- e.g. one old man who's owned and ridden horses all his life, but never indoor plumbing, another who picks up show horses at low end auctions for his granddaughter to show (quite respectably on local circuits) while living in an old singlewide and keeping the horses in an old barn and dirt lot on about 1/8 acre of land. I don't know how much income these guys have, but judging by their standards of living, I doubt its very much.

[Canaqua]

It is not biased it is just facts.
The numbers are TRUE.

Not really. Dig into the numbers...the writer of the linked piece got them from another piece, not original sources. The referred to piece does list some sources, but they are suspect. Some of the horse figures come from random sources and are just rough estimates, with some sources being more credible than others. The only hard horse figure they have is the board figure, from an article quoting Ann Romney on her board rate, two years ago.

The sources for the people figures are supposedly the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Census Bureau. If you go to the linked sources for THOSE, some of the numbers are not supported in there. I have no idea where they got the health care cost figure for a family. It's MUCH, MUCH too low. It appears they are liking to a Consumer Price Index publication, which won't tell you crap about actual dollar amounts for health care...it's an index (with 1984 being 100, I think?) not dollar amounts.

The Atlantic Wire piece backs up their claim of a "tax credit" by linking to the Slate piece we've discussed, and thoroughly discredited, on another thread. The writer of the Slate piece has since come back and corrected himself .

All in all a shoddy reporting job, so I wouldn't take anything in it as the "truth" or a "fact".

[meupatdoes]

Not really. Dig into the numbers...the writer of the linked piece got them from another piece, not original sources. The referred to piece does list some sources, but they are suspect. Some of the horse figures come from random sources and are just rough estimates, with some sources being more credible than others. The only hard horse figure they have is the board figure, from an article quoting Ann Romney on her board rate, two years ago.

The sources for the people figures are supposedly the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Census Bureau. If you go to the linked sources for THOSE, some of the numbers are not supported in there. I have no idea where they got the health care cost figure for a family. It's MUCH, MUCH too low. It appears they are liking to a Consumer Price Index publication, which won't tell you crap about actual dollar amounts for health care...it's an index (with 1984 being 100, I think?) not dollar amounts.

The Atlantic Wire piece backs up their claim of a "tax credit" by linking to the Slate piece we've discussed, and thoroughly discredited, on another thread. The writer of the Slate piece has since come back and corrected himself .

All in all a shoddy reporting job, so I wouldn't take anything in it as the "truth" or a "fact".

Thank you very much for that explanation (honestly, no snark!). It helps not only toward understanding the current issue, but also with where to go to dig into articles further in the future.

[Mike Matson]

As I recall from USDF information, the average dressage rider has 2 horses and an income of over $80,000. Compare that to the median income of an American household which is in the mid forty thousand range.

So as the media digs deeper into dressage, don't expect positive coverage as they report on the financial differences between most involved in dressage and the average American.

[Paragon]

So as the media digs deeper into dressage, don't expect positive coverage as they report on the financial differences between most involved in dressage and the average American.

The average football player makes how many millions? The average baseball player? The average basketball player?

They make HOW MUCH for every game where they warm the bench, miss plays, or sit on the DL?

Hell, the average football player makes more in a single week than I do in a year.

I don't think America at large is going to actually give two craps about how much dressage costs or how much money the participants have. They won't even give a single crap. Because the cost of sports doesn't really matter in this world, except as a caricature of the waste and excess in the first world - one which, again, nobody cares enough about to change.

People will use the expensive of a luxury pastime as it relates to a presidential candidate and whether or not the fact that they have enough money to swim in makes them unable to relate to common people. It has nothing to do with the sport.

Dressage will be just fine.

[witherbee]

I think the point of the article is to paint Romney as an elitist, out of touch person (which has been the issue with him every time he has run). Bottom line is that dressage is not a main stream sport like baseball - if he owned a baseball team he would seem more accessible in spite of the fact that it would actually cost a lot more than a dressage horse. Obama has no interest that would parallel Romney's wife's interest in dressage, so it is a good target.

As for dressage being expensive, horses in general are expensive and people often perceive horse owners as being wealthy - particularly those who ride "English" disciplines. Western folk tend to be given a bit of a pass as they seem more approachable from all of the movies and are seen as more backyard pets and trail horses than other show horses are.

I think that most sports, at the Olympic level or the high levels for that sport, are time consuming and expensive. Most people at the high levels exclusively do that sport and have sponsors and many times family support. As you trickle down, individual income is more important. Then there are those, like the Romney's (and Springsteins, and Spielbergs, and Bloombergs etc.) who are wealthy and that gives them more access to the sport they love.

I just hate to see that elitist tag applied to all who participate in dressage - so many of us work hard to afford what we can and so many of the Olympic athletes have to really struggle with the costs and getting/keeping sponsors...

[SnicklefritzG]

My personal fantasy for Rafalca: Sesame Street! You know you've got it made when you have a cameo appearance on that show.I wonder if there are any episodes left to be filmed this season - it would be cool if she got on the show.

[Carol Ames]

How are they able to dedut hat horse?for$77k?

[equusaround]

I actually think it is about $500K/year to keep a top level jumper in competition. A couple air flights alone coast to coast, yet alone Europe will set you back over $50K.

In 2002, I flew with my stallion (dressage) to NEDA and Devon and spent 6 weeks on the East coast and I spent about $40K on the trip. It was my trip of a lifetime and I'm glad I did it, but it was expensive! The travel (airfare, van and shipping) alone was over $20K. Then there were entries, stabling, rental cars, hotels, food, grooms, etc. and it got really pricey!

[Sandy M]

To each his own (wanted to say it in French, but forgot the spelling ).

Not sure, don't speak French, but I'm recalling "Baron Orlofsky's" aria from the operetta "Die Fledermaus." I believe it's "chacun a son gout." ( I won't vouch for the spelling, either.) LOL