licensing [Archive] - The Farrier & Hoofcare Resource Center Forums

tbloomer

01-27-2006, 08:25 AM

OK I copied this post from a non-licensing thread:

Originally Posted by George Geist
In some cases that might be so. I really dont know. most part-time horseshoers that I know of are that way because they want to be. All of us work about as much as we want to. Assuming what you say is true and it does do this, That would give what was left more work than they could possibly do right? Therefore, this should open up more apprenticeship opportunities as guys businesses expanded. This is if what you say is true which there is really no way to know. We do know that it woked in Illinois for nearly 100 yrs and they never sunk into lake Michigan.
George

George,

I have asked for and not received (from you) any factual response, which indicates that farrier licensing in the state of IL had the affect of increasing income for said licensed farriers. Since you have chosen to make this state an example, I am asking you to support your argument with some facts or in the least make a logical argument based on historical evidence.

You have (on another discussion board) made a claim that during the time that the IL licensing law existed, there was a financial benefit to the farriers in that state. You claimed that they made 20% more than farriers in other states. You have claimed that ". . . guys that I have known personally who worked those shows in those days have told me that they never saw a bad job come out of Illinois"

It sounds like "Those Were the Days." If I were to accept your assertions as truth rather than conjecture then I should hope that a logical thought process would arrive at the conclusion that those farriers who were licensed in the state of IL would have learned to appreciate the benefits of the situation. Therefore when the law was changed, why would those farriers NOT make an attempt to keep the law on the books? Why give up 20% of your income?

If the IL licensing laws were such a great thing for the licensed farriers, why didn't other farriers in other states organize and lobby for farrier licensing? AND since you are pro-union, why didn't the union push for farrier licensing in order to improve the income of union farriers?

You have done a lot of theorizing here about how licensing and unions would benefit the income of farriers. However, you have failed quite miserably to support your conclusions with any hard facts. Your soft facts do not stand up to logical scrutiny.

Whenever I hear about legislation, which restricts trade and commerce, my first reaction, is FOLLOW THE MONEY. Who stands to gain financially from the law? You say it is the farriers. Thus far, I have not heard any other pro-licensing farrier make the argument that licensing would cause an increase of income for farriers. The rest of the PLF have resorted to political fear tactics and cried about the welfare of the horse. Their argument has been made at the emotional level and from the perspective that THEY should be the ones who get to decide who is and who is not licensed.

Your argument is based on the assumption that restricting the number of farriers allowed to practice the trade would cause a change in the balance of supply and demand, which would benefit the established competent farrier. The problem with that argument is that is does not pass historical muster when compared to any other profession, which has the "benefit" of licensing. The reason for that is very simple. Supply and demand will continue to work as it always has. The demand for "black market" farriers will go up. The cost of policing non-licensed black market farriers will be added to licensing fees. Alternative hoofcare providers will pup up and take advantage of "uninformed" horse owners.

We already have an historical example of supply and demand hurting a licensed trade. The American Veterinary Medical Association has been working for the last decade to revamp the veterinary practice acts in every state. Their sole reason for attempting to change the laws is to take advantage of the additional income that they are loosing to alternative "medicine." Homeopathy, massage therapy, dentistry, nutrition, and YES FARRIERY. These have all come under scrutiny with the new laws.

As a result of the AVMA strategy to gain a bigger market share by legislative control, horse owner based grass roots organizations have been formed in several states to fight changes in the veterinary practice acts. It is only a matter of time before some state veterinary board is hauled in front of the Supreme Court and challenged by a group of organized horse owners and alternative care providers. If the licensed veterinarian’s income is suffering (as the AVAM has concluded) due to competition from the free market, what good is their licensing law? Where is the credibility that this law is supposed to bestow upon these learned professionals? Where is the respect of the public? How dare these ****** horse owners resort to alternative treatments for their animals! How dare they question the efficacy or modern veterinary medicine! We need laws to protect these people from themselves . . . and keep more of their money for ourselves.

Meanwhile, what is your take on the situation with Ford and GM . . . what is the UAW going to do for their members? Why are they crying for a government bailout? Why should my tax dollars pay to support GM and Ford employees because the upper management of those companies made ****** decisions about what kind of vehicles to build when gas prices went up over $3/gal? Who lobbied for the tax credit for buying gass guzzling trucks and SUVs?

FOLLOW THE MONEY . . . it doesn't add up unless you write the total in RED!

Tom Bloomer, CF

Ronald E. Kramedjian

01-27-2006, 08:36 AM

Would licensing, registration and certification push the requirement for insurance. If insured would this open farriers to more law suits?Phil,

In TN the vet practice act does not. So I see no reason for a farrier practice act to. If it does, it does. There is not much we can do about it except get insurance and be careful.

Gary_Miller

01-27-2006, 10:13 AM

Moved from thread "Just Read Craig's E-mail"
Gary (Miller)
In some cases that might be so. I really dont know. most part-time horseshoers that I know of are that way because they want to be. All of us work about as much as we want to. Assuming what you say is true and it does do this, That would give what was left more work than they could possibly do right? Therefore, this should open up more apprenticeship opportunities as guys businesses expanded. This is if what you say is true which there is really no way to know. We do know that it woked in Illinois for nearly 100 yrs and they never sunk into lake Michigan.
George
George, my point is licencing/registration has a proven history of costing individuals more money through extra fees and costs with no representation. Which in turn drives up the cost of services to cover the new requirements.

I like to use Idaho's new contractor registration law because it the most recent I know of (Just went into effect as of 1 Jan 06). Its loaded with requirements that cost contractors, suppliers, and home owners lots of extra money. As well as placing constrants on which supplies that have caused them to ensure your registered before selling materials, or they lose lien rights. It has also made it next to impossable for a new or young person to start a contracting business due to the insurance costs.

On the home owner the law states that if you intend to sell your property within a year and you spend more than $2,500 in fixing up your house that you need be registered as a contractor. Knocks out the guy who buys fixer uppers does the work himself then sells at a profit.

Gary, Idaho is a also a right to work state. However that does not stop legislation to make it hard to do what you would like to do.

Gary

George Geist

01-27-2006, 11:06 AM

Tom,
Youve asked me about a multitude of issues, I'll try to cover all of them. The Illinois law had a sunset clause on it. Which as you know means a law automatically expires after a certain time. If I remember correctly I believe it to have been either 50 or 99 years in that state I'm really not sure. When it was passed horseshoers had a lot more political muscle. John Fitzpatrick who founded the United Steelworkers as well as the AFL was a horseshoer. He was also from Chicago. My research thusfar for my book has not yet revealed a connection but I have a very difficult time believing that this could have occured without his having a say in it. My work in that area is ongoing.

By the time this law sunsetted we had a different situation. Illinois horseshoers had become the same disorganized rabble that they are everywhere else. They hadn't the numbers, muscle, or intelligence to function in the political arena anymore. There were some rumors to the effect that the licensing boards were very corrupt(pay attention AFA) and there was also a rumor that I tend to believe more, that a particular politician had a lower priced horseshoer that couldnt pass his test so he personally killed the law to legally keep his horseshoer.

Others thought it ****** of them to be the only state licensed with none of the others in the country being that way. Try to understand in the late 1800s individual states were like their own countries. There was not much interstate travel and Chicago was the only real city in the whole region. With a lot of horses and work there its reasonable to assume that this is why this was done this way. In the modern jet age things are a bit different.

As to other occupations, I believe this passes historical muster with flying colors. Before they were licensed nurses made minimum wage. There was no schooling or testing required. Now they make $25 an hour and can pick and choose where they want to work. As late as the 1960s there were some southern states(naturally) that still had no licensing laws. They had no choice but to pass them and raise pay in order to stop the flow of personnel moving elsewhere. In 1969 X-Ray technicians became licensed. Pay went from $3hr to $7hr overnight. In all these trades they heard all the same anti-licensing arguments that you guys put forth. After it happened, none of them would ever go back.

There will be no cost of policing farriers who operate illegally. That will be done by the police department who will be more than happy to enforce any law on the books. Who will report them? Well, most of us probably wont but I guarantee you somebody will. Alternative hoofcare providers have already popped up because of our non-licensing. Licensing would run these charlatans out of town just as it did in Germany.

It would also be an effective defense against the vet practice acts. I agree with you that they have their eye on us too. If all those other occupations can be wiped out of business with the stroke of a governors pen how safe are we? I will not be an employee of any vet. Besides with my well known record of union activism who would hire me? Anyway point being is that when you hold a license from the state to do something, nobody can stop you from doing what you are licensed to do.

I do not believe the vets are hurting for money, I believe they want more. The old 1980s "greed is good" philosophy. I'll give one more example which all the Pennsylvanians out there can back me up on.

Pennsylvania is the most anal retentive state in the union with the issue of car inspection. Most states dont have it, those who do its tolerable. PA considers themselves a model state for inspection and are therefore the strictest. Brakes are measured with a micrometer and a rust hole the size of a dime will flunk you. We all know this to be chicken s***. There has never ever been one single study proving that car inspection does anything at all for highway safety. Nothing, zero, zilch.

So why do we live with such a ****** law? I believe some mechanic at one time got himself elected to something and made this happen. This law causes an awful lot of guys to have businesses often in spite of themselves. Are there shade tree mechanics? Sure. I dont think anyone can prove that they hurt licensed shops though. Most of them havent the time, equipment, or expertise to make a decent living at it and even if you do use them you have to then go to a licensed shop to get your inspection. This is a law that helps that particular trade.

I find the situation with Ford and GM deplorable. I have no idea what the UAW can or will do. The current leadership of the AFL-CIO are probably the worst people I can think of to be dealing with something like this. Nonetheless I dont think its fair to blame the working people just because they were employed by mismanaged companies. Perhaps if they had attempted to take better care of their workers, those who were making the money for them instead of bankers and wall street investors who are nothing more than parasites, things may have been different. I dont know. As for government bail outs, Chrysler started that along with countless other companies. Certainly nobody comes to bail us out if we dont do well do they?
I figure their crying for a bailout because they know they'll get one. I agree that your tax money should not go to that but it probably will. You want to get into what tax money shouldnt go to we could all really make a list right?

I think that covers all your questions
George

Gary_Miller

01-27-2006, 11:23 AM

Continued from thread "Just Read Craig's E-mail"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary_Miller
No da! The key word is currently. If you would have been paying attentioin yoou know that I have been following the current discussion on the issue of farrier registration recently brought up by the AFA from day one.

Yes I have followed it very closely. To date I have not seen one bit of proposed legislation authored by the AFA. I have seen a lot of discussion about the kind of education that needs to be in place and of how the AFA can work to insure that farriers have a strong voice in the drafting of any legislation should it occur. Of course I have also seen a lot of manipulative and skewed reportage that has been targeted at hurting the AFA by people with an ax to grind.
Does it not start by discussions and opions on what individuals think should happen. All this has happen before any legislatioin is ever written.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary_Miller
Farrier licensing/registration is not yet here but give it time it will be one day. The equine industry is just beginning to really grow. Sometime in the future it will be noticed by legisators as a business/hobby instead of being part of the agriculture industry. When this happens licensing/registration will happen.

No Da!!!! Don't you think it would be a very good idea for us as a group to have done our homework before this happens. Just sticking our heads in the ground trying to avoid the issue puts us in a very good to give the government free access to our rear ends, don't you think?
I agree the home work needs done. Data needs collected, analized, discussed and dicisions made based on the facts, before anything get put in stone. I believe this is where the recent AFA task force lead by Mr. Tayor went wrong it was based on individual feelings, wants, and hidden agendas; and not on analized data and facts. If there was any data collected it was not shared with the membership.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary_Miller
It won't be the legislature that will require it but the people in the industry that insists that it be written into the bill because it will protect the horse owner should something go wrong. This would be the people who bring the first draft to the legislator to have it submitted as a bill.

All the more reason for us to get ahead of the curve and develop an industry wide plan to deal with it when it does arrive.
If the AFA wants to be the leading association in the industry, and I think they do. Then they need develope a plan to include writting the legislation in which they would submit if the issue comes up. The data would need up dated and the plan reviewed annually and tweaked as need based on the new data.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary_Miller
I wish you would not have asked for this I just hate wasting my time. But some people just need to be shown in order to be proven wrong. Straight out of the Idaho occupation licensing/registration laws.

Yeah, I forgot about the contractor laws and how often contractors go belly up or are incompetent. My wife busted my chops on that one. But I was refering to the professional practice acts and as far as I know they do not have insurance requirements built in.
Are farriers not contractor and don't farriers often go belly up or are incompetent?

You are correct in that individuals working in a trade may need to be licensed, in which they have to have so much schooling, apprenticeship hours, and exams. The individual is usually not rquire to have insurance unless they are also the contractor/employer. In which case the contractor/employer must have a license which usully require some type of insurance to be carried also.

Farriers are not only tradesman they are also contrators. So in this case as a tradesman a farrier may be required to have a professional license which could require some standard of education, maybe an apprenticeship as well, and certification or testing of some sort. Then they would be required to have a farriers contractor/business license which would require them to carry the insurance prevously mentioined. Both licenses would have to be renewed annually with the professional license requireing some CE hours in order to be renewed.

Starting to get costly now.

What are we into? An estimated 5 to 6 horses a year just for licenseing fees. Another 1 to 3 horses a month for insurance. Depending on your fees and where you live.

What do we get? A piece of paper with a number on that you are required to hang in your truck/trailer where it can be seen by your customers. You may also be required to put your number on the outside of your dhoeing rig, on your busness card, your invoices and your stationary.

I think our fore fathers would call this taxation without representation.

Gary M.

Rick Burten

01-27-2006, 12:30 PM

In the other thread, Phil said:
The issue of custody, care and control is a grey area
Not quite so grey. IIRC, the moment a farrier latches on to the horse, whether that be in haltering the horse in the stall and then leading it to the work area, or from the first moment the farrier touches the horse at the work area, he/she is deemed to have care, custody and control of the horse. Further, there is at least one court case where an owner successfully sued a veterinarian for damages incurred by the owner while holding their horse for the veterinarian. The court held IIRC that even though the horse was owned by the plaintiff, the plantiff(owner) was not deemed competent to hold the horse while the veterinarian worked on the horse. This precedent will be, IMNTBCHO, applied if an owner is holding their own horse for the farrier. Unless of course, the owner can be proven to be a well trained, competent, professional or professional level horseman/woman/handler.

Just something to think about.

I think what is really needed here is the advise of an attorney who practices equine law.

Now THAT would be a good article for the Professional Farrier Mag, or the AFJ, or an insurance agent/company, and/or as a main topic at a clinic, seminar, summit or convention.

Phil also said
[quote=PA]I wonder what would happen if someone sued a farrier because they thought you had insurance and you didn't?]
First of all, the farrier would have to retain a lawyer(win, lose or draw). Then the farrier would have to defend him/herself in court(remember "Animal Court with the venerable Judge Wampner? I remember a couple of times when a farrier was sued and tried to defend himself. It was really ugly and the farrier lost his case. And that was TV stuff. Imagine what could/would happen in a 'real' court of law). If the judgement was against the farrier, then whatever assets that farrier had, would be used to pay the judgement. Of course, the farrier could counter-sue, but it would still be on his/her dime. Whatever we have, whether it be a little or a lot, is at risk. One way of mitigating this risk is to become incorporated and be an employee of the corporation with the corporation, in addition to having entity insurance(s), providing insurance coverage for each of its employees.

I know that several of us have been asked to, or in actuality have, served as expert witnesses. We have seen , first hand, how badly(and expensively) things can go. Especially when an insurance company is not footing the bill.

Disclaimer: I am not, nor have I ever been, an attorney, nor do I play one on either radio or television. My comments are just things that have been explained to me by others, most of whom are attorneys. Reliance on what I have related, is discouraged for anything but thought, investigation, discussion and perhaps, individual action.

Gary_Miller

01-27-2006, 12:46 PM

Before they were licensed nurses made minimum wage. There was no schooling or testing required. Now they make $25 an hour and can pick and choose where they want to work.
I donk't know about the history part of nursing licensing causing nurses to make more money.
However the wage earned no is not related to licensing but supply and demand. There is a shortage of nurses so hospitals are forced to pay more in order to get the nursing staff needed to do the work.
The shortage is due to not enough room in schools to take all the applicants, due to a shortage of nursing instructors. To be an instructor you need a masters degree.
However to be an RN all you need is a two year AAS degree. A new RN with a AAS degree starts out about $19.80 an hour with differental pay added for nights ($3.37 hr) and weekends ($1.58).
A nurse with a masters degree can make more working as a nurse than they can as a nurse instructer. Many of the nurse instructers at my wife school also worked part time at the hospital just to make ends meet.
Licensing did not get them the money. A shortage of nurses did.

Fees associated with getting and mantaining a nursing license

Initial license
$90 - license fee (Nonrefundable) must be submited before you can take the NCLEX test
$25 - temp graduate license fee (so you can work while waiting for a test date)
$200 - examination fee

Renewal every two years
$100 - license fee

For what? All for the right to practice in their chosen profession.

There will be no cost of policing farriers who operate illegally. That will be done by the police department who will be more than happy to enforce any law on the books.
Like our law enforcement officers need more unnecessary work.

I will not be an employee of any vet.
Why not you would be paid a good wage, have no overhead, a warm shop to work in, and paid benifits.

Anyway point being is that when you hold a license from the state to do something, nobody can stop you from doing what you are licensed to do.
The state can by revolking your license or not renewing it for whatever reason.

Gary

Rick Burten

01-27-2006, 12:49 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary_Miller

If the AFA wants to be the leading association in the industry, and I think they do. Then they need develope a plan to include writting the legislation in which they would submit if the issue comes up. The data would need up dated and the plan reviewed annually and tweaked as need based on the new data.
I wholeheartedly agree! Unfortunately, as it now stands, that will not happen.

Originally Posted by Gary_Miller
Are farriers not contractor and don't farriers often go belly up or are incompetent?
Absolutely.

Starting to get costly now.

What are we into? An estimated 5 to 6 horses a year just for licenseing fees. Another 1 to 3 horses a month for insurance. Depending on your fees and where you live.
Again, how much will it cost if one doesn't have insurance and has to pay, out of pocket, to defend against a lawsuit? Even if one wins the case, how much has it cost? And lets for the moment eliminate a licensing requirement and fees.

I think our fore fathers would call this taxation without representation.
Happens every day. When was the last time you voted to increase your income taxes? Your property taxes? Sales taxes? Did you vote to require a hunting license? Fishing license? Drivers license? Did you vote to have a welfare state? How about a new library? new roads? etc. Did you vote infavor of higher fuel taxes? I don't know about you, but those who were elected to represent me sure don't seem to be representing me or my needs/concerns/issues or interests. Especially when it comes to taxation questions. So, in general, I feel I am being subjected to taxation without representation, both in general and specifically.

Gary_Miller

01-27-2006, 01:18 PM

I wholeheartedly agree! Unfortunately, as it now stands, that will not happen.
I suggest the board get their head out of the sand and at least reopen the issue up for discussion. If they don't it will catch us of guard and then it will be too late.

Again, how much will it cost if one doesn't have insurance and has to pay, out of pocket, to defend against a lawsuit? Even if one wins the case, how much has it cost? And lets for the moment eliminate a licensing requirement and fees.
I agree that have insurance is just a smart busniness practice. Right now it up to the individual farrier its a choice you can make. The diffrence is with licensing it takes the right of choice away.

Happens every day. When was the last time you voted to increase your income taxes? Your property taxes? Sales taxes? Did you vote to require a hunting license? Fishing license? Drivers license? Did you vote to have a welfare state? How about a new library? new roads? etc. Did you vote infavor of higher fuel taxes? I don't know about you, but those who were elected to represent me sure don't seem to be representing me or my needs/concerns/issues or interests. Especially when it comes to taxation questions. So, in general, I feel I am being subjected to taxation without representation, both in general and specifically.
Ditto!!! Not only that but it seems the elected officials keep trying to find ways to get more more of my money. They always like to use the argument that it will only cost the average tax payer $?? more in taxes. A sacrifice of one nights out for dinner. Soon your paying $???? in taxes and can't go aout to dinner. I don't know about you but I like my dinner nights out.
It was not until I paid off my morgage and had to start taking $???? out of my pocket that I really found oout how hard it was to give up my cash for taxes. Untill then it was part of my payment and I didn't have to worry about it.

Gary M.

tbloomer

01-27-2006, 02:33 PM

One way of mitigating this risk is to become incorporated and be an employee of the corporation with the corporation, in addition to having entity insurance(s), providing insurance coverage for each of its employees.

FYI Rick,

I incorporated my business this year. However in my investigation of civil law and corporations I learned that the only liability that incorporation protects you from is debt-liability. Debts incurred by a corporation can only be collected from the assets of that corporation. Creditors cannot come after owners’ and shareholders’ personal assets. Owners/share holders are only liable for debts up to the amount of their investment (stock) in the corporation. When it comes to professional practice liability or personal liability for negligence, the corporate entity AND the individual can be held liable. That is why most medical doctors and lawyers form LLCs instead of corporations - it doesn't protect them from malpractice liability or negligence torts.

Any legal tort action can be brought against a corporation AND an individual employee of a corporation - severally and collectively. The real protection of incorporation is when you file bankruptcy - you get to keep your personal assets and anything you own that is not corporate property.

I incorporated for income tax reasons. My FICA and MEDICARE are now based on my minimum wage salary. The rest of my income (quarterly dividends paid to share holders) is only subject to regular income tax. It's going to save me a substantial sum of money that I would otherwise have to pay as "self employment tax" if I remained a sole proprietor or an LLC.

My liability insurance has to cover Blackburn Forge, Inc. and Tom Bloomer, CF and anyone whom I might hire as an employee.

Tom Bloomer, CF

tbloomer

01-27-2006, 03:02 PM

As to other occupations, I believe this passes historical muster with flying colors. Before they were licensed nurses made minimum wage. There was no schooling or testing required. Now they make $25 an hour and can pick and choose where they want to work. As late as the 1960s there were some southern states(naturally) that still had no licensing laws. They had no choice but to pass them and raise pay in order to stop the flow of personnel moving elsewhere. In 1969 X-Ray technicians became licensed. Pay went from $3hr to $7hr overnight. In all these trades they heard all the same anti-licensing arguments that you guys put forth. After it happened, none of them would ever go back.
George
Funny you should mention nurses. There is talk of passing affordable housing legislation is Sussix County, Delaware because nurses, police officers, and several other licensed professionals cannot afford to own homes in the area where they work due to the skyrocketing cost of realestate. To get $25/hr as a nurse in lower Delaware you have to have a masters degree. A 4 year RN only makes about $19/hr. Try buying a $350,000 home on that income. Meanwhile, most of my client base is located in that same area - because I can charge more for shoeing horses in that area then where I live. In Sussix County Delaware, (non union) framing carpenters make more money than nurses. Go figure! Maybe those poor licensed nurses need a union, heh?

Meanwhile anybody who is willing to study up for and pass the Microsoft, Cisco, and SANS certification tests can get a job working as a network security analyst $75k/yr with no professional licensing requirements. A Cisco Certified Internetworking Expert (CCIE) is worth 6 figures in any job market in the US. It's a tough test, but it's childs play next to the CJF exam. I used to have a lower level Cisco certification. I only had to study for a week to pass the test, but I got me a $5,000 raise in salary. My Novell certification got me a $10,000 raise in salary. It took me 3 months of study to pass the Novell tests. Imagine that. The highest paying IT jobs don't even require a high school diploma. If you have half a brain and can memorize the information to pass the tests, putting a Cisco certification on your resume is the only requirement for a high paying job with a nice fortune 500 company.

Did you know that the entire Internet is run by a bunch of highly paid unlicensed technicians? I know, I used to be one of those guys. There's a whole bunch of certified network gurus out there that can't keep a network from crashing to save their lives . . . but hey they've all got good paying jobs!

Tom Bloomer, CF

Rick Burten

01-27-2006, 04:56 PM

I suggest the board get their head out of the sand and at least reopen the issue up for discussion.
Now that would be interesting to observe. Personally I hope they wait to do this until we're having a slow day here on the boards. That way, we'll be able to really liven things up again.
And, Gary, since you mention it, I'll nominate(and vote for) you to deal with the Franky Lundists and Richard Revilinskis, et al , not to mention the outraged private school owners, that will immediately weigh in with the same old tired, vitriolic, tripe. Personally, I think it will do them all good to get red in the face again.

By the way, has any one heard anything about the AFEC and its progress on its stated goal(s)? Or was that too just a tempest in a tea pot? Since I am aware that at least one and perhaps more private farrier school educators monitors these forums, perhaps one of them will step forward and update us on AFEC and its accomplishments to date,
I agree that have insurance is just a smart busniness practice. Right now it up to the individual farrier its a choice you can make. The diffrence is with licensing it takes the right of choice away.
There is no guarantee, only a supposition on your part, that mandatory insurance would be a part of a licensing package. And, philosophically, would carrying insurance be such a bad idea? After all, self-insuring can be both risky and expensive(even more expensive than the cost of any premiums or ac***ulation of premiuns over the years).

Years ago there was a guy, Bobby(aka BOOBIE) Lioti who went charging around trying to drum up support for requiring all farriers to carry mandatory insurance( Liability, CCC, etc). He didn't even want or care if farriers were licensed. He just wanted mandatory insurance. Fortunately, he was just flatuence on the wind. Initally a bit noisy and smelly, but quickly dispersed and made into non-discernable molecules of non-bombastic ******ity. At the time, Boobie made the tactical error of engaging Mssr. Tom Stovall and others on the Rec. Eq. newsgroup. A group where the literary and semantic style is, shall we say, a lot more freewheeling. There is no suit of protective armor, no hide thick enough, no defense strong enough to withstand that to which Boobie was subjected. Boobie then made the aggregious error of coming to FHRC(us) and trying the same stuff.
Due to the constraints placed on us by our benevolent dictator, it became a bit more challenging to deal with Boobie, but nontheless, we prevailed.

It was not until I paid off my morgage and had to start taking $???? out of my pocket that I really found oout how hard it was to give up my cash for taxes. Untill then it was part of my payment and I didn't have to worry about it.
I feel your pain! :(

Ronald E. Kramedjian

01-27-2006, 08:45 PM

Gary,
I agree the home work needs done. Data needs collected, analized, discussed and dicisions made based on the facts, before anything get put in stone. I believe this is where the recent AFA task force lead by Mr. Tayor went wrong it was based on individual feelings, wants, and hidden agendas; and not on analized data and facts. If there was any data collected it was not shared with the membership.I agree with you on this and I have said as much here on this forum, in the review of the Caldwell Report, published here and circulated to the BOD before the mid year meeting, that started the recent unpleasantness and to Walt himself.

If the AFA wants to be the leading association in the industry, and I think they do. Then they need develope a plan to include writting the legislation in which they would submit if the issue comes up. The data would need up dated and the plan reviewed annually and tweaked as need based on the new data.Again, I have said this in the past and continue to believe it to be the case. Unfortunately the BOD is feeling snake bit at this point and I do not believe that any of them has the stones to even approach a rational conversation on this issue for awhile and this is doubly certain as long as several of the schools have owners sitting on our BOD. It is a blatant conflict of interest but none of them had the class to stand down on the issue.

So in this case as a tradesman a farrier may be required to have a professional license which could require some standard of education, maybe an apprenticeship as well, and certification or testing of some sort.I believe that a more advanced education would be prudent. I do not believe that that advanced education can be had in 6-8 weeks. However this is only my belief, I would like to see some research into this area that is conducted in a reasonable and scientific manner. Unfortunately the best opportunity for that was lost when the current farrier schools used hype to hammer even taking a look at the schools and the way they train students to become farriers.

What do we get?Whenever this topic gets talked about this question gets asked. I don’t have an answer that will make you happy. However the horse should have a better shot at having a competent farrier. The owner should have a little less worry that the farrier they are using is competent. And finally most farriers coming into the business after receiving an advanced education should have more confidence and the skills to actually make it in this business. All of these outcomes would be good in my mind.

Guys that are practicing full time when such laws are passed will likely not see much benefit or change for a while. Guys that are practicing part time will either step up to full time or get out all together. My belief and again this is not based on any actual research is that there will be fewer farriers practicing after a licensing requirement is passed than before it. Of course if a testing component is included in the law for everyone and just education is grand fathered in a law I suspect that the impact will be slightly more significant.

