So the Romneys are selfish for keeping a horse?

[Rum_Pirate]

So the Romney's are selfish for keeping a horse?
And employing a groom with a family to support.
And paying for feed that’s sold by someone with a family to support and transported in trucks by someone with a family to support and manufactured in a factory by people with families to support from stuff that’s grown by farmers with families to support.
And having a barn built by construction workers with families to support with materials trucked by drivers with families to support from factories with workers with families to support.
Sounds to me like that one horse has done more to put Americans to work than that horse’s ass in the White House.

Received by email from a Republican supporter, well it is hardly likely that it is a Democrat supporter.

[Rum_Pirate]

BTW If anyone does not like the posts I make they should be aware of the 'IGNORE' button.

[Meli]

A horses ass comment will get about as much attention as a horses ass deserves

BTW, if this is how Rebubs do their maths.. Double

[Phillip Allen]

A horses ass comment will get about as much attention as a horses ass deserves

BTW, if this is how Rebubs do their maths.. Double

well, you've managed to confuse me... how does that not 'create' jobs?

BTW, I pointed out the same things several weeks ago

How much money do YOU personally inject into the economy

[seanz]

Careful Meli, Phillip is a pony owning elitist.

[Meli]

well, you've managed to confuse me... how does that not 'create' jobs?

BTW, I pointed out the same things several weeks ago

How much money do YOU personally inject into the economy

Pro rata?
More than the likes of romney

[Phillip Allen]

so. the horse business is not worth maintaining as a source of jobs?... we can give up those jobs for the sake of political expediency? Such jobs serve only the idle rich so must be eliminated.

I can see it now... "I used to be a horse trainer with a good income but it was decided by Meli that that wasn't a 'People's' job so that job was eliminated and I was sent to the agri business to weed carrots which is more of a 'People's' job"

[johnw]

I don't recall anyone saying Romney was selfish for keeping a horse. There has been some levity about how he's trying to appeal to the common man while participating, as an owner, in a sport that gives tiaras as prizes, however.

Now me, I'm common as dirt (but good dirt, mind you) and I like horses. My sister married into a family that raised quarter horses. Don't know why they won't let them race against purebreds, probably they're worried about having some mongrel embarrass somebody's expensive horse. It's funny, there are class distinctions in the horsy set, just like in cars or anything else. If you can put a cheap bet down on a horse, even if it's an expensive horse, though, most people can relate to it.

[Meli]

so. the horse business is not worth maintaining as a source of jobs?... we can give up those jobs for the sake of political expediency? Such jobs serve only the idle rich so must be eliminated.

I can see it now... "I used to be a horse trainer with a good income but it was decided by Meli that that wasn't a 'People's' job so that job was eliminated and I was sent to the agri business to weed carrots which is more of a 'People's' job"

Thank you John

I don't recall anyone saying Romney was selfish for keeping a horse. There has been some levity about how he's trying to appeal to the common man while participating, as an owner, in a sport that gives tiaras as prizes, however.

Now me, I'm common as dirt (but good dirt, mind you) and I like horses. My sister married into a family that raised quarter horses. Don't know why they won't let them race against purebreds, probably they're worried about having some mongrel embarrass somebody's expensive horse. It's funny, there are class distinctions in the horsy set, just like in cars or anything else. If you can put a cheap bet down on a horse, even if it's an expensive horse, though, most people can relate to it.

[wardd]

it's good that mitt has horses, so good in fact that i don't mind paying more in taxes for his pets

[Gerarddm]

Of course they aren't selfish. Well off, yes. So what? I do resent the tax deduction they got last year for it, though... $77K.

[Phillip Allen]

Thank you John

yes... he is distancing himself and whoever wants to ride along from the horse attacks against one of his political enemies

[Meli]

whoah, let's have a "be kind to horses tax break"
Subject to the ability to m'aintain the beastie with it's own personal attendant of course.

that prolly puts phil out of the running < pun

[Phillip Allen]

whoah, let's have a "be kind to horses tax break"
Subject to the ability to m'aintain the beastie with it's own personal attendant of course.

that prolly puts phil out of the running < pun

I'm just re enforcing my earlier point... so look at my roast thread and tell me what ya think?

[seanz]

so. the horse business is not worth maintaining as a source of jobs?... we can give up those jobs for the sake of political expediency? Such jobs serve only the idle rich so must be eliminated.

I can see it now... "I used to be a horse trainer with a good income but it was decided by Meli that that wasn't a 'People's' job so that job was eliminated and I was sent to the agri business to weed carrots which is more of a 'People's' job"

No more stick and plenty of carrot, and still he complains.

[Phillip Allen]

No more stick and plenty of carrot, and still he complains.

Hey, you live closer to the 'Pot' than I ever did

[seanz]

Ha! Typical rich elitist American.

