• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

Pricey sports of the wealthy according to MSN...

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    I'm just not getting why it is political

    It says "You don't have to be part of the 1% to enjoy these pastimes, but having lots of money will make it a whole lot easier."

    What part of that statement is wrong? Thinking about horses, you absolutely don't have to be part of the 1% highest earners, but it certainly does make everything easier to do anything if you are.

    Wendy - the article clearly states that you can do dressage with a cheaper horse, but also comments to get to the top levels you are likely to need something much more expensive - what part of that is confrontational?

    Comment


    • #22
      The whole 1% / 99% angle is all politics. What else is it?

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by caballero View Post
        The whole 1% / 99% angle is all politics. What else is it?
        Uh, "the 1%" has become a pop culture term, actually. It's literally an ironic hashtag.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by Appsolute View Post
          Horses are very expensive. I am not wealthy, therefore I can not afford to "play" in the high end horse show world.

          Sure there are a few that can do it on a shoe string, but my working student years taught me that this IS a sport for the wealthy.

          Not sure why everyone gets all aghasted by that.
          Me neither. I think that refusing to accept that a certain amount of money is required to own and care for horses, is why so many horses are put into bad situations. Some people think it is their "right" to own a horse, regardless of whether they are in a financial position to do so. It's not elitist to point out that they are a luxury.

          Comment


          • #25
            with the exception of powerboat racing and NASCAR races....
            pretty much every endeavor can be expensive when pshed to the top...
            But 'Dressage' in itself is not more expensive than, uh, barrel racing.

            but yeah, power prancing has been put on the map, by Mitt and Steven...but alt least people know that it exists and is played at the Olympics...
            Originally posted by BigMama1
            Facts don't have versions. If they do, they are opinions
            GNU Terry Prachett

            Comment


            • #26
              I think they totally missed out on owning your own airplane. Yet I have two relatives who both made the dream of owning or co-owning their own airplane work (my uncle, being a surgeon, may have edged into the 1%, but my cousin definitely did not).

              I also think they should have included race cars. Not a cheap sport at the top of the game, but pretty much anyone can participate locally and have fun.

              Croquet? Really?

              And why did they single out dressage? Is that the Romney effect?

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by Alagirl View Post
                but yeah, power prancing has been put on the map, by Mitt and Steven...but alt least people know that it exists and is played at the Olympics...
                Did you really say POWER PRANCING???? OMG I am going to die over here
                Draumr Hesta Farm
                "Wenn Du denkst es geht nicht mehr, kommt von irgendwo ein kleines Licht daher"
                Member of the COTH Ignorant Disrepectful F-bombs!*- 2Dogs Farm

                Comment


                • #28
                  How about the chick in IL with the halter QH's living on the taxpayers millions, and millions?

                  She was not part of the 1%, but she sure had alot of money which made it alot easier for her.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Ah, yes, The Mainstream Media Glitterati and their never-ending class warfare.
                    The inherent vice of Capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings. The inherent virtue of Socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.
                    Winston Churchill

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by caballero View Post
                      It's not a question regarding the expense of the sports listed.

                      It's a question regarding the motivation to write an article that has Captain Obvious written all over it and tells us nothing we don't already know.

                      Some journalism......
                      Do you feel sonehow embarrassed or ashamed when someone poinys out the obvious? If so, that's your deal, not the deal of whoever is merely making an observation.

                      Hey, if someone wants to describe me as the six foot tall woman wearing gfey skinny jeans in the airport right now, I have no problems with it because I am not embarrassed by my height or my jeans.

                      It would be rather ridiculous for me to turn a simple factual description inyo a post on COTH alledging height warfare.

                      Hey, if someone holds a mirror up and you don't like what you see, don't blame the mirror.
                      The Noodlehttp://tiny.cc/NGKmT&http://tiny.cc/gioSA
                      Jinxyhttp://tiny.cc/PIC798&http://tiny.cc/jinx364
                      Boy Wonderhttp://tiny.cc/G9290
                      The Hana is nuts! NUTS!!http://tinyurl.com/SOCRAZY

                      Comment


                      • #31
                        I would question the motivations of a writer who decides to "point out the obvious" in a manner suggesting their motive is "Look at what a few people spend on their silly luxury sports when you, Joe Schlub reader, are working part-time for hourly wages. Clearly, they have too much money and you aren't getting a piece of it." What is the MOTIVATION in pointing out there are people with what is in fact a high amount of disposable income, and framing the matter in a way to make it look as absurd as possible? There is no benign one and it constantly amuses me that horse people seem to think they're immune to being lumped in with the so-called 1%, even when they're singled out as possessors of more than their "fair share."

                        (Croquet? Seriously? You can get a set for $10 at a yard sale...now, find someone intimately acquainted with the rules....)
                        Author Page
                        Like Omens In the Night on Facebook
                        Steampunk Sweethearts

                        Comment


                        • #32
                          Originally posted by meupatdoes View Post
                          Do you feel sonehow embarrassed or ashamed when someone poinys out the obvious? If so, that's your deal, not the deal of whoever is merely making an observation.
                          If you think this "observation" has no intentional bias, well then bless your heart.

                          Comment


                          • #33
                            Originally posted by caballero View Post
                            If you are so naive that you think this "observation" has no intentional bias, well then bless your heart.
                            well, a, investigate the difference between "descriptive" and "normative."