George Geist

01-27-2006, 09:01 PM

I will second Rick on that has anybody heard any word on this AFEC thing? And yes it was a big mistake to shut off debate on this to appease a loud minority of barely 10%.

I also heard a rumor that the small hysterical minority got to some Farnam execs and nearly jeapordized the AFAs Farnam deal. Does anybody know if there is any truth to this?
George

Tom Stovall, CJF

01-27-2006, 10:42 PM

Farriers need licensing like working girls need social diseases. But, licensing is damn sure coming.

Not because it'll benefit farriers in any way, it won't; rather, because the several states are seeking new sources of revenue to make up for the tax money they've squandered on welfare programs benefiting individuals, special interests, and multinationals. The Great Unwashed Middle Class won't be able to sustain their tax burden indefinitely, which means sooner or later, the states will be forced to start taxing services to a much greater extent than they do at present. Doctors, lawyers, accountants, teachers, farriers, et al, will be seined up, their numbers counted the better to render unto Caesar, and some form of authority will be created to administer the whole SNAFU.

We can keep telling one another how great it is to be independent or we can band together and create a plan we can live with before the states cram one down our collective throats. All our silly, incessant, nattering about the AFA's "conspiracy" to license farriers is a study is shortsightedness because the AFA - or somebody - needs to be working on a model plan and have it ready to put in place as soon as the first legislation is written that will tax... er, license, farriers.

Legislators view taxing services as a cash cow that needs milking and we're going to be sucking hind teat if we don't have a plan ready for the registration, testing, licensing, administration, and enforcement of a program ready to plug in when some avaricious state legislature decides to tax farriers along with other service providers.

By the way Mr. Geist, as somebody who lives in both the South and a right to work state, I find the tone of your comments offensive and I break wind malodorously in your general direction. :)

T.N. Trosin

01-28-2006, 12:26 AM

I will second Rick on that has anybody heard any word on this AFEC thing? And yes it was a big mistake to shut off debate on this to appease a loud minority of barely 10%.

George you have a licence, go get your AFEC Farrier Licence and report back.

I also heard a rumor that the small hysterical minority got to some Farnam execs and nearly jeapordized the AFAs Farnam deal. Does anybody know if there is any truth to this?
George
Fact only Mr. Geist, no rumors, thats the reason that the AFA never got their study compleated.

IMPHO, I wish it would have. After reading the deal the AFA did OK on it but not as good as it could have. Now that Farnam has sold I personally don't expect the new parent company Centeral Garden and Pet to renew the deal.

At any rate

-10 points to Mr. Geist. 5 off for a rumor, 5 off for drifting from the topic.

tbloomer

01-28-2006, 12:30 AM

Tom Stovall, CJF

01-28-2006, 05:43 AM

Legislators view taxing services as a cash cow that needs milking and we're going to be sucking hind teat if we don't have a plan ready for the registration, testing, licensing, administration, and enforcement of a program ready to plug in when some avaricious state legislature decides to tax farriers along with other service providers. -TS

Tom Bloomer CF in gray

My business already has a "General Services" license with the Deleware Department of Revenue. If they wanted to tax services, I am already registered as a service business. I don't think the state would give a damn about whether or not I was able to pass a test to obtain a license as long as they could tax my revenue.

The taxation inherent to the registration/licensing of the various occupations will most likely be specific to the trade/craft/profession and will be in addition to the taxes/fees already required of any entity for doing business in a political subdivision.

If the state decides to tax services, why would said state do anything to restrict the number of licensed farriers?

Right now, under the guise of "protecting" the public interest, Texas licenses/certifies, amongst others, doctors, lawyers, veterinarians, pharmacists, accountants, barbers, beauticians, masseuses, vet techs, and peace officers: Can farriers be far behind?

That would decrease their revenue base. So for service tax purposes, a plain old general services business license needs no qualifications. Why should the government care whether or not I am qualified to practice my trade as long as they are getting a piece of my revenue?

The government doesn't care one way or another whether you're qualified to practice your trade. On the other hand, by creating a bureaucracy that administers the testing, licensing, and enforcement of legislation requiring farriers to be licensed, Big Brother can ultimately increase his revenue, spread his intrusive tentacles even further into our lives, and possibly create gainful employment for his shiftless relatives.

Y'see, in all probability, as soon as farriers are licensed, they'll be required to collect sales tax! Here in Texas, farriers now pay as much as 8.25% in sales taxes on a $12.00 set of shoes: How long before some bright legislator figures out that if the state could keep track of farriers while sanctimoniously pretending to be protecting the public interest, they could be collecting 8.25% of a $120.00 shoeing? Even the dullest of the doofi in Austin can count and $9.90 is an order of magnitude greater than 99¢.

Hot damn, I love a conspiracy!

Ronald E. Kramedjian

01-28-2006, 07:31 AM

Not because it'll benefit farriers in any way, it won't; rather, because the several states are seeking new sources of revenue
Tom,

I agree that it is not going to be designed to our benefit as it stands today. But I do not agree that it is just about new revenue. I am firmly of the opinion that when it happens it is going to be the animal rights, horse owners and associations that push it hardest as a way of benefiting horses and protecting owners.

tbloomer

01-28-2006, 08:22 AM

The government doesn't care one way or another whether you're qualified to practice your trade. On the other hand, by creating a bureaucracy that administers the testing, licensing, and enforcement of legislation requiring farriers to be licensed, Big Brother can ultimately increase his revenue, spread his intrusive tentacles even further into our lives, and possibly create gainful employment for his shiftless relatives.

That's why we have the Second Amendment. It provides us with the ultimate means of dealing with this kind of corruption. :)

TB

George Geist

01-28-2006, 08:53 AM

In the time since I began working at this trade, I have seen this issue come and go a few times. In fact, I estimate its a cycle of about once a decade. This is why most of the older guys dont get involved in this because they've seen it come and go too many times.

At this point it is a non-issue for all of the associations and there is no legislation pending anywhere.

I read Walt Taylors article which he wrote for AFJ back in I believe 2000. I then had the pleasure of meeting the man in California. At that time I told him he was right and I would support him on it. Good to my word to him I speak on behalf of it on the internet.

Tom Stovall says licensing is "damn sure coming". Although I have spoken on behalf of it I am somewhat skeptical that it would ever materialize.

Mr Stovall, what makes you so sure of this? Do you have a well tuned crystal ball or friends in your statehouse? Your declaration sounds pretty absolute.
George

Rick Burten

01-28-2006, 09:20 AM

George,

You know the old saying about death and taxes......

wwhite1973

01-28-2006, 09:23 AM

Quote RK
I agree that it is not going to be designed to our benefit as it stands today. But I do not agree that it is just about new revenue. I am firmly of the opinion that when it happens it is going to be the animal rights, horse owners and associations that push it hardest as a way of benefiting horses and protecting owners.

In Missouri they are gutting workman's compensation laws and have gutted the Head Start program. They don't care about injured workers and children, why would they license shoers except for the shear purpose of $$$$$$$. Certainly not for the horse. Tom hit the nail on the head; if they would implement licensing it would be only for the money.

Animal rights groups. The last confrontation I had with one of those groups they wanted to outlaw riding horses let alone shoeing one. If they have anything to do with it no one will be shoeing horses. Then licensing would definitely be moot and certification would be a thing of the past.

Wayne

George Geist

01-28-2006, 09:27 AM

Jason Maki

01-28-2006, 10:01 AM

Lets do a little math, Mr. Geist.
Fedral income tax-28 percent
FICA-15 percent
State Income tax-11 percent
City income Tax-3 percent
If a you billed a client $ 100 and he paid you $43 would you be happy?Then took more out for incidentials-say another $13. Would you work for them long?
I am sure I have forgotten one or two---before sales tax, gas tax, sin tax on beer, license plates,property tax, luxery tax etc-- I am already giving over 57 percent to the tax man--over half-
Then all of the hidden taxes- lets say 70 percent of my money ends up in some hucksters pocket---
Yeah, lets stand up and be counted, and let some more go to licensing, testing etc...
enough is sure has heck enough
Can anyone say "Golden Mean Society?" or perhaps" I do not consent!"
Jason

George Geist

01-28-2006, 10:27 AM

Jason,
All that stuff is beyond anybodys control. The income tax was thrown out as unconstitutional at least twice that I know of. To make it legal they passed a constitutional amendment which was never properly ratified thereby making it still illegal.

Over the past 20+ years we have seen large scale cuts in funding for various social programs, education, job training, welfare etc etc. Most people support the de-funding of a lot of these things.

The problem I see is that it has never resulted in any of the promised tax relief. Now if you want to be a tax protestor the legal arguments are technically right but you WILL go to prison over it. or worse yet be incinerated `a la Waco.

Wish I could give you a more optimistic outlook but there is none in that area outside of abolishing the federal reserve and getting back to the constitutional government we were founded upon. None of us will live to see that happen either.
George

Tom Stovall, CJF

01-28-2006, 10:38 AM

George Geist in gray

In the time since I began working at this trade, I have seen this issue come and go a few times. In fact, I estimate its a cycle of about once a decade. This is why most of the older guys dont get involved in this because they've seen it come and go too many times.

At 64, I probably qualify as being an "older guy" and I'm somewhat dubious as to whether or not my generation is any more or less involved in the licensing issue than any other. Did I miss the poll?

At this point it is a non-issue for all of the associations and there is no legislation pending anywhere.

If farriers wait until legislation is pending, it will most likely be too late to have any meaningful input.

I read Walt Taylors article which he wrote for AFJ back in I believe 2000. I then had the pleasure of meeting the man in California. At that time I told him he was right and I would support him on it. Good to my word to him I speak on behalf of it on the internet.

Mr. Taylor champions the imposition of licensing, I don't. I'm in favor of having machinery favorable to farriers ready to set in place if/when some governing entity decides to license farriers. Prophylaxis, not imposition.

Tom Stovall says licensing is "damn sure coming". Although I have spoken on behalf of it I am somewhat skeptical that it would ever materialize.

In that case, do nothing. You may be right. Then again, you may also be wrong and the consequences of your being wrong far outweigh those of being right.

Mr Stovall, what makes you so sure of this? Do you have a well tuned crystal ball or friends in your statehouse? Your declaration sounds pretty absolute.

[Old fat guy mounts soapbox.] It has to do with the evolution of our society into one that would rather be politically correct than correct; societal tolerance for public education that graduates kids who can't read, write, or do basic math; societal acceptance of non-productive able bodied members, societal pandering to various ethnic groups, the "one world" economic mentality so dear to multinationals, 50 years of de facto immigration law non-enforcement, and two generations of folks who look first to the government for a helping hand instead of the one at the end of their arm.

Unfortunately, somebody has to pay the light bill and that somebody is the Middle Class.

In most states, the demand for services from non-productive members of society is increasing at a greater rate than can be provided by the productive members, which leaves state legislatures two basic choices: Cut services or seek new revenue. Cutting services, no matter how logical, presented, or well spun, invariably results in the loss of votes. Since the first duty of any politician is to be reelected, I'm fairly certain that farrier licensing is inevitable because licensing represents an untapped source of revenue to profligate state legislatures. More importantly, licensing of all trade/professional/craft folks would enable Big Brother to count our numbers and make the imposition of a sales tax on services much easier accomplished. [Old fat guy dismounts soapbox.]

George Geist

01-28-2006, 11:03 AM

Mr Stovall,
Thank you very much. I knew thats what you were all beating around the bush about and finally Mr. Stovall came out with it.

The issue of being put under greater scrutiny by the taxing authorities. Now come on wasn't that easy? Why couldn't anybody else come out with that?

Yes, this is a cause for concern. I have thought a lot about that myself and it is a legitimate cause for worry. I believe that no evidence can be found in other trades at least that I've heard of any increase in harrassment.

I also believe that the increased money coming to us will more than offset any increased costs.
George

Tom Stovall, CJF

01-28-2006, 12:25 PM

George Geist in gray

Thank you very much. I knew thats what you were all beating around the bush about and finally Mr. Stovall came out with it.

The issue of being put under greater scrutiny by the taxing authorities. Now come on wasn't that easy? Why couldn't anybody else come out with that?

Mr. Geist, you've missed the point. Greater scrutiny by taxing authorities is not the primary issue, the real issue is the academically inspired, politically correct, creation of a society in which the Middle Class has been politically neutered while being forced to fiscally support both Big Business and Big Lazy. It's not politically correct to mention this, but the rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer, and we folks caught in the middle are expected to pay for it all.

Yes, this is a cause for concern. I have thought a lot about that myself and it is a legitimate cause for worry. I believe that no evidence can be found in other trades at least that I've heard of any increase in harrassment.

You might want to read what Mr. Maki had to say about real costs. And, that's just the tip of the iceberg.

I also believe that the increased money coming to us will more than offset any increased costs.

The problem with such thinking is that you, like many economists, fail to consider the obvious ad absurdum argument: What will happen to the American economy when the number of non-productive members of society exceeds that of productive members? If we continue to fail to educate our children, allow enough industry and jobs to be sent offshore, trade enough jobs for McJobs, then sooner or later, the standard of living in America will achieve parity with that of your basic Third World country. The stockholders of multinationals won't mind, the rest of the world will probably figure we got our just deserts, but the Great Unwashed Middle Class will cease to exist in appreciable numbers.

Rick Burten

01-28-2006, 12:57 PM

I also believe that the increased money coming to us will more than offset any increased costs.
George the problem with this line of thought is that it is wishful thinking. If our fees rise unacceptably, people will make others choices for the use of their discretionary income. And no matter what, it still comes down to the individual farrier. There are only so many horse's feet in any farrier's career. How many anyone can provide services for is limited by that individual. It was asked earlier, how much more licensed farriers in Illinois earned than did unlicensed farriers. I don't have an answer. I do know that with or without a license, I have made a comfortable living for me and mine. And, back when we did have licensing, the testing was administered by farriers, errr good ole' boys who were more concerned with protecting their personal turf than they were in bringing new blood into the industry. It was pretty much a lead pipe cinch that if a candidate was planning on shoeing in an area where a member of the testers board was living/working, or if the tester had a good buddy in that area, then that candidate was not going to get his/her license.

[quote=TS]The problem with such thinking is that you, like many economists, fail to consider the obvious ad absurdum argument: What will happen to the American economy when the number of non-productive members of society exceeds that of productive members? If we continue to fail to educate our children, allow enough industry and jobs to be sent offshore, trade enough jobs for McJobs, then sooner or later, the standard of living in America will achieve parity with that of your basic Third World country. The stockholders of multinationals won't mind, the rest of the world will probably figure we got our just deserts, but the Great Unwashed Middle Class will cease to exist in appreciable numbers.
Though somewhat Orwellian in nature, I think Tom's assessment is both accurate and pragmatic.

brian robertson

01-28-2006, 01:46 PM

DANGER!DANGER!DANGER! Jason Maki needs to run, not walk to the nearest CPA. If he really is paying those amounts out of every shoe job he is either unimformed of current tax law (and doing his own) or the most charitable, to the govt., person I've ever encountered or living in his own Cyber Reality.
A sole prop. shoeing business that generates $100,000 gross reciepts a year, on average, should have no more than a $13,000 total tax liability after deducting all legal operating expenses. If he would like to further reduce his taxes he can increase the funding to his retirement account (SEP up to $42,000) to the point his FICA would only be $3,500 and income tax less $1000. Don't believe me? I've been grossing $100,000 for more than a decade. Come see me at the IHCS in Cincinnatti on Thurs. I'll show you. I think the Honorable Mr. Stovall is on the right track but stopped a little short of the station. It's about taxes. The problem with our industry and this whole license paranoia stems from the fact that alot of us choose to run a "cash only" business and/or their 1040 is best described as a flight of fancy. The IRS might be slow but they are not ****** and can be an irresistable force.
I don't curse when I write out those checks for my 1040 ES. I think I'm pretty lucky. If you are paying taxes it means YOU'RE MAKING MONEY! The USA is a great place to live and raise my family and having to pay only 12-15% of my income to do it IS A BARGAIN and that includes paying into Social Security. If I live as long as my father, grand fathers and great grand fathers I'll be getting most of it back.

Rick Burten

01-28-2006, 02:05 PM

Gross receipts mean nothing unless you also know the net net receipts.

Perhaps Cordell will jump in here and help us out.

And all those legal operating expenses you are talking about, include all those fees and taxes Jason referenced. And then some.

Now. I don't disagree that you need an accountant with a really sharp pencilto help you keep as much of your hard earned money as you can, but the fact still remains that the CODB(cost of doing business) for a farrier runs relatively high.

And I don't care how much or how little anyone makes. The government is still getting too much of it.

Though I know we are not supposed to, necessarily, recommend anyone either individual or business , during our discussions, I cannot help but put in a major plug for my accountants. The firm of Dewey, Cheatem and Howe. :D

Jason Maki

01-28-2006, 04:32 PM

Perhaps I should go to a real firm... The tax guy I use is just that...

Jason

Jason Maki

01-28-2006, 04:37 PM

Hey,
Why do we have a ***bersome and unbalanced tax code(other than the obvious wealth redistribution mechanism that it really is)?
Would not a Nat;l sales tax of say 3% to 4% on all products, foodstuffs and services not generate a huge pool of money? Would it not also grow the economy as people found themselves with more real green?
Because it removes a huge beauracracy from control of people and their means. Beurocrats do not relenquish power, only expand their reach and use of it ...
that is very relevant to this conversation.
Jason

Rick Burten

01-28-2006, 05:50 PM

Would not a Nat;l sales tax of say 3% to 4% on all products, foodstuffs and services not generate a huge pool of money?
What are you? Some kind of rabble rouser or something? Why it just wouldn't be fair to leave the money in the hands of the ones that earn it. Why the entire welfare class would have to do without such esssentials as new cadillacs, plasma tvs, funky clothes, relaxation and recreation time. Hell, they might even have to practice some kind of population control if the gov'ment wasn't going to pay for all those worthless children. Further, you'd force people to make decisions as to when, where and how much of their money they are going to spend. ARE YOU NUTS????????

How are you going to keep all those politicians employed? What would you suggest they do if they have to actually EARN a living? And, while we're at it, lets get rid of that cushy pension program all those congressmen/women and senators enjoy. Lets make them subject to the same Social Security as the rest of us. Wanna bet how long it would then take to reform Social Security?
How about making their salary, and that of teachers at every level, merit based instead of tenure guaranteed?

You do know that Steve Forbes has been a huge proponent of a NST for many years. Most of the pols regard him in much the same way as I hold regard for F. Strasser's hoof butchering guidelines.

And as long as we're going to talk about a NST, lets also put a ceiling on it. A ceiling that can never, ever , under any cir***stances, be violated.

Jason Maki

01-28-2006, 06:01 PM

Never ever be violated? Like the constituition, which was cir***vented to create the income tax, FICA, etc in. the first place. When consent to be goverened is given, it can never be revoked... with out a "little revolution", or atleast the implied threat of one...
I am not saying this is neccasary, but at what point might it become "proper"? What if the folks pulling the wagonand paying the tolls just quit? That would in fact be a very real revolution that would make Ghandi proud. You are going to MAKE me work? Make me THINK? Why should I?
Proffesor Williams, a guest speaker on the Rush show last week, or two weeks ago had a solution. Every law passed, every benefit given by the government must apply to ALL people....
Jason

Tom Stovall, CJF

01-28-2006, 06:49 PM

Jason Maki in gray deletia

Proffesor Williams, a guest speaker on the Rush show last week, or two weeks ago had a solution. Every law passed, every benefit given by the government must apply to ALL people.

What a seditious thought! What next? Will the common folk who actually pay the freight start thinking they're entitled to free postage, great health coverage, cushy retirement benefits, and other perks just because officials slopping at the public trough get them? Next thing you know, some member of the working classes may have the temerity to suggest that lobbying is tantamount to bribery. And, election reform? You've gotta be kidding.

Does anybody besides me ever get to thinking anyone who spends more to get a job than the job will pay is probably a crook? That every elected official who accepts contributions is beholding to somebody? Or, that sooner or later, every note comes due? Just think: Tom DeLay, the poster child for political avarice and unrestrained greed, was third in line of succession to the presidency - and if that don't scare you, nothing will. :)

ray steele

01-28-2006, 06:59 PM

You know Rick,
every so often you say a thing or two that makes me get me ****ed off. "worthless children"! sir, and I mean "sir "in the lowest sense of the word but still recognizing that you are human,please take a look in the mirror.
While I respect you as a human, that comment makes me wish your parents had used a condom.

No regards

Ray Steele

What are you? Some kind of rabble rouser or something? Why it just wouldn't be fair to leave the money in the hands of the ones that earn it. Why the entire welfare class would have to do without such esssentials as new cadillacs, plasma tvs, funky clothes, relaxation and recreation time. Hell, they might even have to practice some kind of population control if the gov'ment wasn't going to pay for all those worthless children. Further, you'd force people to make decisions as to when, where and how much of their money they are going to spend. ARE YOU NUTS????????

How are you going to keep all those politicians employed? What would you suggest they do if they have to actually EARN a living? And, while we're at it, lets get rid of that cushy pension program all those congressmen/women and senators enjoy. Lets make them subject to the same Social Security as the rest of us. Wanna bet how long it would then take to reform Social Security?
How about making their salary, and that of teachers at every level, merit based instead of tenure guaranteed?

You do know that Steve Forbes has been a huge proponent of a NST for many years. Most of the pols regard him in much the same way as I hold regard for F. Strasser's hoof butchering guidelines.

And as long as we're going to talk about a NST, lets also put a ceiling on it. A ceiling that can never, ever , under any cir***stances, be violated.

ray steele

01-28-2006, 07:39 PM

Jason,

For a long time I have been in favor of a national sales tax, seems to me if you are "lucky" enough or earnest enough to make it to spend, then pay for your share to ceasar. Without any frills, by that I mean, you should not need a CPA to get you the best tax rate. It should be simple,so simple that even I should be able to do my taxes, and be able to get the best/fair deal.. my feeling is that tax filing should not be a seperate industry, the common man should be able to file his taxes, or a corporations. Keep it understandable. Do you think there is a reason to complicate it? Do you have time to read and comprehend the tax code?
I'm sure there are reasons for the complications, I just havn't heard them,or maybe they are to complicated for me to understand.

Regards

Ray Steele

Hey,
Why do we have a ***bersome and unbalanced tax code(other than the obvious wealth redistribution mechanism that it really is)?
Would not a Nat;l sales tax of say 3% to 4% on all products, foodstuffs and services not generate a huge pool of money? Would it not also grow the economy as people found themselves with more real green?
Because it removes a huge beauracracy from control of people and their means. Beurocrats do not relenquish power, only expand their reach and use of it ...
that is very relevant to this conversation.
Jason

brian robertson

01-28-2006, 07:57 PM

Rick, Operating expenses do not include fees or taxes.

Rick Burten

01-28-2006, 08:29 PM

Rick, Operating expenses do not include fees or taxes.

Maybe not in your neck of the woods, but around here, since I'm paying the freight, they sure do.

brian robertson

01-28-2006, 08:40 PM

Rick Burten

01-28-2006, 08:53 PM

You know Rick,
every so often you say a thing or two that makes me get me ****ed off. "worthless children"! sir, and I mean "sir "in the lowest sense of the word but still recognizing that you are human,please take a look in the mirror.
While I respect you as a human, that comment makes me wish your parents had used a condom.
No regards
Ray Steele
You know what Ray? I couldn't care less. By the way, are you aware that in a large percentage of the inhabited world, human life,including (gasp) children, has less value than does that of animals, particularly, beasts of burden and providers of sustenence. IOW, human life , having little if any value, is worthless. Hell, when America was a mostly agrarian society, people had lots of children not necessarily because they loved children, but because they had economic value.
Want to know how valuable human life is in say, the Middle East? Look no further than your newspaper or television for reports on the suicide bombers. They at least had some value to the terrorists who recruited, trained, and then sent them to their ignoble deaths. But truthfully, those leaders know their follower's lives are basically, worthless and deep in their heart of hearts, the bombers know it too.

And, a pox on LBJ and his "Great Society" that created this welfare class of society. Perhaps if that group used contraceptives, then there would be some non-religious, non-politically correct value attached to those lives. But in retrospect, those lives aren't truely worthless. Afterall, there is a dollar amount that attaches each and every time one more is born to a mother on welfare. Especially when that individual has no intention of ever leaving the system.
So lets see how worthwhile they really are. What do they contribute to society and or the economy? Crime? Drugs? Violence? Terror? Poverty? A "you owe me" attitude, a drain on resources, public and private, Gangs of thugs? Educational failure? All worthwhile things don't you think?
And, While Hillary may think it takes a village, I think it takes a bulldozer.

Jason Maki

01-28-2006, 09:11 PM

If I am shooting from the hip, maybe I should raise the weapon to my shoulder and take more careful aim. I care not a wit for the cost of doing bussiness of anyone but myself. Methinks perhaps the costs of doing bussiness maybe so inflated in other more regulated trades fro presicesley that reason!
I ask my six year old the following two questions:Who is responsible for you?
" I am" he replies
How do you make money?
"You go to work" he looks at me with a chagrined well duh, look.

Pretty simple. Why can educated adults not understand this?
Why does everyone appear to want everyone else to take care of them?
I take care of my family, my self. Everyone and everyhting else is extra.
Jason
addendum: I have a duty to the public safetey and Nat'l security of this country. I enlisted in and was 4fd from the Air Force in my early twenties(this is a wound to my pride and self worth that still pains me 13 years later). My wife and I are Vol. firefighters and she is a Paramedic as well, (volunteer). These are neccasary and appropriate "social" endeavors providing for the community as a whole security or emergency help beyond the scope of the individuals training or ability to overcome. I find that ALL of the men and women i encounter in these services are independant, stubborn and wish to be left to their own devices. A good majority are self-employed. This is an extension of my duty to my family and my self. I refuse to be responsible for every haggard soul who is UNWILLING to even attempt to do for themselves. If they need protected from thug, I'll step in front of them. If their home is on fire, I'll crawl through the smoke and flames to drag them out, if they are hurt or dying, my wife will do her devils damndest to save them: I will not build their home, or stock their pantry. That is a Butchers Bill they must pay on thier own.
This thread has spiraled way off course. I will close with this and recuse myself from the discourse, and further esposal of Radical right wing, non-secular, unpoliticly correct, suck it up and press on ideals. If everyone would take care of their own mess, there would not be a mess to clean up.
Jason

Gary_Miller

01-28-2006, 09:38 PM

Rick, Operating expenses do not include fees or taxes.
Brain what do you mean not part of operating expenses. Anything related to running your business is operating expenses. This includes sale tax paid on purchases of tool, supplies and equipment. As well as fees for professional memberships, subscription, clinics. ect.

Anything before you profit is operating espenses.

Gary

Rick Burten

01-28-2006, 09:44 PM

The cost of doing business for farriers is embarassingly low compared to other trades or service businesses. Rick needs to sit in on a local Chamber of Commerce meeting or a Small Business Administration seminar and talk to rest of the business world. I do believe it would be an eye openning experience. Rick and Jason are shooting from the hip on this topic. They've made up their minds and won't let silly things that the facts get in the way of their fantasy.
What information do you have that leads you to think that I have not sat in on or participated in CoC or BBB meetings? Do you know if I ever owned and/or operated a small business(service or otherwise) besides my farrier practice?
And what are the fantasies and what are the facts? As a sole proprietor all those expenses whether you call them expenses or not, come out of my pocket. They are, in point of fact, a cost of doing business, and any one who doesn't think so and plan for them is on a fool's errand.

At one time a thought Rick was rather clever and open minded but he has shown his true colors with his most recent posts.
I'm hurt. No, really, I'm hurt. Your opinion of me matters so much to me and is so much a part of my every waking and sleeping moment that I don't know how I'll endure even until tomorrow.

To have suffered your slings and arrows is something no one should have to do.

By the way, how many million of your people(relatives, ethnic group, etc)have been exterminated in say the last seventy or so years?

