This is from the Facebook page for the event. The meeting is held on both Saturday, March 16th and Sunday, March 17th. FYI, I will be going there both days and I will report about it for IPR as well as record for YouTube.
The Libertarian National Committee holds its meetings in various locations, both for the convenience of its members, and to afford local residents the opportunity to attend. In March the LNC will hold its meeting in Rosemont.
The meetings are open to anyone and free to attend (except during executive sessions when the room is cleared). There is time for public comment at the beginning of the meeting on Sat and at the close of the meeting Sun. If someone who is not on the LNC would like to speak outside of the public comment segments, they need to ask permission via their LNC Regional Rep. The Rep then asks permission from the board on their behalf.
On Saturday, the meeting starts at 9 am and typically finishes around 6 pm. Sunday they start at 8 or 9 a.m. and usually go to 3 pm or so. Typically Saturday a.m. is reports from the Chair, Vice Chair, Treasurer and Staff. Additional reports from various committees and regions may follow in the afternoon. Then they get to action items (like committee appointments) Saturday afternoon and take on ‘new business” on Sunday.
The meetings are scheduled to be held in the “Walden Room” on the 8th floor.
There will also be a Meet & Greet reception after the meeting, on Saturday evening. Details will follow and a separate event will be posted. (https://www.facebook.com/events/590303344331252/)
Event page: https://www.facebook.com/events/417657151650401/
128 responses so far ↓
1 Starchild // Mar 15, 2013 at 11:55 am
I suggest putting “executive sessions” in quotes, if you use the term at all. It’s a euphemism for secret meetings.
2 Starchild // Mar 15, 2013 at 12:09 pm
Notice how one of the rationales for holding LNC meetings in person at different locations (rather than via teleconference), per the Facebook page on the event reported above, is “to afford local residents the opportunity to attend.”
But then when those local residents show up, they are not allowed to take part in the discussion, and the only times specifically dedicated to public comment are at the very beginning and end of the sessions, rather than being able to weigh in on items as they come up when they have something to contribute. Go figure.
People not on the LNC who would like to speak during the meeting outside of the free speech zones — err, public comment — can however approach anyone on the LNC to ask to be recognized, not just their regional reps. I will always try to get the body to allow you to speak if you wish.
3 Jill Pyeatt // Mar 15, 2013 at 12:12 pm
Starchild, I recommend you meet Krzysztof. He’s a seventeen year-old political prodigy looking at the LP. He’ll be there filming some of the proceedings.
4 Stewart Flood // Mar 15, 2013 at 3:06 pm
So now a member needs permission from their LNC regional rep to address the board?
Things sure have changed…
5 Stewart Flood // Mar 15, 2013 at 3:07 pm
And of course for those of us who DO NOT HAVE REPRESENTATION…
And no, the vice-chair is not our regional representative. Even if he were, he’s not.
6 NewFederalist // Mar 15, 2013 at 4:56 pm
Gosh, I am sure glad that I re-joined the LP. Things are sure better than in 1985!
7 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 7:51 am
I’m at the LNC meeting hotel. Meeting starts at 9 AM. No computer or camera at the moment that I can use in the meeting room (I’m in the business center downstairs). I’m supposed to get a computer I can use at 2 PM and possibly a camera. I don’t know if there will be wifi in the room. I don’t know whether or how any video that gets shot will get uploaded after the fact. If anyone can help with any of this, especially a laptop and/or camera that can be used before 2 PM, give me a call at 415-690-6352 or come up and see me.
8 George Phillies // Mar 16, 2013 at 1:43 pm
A shame we are getting no coverage yet.
9 Krzysztof Lesiak // Mar 16, 2013 at 1:45 pm
George, I will be there in about half an hour. I’ll have my laptop and video camera. Only problem is it’s unlikely that there will be wifi in the room, so I will type up what’s going on and post it after the meeting once I get home.
10 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 3:31 pm
A few notes from the meeting so far. Please note this is not at all a full record or even a record of the most important stuff that occurred, just what I happened to write down. Sorry I haven’t been more actively live blogging so far.
Prior to adopting an agenda this morning, we added a few items, including:
Scott Lieberman – Add discussion of trademark infringement as part of counsel’s report item; also added IT committee report?
