The affordability of ballroom dance (median income per capita)

[JudeMorrigan]

I'd like to emphasize here that my argument has never been that ballroom should be less expensive, but rather that we should all recognize our blessings and not be dismissive of those who aren't in a position to make the choices we do. Which, again, is not something that I've seen people doing in this thread, but have seen elsewhere.

(Oh, and the "with no dependents" is a *huge* caveat. It's a big part of why I've been stuck with excessively young partners for a big part of my time as an am-am dancer - a disproportionate number of the population closer to my age are rather busy raising children.)

 

[fascination]

not only busy raising those children, but busy paying for them

 

[fascination]

there are many factors in play...

serious hobby, vs hobby is one of them....can most folks navigate one style, one local comp a year and one or 2 lessons every 1-2 weeks?...sure, with a few modifications to the budget, this is possible for many...but, if one aspires to a very high level of dancing as well as marks at major comps that reflect that, well, absent some previous dance experience in some other genre as a child, and /or a ridiculous amount of talent, then achieving that goal is likely going to cost a significant amount of money....and, sad as that is for many of us, it is not much different from the financial barriers to attaining most worthwhile accomplishments....and we all have to simply figure out what the cost benefit analysis is for each of us at each point in our lives...my philosophy, as I have said many times is that I don't begrudge any professional the right to charge whatever they see fit, I just have to modify what I can do with them to reflect what I am able to afford at any given point in time.

 

[stash]

And that's where I'm coming from. While sure if we made cuts, we could afford to dance more than we do now, however it still wouldn't be to the level we would want to be at competitively. So in a way it feels like a waste of both time and money. While we would see progress, we would not be able to keep up or compete with those who are at the same level as us, so from our perspective it feels like "what's the point of making those sacrifices if we still can't do what we want to do?" Which is to say when we do dance it is a serious hobby to us. Unlike knitting to me, it's just a hobby. I knit for myself and my loved ones and if I make a mistake, no ones going to say (OMG that's a terrible sock). It works like a sock and it's warm and soft, there for it meets my standards. However, that is the social dance equivalent to me in knitting terms. I don't want that from my dancing, and certainly I don't want that while I'm competing at the open level, and would not be possible even making the cuts to our budget that would be workable for us (ie cutting out all eating out).

 

[fascination]

I applaud knowing that...and, here's the thing, it isn't as if you have to totally abandon it...you can occasionally take a high level coaching, you can occasionally rent floor time to blow the dust off...if you feel like it....but if spending 10k a year to bump along the bottom doesn't sound like a smart idea to you because you are more competitive than that, I don't think there's any shame in that

 

[joedance]

At the risk of being a jerk, I think your post proves you and your fiance absolutely could afford a ballroom hobby on even less than the $38k/yr/person after taxes discussed above, you've just chosen at least these three non-necessities above it:

• Living without roommates
• Having kids
• Paying someone else to prep some of your meals

Nothing wrong with picking those, or any other luxury purchases (or saving) above a hobby, but as someone whose line of work involves seeing how mucked up people's financial lives can get, it's a pet peeve of mine when people use "can't" but really mean "won't."

I find the comment a bit myopic (not jerky). If one gives up everything else in life (and retirement by not saving) at the lower income levels, they can certainly ballroom dance competitively; however, is that really a choice most people would make or even consider. A person does not need to dance to provide food, clothing, or shelter. It's purely an extra discretionary item that has to be balanced against other discretionary items that brings one joy. Giving up everything to dance is no different than giving up everything to work outrageous hours to accrue a lot of wealth that just sits in a bank account. Most people will look for more out of life. ("I don't live to work; I work to live.")

On the topic of affordable the answer is yes, but maybe we need to consider desirable as well especially for a hobby.

Note: this ignores people pursuing a career in dance at which point one may need to sacrifice more in the same way all people who pursue a given career path has to pay their dues to become successful.