By the way, in case it has escaped your notice, they wrote a book(some would opine, "The Book") about my people and slavery and other mundane things. The chapter on slavery starts something like this: "we were slaves unto Pharoah in Egypt...." You by now have surmised the title of this book, right? So pardon me if I have little sympathy for the hand wringing and finger pointing that currently afflicts various and sundry segments of the population and don't revere all human life.

ray steele

01-28-2006, 10:07 PM

What information do you have that leads you to think that I have not sat in on or participated in CoC or BBB meetings? Do you know if I ever owned and/or operated a small business(service or otherwise) besides my farrier practice?
And what are the fantasies and what are the facts? As a sole proprietor all those expenses whether you call them expenses or not, come out of my pocket. They are, in point of fact, a cost of doing business, and any one who doesn't think so and plan for them is on a fool's errand.

I'm hurt. No, really, I'm hurt. Your opinion of me matters so much to me and is so much a part of my every waking and sleeping moment that I don't know how I'll endure even until tomorrow.

To have suffered your slings and arrows is something no one should have to do.

By the way, how many million of your people(relatives, ethnic group, etc)have been exterminated in say the last seventy or so years?

By the way, in case it has escaped your notice, they wrote a book(some would opine, "The Book") about my people and slavery and other mundane things. The chapter on slavery starts something like this: "we were slaves unto Pharoah in Egypt...." You by now have surmised the title of this book, right? So pardon me if I have little sympathy for the hand wringing and finger pointing that currently afflicts various and sundry segments of the population and don't revere all human life.

And there you have it, here in his own words, the self proclaimed "de facto" voice of the American farrier .

Regards

Ray Steele

Franky Lundist

01-28-2006, 11:08 PM

Well in reading some of these posts it seems that rick has proven himself not only pompous arrogant and self centered but something I would never have expected ..........a bigot, and as much as I have said about the AFA and the puppets even they have not stooped to such levels sad rick really sad

T.N. Trosin

01-28-2006, 11:31 PM

And there you have it, here in his own words, the self proclaimed "de facto" voice of the American farrier .

Regards

Ray Steele
Well in reading some of these posts it seems that rick has proven himself not only pompous arrogant and self centered but something I would never have expected ..........a bigot, and as much as I have said about the AFA and the puppets even they have not stooped to such levels sad rick really sad

Something tells me that you both misread that.

Rick Burten

01-29-2006, 12:11 AM

And there you have it, here in his own words, the self proclaimed "de facto" voice of the American farrier .
Your pettiness and peckishness is showing and noted. When and where have I ever claimed to be the voice of the American farrier, defacto or otherwise? Surely you can do better than that if you want to try to insult me.

And Franky, Its good to see you're back. We/I missed you. And before you go throwing that 'bigot' term around, consider that my family is probably one of the more multi-cultural families you will run into. Something I doubt you can claim about yourself. So, pray be careful lest you out yourself for what you , down deep inside, truely are.

And since I have never denied being arrogant, pompous, self-centered or a host of other worthy things, your awakening to the facts is late arriving. I also carry a bunch of contempt around. But that I save for sc*mbags like you.

"Oh we're meeting at the courthouse at eight o'clock tonight, you just come in the door and take the first turn to the right, be careful when you get there cause with all due respect, we're taking down the names of everybody turning left. Oh we're the John Birch Society, the John Birch Society, here to save our country from the Communistic plot........"

"Cry Havoc! set loose the dogs of war......."
Are we having fun yet?

T.N. Trosin

01-29-2006, 01:32 AM

be careful when you get there cause with all due respect, we're taking down the names of everybody turning left.

With all due respect and at the risk of life or limb, I believe the corect line is "we hate to be bereft, but we're takin down the names of everybody turning left"

To continue; "Help us fill the ranks, to get this movement started we need lots of tools and cranks"

A great Chad Mitchle song never the less.;)

Bye the Bye, I appreciate everybody taking the discussion here and I hope that we can all behave and dear leader won't lock this thread.

Thanks
T

T.N. Trosin

01-29-2006, 02:15 AM

There were some rumors to the effect that the licensing boards were very corrupt(pay attention AFA) and there was also a rumor that I tend to believe more, that a particular politician had a lower priced horseshoer that couldnt pass his test so he personally killed the law to legally keep his horseshoer.
George

I just thought that this was funny comming from a IJHU guy.

I agree the home work needs done. Data needs collected, analized, discussed and dicisions made based on the facts, before anything get put in stone. I believe this is where the recent AFA task force lead by Mr. Tayor went wrong it was based on individual feelings, wants, and hidden agendas; and not on analized data and facts. If there was any data collected it was not shared with the membership.
Gary M.

I think that Mr. Taylor did go about it the wrong way as well. But I think that it happened because one of the great hidden fears in leadership is being afraid of aleinating membership, which became (as Burten likes to put it) "colateral damage" anyway. Insted of having a frank discussion with the people he wanted to avoid and stating his reasons and feelings to those people and in turn getting their support, it became part of the "Grand Conspericy".

I suggest the board get their head out of the sand and at least reopen the issue up for discussion. If they don't it will catch us of guard and then it will be too late.
Gary M.

And, Gary, since you mention it, I'll nominate(and vote for) you to deal with the Franky Lundists and Richard Revilinskis, et al , not to mention the outraged private school owners, that will immediately weigh in with the same old tired, vitriolic, tripe. Personally, I think it will do them all good to get red in the face again.

What Burten said
Everytime the AFA BoD would want to talk about it there would be someone out there with the threat of a lawsuite, kinda makes one hesitent.
What the BoD should consider, before anything else is lobbying in what maner we can, for the rejuvination of the Collage farrier program. In a web serch one night there are very few collages that offer a "full" farrier program and I couldn't see one that offered an A.S. Degree in farrier science. So I ask Maki, since the majority of the ones I found online were at colleges in Ohio, and since he went to a liberal college, if he knows of one that offers an A.S. in farrier science.

ray steele

01-29-2006, 06:17 AM

T.N.

In what way do you feel I "misread that"?

Regards

Ray Steele

Something tells me that you both misread that.

tbloomer

01-29-2006, 06:18 AM

Tom (Bloomer),
What taxes do they have in Delaware? With no state income or sales (to best of my understanding) is there anything you have to worry about besides federal? Just curious because I dont know.
George

George,

Delaware has a fairly high state income tax when compared to MD, PA, and NJ. Also higher fuel taxes. Last fall I was driving across the boarder to MD to buy fuel - saving 10 cents/gal. The Govenor got smart and adjusted the fuel tax . . . bad press you know. Delaware has a gross receipts tax which applies to ALL business with over $1million annual gross receipts. DE property taxes are lower than Maryland - for now. That will change as they continue to turn farm land into housing developments for people that want to live in DE and commute to PA, NJ, and MD.

Now that I'm incorporated I've got to pay some nuisance taxes - maybe $350/year but the savings on federal taxes far outweigh the cost of setting up and running an S corp. YMMV

Over all I would say that the cost of living due to taxes in DE is higher than other states where I have lived and had to pay retail sales tax. It's a shell game they play with the average citizen. LOOK, NO SALES TAX! LOW PROPERTY TAX! AND IF YOU HAVE AN EMERGENCY, WE'LL SEND THE POLICE AND AN AMBULANCE . . . NEXT TUESDAY.

When my shoeing rig got wrecked last fall it took 2-1/2 hours for the DE state police to show up. The wreck happened within sight of a DE state troop dispatch station. Next time I get wrecked I want it to happen in front of Dunkin' Doughnuts!

Tom Bloomer, CF

Franky Lundist

01-29-2006, 07:45 AM

Mr Trosin, I dont think anyone misread ricks statement that would be akin to having misread the mike miller report or the walt manifesto, ricks statement may have been a freudian slip by a angry bitter man but either way his white sheet is at the dry cleaners and he just proved that the hats the klan wears are flat its there heads that are pointed.

rick as far as the s***bag comment I guess I will have to stoop to your level and use one of your favorite phrases I think you need too look in the mirror

Jason Maki

01-29-2006, 08:32 AM

TN,
The school I attended had only 800 students... it did not have any farrier program. The closest thing I could think of would be the "horseology' degree's offered by the U of Findlay (used to be Findlay University-Find-lay-or FU :rolleyes: ) or the Lake Erie Colege has an extensive horsey program. No farrier stuff. Findlay has what I would call a horseowners version worth a few credit hours....
That, my freind is a truly brilliant Idea, I would love to say "I have (can) "BS" in this "FS" with a degree (that says) from "FU!"
Jason

Tom Stovall, CJF

01-29-2006, 08:45 AM

T.N. Trosin in gray

What the BoD should consider, before anything else is lobbying in what maner we can, for the rejuvination of the Collage farrier program. In a web serch one night there are very few collages that offer a "full" farrier program and I couldn't see one that offered an A.S. Degree in farrier science.

Unless they've discontingued the programs, Sul Ross in Texas and Walla Walla Community College in Washington offer AS degrees in farriery.

Rick Burten

01-29-2006, 09:13 AM

With all due respect and at the risk of life or limb, I believe the corect line is "we hate to be bereft, but we're takin down the names of everybody turning left"

Tom, no life or limb as risk:D . It was just a further example of synapse failure on my part. In dusting off the cobwebs of my memory of the lyrics , I obviously disremembered correctly :p

Thanks for righting(hmmm, now that was an unintended double entendre) that wrong.

Rick Burten

01-29-2006, 09:30 AM

Mr Trosin, I dont think anyone misread ricks statement that would be akin to having misread the mike miller report or the walt manifesto,
Something you repeatedly demonstrate you did and continue to do.

ricks statement may have been a freudian slip by a angry bitter man but either way his white sheet is at the dry cleaners and he just proved that the hats the klan wears are flat its there heads that are pointed.
Now thats funny. In fact, I'm ROTFLMAO! Why? Because the concept, let alone the visual image, of a Jew in the KKK is one of the most outrageously funny things that anyone has ever said. Did you have an extra plate of ****** for dinner last night? Or do you always just wake up in the morning with nothing but flatulence between your ears?

Hey, Hop Sing, Hold the starch, would 'ya......(dumdiddeedumdiddidum Bonanza, dumdiddidumdiddidum dumdiddidumdumdum)

rick as far as the s***bag comment I guess I will have to stoop to your level and use one of your favorite phrases I think you need too look in the mirror
Franky, to get to my level you'd first need to get your head out of the sewer, and then get the tallest ladder you could find and then when you climbed it to the top, you might be able to touch the sole of my shoes.

Tom Stovall, CJF

01-29-2006, 09:32 AM

[In response to a call for a national sales tax] Rick Burten in gray, deletia

What are you? Some kind of rabble rouser or something? Why it just wouldn't be fair to leave the money in the hands of the ones that earn it. Why the entire welfare class would have to do without such esssentials as new cadillacs, plasma tvs, funky clothes, relaxation and recreation time.

I'm not much on giving an able bodied person a handout, but I think giving them jobs is a great idea: the New Deal wasn't such a bad deal at the time. Re-training folks who've been "offshored" isn't too bad an idea either, some of them could even be trained to (gasp!) get their hands dirty doing stuff the rest of society doesn't want to do. I can understand life throwing somebody an economic curve that breaks off into the dirt, but I don't have much sympathy for anybody who won't work. I think if you give a man a handout, you destroy his self respect - but if you give him a job, he can look at himself in the mirror and smile.

Hell, they might even have to practice some kind of population control if the gov'ment wasn't going to pay for all those worthless children.

It's probably not politically correct to mention this, but children really don't have much intrinsic value except to their parents - and grandchildren are largely overrated, but I've found them to be a great way to get even with my kids. :) Undoubtedly, somebody is going to claim you're the Grinch who dissed Mom, Apple Pie, and the American Way for stating the obvious, but the purposeful perpetuation of an underclass really has no value to society. A careful reader will note you made no mention of any ethnic group in your statement, but I'm quite sure some scholar will raise the specter of racism - and in so doing, profess his own bigotry.

That said, I'm still against licensing farriers; but I'm all for having a plan.

Rick Burten

01-29-2006, 09:45 AM

Ah, Tom.

Once again I find myself sitting at the feet of the master.

As you predicted, the true bigots amongst us have, like curdled milk, seperated from the whole and made their presence known. Why I think I even heard the memorable stanza from the epic "Ode to the Sweetness and Light Brigade. " :

"Truth to the left of them, Truth to the right of them, into the Valley of Truth rode the five hundred."

And, like you, I'm against licensing farriers, but also favor having a plan.

Since catchy phrases are all the rage these days, how about, "Proactive, not reactive"

Franky Lundist

01-29-2006, 10:05 AM

Rick Burten

01-29-2006, 10:29 AM

(Baron post # 87)
One more reference to any body part being inserted into any other body part, and that'll be the last post you put on these forums. (Same goes for anyone else, as well.)

Baron

(rick Franky, to get to my level you'd first need to get your head out of your butt, and then get the tallest ladder you could find and then when you climbed it to the top, you might be able to touch the sole of my shoes.)

Will this rule be enforced?

Franky,
The problem is that you again failed to read for content in context. I never said you should insert your head somewhere/anywhere, I opined that you should remove it. Some might consider this to be valuable medical advice since it goes directly to one's ability to breathe rather than to choke.

By the way Franky, I can't find that referenced quote you said I made, anywhere. Could you please direct me to the exact place I am alleged to have said that? Please?

I did however find a sentence I wrote where I suggested you needed to get your head out of the sewer. Perhaps, in what passes for your mind, you equated two dissimilar structures ? Interesting.

T.N. Trosin

01-29-2006, 10:48 AM

Unless they've discontingued the programs, Sul Ross in Texas and Walla Walla Community College in Washington offer AS degrees in farriery.

That’s the thing Mr. Stovall, I couldn't find a link on either's site that linked through and gave me conclusive evidence as to whether or not they did. I believe that at one time Sul-Ross did, but I know several guys that went through Walla-Walla who have A.S. Ag degrees but none in farrier science.

That, my freind is a truly brilliant Idea, I would love to have a "BS" in "FS" from "FU!"
Jason

Thanks Jason.

T.N.
In what way do you feel I "misread that"?
Regards
Ray Steele
Mr Trosin, I dont think anyone misread ricks statement
I can't say that Rick’s comments, while not necessarily congruent to the conversation on this board, was just a statement that he a has low low tolerance for a fear based mentality and it would appear that he has a very good reason for that, which I never realized. However the fact that he posts during the Shabbat tells me he is not orthodox.

(Baron post # 87)
One more reference to any body part being inserted into any other body part, and that'll be the last post you put on these forums. (Same goes for anyone else, as well.)

Baron

(rick Franky, to get to my level you'd first need to get your head out of your butt, and then get the tallest ladder you could find and then when you climbed it to the top, you might be able to touch the sole of my shoes.)

Will this rule be enforced?

I believe the moratorium covered insertion, not extraction, but I'll leave that to dear leader.

J.H. shoeing

01-29-2006, 10:49 AM

On a high note...

Bloomer

I know the doughnut as "Power Rings" with a high energy coating. My support for the "thin blue line" that is between my family and a chaotic world.

Jeff Holder, CF

Rick Burten

01-29-2006, 11:00 AM

I can't say that Rick’s comments, while not necessarily congruent to the conversation on this board, was just a statement that he a has low low tolerance for a fear based mentality and it would appear that he has a very good reason for that, which I never realized. However the fact that he posts during the Shabbat tells me he is not orthodox..

There has never before been a reason to discuss my ethnicity, nor is it germane to most conversations. And, you are absolutely correct. I am not Orthodox. The image of me going to work in full Orthodox regalia is almost as funny as the image of me 'dressed to kill'(so to speak) as a Klucker.

Jason Maki

01-29-2006, 11:11 AM

Rick,
Maybe you could wear the sheets, have your yamaka(someday I'll spell) under your hood, and Be the Grand Rabbi Wizard of the Klu klux Klan, Isrealite division! :rolleyes:
Franky,
Let it go. we are all big boys and girls, maybe some of us are both, or want to be the other. Maybe I'm a cross dressing homo***ual African Jew who has converted to Islam...What does that have to do with the conversation?
People are what they do and how they live, not there personel proclivities, skin color, specific religious neurosis or who their parents happened to be: We are all different, thus should each be responsible for our own existence. That is in fact the root of Ricks infflammatory, but inttelectually correct statement regarding children. Responsibility is learned from parents: if parents are leaches, odds are they will spawn leaches. If they in fact valued themselves, we would not be having this conversation!
Jason
Did anyone catch the paradixical statement in this post?

Dave Purves

01-29-2006, 11:21 AM

Don't judge a person by the doctorine they believe in, but how that doctorine effects them.

Dave

Rick Burten

01-29-2006, 12:01 PM

Rick,
Maybe you could wear the sheets, have your yamaka(someday I'll spell) under your hood, and Be the Grand Rabbi Wizard of the Klu klux Klan, Isrealite division! :rolleyes:
A capital idea! Its "yarmulkha(e)" though phonetically its pronounced pretty much as you spelled it. :)

There is a problem with your suggestion. Though I am, by birth, training, genetics, whatever, Jewish, I have decided to become an Agnostic Druid. Now, what you might ask is an Agnostic Druid? First, you have to have at least superficial knowledge about who the Druids were/are. They're the folks who brought us Stonehenge, liked to paint their bodies blue and then dance nekked around a fire in the woods. They among other things, worshiped the trees and rocks.

Now begs the question, so what's an Agnostic Druid? Well, though I still like to paint myself the color blue and dance nekkid around a fire, I'm not sure I believe in the trees and the rocks anymore. :D Some might think that this is a 'true crisis of faith' for me. Not to worry, I'm to busy singing, dancing and imbibing, to worry about it.

Perhaps to assuage the righteous indignation of others of my heritage, I'll wear a yarmulkha(e) while engaging in body painting and nekkid dancing.

The only problem with that nekkid dancing around a fire is that if one is in the throes of ecstasy and either dances too close or attempts to jump over the fire, well, rather painful burns to certain delicate anatomical structures/appendages have been known to occur. :eek: This is especially true when there is the presence and conspicuous consumption of the end product of fermenting certain fruits , grains and/or vegetables.

"Ha-va ne gillah, ha-va ne gillah, ha-va ne gillah "

brian robertson

01-29-2006, 03:19 PM

Rick, The point I was trying to get across to you yesterday is that Operating Expenses are deducted from gross income and in this country and ONLY your Net Income is taxed. You can further reduce your net income by increasing your contribution to your SEP. (ex. each $2000 contribution to my SEP will reduced my tax liability approx. $450. So that $2000 only costs me $1550. Not a bad return even for Mutual funds)
I thought you were referring to "Fees" as possibly a local tax of some sort. Of course fees in a general sense is part of CODB and deductable.
I assumed you have not been to a CoC meeting or SBA seminar (not BBB) because your statements concerning business matters are puzzling.

brian robertson

01-29-2006, 03:59 PM

Now looking back a Rick's recent flights of fancy corncerning Welfare in this country it appears heis been using Rush L. as his fact checker. According to the GAO (govt. accounting office) as of 2004, you could take all the "evil social programs" that Rick so vehemently despises (ADC, Headstrart, School lunch and General assistance,ect.) that are being abused by "those worthless people" and multiply by 2.74 and it would approx. equal the farm subsidy payout (you know "the white man welfare") or you could multiply it by 5 and it would equal the Federal subsidy paid to the oil and gas companies the likes of Enron and Haliburten(the other white guys welfare).
By the way, Rick's kindred spirit, Rush L collected welfare for more than a year in California because he was too fat to go the work (his own words).
Rick, in his trirade, also eluded to the stereotype of the "welfare queen" driving her Cadilac birthing all those crack babies for $. It's a classic Neo Con line that brings them all to their feet at their hate fests. The problem is... again according to the GAO reports, the majority of welfare program recipients are white women living outside of the major US cities. She most likely has 2 kids or less. She is either been abandoned, a recent divorcee, widow or victim of domestic violence. She will collect on these evil social welfare for less than 2 years, will take advantage of training programs or additional education and will rarely be back on the dole in her lifetime. These women make up over 70% of the recipients of our social programs. I wonder why Rick seems to hate women so much. Maybe he should spend a little time helping out at a womens shelter; it might humanize him.

Rick Burten

01-29-2006, 05:28 PM

Well, Brian(geesh, I almost slipped up there and typed in Brain instead of Brian),welfare comes in many forms and goes to many entities. A pox on all of them. Had you been able to read for content in context, you might have been able to extrapolate that from what I wrote. And, at least the farmers work for a living or at least they try to. A situation that is far different from walking to the mail box to see if the 'don't go to work' paycheck has arrived yet.

And, while I find Rush L. amusing and often, entertaining, he and I are far from kindrid spirits. However, it wouild appear that you(brian) idolize murderers and liars such as the venerable leftist Ted Kennedy and his band of merry relatives. Or are you a waffler like the esteemed John Kerry? You know the type--never met a statement, position, opinion , ad naseum he couldn't/wouldn't change depending on what was popular or politically expedient at the moment.
Or are you just a member of the Apologista Party who finds it necessary to stick it to hard working individualists and give the money to those less fortunates who blame everyone else for their problems and condition.

I've seen your song and dance performed many times. You're part of that vast conglomorite of pseudos.

I wonder, if the government offered the opportunity, how many of you psuedos would opt out of contributing to all those programs and 'entitlements' you keep cramming down the rest of our collective throat.

Oh, I forgot, you already try to opt out don't you. Sure you do. You've found a clever way to reduce your government tithing. Why, if you were really a believer in what you spout, you'd willingly give up more of what you earn , for the betterment of mankind. But you don't, do you. Nope, under that pseudo -liberal veneer, beats the heart and works the mind, of a conservative capitalist. Prove me wrong. This year, give 75% of your gross rreceipts(stated by you to be $100,000.00 +/-) to government entities. Live on the remaining 30%, and accept no help from any form of government. And then keep doing that for the next five years. Get back to me the beginning of 2012 and then we'll talk.

And yet again, you make the mistake of assuming what, when and where I do things with my life. Another mistake continually made by the pseudos.

By the way Brian, incase you missed it, social programs, in and of themselves can neither be good or evil. Those administering them and those taking advantage of them, are capable of great good or extreme evil. As are those who propose and initiate them in the first place.

The 'Great Society' envisioned by LBJ is a failure. It didn't work in the beginning and, regardless of the protestations to the contrary by the pseudos, it doesn't work now.

The time is rapidly approaching when the work force will no longer be able to provide for the non-work force, when working will become more expensive than not working. I'm sure you pseudos have a contingency plan for that very exigency but I'll bet it doesn't include sharing your wealth with anyone else.

Just out of curiosity, do you blame the teaches and/or the schools for the failure of students to learn to read, write, spell, etc, correctly and at a minimum, at grade level? Do you believe that we owe a free public school education to illegal immigrants and/or their get? How about free health care?

Do you think we should be expending the precious capital of our country prosecuting the war on terror or any other war or regional conflagration? Shoud we be at the forefront of sending aid to countries or regions hard struck by natural disasters knowing full well the feelings of those areas towards the United States? Given an absolute choice between sending aid to tsunami victims, or improving the living conditions and educational systems of blighted sections of America, which would you choose? In your opinion, is it better to aid other countries, or to help that group of Americans that we have so long and vigorously oppressed, namely, Native Americans, or for us less politically correct folks, American Indians? Whats more important to you, a pristine ANWR or less reliance on foreign oil sources? Would you oppose the construction of a dam that would supply work and energy to an area that had little of either if it meant the extinction of some species of fish?
Do you agree with and support the recent Supreme Court ruling regarding how municipalities can use the power of Eminent Domain?
What is more important to you, the welfare and education of you and your family, or the welfare and education of others? Would you allow your children to be bussed to an inner city school(the Bedford-Styvestant area of NYC comes to mind as an example, but any inner city school district will suffice)? If not, why not?

Cyber Farrier

01-29-2006, 05:45 PM

George Geist

01-29-2006, 05:48 PM

Well,
We sure are on a roll here. Certainly I dont think anybody is pro-tax. Thanks Tom Bloomer for the interesting facts about Delaware. I have also wondered what makes the place so desireable in that almost all of the fortune 500 incorporates there. If it is a cop you want, try going over 55 on 95. Ask me how I know?

Anyway, back to topic. All of these social ills which affect this country certainly do exist. Especially as described by Mr.Stovall. Unlike most of the political right-wing, I do not believe these things can be blamed on a progressive tax rate. There are other reasons for this which are much bigger problems than guys like us can ever do anything about.

There are some like Mr.Maki, who think a national sales tax is the way to go. I must disagree. They have it in Canada, it doesnt work well there either. Just picks peoples pockets. To have it instead of Income tax would require getting rid of a constitutional amendment. I dont see that happening. I will refer Jason to the stuff Mr.Robinson is saying. Do things right you can cut your tax liability down to something you can handle.

Admittedly I dont know the laws of all 50 states. I would guess them all to be keeping with the Uniform Commercial Code though. For this reason as Mr Bloomer said if you are already in possession of a business license, what difference would it make to have a division for occupation. Would this not therefore serve to protect the guys who are really in business and adversely affect the so called "beer shoers"?

Finally, Mr Trosin, you know I cant let that one go unanswered. Yes it is true that the JHU has a reputation for being as you implied. It was this very thing that put them on life support and nearly killed them. The thing I am saying is that this is not going on anymore. The people who operated that way are no longer there. It is much different now. It is for this very reason that when I see another association even begin to operate that way that I am hyper sensitive to it. As for what happened in Illinois if what Mr Burton says is correct that was indeed unfortunate. I believe it could have been dealt with though. Perhaps not letting someone be on licensing boards forever may have helped. Before the AFA was gagged their tentative plan was to have horseshoers in the minority on these boards. Maybe that could have helped.

I onced asked a lawyer friend how difficult is the bar exam. The answer was interesting. They told me it depended where you were. In other words places like NY and NJ were very difficult. Places like Iowa or Kansas they were very easy. It just depended how many lawyers were in an area.

This leads me to believe that the state test might have operated in such a way. Is not a good reason but is a reason. Pure speculation on my part.
George

Tom Stovall, CJF

01-29-2006, 06:27 PM

T. N. Trosin in gray, my old stuff in brown, deletia

Unless they've discontinued the programs, Sul Ross in Texas and Walla Walla Community College in Washington offer AS degrees in farriery.

That’s the thing Mr. Stovall, I couldn't find a link on either's site that linked through and gave me conclusive evidence as to whether or not they did. I believe that at one time Sul-Ross did, but I know several guys that went through Walla-Walla who have A.S. Ag degrees but none in farrier science.

Please try the following URLs:
http://www.wwcc.edu/programs/proftech/FRR/
http://www.sulross.edu/pages/3223.asp

T.N. Trosin

01-29-2006, 07:05 PM

Finally, Mr Trosin, you know I cant let that one go unanswered. Yes it is true that the JHU has a reputation for being as you implied. It was this very thing that put them on life support and nearly killed them.
George

It did here in California at least. I was explaining to my apprentice today what I little I knew about the JHU pull out of California and wondered what your thoughts might be George. Dad's JHU and I'm sure he would be interested as well.

For once Franky almost had it right. OK, any reference to either insertion or removal. Clear now?

Baron

Dear Leader has spoken, not that I would ever say something of that nature unless of course it refered to points of insertion of tendons and ligements or the removeal of necrotic tissue (I had to test the waters).

ray steele

01-29-2006, 07:12 PM

T, N.

With all due respect,sir,

I would like you to explain to me your perception of my missread of the post to which you refered,

Regards

Ray Steele

T.N. Trosin

01-29-2006, 07:27 PM

I refer the right honerable gentleman to the response I gave one page ago.

brian robertson

01-29-2006, 07:28 PM

Wow Rick. I was helping you to get your facts straight and you go off the deep end. I've re read your posts and nowhere do you admit you were a little fuzzy with your facts. You go into attack mode like a good Neo Con. "Don't like the message attack the messenger" right from the Republican Party National Directive. I'm still waiting for an appropiate rebutal.

Nowhere in my posts have I stated a party affilation or political philosophy. You have assumed wrong again grasshopper. I have a problem with people who spew nonsense for fact no matter which side of the aisle they're sitting.
The people who hold similar views to yours are responsible for the ruination of the GOP. I've been forced to join the ranks of the independants.

I do my tithing at my church. I volunteer at the local women and childrens shelter as their Mr. Fix It. My family donates to and volunteers at our local food pantry. I try to practice what I preach. I believe all lives are invaluable even yours.

I find offensive your mean spiritedness,intolerant attitude and your willingness to substitute your misguided beliefs for fact on this thread. I felt compelled to call you out on these ideas.
Before your latest diatribe you seemed to have your wits about you.

Are you not taking your medication?