Starchild – Added 5 minute discussion of Paul Frankel exclusion on Ballot Access Committee
945pm – Agenda adopted as amended
Conflict of interest updates
Gary E. Johnson – Is Texas party secretary, secretary of county party
Norm Olsen – Campaigns director for LP Colorado
Arvin Vohra – Market Aces who gave presentation at previous LNC meeting does his website
Mark Hinkle – Is now president of Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association
Starchild – LPC ExCom at-large representative (I didn’t report this previously as a conflict of interest because I didn’t think it fell into that category, but mentioned it today because Gary reported a similar item).
Chair’s report
We’re moving ahead with accepting Bitcoins
Working on getting a Kindle version of LP News; will take staff 3 hours per issue once we’re past learning curve
Bill Redpath – There should be two separate publications, one for outreach, one for internal party stuff (I agree with Bill about this); He also thinks it inevitable LP News will go all electronic at some point (he favors this to save printing & postage costs); I’m not so sure about the desirability of that.
Norm Olsen – Is all in favor of going totally electronic on LP News, wants to make it so we can include local news for people in different areas based on people’s zip codes; (sounds like a good idea to me)
Jim Lark – We haven’t decided what we want LP News to be going forward; we may want to change its format to do more to reward volunteers, donors; have a separate publication for news
Gary Johnson – This is why this should be a separate agenda item; question: is this a member benefit? Members consider newsletter something they are entitled to for paying dues; people hate fundraising letters, but they react differently to LP News; what kind of content do we have that we would deny to people?
Geoff Neale – Thinks LNC should develop policy, and the chair should implement it; says he’s hearing different ideas, so I’ll come up with something that moves us forward, but not too far;
Geoff Neale – Wants to start an international email list for chairs of Libertarian parties in different countries, asked if any objections. I said sounds great as long as LP members can read it. He said “absolutely not”, but that if a person gets permission in writing from each party chair who would be on the list, then that person could be on the list
Treasurer’s report
Tim Hagen – Said monthly FEC reports were filed on time
Membership numbers – said revenues are below budget, but he’s not too concerned about it (he gave a reason but I don’t recall what it was);
Mentioned there are 4 restricted fund accounts (building fund, candidate archiveal, radio ad project, campus) [p. 9 of treasurer’s report]
Norm – What is the candidate archival funding item?
Geoff Neale – LP executive director Carla Howell donated $9000(?) to the party to be used for this specific purpose
Starchild – Asked how other people who want to make donations to be restricted to specific causes like Carla did can do that now; Geoff said anyone who wants to do that can call or email him, but that he may refuse if it’s a small amount like $25
Sam Goldstein – Asks that Carla send out an explanation of that money to state chairs, who might have ideas for spending it.
Starchild (passing along question from Aaron Starr in the gallery) – Would staff (Carla) get a bonus based on money she contributes?
Carla – It won’t be counted for that purpose
Secretary’s report
Dave Blau thanked Ruth Bennett, Jim Lark
Jim Lark – There were errors in reporting ExCom minutes, but thinks substantive issues are correct; with respect to 5/6/12 meeting, thinks they are in good shape; thinks July and November drafts may be missing information; thinks we may need mail ballots for those two
Geoff Neale – Motion to approve all outstanding EC minutes okay?
Scott Lieberman – Dan Wiener’s vote was not recorded in one instance;
Jim Lark – There are questions about attendance being recorded correctly in many cases; no minutes for 5/31/12 Executive Committee meeting
Geoff – Chair suggested item to EC (getting feedback), nobody objected; don’t know that minutes need to say more than that we met, took no action, and adjourned; rules as chair that it is moot;
Dave Blau – Said he will undertake to make corrections and circulate minutes for approval
Rich Tomaso – Were the votes confirmed by audio recording?
Jim Lark – Two votes were incorrectly recorded, others he thinks were correct; do not have audio recording of first day’s (Sat.) session
(his recording is separate from staff’s recording)
(RECESS)
Gary Johnson – Amend voting procedure for electing convention committee members so that LNC elects interim committee chairs, rather than basing it on alphabetical and ties (passed on division) [replaced item #9 on Geoff’s “2014 Convention Committee Voting Procedure]
Starchild – Moved to have balloting for committees sequentially, rather than all at once, in order to help avoid the same people getting elected to multiple committees; motion failed for lack of a second
Dan Wiener – Motion to delete words in point #2 regarding membership eligibility [good – shouldn’t be requirements beyond what are in Bylaws]
Jim Lark – Questioned the phrase “Affiliate of record” At least one person applying for committees belongs to more than one state party;
Wiener’s amendment above passed (Mark Hinkle was only one opposing);
Main motion (to adopt voting procedure as amended) passed (unanimously I think)
Tim Hagen withdrew his self-nomination for the Bylaws Committee, saying he felt there were enough people running.