 

[RiseNFall]

... when people use "can't" but really mean "won't."

Pro has a tongue-in-cheek response about one's priorities when students tell him they cannot afford something dance related that includes "can't" vs. "won't". He hasn't used it with me since I answered, "I'm not ready to sell my house so that I can dance with you... yet." He looked slightly horrified at the idea.

 

[bia]

serious hobby, vs hobby

While sure if we made cuts, we could afford to dance more than we do now, however it still wouldn't be to the level we would want to be at competitively. So in a way it feels like a waste of both time and money. While we would see progress, we would not be able to keep up or compete with those who are at the same level as us, so from our perspective it feels like "what's the point of making those sacrifices if we still can't do what we want to do?"

I agree that this is an important distinction and something we each need to figure out about ourselves. We've made precisely the opposite decision -- that we're willing to watch competitors pass us by as long as we are seeing improvement while putting in a degree of dance commitment that we can sustain long-term. When we first moved to this competitive dance desert and had trouble finding a teacher, I was antsy and frustrated; I'm not OK with giving up competitive dancing altogether. But (especially with the long drive for lessons) the amount of time and money we're willing to give it leads to slow, not fast improvement, and I am OK with that. I think this attitude may be easier to maintain here than if we were in a dance hotbed. We're big fish in this little tiny dance pond, so we live without peer pressure that "real dancers" would be doing more. We just do our thing, enjoy the local praise when it's offered, and go to NQEs for reality checks. If we stop seeing improvement, we'll make adjustments; for now, this works for us.

 

[fascination]

and I applaud that as well...which is closer to my own path at this point

 

[Mr 4 styles]

Yeah but it's not the Waldorf Astoria either

The epic hotels are at Galaxy and heritage comps

 

[Mr 4 styles]

Bia. That was the mrs and I exactly. Then we started winning and moved to a bigger pond. The pressure to keep up increased for sure

 

[bia]

Bia. That was the mrs and I exactly. Then we started winning and moved to a bigger pond. The pressure to keep up increased for sure

Ooh, that's exciting. Not the increase in pressure, but the possibility to get there from here, eventually.

 

[Mr 4 styles]

Worth the work. But hard to maintain.

 

[fascination]

sure...it is definitely about more than money ...it just happens that that is the focus of the thread....but it is certainly also about putting in the time on practice, and fitness and many other choices....and I think that is far easier to do when you know that dance is your vocation than when you have already made your life/family and vocation and then you discover dance and try to add it in...then the degree to which those other sacrifices are possible can change

 

[JudeMorrigan]

Let me start by reiterating that I have no particular objections to the cost of ballroom. I greatly respect the blood, sweat and tears that professionals have put into their craft, and am inclined to think that the top pros in particular are, if anything, worth more than they're often paid.

That said, hold up a second. There are fundamental differences between the sacrifices that are reasonable for a person to make for the careers versus those that are reasonable for one to make for a hobby. For example, the completely awesome ladies of this forum have made it pretty clear that I could find a pretty exceptional amateur partner if only I were willing to relocate. And that's something that many (I'm pretty sure most) pros wind up doing at least once at some point in their careers. While it's still a sacrifice for them (at least some of the time), it's also completely reasonable for them to do so. They're furthering their careers by such a move. On the other hand, if I were to pack up and move to Canada (for example), I'd be throwing away a career. The situations are *not* comparable, and mental toughness is not the factor. (Physical ability is a horse of an entirely different color, nolo contendere.)

And I'm sorry, but I have to say one thing since I keep using my childhood family as an example of how there really are people out there for whom dancesport would really, seriously, honestly be a financial impossibility. While we certainly didn't know it at the time, it's really, really obvious in retrospect that my mother suffered from pretty severe clinical depression. And that that was a major factor in why we spent as much time as we did terrifyingly close to winding up homeless. So even though I know it's *absolutely* not what you meant, I still couldn't help but find the "mental toughness" bit particularly galling. :/