Gary_Miller

01-29-2006, 08:03 PM

IMHO the welfare program in it beginnings was a good idea to help those who are in need of a leg up. It was never intended to do more than give a person a basic allowance while they went to school or searched for a job.
However it has gotten so out of hand that we now have people making a living of of welfare. There is also problem where a person may take a low paying job like at a fast food joint but can't because he would make to much money and loss benifits such as medicare for dependents. So they stay on welfare. Because they can't get off it slowly.
The solution is a workfare system. In the system I have in mind people would be required to work for what they recieve. There would be no sitting around a home but a location in which you would be required to go do public service in order to recieve your welfare check. Though an individual may learn a trade at these locations that would not be the focus but a fall out that just happens. Work at these locations would not be the most pleasent work non the less work that needs done, and at the same time provide insentive for individuals to get off the program.
Ok the plan. Anyone who need a lift up from the welfare program would be required to show up at the local municipal building and go to work doing the odd job that the skilled labor in the shop does not have time to do. For instance street sweeping with a hand broom, cleaning out clogged drains, painting curbs, fire hydrants, parks, washing trucks, ect.. People in need of daycare would drop their children off at the daycare center which is operated by some skilled day care providers and susidized by, you guessed it, other wefare recipiants. This way we as the government don't give anything away and wefare recipiants could hold the head up high and also have insentive to go find better jobs or schooling.
Next I would discontinue the headstart program and move the money from the social welfare program to the eduaction program to help strengthen and provide more funding for our public education system.
I could go on but I think you get the point.

Gary

ray steele

01-29-2006, 08:04 PM

T.N.

I guess I 'm just dense, please explain, in a simplistic refereal that even the basic of us can understand. Again ,simply i am asking ,What is that I misread about Rick Burtens' post that you refered to . If you feel it necessary I will look up the post # from you and the post # of my original request for this clarification. Just let me know if that will be required.I realize that you answered my post and another in one reply, but somehow I did not feel that I got an answer. Could you/would you ,be so kind.

Regards

Ray Steele

George Geist

01-29-2006, 08:11 PM

Mr Trosin,
I dont know all the details of the reasons why Californias racetrack shoers quit the JHU. Mr Stovall has posted an article from Anvil magazine of an interview with the late Harry Patton which touches upon it briefly.

Although it happened before I was involved with the union, from what I understand it was that they chose to affiliate with the Teamsters union because the JHU had nothing to really offer at the time beyond a $10,000 life insurance policy. I have no knowledge of what better deal they may have gotten from the Teamsters. For those who say they went non-union that is simply not the case as evidenced by their Teamsters affiliation.

What I can tell you is that due to anti-raiding laws, they are unable to pursue it, but the JHU would like nothing better than to get the California guys back. I know your father is very well known out there and if you or he would like to talk more about what they have to offer now, feel free to contact me. Either PM here or e-mail mferrant@mail.com or call 717-469-8145
George

Rick Burten

01-29-2006, 08:45 PM

I find offensive your mean spiritedness,intolerant attitude and your willingness to substitute your misguided beliefs for fact on this thread. I felt compelled to call you out on these ideas.
Before your latest diatribe you seemed to have your wits about you.
If you have a quarter and access to a pay phone, call 1-800-DILLIGAF. Since its toll free, you'll even get your quarter back.

Tithing at the church while commendable, isn't doing anything to further your support of the national welfare state and its citizens (but it does reduce your taxes doesn't it? One more way to cop out of paying your fair share to support that which you condemn others for speaking against). To sop your conscience, its nice you do some community service.

As far as the GAO, who cares? As Will Rodgers once said: 'There;s three kinds of lies; lies, damn lies, and statistics."

I just plain don't like the welfare state and the welfare class it has created. And I do resent seeing my hard earned money basically ****ed down the drain. I thought it was wrong when the Government bailed out Ford, but in hindsight I sure wish I had bought about 10,000 shares when the stock was trading at $1.00/share :o

An exception: For those (relatively few)individuals who truely need government assistance because of some( or several) frailty, then I absolutely see both the need and obligation. But for those who have made a living slopping at the federal and/or state and or local welfare trough.

And Brian, one man's idea of ruination is another man's idea of salvation.

As for the rest of it, answer the questions I posed.

Phil Armitage

01-29-2006, 09:21 PM

Hey Rick, since you mentioned "wothless children" in one of your posts. I was wondering do you consider yourself worthy or worthless?

Don't get me started!!! :mad:

No child is worthless, therefore no adult is worthless either. That also makes you not worthless. Don't forget that.

If your paying taxes that means your one of the lucky ones.

Phil Armitage

01-29-2006, 09:49 PM

"One more reference to any body part being inserted into any other body part, and that'll be the last post you put on these forums. (Same goes for anyone else, as well.)"

For once Franky almost had it right. OK, any reference to either insertion or removal. Clear now?

Baron

No not clear yet, what if we are talking about rare things like something that may actually have to do with horseshoeing, can we mention removeing shoes, nails and inserting nails? How about removal of horn, sole or frog. Inserting the mixing tip of vettec products under a foam board. Removeing infected horn with WLD. Inserting the foot into a medicated hoof boot. ;)

T.N. Trosin

01-29-2006, 09:59 PM

And there you have it, here in his own words, the self proclaimed "de facto" voice of the American farrier .
Regards
Ray Steele

Perhaps if you clairfied the above statement. I took it to mean that you thought that Rick's refrences were either anti-semitic, or that he was a becon for licencing.

Simple enough?

brian robertson

01-29-2006, 10:00 PM

Rick, I could only find 2 questions but lots of your fuzzy facts again. In your cyber reality the US govt. might have bailed out Ford. In USA history the federal govt. made federal loan guarantees to Lee Iacoca and Chysler corp. The govt. basically co signed the loans from Wall Street to the Chrysler corp. Chrysler never defaulted so the tax payers never had to pay. It was a vote of confidence to the auto industry. That kept 180,000 people working during tough times.

Yes contributions to qualifying charities are legal tax deduction;even you can tithe.

Yes, I think the US General Accounting Office is a reliable source of information.

"Relatively few" How are you qualified to determine someone elses legitimate need? Maybe you could offer your services as a case worker.

"Welfare State" is another one of those Neo Con buzz words without much traction. The Federal Govt. mandated welfare reforms by the States during the first Bush and both Clinton Administrations. Those reforms shortened the length of benefits, reduced the amount of benefits and reduced the number of people who qualify. According to the US Census Bureau the % of the population receiving General Assistance has gone down the last two decades. The last time I checked we still have only 50 states; none named Welfare.

I have not spoken to anyone who would prefer to "be on welfare" instead of having a job. I've only seen the embarassment and shame in their eyes.
Maybe it's different where you live Rick but it's what I see here in Michigan.

It's easy to pick poor people, they're not very good at defending themselves against the self rightous.

I hope you and yours never fall on hard times and see what it is really like "slopping at the trough".

Rick there's this thing on the 'net called Google. You should try using it since Rush really isn't working out as a fact checker for you

Did someone on welfare/foods stamps cut you off at the grocery store sometime?

Dave Purves

01-29-2006, 10:24 PM

Hey Rick, since you mentioned "wothless children" in one of your posts. I was wondering do you consider yourself worthy or worthless?

While I don't speak for Rick, the definition of worth:
1. material value, esp. as expressed in terms of money
2. importance, value, merit, etc.
3. the quantity to be had for a given sum (a dollars worth)
the preposition
1. deserving or worthy of
2. equal in value
3. having wealth amounting to

we are all born of equal worth, what you do with it is up to you.

Don't get me started!!! :mad:

I believe you're taking this too personally Phil.

No child is worthless,

Agreed. No child should be punished for the short comings of their genetic investors

therefore not adult is worthless either

Slow down, is the adult that beats that child not worthless? Is the adult that abuses that child not worthless? Is the adult that doesn't teach that child about dignity, respect, and responsiblity not worthless? There are too many adults in this world that are exactly that, worthless. Our schools are filled with children from broken homes, being raised by crack addicts and in my opinion the last thing these children need is a handout. They need to be taught that hard work earns respect and worth. Sitting back all day smoking your food stamps does nothing for the human spirit.

. That also makes you not worthless. Don't forget that.

From reading Rick's posts, I have no doubt that his self-worth is not in question. El Magnifico

If your paying taxes that means your one of the lucky ones

While paying your taxes is one way to know you're making money, I don't exactly find it something to feel lucky about. I would much rather offer the passenger seat of my truck to a young lad that's down on his luck and teach him to make a living, than offer my money to feed him with no skills to move beyond.

jmo
Dave

Phil Armitage

01-29-2006, 10:58 PM

Dave I understand what your saying. It is very unfortunate and very sad what some adults will do. It is also very unfortunate that some of us lack tolerance and forgivness. Maybe realiseing that we are all loved and valued is a start.

You are right you should not be speaking for Rick, the :mad: face and question was for Rick and only Rick. I agree with Brian, some of his comments do come across as offensive. Let him explain what he meant.

I have read this entire thread and many others, in particular the comments made by Rick and Frank. Frank's remarks are harsh, but they are targeted to what he sees as a problem with the AFA and the Farrier trade and to be honest I do not have a problem with that and have not found them to be offensive. Ricks comments can get way off track and offensive to the point that I am a little suprised it is tolerated.

JMHO

Dave Purves

01-29-2006, 11:34 PM

Everyone knows that Rick needs no defensive linemen. I'm not trying to defend anything that Rick or anyone else has said. I'm only trying to keep eveyone's eye's on the middle ground here. And I also think that this type of conversation can take a very personal turn very quickly. I'm just trying to keep the "personal" stuff out.

Dave

Phil Armitage

01-29-2006, 11:41 PM

Very noble of you Dave, where were you for the other 85 posts. If you have not noticed it took that course a long time ago. I refrained from saying much until tonight. I have also kept it polite, in case you have not noticed. Am I easier for you to reply to than Rick is? Maybe it is my kinder nature.

Cyber Farrier

01-29-2006, 11:43 PM

No not clear yet, what if we are talking about rare things like something that may actually have to do with horseshoeing, can we mention removeing shoes, nails and inserting nails? How about removal of horn, sole or frog. Inserting the mixing tip of vettec products under a foam board. Removeing infected horn with WLD. Inserting the foot into a medicated hoof boot. ;)
I will, in my benevolent manner, studiously consider each occurrence of such rare "things," and render a fair and pleasing judgment, as befits the awesome omnipotence and scholarly omnicience (as well as the great responsibility) of occupying the Command Chair.

Rick Burten

01-29-2006, 11:52 PM

Hey Rick I was wondering do you consider yourself worthy or worthless?
(shrug of my shoulders) Phil, I don't really think about it. However, depending on who else you might ask, I think some might call me worthy, some might call me worthless. And that will depend on their own particular POV. Either way, at the precise moment I cease to be a viable entity, my worth only matters to those who stand to inherit what ever materialistic toys I have managed to acquire. And, I suppose if my heirs could sell my carcass, it would have some value both to them and who ever purchased it. And, in thinking about it philosophically, I suppose that those who felt I had some worth while I was alive, might, at least for a brief time, continue to believe in my worthiness. Either way, it sure won't matter to me.

No child is worthless, therefore no adult is worthless either. That also makes you not worthless. Don't forget that.
Since we are each entitled to our opinions, I respect yours.
And, upon reflection, you are right. I am not worthless. I can always be used as a bad example. :)

If your paying taxes that means your one of the lucky ones.
Funny, I don't really feel lucky(with regard to the subject at hand). Perhaps you'd like to have my luck. I'll gladly cede it to you.

Rick Burten

01-30-2006, 12:05 AM

Let him explain what he meant.
And I need to do this because?????? Besides, according to what I've been reading, my meaning is, at least to them, crystal clear. You also might want to go and re-read Tom Stovall's comments made with reference to my comments that got some undies all wadded up. Check them out again and get back to me.

I have read this entire thread and many others, in particular the comments made by Rick and Frank. Frank's remarks are harsh, but they are targeted to what he sees as a problem with the AFA and the Farrier trade and to be honest I do not have a problem with that and have not found them to be offensive.
Interesting. You perhaps missed all of Franky's ad hominum stuff or perhaps you just choose to ignore it? And to make sure I understand this, lets say, hypotheticly, you were in a leadership position in the AFA. Now, go back to all those comments made by Franky and insert your name. Then re-read the comments and tell me what you think.

Rick Burten

01-30-2006, 12:24 AM

[QUOTE=brian robertson]Rick, I could only find 2 questions but lots of your fuzzy facts again. In your cyber reality the US govt. might have bailed out Ford. In USA history the federal govt. made federal loan guarantees to Lee Iacoca and Chysler corp. The govt. basically co signed the loans from Wall Street to the Chrysler corp. Chrysler never defaulted so the tax payers never had to pay. It was a vote of confidence to the auto industry. That kept 180,000 people working during tough times.

Brian,
You have my sincerest apologies. I did say Ford when indeed it was Chrysler. Perhaps its just old age, or perhaps it was because I just recently heard on the news that the Pres. has said there will be no bail-out for Ford or GM.

You are also correct when you say that Chrysler never defaulted. But what if they had(and for quite a while it sure looked like they would)? Once again we'd be left holding the bag. As we are now seeing, there are no job guarantees anymore. So would you have the government issue loan guaranteesin order to keep everyone working, to every company that is either downsizing or is going out of business ? And if so, what happens if one or several companies default? Maybe we should bring back the WPA. Heaven knows there's a lot of work that needs done that isn't getting done. And if we were to re-institue the WPA, perhaps we should fold the welfare system right into it. That might be something for which paying some taxes would be worthwhile.

Me, I stand with those who ascribe to the adage "The government that governs least, governs best."

"Oh we're meeting at the courthouse at eight o'clock tonight....." :)

Phil Armitage

01-30-2006, 12:24 AM

And I need to do this because?????? Besides, according to what I've been reading, my meaning is, at least to them, crystal clear. You also might want to go and re-read Tom Stovall's comments made with reference to my comments that got some undies all wadded up. Check them out again and get back to me.

Interesting. You perhaps missed all of Franky's ad hominum stuff or perhaps you just choose to ignore it? And to make sure I understand this, lets say, hypotheticly, you were in a leadership position in the AFA. Now, go back to all those comments made by Franky and insert your name. Then re-read the comments and tell me what you think.

I do not think rehashing things is a healthy discussion, I made my point. As to what Frank said, I did not ignore them and if I placed my name in place of of the names he mentioned the comments would not bother me. Why didnt those persons take the time to respond. I bet they come here and read this stuff, I bet someone by now has informed them of what is being said. Why not clear the air right here on the worlds largest farrier forum? If it were me I would read them and probably have a one on one discussion with Frank on all the issues he has with the AFA. There is a difference between comments directed toward society and classes of people and comments on a process, orginization and its leaders. I am sure you understand that.

I respect alot of the comments, ideas and information that you have shared on this forum and I for one thank you for shareing it.

Good night Rick

Rick Burten

01-30-2006, 12:28 AM

Phil,

Did you perhaps read my comments about "loose cannons" and 'plausable deniability"?

And, thanks for your last statement.

ray steele

01-30-2006, 04:28 AM

Perhaps if you clairfied the above statement. I took it to mean that you thought that Rick's refrences were either anti-semitic, or that he was a becon for licencing.

Simple enough?

T.N.

I wish you had asked for this clarification earlier, we can all read in when we wish, I do remember my first thought when Rick posted the reference to his peoples book , and it was , I don't believe it, he's playing the religion card! Figured he'd pull a Johnny Cochran next with something like *if the shoe don't fit , you can't certify* . I'll let you decide if that is anti semetic, myself I think you would have to take a long stretch to make it so,but If you took it that way,maybe. I would ask that you let me know how your thought process took you there. Believe me I'll check mine.

My reference to rick speaking for the American farrier refers back to the thread about Markel insurance ,I think it was #8. Let me know and I'll look it up.

Was this thread about license? I jumped in about "worthless kids"

Regards

Ray

Ronald E. Kramedjian

01-30-2006, 07:57 AM

With all the complaining about government we should all remember to be thankful that we do not get all of the government that we pay for. :eek:

Rick Burten

01-30-2006, 08:03 AM

I don't believe it, he's playing the religion card!
Nah, I was just trying to make a point, sorry you missed or misunderstood it.

My reference to rick speaking for the American farrier refers back to the thread about Markel insurance ,I think it was #8. Let me know and I'll look it up.

If that was post #8 in this thread, you will note that I started with IIRC, which is short for If I Recall Correctly. Then, an astute reader would have read and possibly remembered the disclaimer I placed at the end of my comments.

So, if in light of these two particular things you somehow read that I was speaking for the American Farrier, then you were/are quite mistaken.

If you are referencing comments I made in a different thread , please give me the link to that thread because I'm too lazy to try and figure out which one it is.

ray steele

01-30-2006, 09:42 AM

Rick, you will see the quote to which I refered under the thread markel.

Ray

T.N. Trosin

01-30-2006, 10:07 AM

now I'm totaly confused on this Ray

Gary_Miller

01-30-2006, 10:30 AM

Since Ricks statement cause so much turmoil especally among the crowd that would rather cause problems on this board and do their best to move a subject of track by directing personal attacks just to yank someone chain.

Yes, Franky Lundist and Ray Steele I'm speaking of you two. like it or not you remind me of the childish little child on the playgroound who throws the sand into the face of someone bigger than them then runs to the teacher when they get they face busted in. In hopes to get the other kid expelled. I refure you to Franky's post #64. And Ray's ranting and raving at T.N. Torsin to explain himself when the subject is not even part of this tread I refure you to post #100.

I would like to comment on how I read and comprehended Ricks statement.

Why it just wouldn't be fair to leave the money in the hands of the ones that earn it. Why the entire welfare class would have to do without such esssentials as new cadillacs, plasma tvs, funky clothes, relaxation and recreation time. Hell, they might even have to practice some kind of population control if the gov'ment wasn't going to pay for all those worthless children. Further, you'd force people to make decisions as to when, where and how much of their money they are going to spend.

First of all I don't really believe that Rick thinks there are worthless children, but children that become worthless due to the situation they are brought into. Now some of you are thinking right now "Well its not the childrens fault that they grow up in this environment but the fault of their parents." and you would be right. However I have personnal seen children of welfare recipents who have had a chance to better themselves in educational programs that would make it possable to suceed trun back to the welfare program because it was easier to do. When this happens they become a canker on society and in my opion a worthless plage/individual. Because they are not contributing to the benifit of our society. So they become wortless.

Is it the individuals fault? The answer is Yes and No. Yes because they are not taking advantage of the programs now in place to help them get out of the rut they were placed in when born. No, because our society has allowed a program to be developed that takes money from the hard working middle class and gives it to those who chose to not work because it easier to just sit and gather a welfare check. And if you want more money all you need to do is have another child and you can get on other programs and a larger welfare check. This we breed people who are not worthless as individuals and gods children but are worthless to providing any benifit to society.

Its a vicious never ending circle that will not be broken until our government revamps the system and stoppes giving what is called entitalments to people who choose not to give back to society. These people are thieves.

Gary

Gary_Miller

01-30-2006, 10:33 AM

Now to get back on the subject of licensing. Those that belive licensing will benifit the trade have not really given it much though or studied the realities that licensing/registration has done to other trades. If they had they would know that the only people who make money with licensing are the government, insurance companies, and lawyers. Not one dime from collecting licensing fees have ever gone back into the betterment of a trade.

However, I lilke others believe it comming and think the best way to stop it is to be prepared with our own program.

The sad thing is the one oraganization in which I think is in the best postion to do this is so scared of the outcome that they have choosen to bury it in the sand. And anyone in a leadership postion is afraid to bring it up again. Where this needs to be on the agenda at the board meeting next month. I would be suprised if it is.

Gary

ray steele

01-30-2006, 12:30 PM

Since Ricks statement cause so much turmoil especally among the crowd that would rather cause problems on this board and do their best to move a subject of track by directing personal attacks just to yank someone chain.

Yes, Franky Lundist and Ray Steele I'm speaking of you two. like it or not you remind me of the childish little child on the playgroound who throws the sand into the face of someone bigger than them then runs to the teacher when they get they face busted in. In hopes to get the other kid expelled. I refure you to Franky's post #64. And Ray's ranting and raving at T.N. Torsin to explain himself when the subject is not even part of this tread I refure you to post #100.

I would like to comment on how I read and comprehended Ricks statement.

First of all I don't really believe that Rick thinks there are worthless children, but children that become worthless due to the situation they are brought into. Now some of you are thinking right now "Well its not the childrens fault that they grow up in this environment but the fault of their parents." and you would be right. However I have personnal seen children of welfare recipents who have had a chance to better themselves in educational programs that would make it possable to suceed trun back to the welfare program because it was easier to do. When this happens they become a canker on society and in my opion a worthless plage/individual. Because they are not contributing to the benifit of our society. So they become wortless.

Is it the individuals fault? The answer is Yes and No. Yes because they are not taking advantage of the programs now in place to help them get out of the rut they were placed in when born. No, because our society has allowed a program to be developed that takes money from the hard working middle class and gives it to those who chose to not work because it easier to just sit and gather a welfare check. And if you want more money all you need to do is have another child and you can get on other programs and a larger welfare check. This we breed people who are not worthless as individuals and gods children but are worthless to providing any benifit to society.

Its a vicious never ending circle that will not be broken until our government revamps the system and stoppes giving what is called entitalments to people who choose not to give back to society. These people are thieves.

Gary

Gary,

As I see it I was answering T. N.s question. I'm not sure if I can change your mind as to it being a rant. if you see it as a rant.I don't. As i noted at the end, we seemed to have gotten of the license quite a bit earlier. When things get ambiqious to me I like to try to clarify so that I know(or think I know what the question is) .

regards

Ray Steele

ray steele

01-30-2006, 12:58 PM

Gary, after giving it some more thought after my last post, If I could I would like to point out that you admonished me for ranting on a thread about licensing and addressing a post within that thread about children and a possible conflict. You then went on to speak to the situation involving the children etc. and that i could see never addressed licensing.
I point this out not for any other reason but to clarify why I try to be sure of peoples meanings before I post. Posting is important to me as i 'm sure it is to you. And it is easy to loose site of a threads original subject, that's why moderators get the big bucks!

If I may add ,what may seem like a little humor/irony, I am very interested in your thoughts, How do you feel about farrier licensing et al.?

Regards and thanks in advance for your comments.

Ray Steele

Cyber Farrier

01-30-2006, 01:10 PM

...that's why moderators get the big bucks!
Ray Steele
This is a major revelation to me! Moderators are getting big bucks? Where? I want to know. And I want to know right NOW!

Baron

ray steele

01-30-2006, 01:29 PM

He woke up! the ruckus is over. ok everyone your on your best behaviour. If we are quiet for a few days he may go back to sleep.

See you in cinccy Baron.

regards

Ray Steele

Gary_Miller

01-30-2006, 03:07 PM

Gary, after giving it some more thought after my last post, If I could I would like to point out that you admonished me for ranting on a thread about licensing and addressing a post within that thread about children and a possible conflict. Ray if you would note the post that I admonished you on was post #100 about insurance which was in a whole diffrent tread, and not Ricks post on the welfare program which was post #37.
You then went on to speak to the situation involving the children etc. and that i could see never addressed licensing.
Which was part of the tread since we were discussing the costs of licensing and taxes and that we felt the government already took more than enough in order to perovide so called entitlements to people who had no disire to get of the welfare system.
I point this out not for any other reason but to clarify why I try to be sure of peoples meanings before I post. Posting is important to me as i 'm sure it is to you. And it is easy to loose site of a threads original subject, that's why moderators get the big bucks!
I don't I seem to have no problem staying with the subject of the thread. It could be that I read and follow whats going on so I can find the relivance to the topic.
Or it could be that I can read the top of each post in the top left hand postion under the name of each person that posts. I think the call it a TITLE.

If I may add ,what may seem like a little humor/irony, I am very interested in your thoughts, How do you feel about farrier licensing et al.?
More like ******ity on your part.
If you would just go back to what you were taught in the first grade you would know how I exacttly how I feel on the subject of Farrier Licensing/Registration. Its called reading for comprehension.
I will help you out.
If you click on my name in any of my posts you will find a place that takes you to all post posted by me. Maybe a good place for you to start.

Gary
"Now go do the right thing." Dr Laura Schlissinger

Rick Burten

01-30-2006, 04:28 PM

It seems to me that there are many farriers, myself included, who,while being against licensing, seem to favor the concept first proposed here by Tom Stovall, of being prepared for that eventuality by having a PLAN.

Perhaps it would be worthwhile to discuss what each of us would like to see as the structure such a plan would take.

My considered opinion regarding the issue and the AFA is that the AFA, having been roasted, drawn and quartered over the issue, is not going anywhere near it until perhaps it is too late(reactive rather than pro-active).

So it looks like its up to us. Afterall , we are members of the ICFA(International Cyber Farriers Assn), right Baron? We can discuss it, formulate a plan, modifiy the plan, discard the plan, do what ever we want to do, except, promote the plan. Thats not its purpose.

If we decide to do this, perhaps Tom will serve as 'lead dog' or perhaps someone else wants to be the coordinator?

Since the full spectrum of farriers seems to be represented here, its as good a place as any to consider this issue, isn't it?

Rick

ps: I hope any/all concerned appreciate my attempt to seque back to the original topic. ;)

Gary Hill

01-30-2006, 04:51 PM

Rick, Just a question as to, why doesn't the AFA open up as we do on this web site? If they want to be leaders then they must be able to communicate to us that have given up on them, to bring us back into the fold? Baron has created this site that in my humble opinion is the BEST on the web, as we are all able to participate no matter what "level" farrier we are. On this site no one really cares if you have the letters behind your name. The level of experience is vast between everyone that posts also. I dropped my membership some 24 years ago mostly due to the additude of the older more experienced farriers of that time, that I feel ,felt threatened by newcomers. I admit I would like very much to be able to run off to alot more clinics but my weekends are tied up competing on my horse and of course I am married to a burn barrel runner so the weekend is always horseback. Something I feel more farriers should do every once in a while. Even owning a horse gives you a differant perspective that the guys that shoe and don't even own a equine? I'm sure most farriers at one time in their life owned and rode, but I do know some that have never ridden or owned a horse and I just don't quite understand them or their ways sometimes? JMO, Thanks, Gary

Phil Armitage

01-30-2006, 04:51 PM

Gary I am very confused about how you are responding to Ray. In all the time I have been posting on this forum I have never known Ray to be mean spirited or lacking comprihention. I don't get it??? I also think your suggestion to go back and read all your posts to get an idea of what you think about licensing is over the top. Are your saying that if your were to hear new thoughts on the subject your thoughts would not change?

There are several reasons why we communicate on this forum, one of them is entertainment. Sometimes I like to use humor sometimes I get passionate about the subject. I think Ray brings balance to this forum, many times he has brought the subject back on track with humor and good questions.

When something is offensive I think it should be discussed. I do not like to remain silent when I read something offensive. I feel silence can be taken as agreement. So I will speak up, maybe in humor, dropping a hint or sometimes direct. If I am guilty of offending anyone I am open to hearing about it, remaining silent does not fix anything. For example if a joke is told or remarks targeting any group is mentioned, it is not funny and I for one will not remain silent and let others think that I am OK with it, I am this way in person and will be this way on this forum.

As far as the subject of licensing lets make a case for or against licensing, currently I see more information that supports being against it than I do, being for it.

Sometimes personal remarks and attacks are made and they happen by miscommunications. It is important to keep asking for clarification as Ray has done. I think Ray did an outstanding job, he kept asking for clarification until he got it. That is far from being ****** and not comprihending. I am sure you learned this during your USAF carreer, I know it was taught. This is all part of building the group dynamics and it needs to happen so that eventually many things will get ironed out and the discussions will turn to be more informative and constructive.

Take care Gary, now go do the right thing :)

George Geist

01-30-2006, 05:12 PM

Rick,
As to what you said before about the WPA. This and the CCC as well as a whole host of alphabet soup organizations were as you know part of FDRs "New Deal". Unfortunately, all of these things were declared unconstitutional. This is why we havent seen them again. Advisors to FDR told him there was a legal question about those programs. His response was if the courts declare it illegal so be it but in the meantime it will work. Sure enough by the time the Supreme Court heard it the country was well out of the depression and those programs were no longer needed especially with the war going on. Point being that FDR never gave anybody something for nothing. He did give jobs though. Thats the major difference between the New Deal and the so-called Great Society.

