They're horses and it's still BS

[fishbones]

Buckman, you'd be surprised at how much horse owners contribute in taxes, and there is very little public money spent on anything related to horses. Much more is spent on things that cater to other "hobbies" that don't contribute to taxes. Skateboarding is done by a very small part of the population, yet communities spend tax dollars on skate parks. How about your bike path in Mansfield? What percentage of the population uses that? Your head would explode if you saw all the different ways in which your tax dollars were spent.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by fishbones

Buckman, you'd be surprised at how much horse owners contribute in taxes, and there is very little public money spent on anything related to horses. Much more is spent on things that cater to other "hobbies" that don't contribute to taxes. Skateboarding is done by a very small part of the population, yet communities spend tax dollars on skate parks. How about your bike path in Mansfield? What percentage of the population uses that? Your head would explode if you saw all the different ways in which your tax dollars were spent.

The bike path in Mansfield is used by hundreds everyday. The skateboard park, like most, are built with donated money. Feel free to post up the surprising numbers of what horse owners pay in horse related taxes. Sportsman pay huge amounts, as you know.

[fishbones]

Originally Posted by buckman

The bike path in Mansfield is used by hundreds everyday. The skateboard park, like most, are built with donated money. Feel free to post up the surprising numbers of what horse owners pay in horse related taxes. Sportsman pay huge amounts, as you know.

Why don't you just admit that you don't like horses? I'm assuming that you have no idea how many people ride in the area that the bridge was replaced. It's probably a lot more than you would expect.

So, your estimate that hundreds use the bike path every day makes it a worthwhile tax funded project? Does that estimate include all the people using the path during the crappy weather and in the winter? I'd guess that the amount of use versus the number of people paying for it is probably less than you think.

As for taxes, stables pay high taxes because they're taxed at the business rate, not residential. Residential horse owners are taxed at the residential rate, but in order to keep horses on your property, you must own a minimum amount of land. The more land you own, the more taxes you pay.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by fishbones

Why don't you just admit that you don't like horses? I'm assuming that you have no idea how many people ride in the area that the bridge was replaced. It's probably a lot more than you would expect.

So, your estimate that hundreds use the bike path every day makes it a worthwhile tax funded project? Does that estimate include all the people using the path during the crappy weather and in the winter? I'd guess that the amount of use versus the number of people using it is probably less than you think.

As for taxes, stables pay high taxes because they're taxed at the business rate, not residential. Residential horse owners are taxed at the residential rate, but in order to keep horses on your property, you must own a minimum amount of land. The more land you own, the more taxes you pay.

Buckman's position is an example of "it doesn't benefit me so I think it's a waste." I think this is a fine opinion to have but instead of making up frivolous numbers and 'facts', just state that you disagree.

Personally, I support the project. It's a project that kept people employed, preserves access for anyone in the state to all areas of the Blue Hills and allows more oversized trucks to use that section of Rt 24.

Let's not forget that the local stables are commercial enterprises that pay taxes. Also, keeping horses is not cheap. Between vet appointments every 6-12 months, having the shoes replaced every 3-6 months, feed and all the other expenses, they generate tax dollars just like any other business. They also have employees (more tax money) and typically pay for services (vet/shoeing) from local providers and as such, keep that money in the community.

For the record, I've never been around horses, but my mother worked on a farm that bred and boarded them when she was a kid.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

Buckman's position is an example of "it doesn't benefit me so I think it's a waste." I think this is a fine opinion to have but instead of making up frivolous numbers and 'facts', just state that you disagree.

Personally, I support the project. It's a project that kept people employed, preserves access for anyone in the state to all areas of the Blue Hills and allows more oversized trucks to use that section of Rt 24.

Let's not forget that the local stables are commercial enterprises that pay taxes. Also, keeping horses is not cheap. Between vet appointments every 6-12 months, having the shoes replaced every 3-6 months, feed and all the other expenses, they generate tax dollars just like any other business. They also have employees (more tax money) and typically pay for services (vet/shoeing) from local providers and as such, keep that money in the community.

For the record, I've never been around horses, but my mother worked on a farm that bred and boarded them when she was a kid.

Oh....your Mom worked with horses.....I can't compete with that.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by buckman

Oh....your Mom worked with horses.....I can't compete with that.

I didn't know this was a competition. I thought it was you making up facts without any real information.

I'm sure there are people who complain when the state uses tax money to maintain parking areas that are used primarily by fishermen or hunters. How is this any different?

[buckman]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

I didn't know this was a competition. I thought it was you making up facts without any real information.

I'm sure there are people who complain when the state uses tax money to maintain parking areas that are used primarily by fishermen or hunters. How is this any different?

When you back up your reply with Mom, how can I dispute your knowledge on the subject?

What did I say that you contend is BS?

Fishemen and hunters pay for those ramps. Buy a boat and you will find out what it cost.

[striperman36]

there are 2 significant plots of land in Blue Hills deeded to horse use.

No suprise about the bridge.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by fishbones

Why don't you just admit that you don't like horses? I'm assuming that you have no idea how many people ride in the area that the bridge was replaced. It's probably a lot more than you would expect.

So, your estimate that hundreds use the bike path every day makes it a worthwhile tax funded project? Does that estimate include all the people using the path during the crappy weather and in the winter? I'd guess that the amount of use versus the number of people paying for it is probably less than you think.

As for taxes, stables pay high taxes because they're taxed at the business rate, not residential. Residential horse owners are taxed at the residential rate, but in order to keep horses on your property, you must own a minimum amount of land. The more land you own, the more taxes you pay.

I love horses.

Alot of horses are kept on land that pays little to no taxes.