Why do they say Retired when you never really worked

[sumitas]

it's like why do cops and firemen retire after 20 years...can't they do something the next 10 years in an office instead of hiring more paper pushers ? all these government workers, retirement age should be 60+ not friggin 55 with 80% pay. i agree misterb dude, there's a lot of folks milking others for an early free ride. but stallions ain't one of them sir.

[Storm Cadet]

Originally Posted by sumitas

it's like why do cops and firemen retire after 20 years...can't they do something the next 10 years in an office instead of hiring more paper pushers ? all these government workers, retirement age should be 60+ not friggin 55 with 80% pay. i agree misterb dude, there's a lot of folks milking others for an early free ride. but stallions ain't one of them sir.

NYC now has these 21 year old kids on the street as cops, they retire at 41, not 55...the NY taxpayers have to pay their retirement salary for 30 years!

[Left Bank]

http://www.brisnet.com/cgi-bin/edito...le.cgi?id=8304
He's going to work

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by sumitas

it's like why do cops and firemen retire after 20 years...can't they do something the next 10 years in an office instead of hiring more paper pushers ? all these government workers, retirement age should be 60+ not friggin 55 with 80% pay. i agree misterb dude, there's a lot of folks milking others for an early free ride. but stallions ain't one of them sir.

my father was a policeman in d.c. for 20 years. not sure he could have handled it much longer, TONS of stress working the streets up there. some places, yeah, they could do a lot more. but the larger cities, those guys, cops and firemen, go thru hell. overworked, definitely underpaid--most of them can't afford to live in the city they work in. hell, a city near here--the city bus drivers make more than the police.

[Zippy Chippy]

What a crazy, messed-up sport: the racehorses are more valuable in the breeding shed than on the racetrack, and the land underneath the racetrack is more valuable than the racetrack itself. The owners of the horses are reluctant to actually race the racehorses out of fear of injury or a "tarnished" record. The actual "racing" part of the horse racing industry seems to be considered a necessary nuisance.

This has to be the only sport where the "athletes" are worth more in retirement than while active.

[Left Bank]

Originally Posted by Zippy Chippy

What a crazy, messed-up sport: the racehorses are more valuable in the breeding shed than on the racetrack, and the land underneath the racetrack is more valuable than the racetrack itself. The owners of the horses are reluctant to actually race the racehorses out of fear of injury or a "tarnished" record. The actual "racing" part of the horse racing industry seems to be considered a necessary nuisance.

This has to be the only sport where the "athletes" are worth more in retirement than while active.

Well,when the government finally steps in about the drug use in the sport and wants bigger cuts out of the slots revenue and the sport falls to pieces,it is all gonna blow up in the breeders and owners faces!!!!

[Zippy Chippy]

Forgive me for this question, but how did it get so bad? I mean, once upon a time profits from breeding were considered "gravy" on top of all the "real profit" that horses earned through winning purses. Today, the exact opposite is true: the purse money is gravy on top of all the real profits from breeding.

Are there just too many owners now with way too much money? I mean, are there just way too many wealthy owners who can routinely throw $50K away in stud fees that is driving this market? It seems like the owners of previous generations had less money and more common sense. Very few were willing to pay exhorbitant amounts in stud fees, and it seems that very few were willing to make the mistake of paying, say, $16M for a horse. Today's free-spending owners have flooded the game in cash, and it has hurt the sport by taking the emphasis off racing. It can't be healthy for the sport when the top talents retire after their sophomore year.

How can this problem be fixed?

[Left Bank]

Get rid of Michael Tabor and Sheik Mahktoum

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Zippy Chippy

Forgive me for this question, but how did it get so bad? I mean, once upon a time profits from breeding were considered "gravy" on top of all the "real profit" that horses earned through winning purses. Today, the exact opposite is true: the purse money is gravy on top of all the real profits from breeding.

Are there just too many owners now with way too much money? I mean, are there just way too many wealthy owners who can routinely throw $50K away in stud fees that is driving this market? It seems like the owners of previous generations had less money and more common sense. Very few were willing to pay exhorbitant amounts in stud fees, and it seems that very few were willing to make the mistake of paying, say, $16M for a horse. Today's free-spending owners have flooded the game in cash, and it has hurt the sport by taking the emphasis off racing. It can't be healthy for the sport when the top talents retire after their sophomore year.

How can this problem be fixed?

maybe too many commercial breeders. not so many farms around any more that breed and race their own, that stand their own at stud...horses are commodities to be traded now. no longer looking to be sporting, but to be money makers. the wish now is not to improve the breed, to race the best you have bred to show that you know what you're doing--but to make money by selling.