As for licensing, what do you think of taking a look at the old Illinois law and using it as a starting point. From there improvements can be made and it can be fine tuned to everyones liking. That is of course if you guys really want to have a plan.
George

Rick Burten

01-30-2006, 05:20 PM

Rick, Just a question as to, why doesn't the AFA open up as we do on this web site? If they want to be leaders then they must be able to communicate to us that have given up on them, to bring us back into the fold?

Gary,

The long and the short of it is that I don't have an answer for your question. I know there are forums on the AFA web site, but its unwieldy to get to and very under used. I know that the subject of communication and better communication comes up regularly at BoD meetings but progress is slow.

Perhaps if you have some ideas as to how the office can better communicate with the membership, potential, current, and lapsed, you should forward them to the office. Or, if your local/state association is an AFA chapter member, you could discuss your concerns and ideas with the BoD representative. Or, call the president of the AFA, whom ever that may be. Talk with him/her about the same things. Or, re-join the AFA, attend the annual meeting at convention and during the time alloted for member's comments, stand up, go to the microphone and state your case. A few years ago a tall, skinny, outspoken guy did just that and ended up getting elected President of the AFA. Go figure. :D

Rick Burten

01-30-2006, 05:23 PM

As for licensing, what do you think of taking a look at the old Illinois law and using it as a starting point. From there improvements can be made and it can be fine tuned to everyones liking.
That would be one place to start. I'd have to hunt pretty hard to find it, but I'm sure its still out there somewhere.

As for FDR, he would seem, at least with respect to that issue, to exemplify "proactive rather than reactive".

"Hey buddy, can ya' spare me a dime...."

Gary Hill

01-30-2006, 05:26 PM

Rick, Me heap good injin but not good leader, me belong to Proud tribe "Wherthheckrwe" Have a good trip to Cincy! Gary

Gary_Miller

01-30-2006, 06:09 PM

Gary I am very confused about how you are responding to Ray. In all the time I have been posting on this forum I have never known Ray to be mean spirited or lacking comprihention. I don't get it??? Lets just surfice it to say I over reacted. I sometime get foot and mouth disease. I was just upset with what seemed to be two individuals more into trying to pick a fight than discussing the subject.
I also think your suggestion to go back and read all your posts to get an idea of what you think about licensing is over the top.
Come on Phil anyone who has been in on this discussion knows what postion I take and how I feel the AFA should proceed.
Are your saying that if your were to hear new thoughts on the subject your thoughts would not change?
Not at all if you recall I have tweeket my postion several times since the subject has started. How ever my orginal stance as not change. Nor will it ever. I think licensing is bad for any trade and benifits no one except the government, insurance companies and lawyers.

And if you also remember when I first started here a year ago what my stance was on farriers paying apprentices. If you remeber the last tread where we discussed apprenticeship that my stance has change 100% thus was due to further knowledge of the industry.

Ray
I offer you my humbly apology for attacking you. Sorry.

Gary

Tom Stovall, CJF

01-30-2006, 06:37 PM

Rick Burten in gray, deletia

If we decide to do this, perhaps Tom will serve as 'lead dog' or perhaps someone else wants to be the coordinator?

I ain't much on coordinating, I think the thread can be mined for ideas when it all plays out.

Anyone who has ever been to one of my demos knows I ain't exactly bashful, so I'll be the lead dog. After all, if you ain't the lead dog, the view don't change a helluva lot. :)

For starters, I don't think any program promulgated solely by farriers has a chance in hell of being accepted by even the most farrier-friendly legislature bent on taxing the bejesus out of us on whatever pretext. If/when licensing comes, a sale tax on services won't be far behind.

Many of us have more pragmatic knowledge about horses' feet than do equine practitioners, but 40 years of experience and a "CJF" after one's name doesn't imbue nearly the credibility as "DVM" after the name of a newly hatched vet. Why not use their credibility to gain our ends?

Like most farriers, I know a bunch of veterinarians and not a single one of 'em wants to shoe horses for a living. Most of 'em are quite content to say to a farrier, "This is what's wrong: Fix it." With that thought in mind, we need to get rid of our illogical, adversarial, counterproductive, don't-tread-on-my-turf, mindset and enlist the aid of the veterinary community in our quest to build a prophylactic model for farrier licensing. If we can ride the coattails of their credibility through the legislative process, we've done a Good Thing - and nobody loses any hair.

We could set up a State Board of Farrier Examiners, or something equally high sounding, comprised of several faculty vets from the state vet school and a few smooth mouthed farriers appointed by the state farrier association. This bunch might be a crew of aged reprobates, but to the layman, the term "State Board" implies instant credibility because folks associate the term with a bunch of knowlegable old timers who epitomize stature within a professional organization.

We could go about it by meeting with the faculty vets at the nearest vet school and pitching our plan to them. No need to bullsheist anybody, just tell the truth: As farriers, damn few of us want licensing, but we're worried about it coming to pass and having to dance to the tune of somebody's cousin the bureaucrat who can't spell H-O-R-S-E on his best day. Tell 'em we need to have a plan ready to plug in if/when the legislature starts writing legislation pertaining to the licensing of farriers and that they can save our bacon. When all else fails, tell the truth.

We don't have the political clout to get anything done - but veterinarians do. Assuming the vets go for it, we need to formulate a plan for the testing of licensees, administration (i.e., a data base of all licensees), and some means of enforcing the legislation.

To my notion, anyone who can't pass the AFA basic test - and that goes for every wannabe barefoot hoof trimmer and any horseshoer who thinks hair is going to grow on his palm if he deigns to perimeter fit - is just pretending to be a hoof care provider. I think the test is a fair indicator of minimal ability to shoe to a reasonable standard, but it doesn't necessarily have squat to do with anyone's day-to-day farriery.

If/when, licensing becomes reality, we'll need to determine a cutoff date two or three years in the future, after which anyone picking up a foot for hire will be licensed, working toward licensure by working in the company of a licensee, or in violation of the law. No "ifs," "ands," "buts," or "ors" - working without a license must incur a meaningful penalty or nobody will obey the law.

We could have the newly fledged Board appoint several testers to give the test 12 or more times a year at venues across the state for the first two or three years to insure that every working farrier in the state has the opportunity to take the test. After the cutoff, we can throttle back the testing to quarterly and have them at the state vet school. Most importantly, there should be no "grandfathering in" of possible incompetents! Ultimately, we can have reciprocity with political subdivisions that require every licensee to have passed a test like ours, but not with those that have "grandfathered in" anyone.

You can bet Our Fair State is going to require liability insurance, but so what? IIRC, in Texas, $1,000,000 in personal liability coverage costs less than $1,200 a year and it's deductible.

If the vets will go along with the proposal, an unpaid State Board of Farriery could oversee the program with one or two paid employees housed at the State vet school with little more than a computer and a phone with an 800 number for equipment.

As I see it, if we can get the vets on our side, it'd be relatively painless to promulgate a set of rules everybody can live with; if not, I'm going to be damn glad I can pass a TIG test. :)

George Geist

01-30-2006, 06:51 PM

Mr Stovall,
Sounds very interesting. The thing I question is your idea of no grandfathering. Although laudible, I'm not sure of the legality of it. Not being an attorney I cant say for sure, but I was under the belief that similar type legislation has to have grandfathering to make it pass constitutional muster. This can be double checked though.
George

Tom Stovall, CJF

01-30-2006, 07:43 PM

George Geist in gray

Sounds very interesting. The thing I question is your idea of no grandfathering. Although laudible, I'm not sure of the legality of it. Not being an attorney I cant say for sure, but I was under the belief that similar type legislation has to have grandfathering to make it pass constitutional muster. This can be double checked though.

Texas is a right to work state. One can't be forced to join a union or to pay dues to a union, as a condition of employment, but one can certainly be required by the state to pass certain tests involving both academics and motor skills as a condition of the state's granting a license to practice a trade or profession. Furthermore, the state can, and often does, restrict, under penalty of law, the practice of a trade or profession to state licensees.

While laws regulating the practice of trades and professions must be applied equally - without regard to race, color, creed, national origin, gender, or age - no one has any intrinsic right to engage in any trade or profession regulated by the state unless they satisfy the eligibility criteria mandated by the state.

This means "grandfathering in" might be successfully challenged as being discriminatory on the basis of age by someone who was required by statute to pass the test, but could probably not be successfully challenged by a more experienced individual, who feels time in grade should be the equivalent to a passing grade. Besides, if a reasonable time is given to everyone wanting to practice the trade to satisfy the eligibility requirements, why the hell would anyone with a lick of pride want to be "grandfathered in"?

As I see it, the clear inference of "grandfathering in" is that someone like myself can't pass the test due to the infirmities of age - or reduced capacity - and I'll be damned if I'd ever want that particular albatross hanging around my neck! :) If I can't pass the same test everybody else takes, I damn sure don't need to be shoeing horses. And, if that particular shoe fits, nobody else does either.

George Geist

01-30-2006, 07:59 PM

Mr Stovall,
Im not talking about unions or right to work laws. What I meant was that if someone is already actively practicing a trade, whatever it might be. To not grandfather in those individuals already engaged in such trade, I believe can be legally construed as denying them their right to make a living. I believe this to be the way this works but as I said experts in this matter ought to be consulted.
George

Phil Armitage

01-30-2006, 08:21 PM

What is wrong with grandfathering. I am already practiceing the trade everyday to the point hair can't grow on my palms (wouldnt make it through the calouse) even if I were to parimeter fit.

I like the idea of being in control of our own destiney, but what is to say the licenseing is enevidable. Sounds like we might create our own problems out of paranoia. First of all I would want to know why you think it is definately comeing. I do not feel I have been sold on that notion.

Tom Stovall, CJF

01-30-2006, 08:49 PM

George Geist in gray

Im not talking about unions or right to work laws. What I meant was that if someone is already actively practicing a trade, whatever it might be. To not grandfather in those individuals already engaged in such trade, I believe can be legally construed as denying them their right to make a living. I believe this to be the way this works but as I said experts in this matter ought to be consulted.

If a state requires everyone engaging in a trade to be licensed after a certain date in order to practice that trade, then no one could possibly be denied their "right" to make a living as long as the state requires everyone engaged in that trade to meet the same criteria for obtaining a license. The fact someone may have been engaged in a trade for [n] years before licensing was required by the state is irrelevant; however, one might reasonably assume the knowledge and skills such a person may have amassed over those years might be extremely helpful in their satisfying the criteria for licensure.

Or, not.

On day one, everyone will be a virgin. :)

ray steele

01-30-2006, 10:35 PM

.

Ray
I offer you my humbly apology for attacking you. Sorry.

Gary[/QUOTE]

Gary,(and to all the viewing audience)

In the heat of the battle alot is said, and I believe it is said because folks believe in it. the most important thing to me about it is that we keep corresponding, not that we agree, i will not say that I was not perplexed(take that any way that you like) but I did not post expecting everyone to say that I was the messiah. Please keep posting and voicing, but not at me (joke)or I'll Tell .

Stay safe, I'm going to bed and to cincy in the am.

Regards

Ray Steele

Tom Stovall, CJF

01-30-2006, 11:53 PM

Phil Armitage in gray

What is wrong with grandfathering.

Grandfathering rewards longevity, not competence. Grandfathering is intrinsically prejudicial because it favors one segment of a trade over another. Grandfathering makes a mockery of using testing as a criterion for practicing a trade because some folks aren't required to take the test. Grandfathering lowers the credibility of anyone who fails to take a test that is required to be taken by other members of a trade. Grandfathering lowers the public's perception of the trade because not all members are required to demonstrate competence. Grandfathering sucks.

I am already practiceing the trade everyday to the point hair can't grow on my palms (wouldnt make it through the calouse) even if I were to parimeter fit.

So what? In terms of licensure, you're just practicing for the test, you haven't demonstrated your ability to pass it.

I like the idea of being in control of our own destiney, but what is to say the licenseing is enevidable. Sounds like we might create our own problems out of paranoia.

You're confusing paranoia with prophylaxis.

First of all I would want to know why you think it is definately comeing. I do not feel I have been sold on that notion.

Asked and answered. Please see posts 17, 20, 29 and 31 in this thread.

George Geist

01-31-2006, 03:57 AM

Certainly nobody could ever accuse Mr. Stovall of not having an opinion about something. Contrary to what he might think I do agree with most of the things he says. His reasons to be against grandfathering are sound but I am not sure of the legality of it. Like it or not, I believe it has to be. If not, ok no problem here. Experts on constitutional law and legislation need to be consulted.
George

Mike Ferrara

01-31-2006, 06:15 AM

To my notion, anyone who can't pass the AFA basic test - and that goes for every wannabe barefoot hoof trimmer and any horseshoer who thinks hair is going to grow on his palm if he deigns to perimeter fit - is just pretending to be a hoof care provider. I think the test is a fair indicator of minimal ability to shoe to a reasonable standard, but it doesn't necessarily have squat to do with anyone's day-to-day farriery.

If the purpose of the test is to insure some level of competence in ones day to day work then the test should directly relate. If it doesn't, all the test is proving is ones ability to prepare for, take and pass a test..any test.

If such a thing ever comes to any kind of official debate or public testimony I would imagine that we'll hear from the farriers who don't even own a forge. I, for one, know successful farriers who fit that description. I know they couldn't pass the AFA test but your notion that they are "just pretending to be hoof care providers" might require some sort of proof.

Aside from that, I know at least one who will argue thet the practical is subjective by it's very nature and the proof of that is in the very wording of the requirements and it's use of terms like "flat", "all points on a plane" and so on. A while back (I'll try to find it) I posted a list of some examples from the AFA site. Since nothing is flat, the word flat only has meaning if a tolerance and means of measurement is stated. "Flat" doesn't exist in the physical world but we can measure the degree of flatness though. You won't get all points of a surface on a plane because a plane is defined by only three points. I think I could use the AFA rules to fail any shoeing job on the face of the planet and back my case with numbers. That might not be the intent of the test but intent doesn't mean anything uless standards insure that intent.

Edit...it was post 139 in "one horse owners thoughts on licensing". I gave this list of terms that can not be used as objective criteria without stating a tolerance and the method of measurement "flat", "on a plane", "straight", "smooth", "symetrical". There are of course more. I took those right from the AFA literature.

In another post I made some suggestions on how they might go about taking the subjectivity out of judging the shoe board. It must be subjective because of all the shoes we keep hearing about that pass in one place but fail in another. A simple object like a horse shoe is rather simple to specify and measure. That test needs a lot of work before it would become something that I'd want to see become law. I think we pretty much established that they don't really test the weld on the bar shoe. I'd like to look over about 100 or so "passed" shoes to get an idea of how many really can forge weld.

BTW, if you remember we got on the subject of welds being broken by being wacked with another shoe. I mentioned that I had a bar shoe weld that I was going to check. It's not really a shoe...just a piece of bar stoch I turned, and welded...the one and only I've ever done BTW. I admit it, it just isn't something that I've ever had a need of in practice. Anyway, I beat the daylights out of it with a 4 pound crosspeen in two different directions and while I did deform the "shoe", the weld showed no signs of failuire. I've never had call to make 4 handmade shoes and shoe the horse in 2 hours either and at the moment I doubt that I could...so I'm just pretending right?

The more discussion I read on this issue the less convinced I am that we want farriers involved in formulating a licensing plan.

Phil Armitage

01-31-2006, 06:49 AM

I do not believe the horse owner cares if a farrier passes a test or not, this does not demonstrate competence. What you do everyday with horses in your area demonstrates competence and the growth of your buisness is by word of mouth. The true test is your everyday work, how you treat customers and there horses. I like what John Bloombach says, "the work will teach you".

I understand the argument to gain control of something like licenseing if it is in fact comeing anyways. I really do not believe it will come to pass, because I really do not think it is that important. Right now the importance I see on the subject has been internal by a very small number of farriers. Bringing something on to the trade that most are against is very strange and frankly there is not much justification, facts or numbers to make the argument.

Certification by useing the AFA's standards is also very strange, especially when we all know it is not a good model for everyday work. I agree with Mike if we are going to use the argument that licenseing and certification is to prove competence then it should be a standard that fits what is required for everyday work.

Mike Ferrara

01-31-2006, 07:31 AM

Certification by useing the AFA's standards is also very strange, especially when we all know it is not a good model for everyday work. I agree with Mike if we are going to use the argument that licenseing and certification is to prove competence then it should be a standard that fits what is required for everyday work.

In all honesty, I see a lot of this as an attempt by the AFA or just CJF's in general to push their standards off on others in an attempt to make it "the standard". Arbitrary...my butt...what good is that?

The bulk of my work is just applying keg shoes and the vast majority get applied without modification. I don't always like it but that's the way it is. I do lots of forging but I really don't need to do very much on the job.

I'm being honest here...I'm getting older, I'm not the power house I once was and I don't watch the clock when I shoe a horse. I take my time, do the best job I can and try to enjoy being around horses rather than at a desk subject to the will of some ahole MBA.

Could I practice and get 4 handmades on in the time limit? I say I could but who cares...I may as well be back at my desk. I've spent most of my adult life preparing for and passing tests that accomplished nothing other than to satisfy some arbitrary standard and wast a ton of time and resources. The AFA and all this BS arbitrary standard garbage is yet going to take the enjoyment out of this trade. That'll be after the fight though.

I say lets bring in six sigma and ISO and baptize these gamokes the right way. If it's quality we want to insure then lets use a real quality control system.

Rick Burten

01-31-2006, 07:47 AM

[QUOTE=Mike Ferrara
If such a thing ever comes to any kind of official debate or public testimony I would imagine that we'll hear from the farriers who don't even own a forge. [/quote]

Mike,
One does not need a forge to take or pass the CF practical. As for the shoe display, Ive seen those modifications made by someone who only had an Ox-Acetylene torch.

And, I am not in total disagreement with the points you make which is why its nice to discuss them now to see if we can at least start building a workable plan.

See you in cincy.

Mike Ferrara

01-31-2006, 08:42 AM

[QUOTE=Mike Ferrara
If such a thing ever comes to any kind of official debate or public testimony I would imagine that we'll hear from the farriers who don't even own a forge.

Mike,
One does not need a forge to take or pass the CF practical. As for the shoe display, Ive seen those modifications made by someone who only had an Ox-Acetylene torch.

And, I am not in total disagreement with the points you make which is why its nice to discuss them now to see if we can at least start building a workable plan.

See you in cincy.[/QUOTE]

You may have a point as to the value of being prepared up front. Many of us do have different points of view but comming to some sort of consensus and presenting a somewhat unified front could help steer things that way. If law makers do get it in mind to institute licensing they won't want to work any harder than they need to.

Is this an excersize we really want to take a stab at here on the board? If it is, as you can probably imagine, I have some ideas on how to go about it. LOL

Most problem solving excersizes start (or should) with the definition and quantification of the problem. Do we have problems now and if so, what are they and how big? If we intend it to be useful, we should attempt to address real problems with real solutions. Formally define the problem and the current system and go from there. Often, analysis reveals that the problem doesn't exist or that it's very different in nature than what we thought. So...what do we want licensing to fix. A better question might be, what do we think law makers would percieve as the purpose for licensing? Their perception of the nature and magnitude of any current problems may be the very first things that need to be addressed. We need to define the problem with data first.

Jumping straight to testing and quality assurance is probably jumping the gun because we haven't established the purpose for licensing in the first place.

BTW, I'm not making this up. It's systems analysis 101. The type of system really doesn't matter.

Gary_Miller

01-31-2006, 09:03 AM

Its more likly that any testing would have to be written only so as to take the subjectiveness out of the test. This will be especally true if the government controls the licensing.

Gary

Dave Purves

01-31-2006, 07:15 PM

You may have a point as to the value of being prepared up front. Many of us do have different points of view but comming to some sort of consensus and presenting a somewhat unified front could help steer things that way. If law makers do get it in mind to institute licensing they won't want to work any harder than they need to.

Is this an excersize we really want to take a stab at here on the board? If it is, as you can probably imagine, I have some ideas on how to go about it. LOL

Most problem solving excersizes start (or should) with the definition and quantification of the problem. Do we have problems now and if so, what are they and how big? If we intend it to be useful, we should attempt to address real problems with real solutions. Formally define the problem and the current system and go from there. Often, analysis reveals that the problem doesn't exist or that it's very different in nature than what we thought. So...what do we want licensing to fix. A better question might be, what do we think law makers would percieve as the purpose for licensing? Their perception of the nature and magnitude of any current problems may be the very first things that need to be addressed. We need to define the problem with data first.

Jumping straight to testing and quality assurance is probably jumping the gun because we haven't established the purpose for licensing in the first place.

BTW, I'm not making this up. It's systems analysis 101. The type of system really doesn't matter.

Mike, I think most farriers in the US would agree that not having some type of "apprenticeship program" is indeed a problem, or at least having one, would help the new comers get a little better start. Whether licensing would fix that problem or not, I have no idea, but I do think that some type of national farrier apprenticeship program would be valuable to the trade.

Dave

George Geist

01-31-2006, 07:28 PM

Dave,
Excellent point. I was going to bring that up too as Mr. Stovalls plan has no provision at all for apprenticeship. I hope it was just an oversight. I also wish the AFA wouild resurrect the idea.

In an effort to move on, I will assume for arguments sake that Mr Stovall is right as far as legality is concerned. That being the case he wants no grandfathering. Although admirable that he would volunteer to be tested, I for one would never insult a man like him by saying he should take anybody's test. I would prefer to grandfather everybody currently working at the trade. I also agree that the AFAs test is probably not the best thing to use. However, rather than open a new argument I'll let that go for now.

I will offer this compromise to Mr.Stovall. During the phase-in period all horseshoers who are certified by somebody, anybody, be grandfathered. Those who are not will take a written test only. After the cut off date testing both written and practical will be mandatory. This will be workable and stands a better chance of becoming law. It would be the least PITA for working horseshoers. Also a reciprocity system with other states needs to be written into it too.
George

Tom Stovall, CJF

01-31-2006, 08:11 PM

Phil Armitage in gray

I do not believe the horse owner cares if a farrier passes a test or not, this does not demonstrate competence.

What horse owner's think is irrelevant in terms of licensing: At issue is formulating a set of plug-in rules and regs ready to put in place should licensing come to pass.

What you do everyday with horses in your area demonstrates competence and the growth of your buisness is by word of mouth.

Balderdash. The least incompetent farrier in many places is usually covered up, but he's none the less incompetent.

The true test is your everyday work, how you treat customers and there horses. I like what John Bloombach says, "the work will teach you".

While I have the utmost respect for Mr. Blombach, the true test of anyone's work is whether their horses are consistently getting whatever they need to do whatever they do as best they can. e.g., Anybody can shoe a stakes horse but it takes a helluva good hand to move a bottom claimer.

I understand the argument to gain control of something like licenseing if it is in fact comeing anyways. I really do not believe it will come to pass, because I really do not think it is that important.

I hope you're right.

Right now the importance I see on the subject has been internal by a very small number of farriers. Bringing something on to the trade that most are against is very strange and frankly there is not much justification, facts or numbers to make the argument.

Dare I point out the wisdom contained in the Boy Scout Motto?

Certification by useing the AFA's standards is also very strange, especially when we all know it is not a good model for everyday work.

Whoa! Whatever gave you such a silly idea? The AFA's standards work very well with some horses - not at all with others - just like NB and every other so-called "standard" that attempts to fit all horses into the same box without regard for conformation, job classification, and dead Greeks.

I agree with Mike if we are going to use the argument that licenseing and certification is to prove competence then it should be a standard that fits what is required for everyday work.

A test modeled after the AFA's basic test would be indicative of the testee's knowing which way to turn a horseshoe nail, little else. On the other hand, knowing which way to turn a nail would do wonders in terms of weeding out wannabes. Think about it.

Tom Stovall, CJF

01-31-2006, 08:33 PM

Mike Ferrara in gray, deletia

If the purpose of the test is to insure some level of competence in ones day to day work then the test should directly relate. If it doesn't, all the test is proving is ones ability to prepare for, take and pass a test..any test.

The object of the exercise is to determine which folks are incapable of passing a test with clearly defined criteria, not to cull working farriers. Any competent working farrier would be able to pass a simple test modeled after the AFA's basic test.

If such a thing ever comes to any kind of official debate or public testimony I would imagine that we'll hear from the farriers who don't even own a forge.

So what? There's no forgework involved.

I, for one, know successful farriers who fit that description. I know they couldn't pass the AFA test but your notion that they are "just pretending to be hoof care providers" might require some sort of proof.

I know race platers who shoe high dollar horses every day who haven't lit a forge in years - but I don't know any competent farrier who doesn't know which way to turn a nail. The AFA's basic test is about knowing which way to turn a nail, not about working the fire.

The more discussion I read on this issue the less convinced I am that we want farriers involved in formulating a licensing plan.

Assuming licensing is on the horizon, if not farriers, who? Personally, I'd feel a lot more comfortable with farriers instead of bureaucrats promulgating the rules: Did you have someone else in mind? :)

Tom Stovall, CJF

01-31-2006, 09:08 PM

George Geist in gray

Excellent point. [apprenticeship] I was going to bring that up too as
Mr. Stovalls plan has no provision at all for apprenticeship. I hope it
was just an oversight. I also wish the AFA wouild resurrect the idea.

I alluded to the idea when I wrote something to the effect of
"Licensed, in the company of a licensee working towards licensure, or in
violation of the law" - but I didn't come right out and say the "A" word.
:) Mea culpa.

In an effort to move on, I will assume for arguments sake that Mr Stovall is right as far as legality is concerned. That being the case he
wants no grandfathering. Although admirable that he would volunteer to
be tested, I for one would never insult a man like him by saying he
should take anybody's test.

Mr. Geist, I would consider it an insult if I were not tested because somebody thought I could shoe a horse or I passed a test at some time in the past! As advertised, if I can't pass the same test everybody else is required to take, I damn sure don't need to be shoeing horses. That said, I'm just arrogant to think I can still pass most tests of farriery skills. :)

I would prefer to grandfather everybody currently working at the trade. I also agree that the AFAs test is probably not the best thing to use. However, rather than open a new argument I'll let that go for now.

If y'all put me in charge, the practical would be one one front and one
hind with a keg shoe, dead easy, pass/fail - but the written would be considerably more involved and knowing summat about anatomy, physiology, and dead Greeks would be be extremely helpful.

I will offer this compromise to Mr.Stovall. During the phase-in period all horseshoers who are certified by somebody, anybody, be
grandfathered.

Compromise hell! It ain't about what you've done in the past, it's what
you can do on test day.

Those who are not will take a written test only. After the cut off date
testing both written and practical will be mandatory. This will be
workable and stands a better chance of becoming law. It would be the
least PITA for working horseshoers. Also a reciprocity system with other
states needs to be written into it too.

Reciprocity is great, as long as there's no nonsensical grandfathering
in of possible incompetents. :)

Dave Purves

01-31-2006, 09:52 PM

One front foot, one hind foot with kegs is perfect. However, if everyone is so hell bent on doing everyday work, then I suggest that the applicant shoe all four feet of a horse, in any manner in which he or she choses, kegs or handmades, no time limit. However, there will be a panel of judges, the horse will be evaluated at the walk and trot in hand. Notes about movement and subsequent lameness or deviations will be made. The applicant will write down what he or she see's. Before the shoeing can go further, the applicant will turn in his or her written observations to the panel for a pass/fail grade. If the applicant passes then he or she will be allowed to move on to the practical shoeing portion. At this time, no judging will take place until the entire job is done. There is no sense in judging level and balance mid-way through as many of us will adjust this many times throughout the shoeing process. Once the job is complete, the horse will again be observed at the walk and trot in hand. If the horse is sound, and noted changes were made then and only then will the actual shoeing be judged. The criteria should include but not be limited to:
1. Shoe fit
2. Balance
3. Nailing
4. Clinches and finish
(All of this criteria will be judged against the notes that were made by the applicant at the time the horse was observed at the walk and trot)
The applicant can use any and all power tools necessary or carried on thier truck to finish the job.

Shoe modifications should also be mandated. Not so much for the quality and "look" but for the functional ability to do what they are intended to do. Sorry Mike, but if you don't carry a forge, and you can't pull clips or extended heels, then you need to be doing a different job.

This is just a start, something I jotted down while eating my pizza.