[Phillip Allen]

rich is a relitive term... and VERY political, meant to appeal to the haters/enviers of others who have more...

[Horace]

I just spent $3,400.......but I didn't turn around and demand that the government give me a tax break to support my hobby.

I pay for my own damn hobbies. And, apparently, I pay for Romney's too.

Care to elaborate how?

Of course they aren't selfish. Well off, yes. So what? I do resent the tax deduction they got last year for it, though... $77K.

Can you prove they got a "$77k" deduction?

(Hint: I don't believe you can. And if you can't, what word would you use to describe yourself and ljb5?)

[seanz]

rich is a relitive term... and VERY political, meant to appeal to the haters/enviers of others who have more...

Spoken like a frightened rich person.........

[Phillip Allen]

Spoken like a frightened rich person.........

rich compared to WHO?

[seanz]

Oh, I dunno. Most of the rest of the World? People that can't afford ponies? Retired Mexican stonemasons?

[Phillip Allen]

Oh, I dunno. Most of the rest of the World? People that can't afford ponies? Retired Mexican stonemasons?

the Mexican masons around here live pretty high off the hog

[seanz]

the Mexican masons around here live pretty high off the hog

They're not Mexican stonemasons, they're Arkansawian stonemasons, same as you. Bet they know how to cook potroast too.

[Phillip Allen]

They're not Mexican stonemasons, they're Arkansawian stonemasons, same as you. Bet they know how to cook potroast too.

they were Mexican before they moved up here... they are good workers and bend over backwards to earn as much as they can... except the ones who aren't good workers and don't know their trade

[Horace]

Can you prove they got a "$77k" deduction?

(Hint: I don't believe you can. And if you can't, what word would you use to describe yourself and ljb5?)

I thought this was common knowledge.

It's in his 2010 tax return. Duh.

Duh. Prove it. (Bet you can't.)

Competence matters.

[Phillip Allen]

Duh. Prove it. (Bet you can't.)

Competence matters.

the 'I thought' comment is a play for time... a dance I recognized right away

[S/V Laura Ellen]

rich compared to WHO?

Romney is rich compared to other very rich people.

[Lew Barrett]

Duh. Prove it. (Bet you can't.)

Competence matters.

You can download it here

But if you are feeling lazy, you can scroll halfway down this page and see the excerpted amount. Closer to 78K actually.

Check out "form 1116" and let us know what you think about the "various countries" stuff and the tax credits contained therein. I don't pretend to be an expert on this, but LJB's claim was rather easily proven.

[seanz]

the 'I thought' comment is a play for time... a dance I recognized right away

Yep, that's what he was doing, no doubt about it.

[Lew Barrett]

Yep, that's what he was doing, no doubt about it.

When items are so easily researched on the internet, it is an entertainment of no small measure that barbs are tossed like so many hooks on a trawler's line without the expedient of checking the facts first. I didn't know if the notion was provable or not but here google is your friend. It was so easy, so very easy, like a simple little walk in the sun!

[Horace]

.
Let's see. Your posts were as follows:

I just spent $3,400............but I didn't turn around and demand that the government give me a tax break to support my hobby.

I pay for my own damn hobbies. And, apparently, I pay for Romney's too.

Can you prove they got a "$77k" deduction?

(Hint: I don't believe you can. And if you can't, what word would you use to describe yourself and ljb5?)

I thought this was common knowledge.

It's in his 2010 tax return. Duh.

Seriously? You can't find it?

https://www.google.com/#hl=en&sugexp...w=1600&bih=775

He declared a $77,000 loss, took a $50 tax deduction with a possible loss carry-over to future years.

It's even on his own damn web page. http://www.mittromney.com/learn/mitt/tax-return/main

Why don't you know this?

Business Week did a story about it.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...pes-on-rafalca

Can you read? Why do you always need other people do provide information to you? Why can't you find anything for yourself?

I told you half an hour ago that it's in his 2010 tax returns. And you're so dumb you can't figure out that means to go take a look at his 2010 tax returns?!

Here, I'll type more slowly for you so maybe you can understand: It is in his 2010 tax returns. Go check his 2010 tax returns.

You first claim that a $77,000 deduction was taken by the Romneys, then research it, spin on a dime and admit that it was only a $50 deduction, and brazenly try to claim that I was mistaken. Too funny. (And a little sad, as well.) And then you try to top it off by quoting the facts disproving your own statement, as if I weren't already aware of the real figures.