                            And, b, it doesn't really matter whether something is portrayed positively or negatively. What matters is whether it is portrayed HONESTLY, because if it is portrayed honestly and you do not like what you see, the problem is not with the mirror.

                            What is it about the truth that you don't want it to be spoken?
                            The Noodlehttp://tiny.cc/NGKmT&http://tiny.cc/gioSA
                            Jinxyhttp://tiny.cc/PIC798&http://tiny.cc/jinx364
                            Boy Wonderhttp://tiny.cc/G9290
                            The Hana is nuts! NUTS!!http://tinyurl.com/SOCRAZY

                            Comment


                            • #34
                              Originally posted by danceronice View Post
                              I would question the motivations of a writer who decides to "point out the obvious" in a manner suggesting their motive is "Look at what a few people spend on their silly luxury sports when you, Joe Schlub reader, are working part-time for hourly wages. Clearly, they have too much money and you aren't getting a piece of it." What is the MOTIVATION in pointing out there are people with what is in fact a high amount of disposable income, and framing the matter in a way to make it look as absurd as possible? There is no benign one and it constantly amuses me that horse people seem to think they're immune to being lumped in with the so-called 1%, even when they're singled out as possessors of more than their "fair share."

                              (Croquet? Seriously? You can get a set for $10 at a yard sale...now, find someone intimately acquainted with the rules....)
                              I'd say the motivation is "entertainment with an edge." Anyone remember the old TV show, "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous?" A Britster called Robin Leach used to take his audience on tours of the world's great decadent sporting venues and estates, enhanced by his fake-plummy descriptive narrative. Nobody thought it "political" anymore than we think "Downton Abbey" is today--just more or less an hour's escapism and daydreaming.

                              Showcasing "The Rich" becomes political only when put in some kind of "Us" vs. "Them" framework, which, as someone above has noted, is kind of an ironic red herring, because lots of people qualify for the much-ballyhooed "1%" who are small business owners, MD's, etc.

                              The point has already been well-made that you can practice most of these sports without being stinkin' rich--dressage locally on your own pet horse, croquet on any lawn with a set from Wal-Mart, bird shooting with your granddad's gun and a dog you train yourself. Skiing or snowboarding too--yeah, you CAN rent a helicopter to take you to the top of Kitzbuell, but you can also go to Sundown Mtn. and ski your kids' brains out for a $40 all-day lift ticket.

                              I just interpret this as what Mom calls a "fluff piece."

                              Comment


                              • #35
                                Originally posted by meupatdoes View Post
                                What matters is whether it is portrayed HONESTLY,
                                Your definition of "honestly" is different than mine then.

                                Comment


                                • #36
                                  Originally posted by danceronice View Post
                                  I would question the motivations of a writer who decides to "point out the obvious" in a manner suggesting their motive is "Look at what a few people spend on their silly luxury sports when you, Joe Schlub reader, are working part-time for hourly wages. Clearly, they have too much money and you aren't getting a piece of it." What is the MOTIVATION in pointing out there are people with what is in fact a high amount of disposable income, and framing the matter in a way to make it look as absurd as possible? There is no benign one and it constantly amuses me that horse people seem to think they're immune to being lumped in with the so-called 1%, even when they're singled out as possessors of more than their "fair share."
                                  Did you read the "article"? There's literally no point in any of the five-sentence blurbs under every sport where I was like "OMG, they're totally making that seem absurd." In fact, the only "sport" where I got even the tiniest smidge of that sort of vibe was in the croquet blurb, where they mentioned a specific set being on sale for $7k and said "act now!". None of the horse ones were ridiculous, except where they pointed out the $500 Derby hats....although there was plenty of mocking about the hats at the Royal Wedding, too.

                                  Comment


                                  • #37
                                    The true stupidity of continuing to pitch the 1% vs. 99% trope is that it assumes we live financially in a zero-sum world and that is hardly the case.

                                    Some of the most miserable misers I've ever known have lived under this weird conviction that if anyone else in the world is making money, they must be losing it proportionately. Where ever do they get this? Unless you are in a business and your direct competitor is known to be "stealing" your clients, otherwise known as "capitalism," folks, this entire idea is just ridiculous.

                                    There is simply no relationship between whether or not The Rich spend their money on sports, or gambling, or just sit on it and whether there are Jobs on Main Street. The whole "trickle-down economics" thing is a relic of the Reagan administration and has been proven to be a myth.

                                    Comment


                                    • #38
                                      Originally posted by caballero View Post
                                      The whole 1% / 99% angle is all politics. What else is it?
                                      Somebody looking for a conspiracy where there isn't one.

                                      Comment


                                      • #39
                                        Hint: any web article that includes a number in its title (10 Weird Tips to Lose Weight, Avoid These 5 Dumb 401(k) Mistakes!, 12 Fashion Trends You'll Love!) is generally not "journalism". This was a fluff filler piece on an investing website probably compiled by a 22-yr old intern. Nor was this an editorial; it was silly voyeurism on a website designed to appeal to people who aspire to be rich.
                                        I'm confident the slobbering, union-loving rabble of your imagination is not reading that site.

                                        Comment


                                        • #40
                                          Originally posted by twostinkydogs View Post
                                          Wealth is not a synonym for class.

                                          There doesn't appear to be anything particularly inflammatory about the article, horses are absolutely an expensive hobby.
                                          I want to give this a whole bunch of green thumbs up.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X