Dave

I forgot to mention that the horses occupation must also be taken into account during the shoeing procedure. Big lick or packages for gaited horses should be left out since they are not prevelant in all areas of the country. And if they are , then they should be left out cause I've never shod one, and I don't want to.

Dave

Gary Hill

02-01-2006, 01:13 AM

What is the persistance to drawing clips? I can punch a blank or repunch a keg to fit the foot I'm working on and never need a clip. Sure I can draw one but really why, when you have the ability to attach the shoe in a proper manner? Clips and pads are things I avoid with an extreme. Why ? Because I just don't look at a hoof and say I think this horse needs pads or clips. I can protect the hoof with a wider web shoe and again, punch holes where the hoof tells me it needs them not a machine stamped shoe. Even in extreme weather conditions here in my part of the sandpile do I use them or see others use them. A buddy of mine practices clips all day some times at his shop but he dones't apply them either???I don't have one Hunter or Jumper anymore because my clients are Western performance horses and get along fine. The gaited horses which make up a quarter of my business never need them either. The drafts do and are the only ones I use a clip on but thats due mostly to the fact I have borium on them. My other pulling and carriage horses don't need preventers. It was a fun shoe to build as alot of the shoes are but do I nail them on- NO. Anyway JMO, Thanks, Gary

Gary Hill

02-01-2006, 02:06 AM

I 'd like to add that I was proud that the AFA did make some sort of attempt to dam up the flow of newbies that constantly flood our business.The attempt to make the schools accountable was admireable. I am 100% againest licensing and I don't really feel we need it. If it happens, then like Tom Stovall said, Test everyone. The schools flood the market and when I got out of school I hightailed it to the first Farrier Clinic and Test I could get too. I apprenticed with the Pres of the State Assn and took my first attempt using unfinished heel shoes that I worked in a coal forge in a flimsy excuse of a rig but it was all I had. All the others testing, shod cold. Sure I was over time by 15 minutes, so I failed. The judges were local farriers that were Traveling Farriers so they were allowed to judge us. I personally knew one of them as I had shod a few horses at his own barn while he was on the East Coast following the horseshows. He really didn't like me working in HIS personal stable but the boarders needed someone and I got the call? I really don't think the guy liked me as he was quite "ugly" to me and critical. But that was his job and I expected that as I was fresh out of school. If the AFA wants to take the lead then they need to be leaders in the field and use and promote more than the shoe making contests and look more into the new and differant things that are working in todays horseworld. NB would have to be included if they ever want my dues again. And their rag or mag is so bias that they have to Control whats in it. Sounds like insecurity to me? The AFJ is still the voice of the American Farrier whether they are in the Assn or Lonewolfs. IF the schools would develop farriers and not be somewhat involved with the profit of mass numbers ,but then again just what is Capitalism? Just my thoughts, Gary

Phil Armitage

02-01-2006, 07:04 AM

T.N. Trosin

02-01-2006, 10:51 AM

[QUOTE=Tom Stovall, CJF
Balderdash. The least incompetent farrier in many places is usually covered up, but he's none the less incompetent.
[/QUOTE]

True Fact. But the main reason I singled Mr. Stoval's quote is because I think it's the first time I have seen the word "Balderdash" used in the forum.

Mike Ferrara

02-03-2006, 02:01 PM

Assuming licensing is on the horizon, if not farriers, who? Personally, I'd feel a lot more comfortable with farriers instead of bureaucrats promulgating the rules: Did you have someone else in mind? :)

Aren't we talking about putting some farriers or farrier organizations into the role of being being or somehow helping the bureaucrats? Is that just making more bureaucrats? Are we so sure that farriers can do it better? I'm not.

Almost on a daily basis I'm reading or seeing examples of what happens when farriers engage in tasks other than farriery. Being a farrier does not necessarily qualify one to design or administer a system of any kind even if it has to do with farriery. Maybe throwing farriers into the task is jst adding more unqualified people into the mix.

IMO, whoever does design a licensing system should interview farriers but they probably shouldn't be a farrier unless they also have some background in system design...at least at the 101 level.

Mike Ferrara

02-03-2006, 02:24 PM

Mike, I think most farriers in the US would agree that not having some type of "apprenticeship program" is indeed a problem, or at least having one, would help the new comers get a little better start. Whether licensing would fix that problem or not, I have no idea, but I do think that some type of national farrier apprenticeship program would be valuable to the trade.

Dave

I think apprenticeships are great. I served one (sort of) under one farrier and worked with a couple of others.

From what I gather, few are so lucky. The problem I see is that it doesn't seem right to "require" an apprenticeship untill some sort of apprenticeship system exists.

I certainly can't find a reason to object to farriers trying to institute such a system. In fact, it might eliminate any need for a licensing system (even though such a "need" hasn't been demonstrated, IMO).

As I said in an earlier post, the first step is to define the problem. Then you identify the causes and then explore alternative fixes and finally propose a "best" solution. Before being implimented that solution should somehow be tested and debugged.

What I'm asking is that someone who thinks there is a problem to demonstrate that they know what it is and that their proposed "fix" is, in fact, a fix. I've had my fill of systems that are put in place because some one likes the look or sound of it even though they haven't demonstrated that it will improve anything. It's like rearranging the furniture on the deck of the Titanic. You may like the way it looks but the ship is still going down.

Every thing is better with blue bonnet...I mean without government. If we are really aniticapating a government desire for licensicing due to the existance of some problem maybe what we should be concerned with is heading things off at the pass and getting rid of the problem soon enough to keep the government out all together.

So again, what's the problem?

Mike Ferrara

02-03-2006, 02:45 PM

Sorry Mike, but if you don't carry a forge, and you can't pull clips or extended heels, then you need to be doing a different job.

Do you have any evidence to present that might support that position?

Dave Purves

02-03-2006, 04:51 PM

George Geist

02-03-2006, 08:16 PM

Guys,
In the 25 years that I've been doing this it really has gotten a lot easier. When I first started there were no bar shoes. You had to make them. Shoes came in 1 pattern. There were no fronts and hinds. If you needed clips, you drew them yourself.

With all of this no longer necessary it cannot help but take its toll on our skill level. We owe it to all the horseshoers who came before us to try not to let this happen. For this reason it is important that some kind of forging be incorporated into the testing. I think making a bar shoe should be satisfactory.
George

calshoer

02-03-2006, 08:42 PM

Well you all should at least be relieved to hear that in my new job as the farrier science instructor at the local college I was supplied with a s**t load of Delta plains ,(unfinished,somewhat crude shoes with UGLY chopped off heels ) and a few diamond toe and heel. Thats it.
Therefore the students will be hot shaping and modifying every shoe we apply. :D
Patty .

Tom Stovall, CJF

02-03-2006, 11:36 PM

Mike Ferrara in gray

Aren't we talking about putting some farriers or farrier organizations into the role of being being or somehow helping the bureaucrats? Is that just making more bureaucrats? Are we so sure that farriers can do it better? I'm not.

The object of the exercise is to have a plan ready to plug in instead of having some bureaucrat's plan plugged into us, should licensing come to pass.

Almost on a daily basis I'm reading or seeing examples of what happens when farriers engage in tasks other than farriery. Being a farrier does not necessarily qualify one to design or administer a system of any kind even if it has to do with farriery. Maybe throwing farriers into the task is jst adding more unqualified people into the mix.

Being a farrier implies some small expertise in matters of farriery - and the promulgation of licensing rules and regs relative to farriery would probably require a bit of expertise. Do you feel being utterly ignorant of farriery would be an adequate substitute for expertise?

IMO, whoever does design a licensing system should interview farriers but they probably shouldn't be a farrier unless they also have some background in system design...at least at the 101 level.

Since MBA system design works so well at the corporate, government, and military levels, why would farriers want to infect themselves with that particular pathology when designing a prophylactic program? :)

Mike Ferrara

02-04-2006, 07:57 AM

I always figured that a true professional either has the tools to do the job, or can make what he needs. So if you have a client that requests shoes with clips, but you don't have clipped shoes in the size you need, you must pull the clips. Or order the shoes you need and re-schedule (not very professional in my opinion). You would also have a hard time convincing any of my clients that it's not benificial to hot fit your shoes. So I would say if you have a client that requests you hot fit the shoes what would you do without a forge? What if you don't have a forge and as you pull in you notice the vet is there and gives you a prescription for extended heels and a lateral toe extension? Part of being a professional farrier is the ability to do whatever you need to do to make the horse move at it's maximum potential. Sometimes just nailing up some kegs out of the box isn't quite enough.

Dave

Can you offer any evidence that proves I'm wrong?

You're making statements that reflect your own values or opinions. The evidence that you're wrong is the simple fact that I know several successful fariers who don't carry a forge. A farrier that doesn't use a forge just needs to know what they use and stock it. In 25 years I haven't ever had a client request hot fitting. No farrier is under any obligation to do all kinds of work either. You have the choice to offer the services that you want to offer.

Mike Ferrara

02-04-2006, 08:09 AM

Guys,

With all of this no longer necessary it cannot help but take its toll on our skill level. We owe it to all the horseshoers who came before us to try not to let this happen. For this reason it is important that some kind of forging be incorporated into the testing. I think making a bar shoe should be satisfactory.
George

You said it...it's no longer necessary. You can buy just about anything. I know I can sure buy a larger variety od stuff than I could ever realistically expect to use.

We don't owe the farriers who came before us anything at all. You're talking about testing forge skills because of tradition not because of any lagitimate business purpose. This is a very good example of why I'm questioning the qualification of farriers to decide what kind of testing would be required for licensing. You would require some one who doesn't need a forge to get one, learn to use it and be tested on it's use before they can be licensed to nail on keg shoes because of tradition that's of value to YOU!

Is this why some farriers are in favor of licensing or making sure that farrriers are in on the design of the licensing system, to force their values on other farriers?

Again, what is it you want to accomplish with licensing?

Mike Ferrara

02-04-2006, 08:16 AM

George Geist

02-04-2006, 08:34 AM

Mike Ferrara

02-04-2006, 10:34 AM

Ok Mike,
You think I've said controversial things before, get your quote button ready cause here it comes.

There are notable exceptions, one of my best friends shoes exclusively cold and is one of the best shoers I know. But I will say that by and large the better you are in the fire the better you are on feet. The skill and craftsmanship of blacksmithing will make you a better horseshoer.

Even most Thoroughbred platers are excellent blacksmiths. To neglect that aspect of our trade will have an adverse effect on our skill level.

I don't think we've really established a correlation between blacksmithing skill and horse shoeing skill. To theorize that a correlation exists and to use data to demonstrate that correlation are two very different things.

In addition to that, what happens when you dont have something you need? which WILL happen. Remember the UPS strike a few years ago? What if your supplier doesnt have the thing you need but expects another shipment in 2 weeks but you need to get a horse done today? An ability to forge things you need gives you a great level of confidence which carries over into your day to day work.

What happens when you have a retail store and your suppliers are out of something you need? You wait. Taking lead times into account is part of planning your inventory. It's done every day and a farrier can do it too. There's no need to be the manufacturer and the retailer unless a manufacturer doesn't exist or vertical integration is part of your business plan.

I know I'll get a lot of disagreement on it but I'll say it again- The better you are in the fire, the better you are on feet.

Again, I don't see where this has been demonstrated.

I know I'm shoveling sand against the tide on this one but lets not let skill levels diminish in any way.
George

IMO, tradition and your own personal values should be left out of a licensing discussion. We're talking about legislation and before you require a skill by law you had better be able to demonstrate a real and universal need for that skill, IMO.

At one time, at least in rural parts of this country, the local blacksmith was often the local farrier too. They made everything from tools to farm impliments and hardware. Do you do much of that George? Do you think that fariers today might be far less educated as blacksmiths than those of yesteryear (including those who are great at forging shoes)? If you came out to shoe my horse and I needed a new set of fireplace tools, a new hatchet or maybe some door latches or hinges could you knock them out for me quick while you were here? A deplorable degradation in skill to be sure but skills no longer needed by farriers. Should we mandate those skills by law for the sake of tradition or don't YOUR traditions go back that far?

Rick Burten

02-04-2006, 11:16 AM

One front foot, one hind foot with kegs is perfect. However, if everyone is so hell bent on doing everyday work, then I suggest that the applicant shoe all four feet of a horse, in any manner in which he or she choses, kegs or handmades, no time limit. However, there will be a panel of judges, the horse will be evaluated at the walk and trot in hand. Notes about movement and subsequent lameness or deviations will be made. The applicant will write down what he or she see's. Before the shoeing can go further, the applicant will turn in his or her written observations to the panel for a pass/fail grade. If the applicant passes then he or she will be allowed to move on to the practical shoeing portion. At this time, no judging will take place until the entire job is done. There is no sense in judging level and balance mid-way through as many of us will adjust this many times throughout the shoeing process. Once the job is complete, the horse will again be observed at the walk and trot in hand. If the horse is sound, and noted changes were made then and only then will the actual shoeing be judged.
Dave
I would like to point out that this suggestion closely(but not completely) resembles the practical exam offered by The Guild Of Professional Farriers.
So, once again, I challange anyone who is disaffected, disgruntled, disturbed by, disgusted with, ad naseum, the AFA certification exams, to step up and stand for the Guild exams. Having said that, the first requirement that you will have to meet is having a minimum of four years of farrier experience where the preponderance of your income is derived from farriery.

I hear a lot of talking, blustering and equivocating, but thus far, no one seems ready to actually take a step in the right direction. And that of course is, JMNTBCHO :)

George Geist

02-04-2006, 05:48 PM

Mike,
I have not talked about myself on these boards because I find most of it irrelevant to what is being discussed. But just this one time, yes, if you needed things done of that nature I could probably fulfill your needs.

I'm not really sure what you refer to as far as education levels. True most blacksmiths of yesteryear were not formally schooled. Nor were most working class people. I believe a better word for them would be learned. Up to and before the WWII generation only the rich graduated high school. However, an 8th grade education of those people was comparable to 2 years of college today.

Most of us probably have grandparents that were not like typical drop-outs were they? They were different times, situations, and people. Check out the thread about people who cant make change. Never had that years ago.

If you could picture all of the metalworking trades as a tree. Welders, machinists, jewelers, foundrymen, horseshoers, etc etc would all be the branches. Blacksmiths would be the trunk. It is the trade we all come from with horseshoers keeping the strongest ties.

Now, every association, national or state, as well as every racing commission or governing body of racing which requires testing, as well as every mounted police department which tests civilian horseshoer applicants, all require a demonstration of basic forging skill.

Now, Mr. Stovall wants no grandfathering. You want no forging. Try to keep in mind that when it comes to legislation there are 2 things to consider. One is what we want and what we would like. The other is what's do-able and that we can deliver on. A bill that is too radical and unbending will go down in flames. Be mindful of what is needed for something to be passed into law.
It will not be like the AFA where you can say as we so often hear "If you dont like the test dont take it". This will be mandatory. Not taking it is not an option. Therefore, it must be palatable to as many as possible and must pass legal muster. This is why I thought taking a look at the old Illinois statute would be a good starting point because that one did become law.

Didn't mean to stray but we must never let skill levels diminish. Forging is still an integral part of the trade. I believe it always will be.
George

Mike Ferrara

02-04-2006, 06:16 PM

Mike,

Now, Mr. Stovall wants no grandfathering. You want no forging. Try to keep in mind that when it comes to legislation there are 2 things to consider. One is what we want and what we would like. The other is what's do-able and that we can deliver on. A bill that is too radical and unbending will go down in flames. Be mindful of what is needed for something to be passed into law.
It will not be like the AFA where you can say as we so often hear "If you dont like the test dont take it". This will be mandatory. Not taking it is not an option. Therefore, it must be palatable to as many as possible and must pass legal muster. This is why I thought taking a look at the old Illinois statute would be a good starting point because that one did become law.

I don't see it as being about what you, Tom or I want. Legislation should, IMO, solve a problem or avoid one. I'm asking the question...What's the problem that we're trying to solve and what's really going to solve it? Noone seems to be answering that question. If we would require forge skills by law we should be able to prove that you can't be an effective farrier without them. You yourself stated that one of the best farriers you know doesn't forge yet you would legally require him to be be tested in forging because you like forging. I don't want our laws to force things on me because you like them.

Personally I have several forges and make all manor of things. I just can't see a reason to pass laws that require others to do the same.

Didn't mean to stray but we must never let skill levels diminish. Forging is still an integral part of the trade. I believe it always will be.
George

That's just it. We absolutely can let unneeded or obsolete skills fall by the wayside without adversly effecting function. Forging is an integral part of the trade for some of us because we choose it to be. I don't buy clipped keg shoes, bar shoes or whatever but that's a choice and the next guy can buy them if he wants to, that is, until we start passing laws to cram our way of doing things down the throats of others just because we like it that way.

George Geist

02-04-2006, 06:30 PM

Gary_Miller

02-04-2006, 08:00 PM

I said this once before however it seemed to pass right by everyone so I will say it again in a diffrent way.

Its not likey any bill will get through any legislature where the test has any subjectivity to it at all. The human factor in the test will have to be removed completly before any bill will pass. Which means that for licensing purposes the test would only be a written test given by an independent testing agency.

Gary

wwhite1973

02-04-2006, 09:42 PM

Mike Ferrara

02-05-2006, 04:35 AM

Mike,
As I understand it, what we are supposed to be doing here is trying to work together to craft a licensing bill. Because Mr.Stovall believes as do others that licensing is coming, and the AFA will no longer discuss this. The people on this forum have decided to talk about it amongst ourselves since we are under no AFA gag order.

George

That's why I keep suggesting that we first identify the goal of licensing and work backward from there. If we can't propose something that will pass the simplest line of questioning, how would we ever expect any one to take it seriously.

In addition lets look at some other licenses. I took a very simple driving test over 30 years ago and since then it's just a quick written test which tests your understanding of applicable law more than it does your skill as a driver.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think electricians or carpenters need to be licensed but contractors do in most places. The test taken to get that license as I remember is more a test of building code and applicable law since the contractor holding the license need not even be a tradesperson at all.

Lets also look at why other licenses exist. Most of us must travel on public roads and live in buildings so there are building codes and laws governing the rules of the road. The licenses attempt to verify knowledge of those laws. Another example that does effect public safety yet there are no licenses is scuba diving. While there is a huge certification system there are very few places (mostly parks) where one is required by law to posses a certification in order to dive. A license isn't even required in order to teach scuba diving and you can get people killed by doing a poor job. There are some key differences. Realtively few people own horses or scuba dive and no one is forced to do either. It just doesn't effect a very large portion of the population. Where I'm going with this is attempting to answer the question...who would lobby for licensing and why? With so few effected and no one forced into it I don't believe that either the government or the public in general will ever care one way or the other. As I see it there are only two possible sources of a push for licensing legislation and that would be farriers themselves or maybe animal rights folks. At that, I think the animal rights folks have way bigger fish to fry and horse shoeing is probably way down on their list.

In conclusion, I don't think licensing is comming unless farriers or farrier associations make it happen. That would seem consistent with the fact that the AFA and farriers are the only ones I've heard discussing the issue. The only people I've heard say they want licesning are farriers. The only threat of licensing that I see is from within our own ranks.

Gary_Miller

02-05-2006, 10:04 AM

Gary,
I think you have said it the way it really is. States are only interested in the money and turning potential $$$ contributors away because of a rigid certification test would go against the grain. Bottom line is if they can't generate a substantial contribution to the state vault, why bother.
Wayne
Its not the money thats the issue.

The subjectivity of the test is the problem.

To much is based on the opion of the tester. This leaves room for argument and law suits based on the defense that the examiner was bais agaist the examinie.

In order for the test to have any validity the answers must be cut and dry and measurable. So there can be no argument.

This means that any test tied to licensing would probable end up being a written test only in order to test you knowlede of the trade.

The pratical/skill portion of the licensing requirement would be through the educational requirements. Which could include schools, apprenticeships and experiance.

Gary

Mike Ferrara

02-05-2006, 10:17 AM

This means that any test tied to licensing probable end up being a written test only in order to test you knowlede of the trade.

I think if we look at other license tests we see that the primary subject of the test is knowledge of the laws that are applicable.

The pratical/skill portion of the licensing requirement would be through the educational requirements. Which could include schools, apprenticeships and experiance.

Gary

And this is where grandfathering could actually make sense.

wwhite1973

02-05-2006, 10:47 AM

Originally Posted by Gary_Miller
Its not the money thats the issue.

I was just repeating what a friend of mine in the state legislature told me.

Originally Posted by Gary_Miller
The subjectivity of the test is the problem.

To much is based on the opion of the tester. This leaves room for argument and law suits based on the defense that the examiner was bais agaist the examinie.

In order for the test to have any validity the answers must be cut and dry and measurable. So there can be no argument.

This means that any test tied to licensing would probable end up being a written test only in order to test you knowlede of the trade.

The pratical/skill portion of the licensing requirement would be through the educational requirements. Which could include schools, apprenticeships and experiance.

I totally agree.

Wayne

T.N. Trosin

02-07-2006, 02:39 AM

tbloomer

02-07-2006, 08:12 AM

Just so you know. I spent 3 of 4 days at Equine Affair out here, and of all of the questions asked not one had to do with licensing.

Strange how people were more concerned with finding a farrier that would show up at their place at all.

The people who have problems keeping a farrier usually have one or more of the following situations:

1. Inadequate work environment.
2. Filthy horses.
3. Rank horses.
4. Horses not caught when the farrier arrives.
5. Scheduling problems - weekend or evening hours only.
6. Payment issues . . . can you hold my check till next tuesday?
7. Only want a farrier twice a year.

I try to make it clear to my customers that sticking to a regular schedule and having a good work enviroment are the most important factors that I look for in a good customer.

It would be good for the farrier industry if the national farrier associations would focus their horse owner education efforts on educating horse owners about how to be good customers. Instead the emphasis seems to be placed on teaching horse owners about shoeing so that they can tell their farrier how to shoe their horses. IMNTBHO that is the wrong message.

Tom Bloomer, CF

Mike Ferrara

02-07-2006, 08:52 AM

Well said Tom.

Years ago, in a different area, I had a bunch of GREAT backyard accounts. The ones I get called on in this area miss on every one of your points and they're cheap to boot. They all say they'll go on a schedule but just try to get it done. I spend all my time tracking dates only to call and get an excuse why they can't do it. I stopped trying. If they call and if I have time I'll go and charge accordingly but they may not save any money by having it done once every six months instead of once every six weeks. I've already charged as much as $90 for a trim and in one case that wasn't enough. Many of those horses are going to have garbage feet and there isn't a thing that I can do about it.

Don't even get me started on work environment. LOL at some of these places I can't use a fan in hot weather because it just blows sand in my face...no light, soft unlevel ground...you name it. Then they don't want you there other than evenings or weekends even if you provide your own handler who can actually handle a horse. They actually wonder why they can't keep any one.

I say license owners!

tbloomer

02-07-2006, 09:45 AM

I once told a prospective customer that I refuse to work on horses standing in mud. Her reply was . . . get ready for this one . . . "the other farrier always wore boots and an apron."

Tom Bloomer, CF

sjfarrier

02-07-2006, 11:16 AM

jseyffer

02-07-2006, 01:24 PM

My favorite was the guy who spent $15,000 on a roping arena but there was no shade for shoeing. He said "cowboys have to be tough". I explained that I was not a cowboy (can't rope anything faster that a beach ball and I never could figure cattle out) and I was not tough. I was, however, expensive. I shod for his father for quite a while but not for him again....

Rick Burten

02-07-2006, 01:44 PM

Two or 3 friends of mine have told me that they will never renew their dues with the AFA because they say that the AFA supports licensing. I support not helping anyone who supports licensing.
Congratulations! you can be the bearer of good tidings. Tell your friends that although there are some in the AFA that are pro-licensing, that is NOT the position of the AFA nor , inspite of all the rhetoric, blustering and whining to the contrary has it ever been the position of the AFA.

Remind your friends that dues are $105.00/year and that the check should be made out to the AFA and sent to 4059 Iron Works Parkway, Suite 1, Lexington, KY. 40511-8488. And don't forget to send in your dues, too.

George Geist

02-07-2006, 07:15 PM

Jason Maki

02-07-2006, 07:21 PM

George,
licensing leads to more money for who? The licensing agency, the trial lawyers, the"testing"agency etc
When i want to make more money i increase my rates...I am always seeking better clients and attempting to better my skills under a horse, my anaotomical knowledge and in the fire. i am attempting to rain in my expenses to turn a better profit... You find succesful people, work with them, emulate what works for them, catered to your unique skills and talents... I need to talk more to my clients and TELL them the value they are receiving and what i think... that is how I make more money... not by a license...
Jason

Gary_Miller

02-07-2006, 08:23 PM

Why do we need it now?

When it comes to being licensed this will be the reason given?

DECLARATION OF POLICY. This chapter is enacted as an exercise of the
power of the state to promote the public health, safety and welfare by
safeguarding the people of this state against incompetent, dishonest or
unprincipled practitioners of Farrier Science. It is hereby declared that
the right to practice farrier science is a privilege conferred by
legislative grant to persons possessed of the personal and professional
qualifications specified in this chapter.

Gary

Mike Ferrara

02-07-2006, 09:45 PM

SJ,
I must disagree on that. Youll find that every Butcher, Baker, and Candlestick maker out there who holds an occupational license, it is because the people of those respective trades worked and lobbied to make it so. Licensing leads to more money. Thats the goal to keep focused on.
George

How does a license get you more money? By more money, do you mean more profit or just higher fees?

Does a licensing law effect supply or demand and how?

Does it have bearing on the costs of doing business (insurance, licensing fees or whatever) leaving the trades people no chioce but to charge more?

Personally I'm convinced that there are more than a few farriers who think the same way as you. However, if you aren't satisfied with what clients are willing to pay you there are probably ways to actually increase the market value of your services. If all else fails there are always other businesses. Still though, come on, there are plenty of those six figure shoers out there. Are you saying that you need a license because that isn't enough for you or you're unable to get there?

J.H. shoeing

02-07-2006, 09:50 PM

Oh come on Jason tell us what you really think!

By the way, we are on the same page.

Jeff, CF

T.N. Trosin

02-08-2006, 07:06 AM

It would be good for the farrier industry if the national farrier associations would focus their horse owner education efforts on educating horse owners about how to be good customers.

I think you missed the point here. What I could divine from the questions asked by horse owners none of them were concerned about licensing. Thus no demand from the consumer for such, which despite what George says is where most licensing has come from.
I like how you people with weather instantly assume that these people can’t get farriers because of the conditions of their yard. For most of them it was the fact that their farrier was retiring or moving out of state, or in the case of one local farrier, he’s injured and his help can’t keep up with out him.
The few people who came up who stated they had trouble keeping a farrier were asked not only by myself but the other guy working the booth to take for lack of a better phrase a “fearless inventory” of the reasons why they couldn’t keep a farrier including but not limited to the condition of their yard and the behavior of their horse.

Instead the emphasis seems to be placed on teaching horse owners about shoeing so that they can tell their farrier how to shoe their horses. IMNTBHO that is the wrong message.
Tom Bloomer, CF
I think you misconstrued teaching horse owners what questions to ask and how to talk with their horseshoer with teaching horse owners to “shoe horses”. Over the years I have learned when giving horse owners advice, who weren’t my clients, to be very careful how I phrase things and preface my comments with statements such as, “I’m not here to tell you how your horse should be shod” and “I can’t say conclusively because I can’t see your horse” and that’s the way we approached it out here at least.

Phil Armitage

02-08-2006, 07:36 AM

While I know that this is a hot topic here in the boards, I do not think that licensing is that big of a deal. There are those that say the AFA is the best farrier assn. out there. Maybe, maybe not I am not saying that they are not.
I for one know this, I have never seen an instance at any time, in which a group (This case farriers) invite another group (In this case Lawmakers and lawyers) to make rules for them to follow, and then sanction them for not following them.
I personally cannot believe that anyone would fall for such a thing. Sometimes I think it is an ego trip that supporters of this kind of thing are on. Whenever you have a group of folks who support being ruled by another group, you have a very few groveling to be thought of as the elite farriers or whatever they are doing. 300 years ago there was no licensing requirment and for the last 20 years that I personally know of there has been none, why do we need it now? IF YOU ARE GOOD, EVERYONE ALREADY KNOWS IT. YOU DON'T HAVE TO TELL ANYONE!!! Start licensing us and in 5 years, some member who wants something better will propose having an elite license making them sound better than anyone else
Don't get me wrong, there are farriers out there who could probably shoe rings around me, and whoever they are, licensing will not make you or me any better shoer or not!
Two or 3 friends of mine have told me that they will never renew their dues with the AFA because they say that the AFA supports licensing. I support not helping anyone who supports licensing.