My post from another thread (with additional emphasis added for your edjermacation):

Money (profit) made from hobbies is taxable. It would (and in fact does) follow that expenses to make that money are deductible. [T]he guidelines are not all that difficult to figure out; the details might be. Please take note, especially of the emphasized phrase:

"The IRS presumes that an activity is carried on for profit if it makes a profit during at least three of the last five tax years, including the current year — at least two of the last seven years for activities that consist primarily of breeding, showing, training or racing horses." (IRS)

The losses listed for the business are not (yet) deductions:

"In 2010, the only complete year of tax returns that the Romneys have released publicly, the couple was able to deduct only $50 of more than $77,000 in losses related to the horse business. When they can turn the losses into future deductions depends in part on whether and when their horse business becomes profitable." (Washington Post, 27 July 2012)

I'm surprised that edjermacated gentlemen don't use their search engines before posting. Or is that part of the fun?

Obviously, your competence in tax law may not extend beyond the complexities of the 1040EZ.

I understand you're supposed to be yet another of our forum's edjermacated fellows—super-edjermacated even. Would you mind sharing your field(s) of expertise, and your qualifications therein? Then I might know when to take you seriously, and when you're just tootin'.

[Lew Barrett]

.
Let's see. Your posts were as follows:




You first claim that a $77,000 deduction was taken by the Romneys, then research it, spin on a dime and admit that it was only a $50 deduction, and brazenly try to claim that I was mistaken. Too funny. (And a little sad, as well.) And then you try to top it off by quoting the facts disproving your own statement, as if I weren't already aware of the real figures.

My post from another thread (with additional emphasis added for your edjermacation):

Obviously, your competence in tax law may not extend beyond the complexities of the 1040EZ.

I understand you're supposed to be yet another of our forum's edjermacated fellows—super-edjermacated even. Would you mind sharing your field(s) of expertise, and your qualifications therein? Then I might know when to take you seriously, and when you're just tootin'.

It was taken as a loss (and potential future deduction) against future gains. It is either a lousy business, or he's not making much money at it, perhaps dispelling the notion that he's a great business person? If the horse is a winner and he can make stud money or dough from selling the offspring, or however it is one can manage to spin money from dressage, then in the future you may well be paying for his hobby. In the meantime, he's having a ton of fun with horsies and calling it a "business."

It's listed as an expense item on his return, the allowable deduction for which was fifty bucks (this year) and the loss of which was $78,000 posted against future gains or passive income. I think it's fair to say he had a $77K loss) (and possible future deduction) posted on his return for his wife's horse hobby.
They gave him a $50 credit for it but hey, every buck counts, right?

I guess I could have done the same with my boat: I took clients out on it, but you know, I never bothered. My CPA told me I could have but that it opened a can of worms. Romney probably has more robins on his lawn to deal with the worms than I do though.

[Horace]

You can download it here

But if you are feeling lazy, you can scroll halfway down this page and see the excerpted amount. Closer to 78K actually.

Sorry, Lew: been there, done that—a couple of weeks ago. (The omitted part of your comment above is irrelevant to ljb5's posts.)

When items are so easily researched on the internet, it is an entertainment of no small measure that barbs are tossed like so many hooks on a trawler's line without the expedient of checking the facts first. I didn't know if the notion was provable or not but here google is your friend. It was so easy, so very easy, like a simple little walk in the sun!

I presume, my dear, that the preceding was directed to the charming and competent ljb5. (Indeed, it would have been easy for him to have checked, wouldn't it? And thank you, I did find it quite amusing.)

[Horace]

It was taken as a deduction against future gains. It is either a lousy business, or he's not making much money at it, perhaps dispelling the notion that he's a great business person? If the horse is a winner and he can make stud money or dough from selling the offspring, or however you it is can manage to spin money from dressage, then in the future you may well be paying for his hobby. In the meantime, h's having a ton of fun with horsies.

And the above effort proves exactly what? (Beyond that Romney has a prudent accountant.)

It's listed as an expense item on his return, the allowable deduction for which was fifty bucks (this year), the loss of which was $78,000 posted against future gains or passive income.

By golly, I think that's the plan. (But see Post #35.)

I think it's fair to say he had a $77K deduction posted on his return for his wife's horse hobby.

Are you trying to insinuate something? And if so, can you demonstrate it?

They gave him a $50 credit for it. Nu?

Not quite sure what you're trying to say here. (Are you?)

I guess I could have done the same with my boat: I took clients out on it, but you know, I never bothered. My CPA told me I could have but that it opened a can of worms. Romney probably has more robins on his lawn to deal with the worms than I do though.

See Post #35.

[David G]

Horace,

I have NOT researched the issue, but just from the info on this thread... it strikes me that you are substantially correct. A $50 actual (current) deduction. A $77k+ potential deduction that is dependent upon the Romney's turning a future profit for it to be applied against. I don't know enough about the horse game to speculate about how likely that is to happen, but it hasn't happened yet. But in my ignorance... I'm skeptical that it'll come to pass.