Hey Steve welcome to the site. Good to see some new blood on the forum and hear the thoughts of others. I understand where you are comeing from. I agree with you and feel you are absolutely correct about licensing not makeing us better farriers and I would like to add makeing us more money. Gaining work, keeping it and makeing enough to stay at it is totaly up to the individual, we make or break our own buisness. There are things that make us better, one of them is working together AFA or not. When we get together and help each other out it makes us better. I have gained so much by attending clinics some are AFA some are not, I do not need to record them, I do not need to tell my customers about it, all I do is let it help me and it shows in my work. What we do is our resume. The best thing we can do is keep learning, apply the our God given talent (this is and art) and let the work do the talking. This is kind of like Star search in a way, if you can sing it doesnt take a rocket scientist to notice if your off key it will just show, and you need to go see your singing coach. Horseshoeing is more of an art than a science and an artist, musician, singer does not need a piece of paper to say they can do what they do. However we need each other to get better, looking at eachother work and giveing constructive critiscm and giveing compliments to keep us motivated and moveing in the right direction.

Bill Adams

02-08-2006, 10:21 PM

The ideas that lead to licencing are probably good and pure but they don't get put into real practice. Many of the laws in the construction industry amount to a protection racket. The bigger the city the bigger the problem. In many rural areas there isn't even an inspector. The same thing will apply to us.
Mike brought up a good point about making money. I can charge any thing I damm well please now, the only restriction is the product I deliver. Do I need to depend on another authority to help me make a living?
We have brought up the medical practices here. Do the licencing boards keep doctors practicing properly or do the insurance companys? Could it even be imagined that a person may want to be a good doctor and study and practice to become that. To that person a licence is just a formality, one that is unnessary in our biz.
Bill

tbloomer

02-09-2006, 07:48 AM

I think you missed the point here. What I could divine from the questions asked by horse owners none of them were concerned about licensing. Thus no demand from the consumer for such, which despite what George says is where most licensing has come from.
I like how you people with weather instantly assume that these people can’t get farriers because of the conditions of their yard. For most of them it was the fact that their farrier was retiring or moving out of state, or in the case of one local farrier, he’s injured and his help can’t keep up with out him.
The few people who came up who stated they had trouble keeping a farrier were asked not only by myself but the other guy working the booth to take for lack of a better phrase a “fearless inventory” of the reasons why they couldn’t keep a farrier including but not limited to the condition of their yard and the behavior of their horse.

I think you misconstrued teaching horse owners what questions to ask and how to talk with their horseshoer with teaching horse owners to “shoe horses”. Over the years I have learned when giving horse owners advice, who weren’t my clients, to be very careful how I phrase things and preface my comments with statements such as, “I’m not here to tell you how your horse should be shod” and “I can’t say conclusively because I can’t see your horse” and that’s the way we approached it out here at least.

I do not believe that I have not misconstrued anything. I was talking about national farrier associations educating horse owners, not Tom Trosin educating horse owners. However, since you are volunteering your time at an Equine Affair as a representative of a national and a local association, I guess that counts as an official effort on the part of both associations to educate horse owners :) So in respect to your participation as a good will ambassador, perhaps I have misconstrued . . . just a little :)

Tom Bloomer, CF

Gary_Miller

02-09-2006, 09:21 AM

When it comes to being licensed this will be the reason given?

DECLARATION OF POLICY. This chapter is enacted as an exercise of the
power of the state to promote the public health, safety and welfare by
safeguarding the people of this state against incompetent, dishonest or
unprincipled practitioners of Farrier Science. It is hereby declared that
the right to practice farrier science is a privilege conferred by
legislative grant to persons possessed of the personal and professional
qualifications specified in this chapter.

Gary
Im suprised that no one commented on this Declaration of Policy.

This is the first paragraph in the Idaho Statute covering Veterinary paractice better known as The Idaho Veterinary Practice Act.

The only change I made was replacing the words veterinary medicine with farrier science.

If you check most licensing laws you will find that the reason given for licensing is for the protection of the public, and not for the betterment of the industry.

Gary

Phantom Farrier

02-09-2006, 06:19 PM

When it comes to being licensed this will be the reason given?

DECLARATION OF POLICY. This chapter is enacted as an exercise of the
power of the state to promote the public health, safety and welfare by
safeguarding the people of this state against incompetent, dishonest or
unprincipled practitioners of Farrier Science. It is hereby declared that
the right to practice farrier science is a privilege conferred by
legislative grant to persons possessed of the personal and professional
qualifications specified in this chapter.

Gary

Gary,

Under a forced licensing scheme like most European countries have already, your right to shoe horses is taken away and replaced with a privilege granted by the state for a fee. Very un-American!

Phantom

T.N. Trosin

02-10-2006, 12:04 AM

Im suprised that no one commented on this Declaration of Policy.

This is the first paragraph in the Idaho Statute covering Veterinary paractice better known as The Idaho Veterinary Practice Act.

The only change I made was replacing the words veterinary medicine with farrier science.

If you check most licensing laws you will find that the reason given for licensing is for the protection of the public, and not for the betterment of the industry.

Gary
NOt that most of us didn't know that.
Whats your point?

Phil Armitage

02-10-2006, 07:26 AM

I thought Gary's point was very clear. He is saying the reason or lets say purpose for licensing is not intended to better the trade, it is intended to protect the public. Just giveing another reason against licensing.

I would like to know if anyone thinks licensing would better the trade? If you do, how would it be accomplished?

Gary_Miller

02-10-2006, 10:44 AM

Whats your point?
Here is some more.

54-601. PURPOSES OF THE ACT. The practice of podiatry in the state of Idaho is hereby declared to affect the public health, safety and welfare and to be subject to regulation and control in the public interest. It is further declared to be a matter of public interest and concern that the profession of podiatry merit and receive the confidence of the public, and to that end that only qualified persons be permitted to practice podiatry in the state of Idaho. This act shall be liberally construed to carry out these objects and Purposes

54-1501. PRACTICE OF OPTOMETRY DEFINED. Optometry is defined as the science which relates to the examination and treatment of conditions of or relating to the eyes and/or eyelids, the analysis of their function and the employment of preventive or corrective measures to insure maximum vision and comfort. The practice of optometry is declared to be a learned profession. The practice of optometry affects the public health, welfare and safety and the public interest requires regulation and control of the practice of optometry and limitation of the practice to qualified persons. The "practice of optometry" means:

54-1401. PURPOSE -- LICENSE REQUIRED -- REPRESENTATION TO THE PUBLIC. In order to safeguard the public health, safety and welfare, it is in the public interest to regulate and control nursing in the state of Idaho, to promote quality health care services, to prohibit unqualified and dishonest persons from practicing nursing, and to protect against acts or conduct which may endanger the health and safety of the public.

54-1101. PUBLIC INTEREST AND CONCERN IN DISPOSITION OF HUMAN BODIES. The practice and processes involved in processing and making final disposition of human bodies is hereby declared to affect the public interest, health, safety and welfare and to be subject to regulation and control in the public interest. It is further declared to be a matter of public interest and concern that the processes involved in preparing and making final disposition of human bodies should be so controlled as to protect the public interest and merit the confidence of the public, and to that end that only qualified persons be permitted to practice such acts in the state of Idaho. This act shall be liberally construed to carry out these objects and purposes.

The point is.

A lot has been said that licensing will make the industry better, its needed to protect horses, and to help increase income.

However that is not the case at all. In licensing any profession individuals in the profession have always pushed to licensing using the excuse that it would protect the public. This is because any other reason would not even get looked at in the legislation.

Gary

T.N. Trosin

02-10-2006, 11:02 AM

The point is.

A lot has been said that licensing will make the industry better, its needed to protect horses, and to help increase income.
Gary

I never have. Eventhough you license someone doesn't gaurentee that they will continue their education beyond that basic bench mark.

Again tell me something I don't already know.

Phil Armitage

02-10-2006, 03:59 PM

I never have. Eventhough you license someone doesn't gaurentee that they will continue their education beyond that basic bench mark.

Again tell me something I don't already know.

T.N. now I have to ask, what is your point? Gary is simply adding information for all (not just you) to consider. If you are for licensing then what can you add to counter what Gary has shared if you are against licensing then I quess not much more needs to be said. So T.N. what exactly is your point?

Gary_Miller

02-10-2006, 07:38 PM

I never have.
I never said you did. However, if you have been following this issue from it begining, you should know lots of individuals have.

Many are in leadership postions in the AFA.
Eventhough you license someone doesn't gaurentee that they will continue their education beyond that basic bench mark.
However, some individuals will argue if CE is needed to renew your license that individuals will continue their education.

Again tell me something I don't already know.
If you think I am only posting this information to you then you have been breathing in to much burnt hoof.

I was simply providing informatioin as well as answering a question asked by "sjfarrier" on why some induviduals think we need to be licensed.

Gary

Phantom Farrier

02-10-2006, 08:35 PM

Gary_Miller

02-10-2006, 08:57 PM

Forced licensing is both unnecessary and unwarranted as the farrier industry is self-regulating. If I do a good job and my client likes the way their horse is going, I will be called back to shoe again - and if not - I'm unemployed.
However with the changing industry from the working ranch horse to the show horse and even more to the pet. Horse owners are changing from people who knew about horses and what was good for them and how to judge a shoe job. To people who know nothing about horses and what is necessary to care for them, let alone what a good shoe job is.
The industry is slowly moving from a industry of knowledgable owners to those who have no knowledge. With this we will soon find people who want to see some regulation just so they don't have to make the decission themselves to what is right and what is wrong.

Why this obsession with red tape and regulation?John I'm sure you know I'm against regulation as I believe it has not done any good for any industry. However, I have to agree with others who have said that if the industry as a whole does not want regulation then we need to have our ducks in a row so we can fight against regulation. If not then the industry is distend to be regulated. Not only farrier but the horse industry as a whole.

Gary

T.N. Trosin

02-11-2006, 01:50 AM

T.N. now I have to ask, what is your point? Gary is simply adding information for all (not just you) to consider. If you are for licensing then what can you add to counter what Gary has shared if you are against licensing then I quess not much more needs to be said. So T.N. what exactly is your point?

My point is that everyone here already knows that you can substitute the word farrier in just about all of the countries VPA's, and he's not adding to the conversation accept a fear based mentality, which I abhor. If he's that afraid then he needs to get in the fire or find some more horses to work on. Further I consider his actions to verge on conjecture, which is another thing I don't particularly care for.

I never said you did. However, if you have been following this issue from it begining, you should know lots of individuals have.

Many are in leadership postions in the AFA.

I started the thread and I have been following the issue since 1992, which isn't as long as say Mr. Stovall, but still it's been a while.
Further I think I said when I started this thread have your facts straight especially concerning the AFA, and considering that you have stated that you have better things to spend your money on right now I don't think your in a position to tell me who is for or against licensing in the AFA.

However, some individuals will argue if CE is needed to renew your license that individuals will continue their education.
Let them argue that point then, there isn't a whole lot you can do about it. I have had a California Horse Racing Board license for the last 14 years and I renew my license every 3, I have yet to be asked if I continue my education.

If you think I am only posting this information to you then you have been breathing in to much burnt hoof.
Gary

Burnt hoof aside, I think your posting the information for all to see, but it doesn't impress me or add much to this conversation. You’re against licensing; we already know that, you need to find a more compelling argument than pasting the word farrier in a VPA.

Rick Burten

02-11-2006, 07:59 AM

Gary,

Under a forced licensing scheme like most European countries have already, your right to shoe horses is taken away and replaced with a privilege granted by the state for a fee. Very un-American!
Phantom

So is being licensed to drive, un-American? How about being licensed to be a doctor, veterinarian, CPA, attorney, barber, hair dresser, manicurist, pilot, real estate agent? I wounder if truck drives with a CDL realize how un-American they are.

Phantom Farrier

02-11-2006, 08:15 AM

My point is that everyone here already knows that you can substitute the word farrier in just about all of the countries VPA's, and he's not adding to the conversation accept a fear based mentality, which I abhor. If he's that afraid then he needs to get in the fire or find some more horses to work on. Further I consider his actions to verge on conjecture, which is another thing I don't particularly care for.
This is a friendly discussion where no one is right or wrong. If you don't like what is being discussed or how, I suggest you find another forum to vent your frustration.
I started the thread and I have been following the issue since 1992, which isn't as long as say Mr. Stovall, but still it's been a while.
Further I think I said when I started this thread have your facts straight especially concerning the AFA, and considering that you have stated that you have better things to spend your money on right now I don't think your in a position to tell me who is for or against licensing in the AFA.
You think you are the center of this discussion - you are not that important nor is your opinion.
Burnt hoof aside, I think your posting the information for all to see, but it doesn't impress me or add much to this conversation. You’re against licensing; we already know that, you need to find a more compelling argument than pasting the word farrier in a VPA.
You're not impressed - we're not impressed.

Phantom

Phantom Farrier

02-11-2006, 08:22 AM

So is being licensed to drive, un-American? How about being licensed to be a doctor, veterinarian, CPA, attorney, barber, hair dresser, manicurist, pilot, real estate agent? I wounder if truck drives with a CDL realize how un-American they are.
Rick,

We're not talking about a fishing licese, we're talking about making horseshoeing a criminal activity.

The taking away of freedom is what's un-american. The part I don't understand is why you are in such a hurry to give up that freedom without any resistance? Now that's really un-American!

Phantom :)

Gary_Miller

02-11-2006, 09:24 AM

John
How you going to fight it? Where you going to go with the fight?

Precidence has already been established that occupational licensing is legal and not unconstitutional. No court in the land will do anything but up hold the states right to require it.

Therefore the best thing we can do is prepare for, IMO what will come to pass, and wright the legisilation we as farriers want and have it ready so when it does come up on any legislation we are ready to fight for the license requirement that are best for the industry.

Gary

Phantom Farrier

02-11-2006, 12:13 PM

John
How you going to fight it? Where you going to go with the fight?
Where's the ole American Spirit?
Precidence has already been established that occupational licensing is legal and not unconstitutional. No court in the land will do anything but up hold the states right to require it.
Licensing will only come as a result of public outcry.
Therefore the best thing we can do is prepare for, IMO what will come to pass, and wright the legisilation we as farriers want and have it ready so when it does come up on any legislation we are ready to fight for the license requirement that are best for the industry.

Gary,

Prepare? How will that be accomplished? AFA? Grandfathering? Baloney!

We prepare by maintaining constant vigilance and holding ourselves to the highest professional and personal standard both on and off the job and resist practices that might undermine or defeat them.

Phantom :)

George Geist

02-11-2006, 12:54 PM

The grandfathering compromise that I offered up to Mr.Stovall some time ago was precisely what was done with the truck drivers back in '92 when the federal CDL law was passed. It surprises me that you guys have so much problem with the concept of grandfathering, especially with the alarming level of turnover that this trade has.

I would say that within 10 years all grandfathered people would be gone anyway. The AFA grandfathered people in to being certified in the early days of their certification provided they were certified by a state group who had testing at least equal, if not harder than what they were devising.

For what reason do you guys see it necessary to test guys who have already been tested? For those of you who bang the drum so loudly about AFA (and others) certification, this would finally give that some legal standing. Something it does not now, nor will ever have. It might even encourage guys to go and get certified who see no reason to now.
George

Phil Armitage

02-11-2006, 01:23 PM

Licensing aside, I think the point is to force testing. I have no problem with encourageing new farriers to be tested and taught by seasoned farriers. What needs to be stressed to new farriers is this will improve there skills and there income. In my opinion shoeing horses is not like other trades it is more like being a craftsmen or artist. Artists are not licensed are they? If there is too much focus on standardizeing then artistic ability and thinking out of the box is stifled. It is un-artistic as well as un-american to stifle this freedom. Everyone has a different way of explaining what balance and proper trimming is, "The wooden indian", "Natural Balance", feel, observation, gut, Uniform Sole thickness, whatever else someone wants to call it. It is an art and common sense. The self regulateing part of the trade is there, art is self regulateing, if people like it and it works then the artist advances and makes a liveing or you do something else for a liveing. There will always be people looking for quick and easy and cheap. Also people looking for what they want to hear. Nothing will eliminate this part of our scociety. The good news is there are more people looking for qaulity and sound horses with healthy feet. I seek out knowledge that will improve my ability to do the job right. I do not want to reinvent the wheel I want to learn what the already succesfull farrier is doing and work for clients that appreciate this kind of work.

There is not need for grandfathering, if there is no license. There is a need for teaching. Something retired farriers should consider and farriers getting close to retirement should plan for.

Tom Stovall, CJF

02-11-2006, 01:35 PM

George Geist in gray, deletia

I would say that within 10 years all grandfathered people would be gone anyway. The AFA grandfathered people in to being certified in the early days of their certification provided they were certified by a state group who had testing at least equal, if not harder than what they were devising.

Please provide verification for your statement. I certified at the AFA Basic level in 1981 when the test was first available in Texas. The test was administered and graded by Jack Miller on AFA, not TPFA, standards. As I recall, Jack had asked me to do a plating demo at the TPFA meeting at which the certification was scheduled and asked if I wanted use the demo for the practical. Since I was fixing to shoe a horse for free anyway, I said, "Sure."

The TPFA required anyone wanting to test at the AFA Journeyman level to pass four interim TPFA tests before testing at the Journeyman level, but none of those were required by the AFA at the time. (Please see <http://www.katyforge.com/jnymn.html>. The first time the AFA Journeyman Test was offered in Texas was in November, 1983. Don Gustafson and I took the test and passed it.

The Basic and Journeyman tests I took emanated from the AFA, not the TPFA. To my knowledge, nobody has ever been "grandfathered in" to the AFA's certification program.

For what reason do you guys see it necessary to test guys who have already been tested?

In the words of Willie Nelson, "Yesterday's dead and tomorrow is blind..." Which means, what you did yesterday is history, tomorrow is conjecture, and any test is about demonstrating knowledge and motor skills today.

For those of you who bang the drum so loudly about AFA (and others) certification, this would finally give that some legal standing. Something it does not now, nor will ever have. It might even encourage guys to go and get certified who see no reason to now.

AFA certification has a certain amount of legal standing right now. Anyone claiming the credential who hasn't passed the test is operating under false pretenses and if such a specimen managed to get under a horse on that basis, he could probably be prosecuted for obtaining money under false pretenses, aka, "fraud."

Mind you, I'm just as dead set against licensing as I ever was, but I still think our formulating a plug-in plan is a good idea. I especially like the idea of week-long, full-contact, total-immersion, specialty seminars. Such a system might even be engineered to provide shoeing school graduates an opportunity to further their education at the more-or-less intermediate level after they've learned which way to turn a nail in shoeing school.

ray steele

02-11-2006, 07:06 PM

Rick Burten

02-11-2006, 08:35 PM

Rick,
We're not talking about a fishing licese, we're talking about making horseshoeing a criminal activity.
Just as much as we have made practicing medicine, cutting hair, driving a car, going hunting, going fishing, owning a gun, practicing law, etc, a criminal activity, right?

The taking away of freedom is what's un-american.
No freedom is lost, anymore than what you must consider lost in any of the above instances.

The part I don't understand is why you are in such a hurry to give up that freedom without any resistance? Now that's really un-American!
Whose in a hurry to give anything up? And, since I have already been subjected to one licensing requirement in order to practice my profession, and since that requirement had no impact on my ability to remain gainfully employed doing what I do, I'm puzzled by your idea that mine or anyone's freedom to practice this profession will be lost. I've got a driver's license and I'm free to drive without worry so long as I obey/follow the law. My doctors and attorneys are free to practice their respective professions as they choose, so long as they follow/obey the law. Do you see a pattern here?

Gary Hill

02-11-2006, 08:55 PM

What is the law when it comes to shoeing? Every breed has it's own regulations that they allow for their shows? You could get ten "Master Farriers" and they would argue the best way to shoe any particular horse. It just seems that a very few farriers are the ones that want to push licensing on all the rest. Are they so afraid of loosing work to a lesser farrier that they want to outlaw anyone that doesn't agree to their way? I am blessed that horses outnumber farriers in my area and I can name about 30 in my area and I hardly every cross paths with another and we either wave or pull over and visit, when we see each other. We swap info on bad accounts and lameness issues rather than worry about whether or not we're CF, CJF or licensed? I do know a couple of CJF's that look down on us or me but I know I work on just as good or better horses and stay as busy as I Want to, so it rolls off my back. Best to all, Gary

George Geist

02-11-2006, 09:43 PM

Phil,
You say you are for forced testing. Good me too. Now we're on the same page. Tell me just how in the world can this be achieved without licensing?

The only thing in this country that is required to be a farrier is to just start calling yourself one. If someone is a little more serious they can go as far as to go to Kinko's or Office Max and get some cards made up. That's it. That's all that is legally necessary.

Admittedly, I'm a bit of a dinosaur. I'm still quite old school about how I do a lot of things. But it's been a long time since I worked on an old $200 hack stable plug. Horses are getting more and more expensive. Owners are getting more and more rich. As a result of this, more and more is being asked of us as farriers. All of you guys can agree to this. Voluntary certification just doesn't cut it.

Something mandatory must be devised. If there is a different way than licensing I'd sure like to hear it.
George

Gary_Miller

02-11-2006, 11:21 PM

My point is that everyone here already knows that you can substitute the word farrier in just about all of the countries VPA's, and he's not adding to the conversation accept a fear based mentality, which I abhor.
Not fear! Facts cold hard facts about how easy it is to right licensing laws due to the abillity to modify current existing laws. As well as stating the main reasons that licensing laws are written.
If he's that afraid then he needs to get in the fire or find some more horses to work on.
Afraid? I'm not afraid of licensing or certification or anything dealing with this industry. Yes I'm still building a business and customers. However I'm also serving an apprenticeship two days a week, and I live and breath horseshoeing every minute of the day. And your right I do need to get into the fire and find more horses to work on. But doesn't everyone who is just getting started and working on developing their skills.
Further I consider his actions to verge on conjecture, which is another thing I don't particularly care for.
SO!!!! I have never cared about what others think of my actions, and I'm espeically not going to start with the likes of you.
I started the thread and I have been following the issue since 1992, which isn't as long as say Mr. Stovall, but still it's been a while.
You may have started this tread. However there are at least 11 other treads discussing this issue before this one, and if you check the first one started when the AFJ broke the story last spring I think you will find out I was the first to reply.
Further I think I said when I started this thread have your facts straight especially concerning the AFA, and considering that you have stated that you have better things to spend your money on right now I don't think your in a position to tell me who is for or against licensing in the AFA.
Well if you check the editorial in the May/June and the July/August 2005 PF you will find out I'm stating facts. And while you are at it checkout Mr. Ridley's statement made in the July/August 2005 PF.
Let them argue that point then, there isn't a whole lot you can do about it. I have had a California Horse Racing Board license for the last 14 years and I renew my license every 3, I have yet to be asked if I continue my education.
Only because its not written into the law.
Anything can be written into the law and once its passed all will have to follow the requirement in order to practice the profesion legaly.
Burnt hoof aside, I think your posting the information for all to see, but it doesn't impress me or add much to this conversation.
Well I'm not here to impress you and you may not think its relivent. But thats only because you are closed minded and can't see the big picture.
You’re against licensing; we already know that, you need to find a more compelling argument than pasting the word farrier in a VPA.
A more compelling arguement for what????

Gary

Gary_Miller

02-12-2006, 03:00 AM

Where's the ole American Spirit?
It has nothing to do with lossing sprit. The preciedence has been set by other licensing laws.
Licensing will only come as a result of public outcry.
Most licensing laws that I'm aware of have not came from public out cry, but from the industry itself. Usually from an association who wants some type of control. So they right a bill convince someone in the state legislature to introduce the bill and and the rest is history.
Prepare? How will that be accomplished? AFA? Grandfathering? Baloney!.
Prepare by doing studies which collect data so when it does come up we The industry can show the legislature that it not necessary.
Prepare by having a draft of the bill ready to introduce if need be so the industry can have what they want in the law.
I think the AFA is in the best postion to collect the data and write the draft with input from the industry.
I think Grandfathering is good but only to keep the current farrier working until the certification can be completed. With a time limit written into the bill in which they must have thier certification from any of the three farrier organizatioins
We prepare by maintaining constant vigilance and holding ourselves to the highest professional and personal standard both on and off the job and resist practices that might undermine or defeat them.
That's OK for now. However, the next time someone pushes for licensing. The industry may not be able to stop it. So then what? If there is not a plan then the industry will have to live by what ever is decided by the legislation with out input. Not exactly controling our own destiny.

Gary

Franky Lundist

02-12-2006, 06:33 AM

Gary oddly enough the only someone that seems to be pushing for licensing is the AFA magic circle, after all a "past president of the AFA" started all this stuff perhaps we are back to the lets clean our house before we look into others,
The AFA and its puppet like committes seem to be the ones that have started this they seem to be the only ones who want it sounds more like a teamster's union boss trying to grab control by scaring farriers into believing its needed
Next anyone who thinks that licensing will bring them more money is just a plain *** *****, it will cost more to be in business, it will cost more to the horse owner, who will get the horse shod less, it will be impossible to enforce with out some type of funding (unless like in the UK we turn in our brother farriers love the big brother system dont you?) and then those of us who dont like the idea of being controlled by the government or by an association that can't seem to even wipe its own nose will be swamped with work and doing it illegally to boot.
If the AFA really wants to do some good they will actually try to project a positive image and educate the horseowners but from what we have all read and seen that will happen when pigs fly or rick is left speechless, I doubt we will see either one of those happen anytime soon

Phantom Farrier

02-12-2006, 08:02 AM

Most licensing laws that I'm aware of have not came from public out cry, but from the industry itself. Usually from an association who wants some type of control. So they right a bill convince someone in the state legislature to introduce the bill and and the rest is history.

You are right in that some associations want absolute and uncompromised control of an entire industry.

I think Grandfathering is good but only to keep the current farrier working until the certification can be completed. With a time limit written into the bill in which they must have thier certification from any of the three farrier organizatioins
You must be joking - the lowest common denominator.

If there is not a plan then the industry will have to live by what ever is decided by the legislation with out input. Not exactly controling our own destiny.Gary
The Massachusetts legislature will be interested in revenue and nothing else.

Gary,

While I agree with some of what you say, the AFA has but one responsibility and that is to help those who wish to improve their skills through education and professional development activities. If the AFA wants to be respected as a global player in the hoof-care industry it is so important that it maintains the highest of ethical standards. :)

Phantom

Phantom Farrier

02-12-2006, 08:17 AM

Gary oddly enough the only someone that seems to be pushing for licensing is the AFA magic circle, after all a "past president of the AFA" started all this stuff perhaps we are back to the lets clean our house before we look into others,
Franky,
You are not a member of the AFA or you are too chicken**** to use your real name.
The AFA and its puppet like committes seem to be the ones that have started this they seem to be the only ones who want it sounds more like a teamster's union boss trying to grab control by scaring farriers into believing its needed
You can't even vote the bums out, because you are not a member.
If the AFA really wants to do some good they will actually try to project a positive image and educate the horseowners but from what we have all read and seen that will happen when pigs fly or rick is left speechless, I doubt we will see either one of those happen anytime soon
Franky,
Join the AFA then maybe someone will listen. :)

Phantom

Phil Armitage

02-12-2006, 08:57 AM

Phil,
You say you are for forced testing. Good me too. Now we're on the same page. Tell me just how in the world can this be achieved without licensing?

I am not for forced anything, I am for encourageing farriers to continue there education and testing is also a good way for anyone to learn however I am not for doing this by force you do not need to force craftsmen and artist to learn more about something they love. People are already continueing there education and want to learn more. If the AFA wants a piece of that pie then they need to figure out how to get it.

Here is what I originaly said.

"Licensing aside, I think the point is to force testing. I have no problem with encourageing new farriers to be tested and taught by seasoned farriers. What needs to be stressed to new farriers is this will improve there skills and there income. In my opinion shoeing horses is not like other trades it is more like being a craftsmen or artist. Artists are not licensed are they?"