Of course... this doesn't alter my overall perception of Romney. It simply reinforces it. He's a spineless hollow suit. The proverbial pampered twit who was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple. He's out of touch, and out of step. His stated economic plan would put the U.S. right back in the crapper. He's an inadvertently dangerous man.

[Lew Barrett]

And the above effort proves exactly what? (Beyond that Romney has a prudent accountant.)

By golly, I think that's the plan. (But see Post #35.)

How you see the plan (as a positive use of tax code for a "business") and how I see the plan (as an attempt at future gain to pay for a hobby) represents the crux of the differences in view points here. (gratuitous, un-heartfelt smiley added).
The plan was to go through this for fifty bucks? A man running for the public's favor, who shows 24 million in income, lists his wife's hobby as a business to get back fifty dollars? Or, as one might reasonably assume, lists the loss in the event of future gains, in which case LJB's assertion that the public pays while Romney plays has some merit. Of course, there's also the potential to use this against gains elsewhere. By the way, reference to post 35 is pleasant but only now coming into play as I posted on 34. (additional gratuitous smiley inserted for un-heartfelt snide value as no humor is intended, nor is anything actually funny).

Are you trying to insinuate something? And if so, can you demonstrate it?

No insinuation at all, my friend. He took a $77K loss on his wife's hobby posted against future (?) gains. How does that play for the regular folks?

Not quite sure what you're trying to say here. (Are you?)

Now now, play nicely! Nu means nu. Google it.

See Post #35.

I'm not sure what you mean here. Are you?

[johnw]

yes... he is distancing himself and whoever wants to ride along from the horse attacks against one of his political enemies

Gee, Phillip, I give my honest opinion and you think there's some sort of plot going on? Get a grip.

John Kerry tried to dodge the sales tax on his boat. Lots of rich people do that. Newsmax had a fit over it, but if they've had a similar problem with Romney's write-off, I've not heard of it. In some ways, the tax games rich people play are less interesting to the general public than the optics of the sports they play.

Remember the famous "flip flop" ad showing Kerry tacking a sailboard? How much of that was about portraying him as a flip-flopper, and how much was about portraying him as an elitist, because he partakes in sailing, a non-gasoline sport? George H.W. Bush was never viewed as elitist for running a powerboat that cost a lot more than any sailboard. People could picture themselves in the powerboat.

We've all seen this kind of image stuff before. When Reagan decided to run for president, his publicist told him to stop wearing jodhpurs while riding and wear jeans instead. His horsy habit was instantly transformed from elitist to cowboy.


http://moirasthread.blogspot.com/200...road-1947.html

How you do that with dressage, I'm not sure.

I suppose you'll read the above and try to find something to accuse me of, Phillip, but what's the point? If you're trying to make yourself look clever, or even like you're paying attention, it isn't working, so why not take it for what it is, an honest opinion? How could that hurt you?

[Phillip Allen]

I wonder where I could get some jodhpurs?... I've wanted some for quite a while

[seanz]

Why, does your new college have a polo team?

[Phillip Allen]

Why, does your new college have a polo team?

there IS a polo club here somewhere... I've watched them play

[Phillip Allen]

what is the purpose of jodhpurs anyway?

[seanz]

there IS a polo club here somewhere... I've watched them play

Knew it, just knew it.

what is the purpose of jodhpurs anyway?

Judging from what I've seen, their purpose is to make women's bottoms look larger than they actually are.

[Phillip Allen]

Knew it, just knew it.



Judging from what I've seen, their purpose is to make women's bottoms look larger than they actually are.

I was wondering if there were some original purpose for them?

[Nicholas Scheuer]

Jodhpurs for horse people are like Tilley hats; they say to an onlooker, I ride very expensive horses (or expensive sailboats), and you don't. Othewrwise they'd just wear jeans.

[Meli]

Bet I'm richer than Phil nyah

[Phillip Allen]

You might have me confused with someone else. I never said he took a $77,000 deduction.

I said he declared a $77k loss and took a $50 deduction, with a possible loss carry-over to future years.

Please go back and re-read exactly what I wrote. Then apologize to me.

================================================== ================================================== ==

Then think about this simple question: Why declare anything about the horse on his tax returns unless to take a deduction, either in the current year or future years?

there are all kinds of lies...

[Phillip Allen]

Bet I'm richer than Phil nyah

like a compost heap? (sorry... it was too easy)

[Phillip Allen]

lj responded to this quote: "Can you prove they got a "$77k" deduction?"

I thought this was common knowledge.

It's in his 2010 tax return. Duh.

there are all sorts of lies...

in an obvious response to the question: "Can you prove they got a "$77k" deduction?"

lj said: "I thought this was common knowledge."

lj is playing fast and loose with truth it would seem

[Nanoose]

Boy. Michael Phelps is a dead ringer. Maybe HE should run for president!