I should have said I think the motive of many are to force testing and certification. I am not for forceing anyone to do anything.

The only thing in this country that is required to be a farrier is to just start calling yourself one. If someone is a little more serious they can go as far as to go to Kinko's or Office Max and get some cards made up. That's it. That's all that is legally necessary.

I disagree, there is much more required. I can't imagine anyone off the street with just a notion to be a farrier and a buisness card getting under or even near some horses and being successfull. You are leaveing out the fact that the horse is a liveing breathing intelligent part of the eqaution. This is hard work that requires a lot of skill and anyone really serious about giveing it a go realises it in a short amount of time. We all make mistakes as we learn, nobody is mistake free this is part of learning.

Admittedly, I'm a bit of a dinosaur. I'm still quite old school about how I do a lot of things. But it's been a long time since I worked on an old $200 hack stable plug. Horses are getting more and more expensive. Owners are getting more and more rich. As a result of this, more and more is being asked of us as farriers. All of you guys can agree to this. Voluntary certification just doesn't cut it.

I see volentary continueing education happeing a lot and this is without force. I as well as many others may not make it to a big event like the AFA convention or Cincinnati and that is brought up every year, however I attended clinics and I know many other farriers around the country do the same. Attend several small clinics throughout the year and I do this every year.

Something mandatory must be devised. If there is a different way than licensing I'd sure like to hear it.
George

Just because a farrier chooses to continue there education outside the circle of the AFA does not mean they are not continueing or getting good training and education. I think the AFA has great information to teach, but what makes you think the education and training the AFA provides is the only answer.

You do not see good clinicians AFA or not forceing anything, if they are any good word gets out and attendance grows. Just like an individuals farrier buisness, if your any good, word of mouth will help your buisness grow. If you need to force people to do buisness with you then something is wrong.

Mike Ferrara

02-12-2006, 09:08 AM

Something mandatory must be devised.

Why?
What problem are we trying to solve?
How is testing or licensing going to solve that problem that we have yet to define?

You have yet to demonstrate that there's a need or problem that requires any action at all and you have certainly not demonstrated that testing or licensing is the fix.

Phil Armitage

02-12-2006, 09:09 AM

Mike Ferrara

02-12-2006, 09:26 AM

Today I had the type of day that left me doing alot of thinking, and not getting much, that can be quantified,accomplished. Reading some of the posts on this thread and thinking back to this summer and basically 30 or so years since I began in this trade, I've again realized that we have brought it all up again, as it has been brought up in the past. In 1974, in Oklahoma, I 1st heard about Illinois and it's licensing.
We and I have talked about licensing for carpenters , plumbers ,vets. dog kennels and what all else. We have heard how to some license will/may improve the trade, how it is for the good of the animal, that the horse owner will /may be assured that a minimum standard is attainable by the practicioner.
I have asked if anyone can state how bad the problem of poor shoeing is,how many horses have been permanently maimed/hurt by it.

Well it came to me, are you ready? Food Chefs are not licensed! I mean the men and women who cook food,create meals/masterpieces/grub, either at the local "greasy spoon" or at the Ritz(is there such a place)? They directly
affect humans,but are not required to have a license. Some get big pay by providing a one of a kind experience(high paid farrier) , some get minimum wage for burning a burger(back yard shoer like me). We take our children ,wife, mother (you get the point I hope) to thier establishments because we like what they do, and how they do it or because we are cheap and would not pay the high price. But they are not licensed. They deal with humans. We deal with horses. Lets license all the chefs/cooks. Then they can collectively raise the prices until we decide that we do not want to eat out.

Regards

Ray Steele

Ray,

The vast majority of trades are not licensed. In construction, it's the contractor that is licensed. I can work in the trade if the contractor will hire me. Unions may have tests but union cards can be baught and a contractor, as far as I know, is not required by law to be a union shop.

You don't need a license to teach scuba diving, sky diving or mountain/ice climbing and those of us who teach activities like that can kill scores of people in a heart beat.

What we're looking at is a hand full of people who would like to turn this into a communist country and limit competition by force of law. Lets face it, don't unions fit right in with rewards given for time rather than talent or drive. It's no different that 25 years ago when I just about had to fight my way into a barn to work because there was some lazy old coot who wanted to shoe 2 horses a day and get rich doing it without any competition from the likes of me. The cowards gave up on the physical threats and are now screaming for the law to do it for them.

Personally, I'll take the lazy old coot who wanted to fight over the candy azzed cry babies we're putting up with now.

George Geist

02-12-2006, 09:33 AM

Phil,
I didn't say the AFA was the only answer to anything. In fact I'm glad their not involved with this.

If something of a legislative nature ever comes up somewhere, sure they will I'm sure have some input but it will be taken under advisement. They wont be driving the bus. Their BOD directive as well as their 501(c)(3) status ensures that.

Mike,
The need has already been pointed out many times. What part of it did you miss?

Franky,
Glad your'e back. How come you never showed up to the Cincinnati deal?
George

Phantom Farrier

02-12-2006, 11:00 AM

Just as much as we have made practicing medicine, cutting hair, driving a car, going hunting, going fishing, owning a gun, practicing law, etc, a criminal activity, right? No freedom is lost, anymore than what you must consider lost in any of the above instances.

Rick
Try performing any of those freely, no matter how qualified you might be, without kissing the hand of the state and you will find out just how "criminal" these activities can be.
Whose in a hurry to give anything up? And, since I have already been subjected to one licensing requirement in order to practice my profession, and since that requirement had no impact on my ability to remain gainfully employed doing what I do, I'm puzzled by your idea that mine or anyone's freedom to practice this profession will be lost. I've got a driver's license and I'm free to drive without worry so long as I obey/follow the law. My doctors and attorneys are free to practice their respective professions as they choose, so long as they follow/obey the law. Do you see a pattern here?
Rick,
You continue to use the Great Illinois Farrier License Failure as an example - why? Try driving in Illinois without a driver's license - let me know if driving in Illinois has been criminalized or not. :)

Phantom

wwhite1973

02-12-2006, 11:15 AM

Originally posted by George Geist
Mike,
The need has already been pointed out many times. What part of it did you miss?

George personally I think Mike has done a good job on these threads pointing out that there is no need. What part of it did you miss!

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink, same goes for CE. The desire to learn has to be in the individual and no one on earth can force someone to learn. A person also has to take pride in their work or it can become sub par work very quickly. What it boils down to George is that the AFA, or anyone else can do what ever they want to, but it all comes down to the individual, not just in our trade but any trade. Dictated licensing, CE, or certification isn't going to change the things YOU want it to. I think most of the farriers on this board have said that newbies haven't really been a threat to their business, but by your own omission it seems to have done something to yours. Your paranoia is unbeleivable and you saying someone can go to Kinko's, get cards made and go into business can be said about the majority of the trades. As has been pointed out many times on this board licensing didn't make doctors or nurses infalible now did it. There were still bad ones who slipped through the cracks.
My mentor, after he looked at my last shoe job I did under his supervision, told me that he could see my desire to succeed, in my work. He said over the years he had seen those students that lacked the desire to succeed or learn and didn't take pride in their work, that after time they just became an old rusty shoe at the bottom of the pile.

Wayne

Phantom Farrier

02-12-2006, 11:41 AM

George personally I think Mike has done a good job on these threads pointing out that there is no need. What part of it did you miss!

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink, same goes for CE. The desire to learn has to be in the individual and no one on earth can force someone to learn. A person also has to take pride in their work or it can become sub par work very quickly. What it boils down to George is that the AFA, or anyone else can do what ever they want to, but it all comes down to the individual, not just in our trade but any trade. Dictated licensing, CE, or certification isn't going to change the things YOU want it to. I think most of the farriers on this board have said that newbies haven't really been a threat to their business, but by your own omission it seems to have done something to yours. Your paranoia is unbeleivable and you saying someone can go to Kinko's, get cards made and go into business can be said about the majority of the trades. As has been pointed out many times on this board licensing didn't make doctors or nurses infalible now did it. There were still bad ones who slipped through the cracks.
My mentor, after he looked at my last shoe job I did under his supervision, told me that he could see my desire to succeed, in my work. He said over the years he had seen those students that lacked the desire to succeed or learn and didn't take pride in their work, that after time they just became an old rusty shoe at the bottom of the pile.

Wayne

Wayne,

Nicely said.

Originally posted by George Geist
Mike,
The need has already been pointed out many times. What part of it did you miss?
Gearge,
My dad was farrier for 50 years, but in his previous career he was a union steward. A union man he was for all his life and never lost it. You probably understand the mindset of the "socialist capitalist" - I never figured it out.

Phantom :)

Mike Ferrara

02-12-2006, 11:45 AM

Mike,
The need has already been pointed out many times. What part of it did you miss?

If anything resembling a problem definition has been pointed out, I guess I missed the whole thing. Could you bear with me and repeat it?

For those of us who aren't so quick could also please outline how licensing will solve that problem?

Mike Ferrara

02-12-2006, 12:02 PM

Drivers licenses...

I haven't had my driving skill tested since I was 16 and the test was pretty lame at that. the written test that I have had to take a few times since is primarily focused on testing your knowledge of the applicable laws. If there are ever laws governing the way that we shoe a horse, we may need a test to insure that farriers know those laws. Do we want laws to tell us how to shoe a horse? What standard shall we use...the AFA, NB, Strasser maybe? Also keep in mind that we drive on public lands where we can effect the public at large. In contrast, most of our shoeing is on private property and can only effect those who choose to contract our services.

Hunting and fishing...

Fishing licenses are simply a way to charge a fee for the privilage of fishing. There is no test. Some states require children under a certain age to take a safety course prior to obtaining a hunting license but in most cases age does away with the requirement for the course. A few states require out of state folks to contract the services of a licensed outfitter and while there may be some valid safety concerns, I'd guess there's a fair amount of politics in that also.

In most states, owning a gun requires no license although some cities have gun registration and some require a license to carry and use the gun. In those cases the license is a means of control. Do some of you feel the need to be controled? If you feel that you need special permission to do anything that you're wanting to do, just give me a call. I'll be happy to take a moment to review your situation and either give or deny my permission. I can even print off a license and send it to you if you'd like. LOL

George Geist

02-12-2006, 12:37 PM

Mike,
In addition to the things I've said, the Miller report was a very good read. I believe it was accurate. As I said this would only affect the least common denominator. It would also increase the income of the average horseshoer. Most of you anti-licensing guys even have to grudgingly admit that it would. Nobody is saying that CE or good business practices or competitions or any of that stuff should be discontinued. Nobody will be told how to run their businesses. Wayne says newbies dont hurt anyones business. I think you miss the point.

As I said before I dont think any horseshoer anywhere should be getting any less than at least $150 a horse. Race horses should be $200. When somebody charges $50 or $60 it brings the averages down. You guys tell me all you have to do is raise prices. You dont even believe that yourselves and I can prove that too. If you believed that you would drive all over town looking for the most expensive gas you could find thinking it was the best wouldn't you?

I dont know how firearm registration snuck into this but that has nothing to do with business. That is nothing more than laying the groundwork for eventual confiscation. It's another issue near and dear to me which I could talk about all day long but it has nothing to do with protecting the trade.
Hunting requires the successful completion of a safety course in all 50 states.
The older people who were grandfathered in to that get less and less every year. The licensing for hunting and fishing were also lobbied for and fought for by sportsmen themselves. It was part of proper wildlife management and brought about much needed order. The money raised from these licenses goes right where it should. Fish stocking, Bird stocking, Deer feeding etc.

For the lousy job government does with most of what it is entrusted with, I think the fish and game departments of most states do a very good job. They are an excellent example of licensing working as it should.
George

Phantom Farrier

02-12-2006, 12:55 PM

Mike,
In addition to the things I've said, the Miller report was a very good read. I believe it was accurate. As I said this would only affect the least common denominator. It would also increase the income of the average horseshoer. Most of you anti-licensing guys even have to grudgingly admit that it would. Nobody is saying that CE or good business practices or competitions or any of that stuff should be discontinued. Nobody will be told how to run their businesses. Wayne says newbies dont hurt anyones business. I think you miss the point.

As I said before I dont think any horseshoer anywhere should be getting any less than at least $150 a horse. Race horses should be $200. When somebody charges $50 or $60 it brings the averages down. You guys tell me all you have to do is raise prices. You dont even believe that yourselves and I can prove that too. If you believed that you would drive all over town looking for the most expensive gas you could find thinking it was the best wouldn't you?

I dont know how firearm registration snuck into this but that has nothing to do with business. That is nothing more than laying the groundwork for eventual confiscation. It's another issue near and dear to me which I could talk about all day long but it has nothing to do with protecting the trade.
George

George,

You're not really serious are you, how could licensing farriers raise the profit margin for my business? Are you suggesting that increasing my cost is the same as getting me more money for my shoeing? Typical liberal double-speak. If we all buy licenses we will be investing in the farrier industry, right?

I see clearly how firearm registration has snuck into this conversation and has everything to do with business. It's all about money and control.

Phantom :)

George Geist

02-12-2006, 01:09 PM

Phil Armitage

02-12-2006, 01:35 PM

John,
Scroll back and see some of the examples I gave to Tom Bloomer earlier. The examples of occupational licensing raising income could go on and on. The biggest problem as I see it is that no matter how many examples I cite, you guys just keep saying "I dont believe that".

You continuing to demagogue this issue for your personal political gain is pretty shameful though. I would much prefer being associated with Walt Taylor than with the likes of Richard Revilinski and Franky Lundist who you guys stand shoulder to shoulder with.

Tell you what, up till now most of you guys arguments have been pretty sorry. The only logical concern has been brought up by Mr.Stovall with his concern about taxing authorities. I think the case for licensing has been satisfactorily proven in spite of you guys disbelief. So, lets be fair here. Why dont you guys put up some examples of occupational licensing ruining businesses. I challenge you all to cite any business you can think of where it is doing worse after licensing than it was before it.
George

George what problem do you see in the trade as it is right now? I have bit my tounque as to other motives you might be haveing for licensing. However now that you have stooped to a lower level, I quess I can come down and play. During this thread I have often gotten the impression that you and Mr. Miller are actually more concerned with protecting your personal income and actually fear the likes of competition and new farriers comeing into the trade. Personaly I think competition is good for the trade and keeps us from being slackers, competition is better for the buyer. Just like fuel prices, since you brought up that analogy.

wwhite1973

02-12-2006, 01:37 PM

Originally posted by George Geist
It would also increase the income of the average horseshoer. Most of you anti-licensing guys even have to grudgingly admit that it would.

Sorry George I have to disagree again. Licensing is no more going to decide shoeing prices than unions have got the same wages for workers, union or not. Yes one might argue that unions have raised living standards of non union members, but they still aren't getting the same wages that union tradesmen get.

Orginally posted by Georg Geist
As I said before I dont think any horseshoer anywhere should be getting any less than at least $150 a horse. Race horses should be $200.

Well that is nice of you George but pinch yourself! You are dreaming. I shoe for one couple who makes $35,000 a year between the both of them. I shoe both their horses in 2 hours and charge them $110. That is $55 an hour. The guy only makes $12 an hour and and that is tops for the county he lives in. If licensing is going to make prices equal then what happens to these people. They sell their horses, just let them go or shoe them themselves. I know that doesn't bother you but it does me. When I was still with the UAW, they said with benefits(medical, retirement, etc) I was making $63.50 an hour. When I go north of where I live then I get $125 for 4 shoes. The people in that area make $100,000 to $200,000 a year and pay as much as $425 a month to board their horses. See George in your babblings about shoeing prices you forget, all paychecks are not created equal and neither are different regions of the US. Market dictates price, not licensing. I am sorry George but if I were to charge $150 per horse in the area I live in, I would lose 80% of my clientel because they couldn't afford it.

Wayne

Gary Hill

02-12-2006, 01:39 PM

George, we all know you are a full blown Union guy and good for you if it works for you. Occupational license's are plainly bought and the funds go to the state. No test, no requirements other than the $10 out of your pocket. As to making us more money? I have to disagree with that because we are all FREE to charge as much or as little as you want! You are FREE to shoe as many horses in a day as you want, or as few as you want! The bottom line is that most common horseowners always shop for a cheap price, because some fools will work cheap to get work. Will licensing make those type go away? NO it will just bring down the bar, making it easy for more unskilled people to get into this business. I assume you have been in this business for more that 20 years, if I have read some of your statements correct. Personally you should have a FULL book at this point in your career and be able to pick and choose the types of horses and clients you want to work for. Working smarter not harder seems to be a better approach at this point but I don't know about your clientle or how busy you stay? I still have clients that I have worked for over 20years and not needed anything other than my skills to survive. I'll go down as one that "Doesn't believe it either!" Best, Gary

wwhite1973

02-12-2006, 01:41 PM

One more point George. Doctors are licensed right. If I go to a doctor up north I pay $80 for an office visit and if they are a specialist as much as $125. In my county I pay $55 and $85 respectively.

Wayne

Phil Armitage

02-12-2006, 01:47 PM

Well that is nice of you George but pinch yourself! You are dreaming. I shoe for one couple who makes $35,000 a year between the both of them. I shoe both their horses in 2 hours and charge them $110. That is $55 an hour. The guy only makes $12 an hour and and that is tops for the county he lives in. If licensing is going to make prices equal then what happens to these people. They sell their horses, just let them go or shoe them themselves. I know that doesn't bother you but it does me. When I was still with the UAW, they said with benefits(medical, retirement, etc) I was making $63.50 an hour. When I go north of where I live then I get $125 for 4 shoes. The people in that area make $100,000 to $200,000 a year and pay as much as $425 a month to board their horses. See George in your babblings about shoeing prices you forget, all paychecks are not created equal and neither are different regions of the US. Market dictates price, not licensing. I am sorry George but if I were to charge $150 per horse in the area I live in, I would lose 80% of my clientel because they couldn't afford it.
Wayne

Ditto, almost sounds like your my neighbor.

wwhite1973

02-12-2006, 02:03 PM

Origianlly posted by George Geist
Tell you what, up till now most of you guys arguments have been pretty sorry.

I would expect that from one as paranoid as you seem to be. Actually your arguments are those of little substance

Orginally posted by Phil Armitage
During this thread I have often gotten the impression that you and Mr. Miller are actually more concerned with protecting your personal income and actually fear the likes of competition and new farriers comeing into the trade.

I think Phil is on to something here!

Orginally posted by Gary Hill
I assume you have been in this business for more that 20 years, if I have read some of your statements correct. Personally you should have a FULL book at this point in your career and be able to pick and choose the types of horses and clients you want to work for.

You weren't by yourself Gary, I have the same impression. However I am sorry George, but you come off as someone who has trouble keeping clientel.

In closing George I would like to say that licensing, CE, certification, etc. isn't going to make you the best farrier that you can be. It takes pride, determination, self respect, a desire to learn and hone your skills, and a love of your trade. It is my beleif that a person with these qualities will make a good living shoeing horses regardless if they have a license in their back pocket or not.

Wayne

Ben-Sturman

02-12-2006, 02:18 PM

George, where the h e l l has licensing been 100% perfect or gotten rid of the low lifes involved in any craft that is done in this world? I really can't recall any thing you have brought up that proves licensing works to improve income. If it costs me more time and money to practice and study, time I can't spend making money, and then have to pay for that license, I've already lolst money and the only way to recover that is to raise prices to pass on to the customer. Now, what if that customer doesn't give a rats arse about me being licensed and only care that I do good work at a fair price to the both of us, and then I go and say I have to raise prices to cover licensing fees and test fees. Most will say, sorry but I don't care about that and go find a cheaper guy who doesn't care and is working illegally under your system. So now I've lost even more income and got my license to prove it. Licensing hasn't and will not get rid of hacks, cheaters, *****s, or under qualified workers in any craft and never will. Licensing will not make me more money. Study, practice, hard work, and perserverance will. That ****** piece of paper won't be worth the snot I blew my nose with that's on it. Your price scale would be wonderful, but take a poll of owners and see how many of them would go for that. Black market shoeing would run rampant and there wouldn't be enough enforcement to stop it. As Wayne said, maybe you need to travel some and check out financial conditions in other parts of the country, that might open your eyes to why your price scale wouldn't work. Not everyone that ownes horses is rich, it doesn't mean they can't take care of them properly, it just means they are good with a budget and only have so much available so they get the best they can for the price that works. If that's me at $80.00 to $90.00 per horse then so be it, if it's you at $150.00, so be it, if it's someone at $55.00 and it's good work and the shoer makes a living, so be it. Nobody makes the same everywhere and we will never force that into being. If licensing comes, I will be ready, pass the test, pay the fee, and keep working at the only job I have ever loved to get up and do everyday. That won't stop me, but it won't make me any more money either. Just some ranting after following this for so long and hearing the same BS from both sides over and over. I like the idea of having a plan to plug in, but let's set it up, hide it away, and not let the government know lest they want to start the process sooner than later. If you still believe that licensing will make me more money, write up an out line of how that will happen and present it to me so I can see it. Just saying that having it doesn't convince me. I'm a very visual learner.

Thanks for reading.

Ben

George Geist

02-12-2006, 03:01 PM

Ok guys,

Q. Whats the definition of a successful horseshoer?

A. One who has a wife with a real good job!

Whats the matter, nobody laughing? Tell me am I the only one who gets PO'd every time I hear that joke? Most horseshoers are terribly underpaid. I want them all to make more. I dont care if you get $1000 a horse, I want you to get more. It will never be satisfactory. I can't believe you guys disrespect the trade enough to think you dont deserve it. As I said before the minimal fees will be 100% tax deductible thereby in effect costing you nothing.

It should not cost any more than an average racetrack. Anybody who cant do $20 a year is who needs to find another job. The cost will not be a problem. People who operate illegally will get caught. It will happen, guarantee it. Laws of this nature usually have teeth in them for non-compliance too so I doubt very many will risk it especially if they get caught once.

I am well aware of the different areas and the disparity of incomes. The question should be why is the so-called "going rate" not set by us? Horseshoers and dirt farmers are the only 2 businesses I can think of where the customer sets the prices.

As I said before I'm not the least bit optimistic about this ever happening. We are entirely too much of a disorganized rabble. What we are supposed to be doing is coming up with a plan. We were on track for a little bit but this seems to have degenerated into another firestorm of opposition.

Now, as I said before present one case of an occupation being ruined by occupational licensing. You guys haven't done that. Instead you chose to attack me. I want all of you guys to have more money and benefits too. When it comes to owner vs. farrier disputes I come down on the side of the horseshoer every time. I dont care if you trim with a chainsaw. Yet I'm the bad guy right?
George

Phil Armitage

02-12-2006, 03:07 PM

George I am laughing too hard to comment right now. :D

T.N. Trosin

02-12-2006, 03:13 PM

If something of a legislative nature ever comes up somewhere, sure they will I'm sure have some input but it will be taken under advisement. They wont be driving the bus. Their BOD directive as well as their 501(c)(3) status ensures that.
George
More so our 501(c)(3)
I still wonder if anybody else will get that George.
Although I still think that the BoD needs to come to a consensus on the issue.

wwhite1973

02-12-2006, 03:38 PM

Originally posted by George Geist
I am well aware of the different areas and the disparity of incomes. The question should be why is the so-called "going rate" not set by us? Horseshoers and dirt farmers are the only 2 businesses I can think of where the customer sets the prices.

George you are right. The going rate is set by the shoer. In my area it is $55 and to the north it is $125.

Supply and demand usually sets the prices for any market.

Originally posted by George Geist
Q. Whats the definition of a successful horseshoer?

A. One who has a wife with a real good job!
Well I guess I am a successful shoer because my wife has a good job.

Orginally posted by George Geist
Now, as I said before present one case of an occupation being ruined by occupational licensing.
George I don't think the majority of us have said licensing would ruin our trade. The concern is the uneccasary BS and red tape that it ads to the industry without any really added benefits. Did licensing help the doctors in my county when compared to the northern counties. Did licnesing contractors really help the building industry?
I might of missed it somewhere but I don't think you have really given a good example of where it actually made a trade better. If I missed that example I apologize and I am sure you will enlighten me.
Wayne

Phantom Farrier

02-12-2006, 03:53 PM

John,
You continuing to demagogue this issue for your personal political gain is pretty shameful though. I would much prefer being associated with Walt Taylor than with the likes of Richard Revilinski and Franky Lundist who you guys stand shoulder to shoulder with.George

George,
I'm flattered by your kindness, I know what you mean. As our integrity grows, our emphasis changes. It is not so crucial that we always be right, only that we be honest. We do not have to be winners or such high acheivers so much as we have to be real human beings.

Conquest is not as important as connection. We do not always have to compare ourselves and be better than the next guy. We can exchange and appreciate the communication.

Be fruitful and multiply.

Phantom :)

I am bound only to be true and live up to my own light.

SlowShoe

02-12-2006, 04:13 PM

Now, as I said before present one case of an occupation being ruined by occupational licensing.

..Yet I'm the bad guy right?
George

For me its not a matter of improving my occupation. I think licensing has nothing to do with that what so ever. Licensing is a form of control, I will not be controlled.

Some people need to be told what, when, and how to do things. I think you fall into that category.

I look at it this way. I will not ask the goverments permission to make a living. Ever. I do not agree with licensing whatsoever... And I don't mean just for farriers. I mean for marriage, for travel, for buyign and selling, waepons, wahtever... I will not give up my freedoms for some form of bull sh@t security.

If you want to limit yourself, go right ahead. Just dont drag me down with you.

-josh

...Live free, or live like most people. Its your choice.

tbloomer

02-12-2006, 04:50 PM

tbloomer

02-12-2006, 05:06 PM

J.H. shoeing

02-12-2006, 06:03 PM

I really wanted to stay out of this one, but for a G per head I'm gonna reply.

George

I agree. I think I should get a grand per horse, I think they should be the two of the never lose a shoe rope horses I do, and the front of a little bay mare that is a lesson pony. That would get me to the magic number and the owners would haul all three to me. I think I can find another two and a half that I would really enjoy shoeing each week so I could fill up my six week rotation. Then again I could just shoe five fulls for three days and go get in Tom Stovalls way for the rest of the 5 and half weeks.

I think I will work on this. If I can make it work I'll get back to ya. If not I will be reachable by cell since I will be driving back and forth to San Antonio to shoe the rest of my "cheaper" horses.

By the way my wife says she agreed also that I should be getting a G per horse, but she didn't want me to drop anyone.

Jeff, CF

George Geist

02-12-2006, 06:45 PM

Well finally,
Finally we got a guy that wants to make more money. Good for you Jeff the situation isn't totally hopeless. Hope the rest of you guys are polling your wives about that. I'm sure the ladies would all agree with Jeffs wife.

Tom,
Exactly what do you mean by a "Government Enforced Union". I've never heard of any such thing anywhere.
George

Franky Lundist

02-12-2006, 06:52 PM

Franky,
Join the AFA then maybe someone will listen.

Sorry I didnt realize you had to be a AFA member to have a say in how some **** **** decides to regulate your trade.

As for missing Cincinnati sorry personal situation I guess it just wasnt in the cards.

Phil Armitage

02-12-2006, 06:56 PM

Hey Franky, since your against regulateing the trade, your OK in my book.

Rick Burten

02-12-2006, 07:12 PM

Rick
Try performing any of those freely, no matter how qualified you might be, without kissing the hand of the state and you will find out just how "criminal" these activities can be.
I think that that was the point I was trying to make. :confused:

Rick,
You continue to use the Great Illinois Farrier License Failure as an example - why? Try driving in Illinois without a driver's license - let me know if driving in Illinois has been criminalized or not. :)
Again, John, that was my point. Even though you have to have a license to drive, so long as you do so legally, there is no restriction on my freedom to drive. I take the tests, pay a fee, get my license and voila' , away I go.

Same is true for the other professions/instances I mentioned.

The freedom to practice medicine, for example, by a qualified individual, is not constricted because that individual has to have a license is it?

Regardless, before anyone goes and misconstrues our discussion, I will remind one and all that I am not pro licensing for farriers. I am in favor of proactivity rather than reactivity in anticipating and planning for what is likely to be coming down the pike sometime in the future. And, IIRC, John, you have said that if a meaningful plan could be formulated and (perhaps)enacted, you would not necessarily be "anti" on the subject of farrier licensing. I think we are more 'in accord' than 'in disaccord'.