Chris Maden is listed on paperwork distributed to LNC members listing convention committee applications as not being an active member. Rich Tomaso said he believes Chris Maden is an active LP member in Massachusetts (and subsequently found out from an email response from Chris that he is a life member).
Ballots for all 3 convention committees must be turned in no later than 930am to the secretary
Secret meeting for breach of confidentiality and executive director contract; (started 1129am); continued after lunch (still going right now, probably done soon)
11 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 3:33 pm
On the second to last paragraph above, the written ballots will be distributed today, must be returned by 930am tomorrow morning to be counted
12 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 3:33 pm
We just finished the secret meeting.
13 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 3:36 pm
Now we’re going to hear a report from the building committee (David Blau reporting on efforts to buy a building). Says committee members have been busy calling donors, working on “coordinated marketing & donation strategy”, says others on committee (Mark Hinkle, etc.) know more about the specifics.
14 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 3:37 pm
Carla Howell says we’ve contracted with a direct mail expert in the D.C. area, should be ready within days to go out, accompanied by “phone blasts”; separate packages for high and low dollar donors as recommended by this consultant; Mark Hinkle has been doing personal solicitations.
15 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 3:38 pm
Mark Hinkle says “contributions are coming in”; anecdotally said one person just doubled his donation to $1000 in order “to be on the plaque”; said email blasts have gone out to those who contributed, pledged contributions, or those who had money returned who had previously donated
16 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 3:39 pm
Mark Hinkle says “there does seem to be an interest in naming rights, stuff like that”
17 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 3:40 pm
Michael Cloud just made $5000 matching fund offer if another member also donates
18 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 3:42 pm
Rich Tomaso asked for amount raised so far (someone is looking that up); Dave Blau thanked Michael for his donation, said he’ll match the $5000
19 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 3:45 pm
Dave says Robert Kraus (LP operations director) has been in contact with real estate agent who’s been forwarding leads; no particular property being considered at this time
Mark Hinkle in response to question from Jim Lark says there is no bias toward Alexandria over Arlington as possible location, but there are more properties available in Alexandria (Arvin Vohra has said, and I and Paulie Frankel agree, that Arlington would be better due to proximity and access via Metro, etc.)
20 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 3:46 pm
$116K cash raised, another $25K in pledges so far? (I’m not sure I heard those numbers correctly).
21 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 3:46 pm
Chris Lesiak brought me a computer to use and is taking video in the back. He says he knows how to upload it later.
22 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 3:47 pm
Now talking about lease extension.
23 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 3:50 pm
Robert Kraus has passed out a copy of proposed lease extension at the Watergate building where the party HQ is currently located, to cover us until a new building is purchased; currently paying $11,500 per month, that would continue under this arrangement for 3 years
24 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 3:51 pm
Scott Lieberman pointed out (and I agree) that we could save money by moving to cheaper rental digs in Arlington in the meantime
25 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 3:51 pm
We could terminate the proposed 3-year lease with 6 months notice
26 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 3:57 pm
We just voted to extend the Watergate lease. Vote was 16-1 with one abstention (I voted no, Norm Olsen abstained)
27 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 3:58 pm
Staff reports net starting with Carla Howell – Lee Wrights has taken over chairing the meeting temporarily
28 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:00 pm
Carla Howell giving staff report: Says membership is climbing slowly but steadily. Fewer members are lapsing every month since November, reducing the number of people who must be called to renew. Consistently about 30% of lapsed members renew when called, emailed, or mailed. 45-50% of those with whom we speak directly renew.
29 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:01 pm
Krzysztof @9 – There is WiFi here; see me for password.
30 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:03 pm
Carla says there are many details to iron out with building fund project on naming rights and such.
She says fundraising is down in general, mostly a time issue, also post-election year January is difficult time to raise money.
31 George Phillies // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:03 pm
What were the official topics of the secret meeting? Was it that someone *had* breached confidentiality, or that the general topic needed discussion?
32 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:04 pm
Carla says if you pledge $1000 or more to the building fund, your name will be on a plaque. There’s also a $5000 level donor plaque, and for $10,000 you get an individual plaque, for $25,000 you get a room named after you.
33 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:07 pm
George @31 – Geoff Neale (LP chair) read a statement upon return to open session, that a member had inadvertently breached confidentiality, apologized to the body, and promised to be more diligent in the future.
I would love to say more, but I don’t think I can elaborate further given the penchant for secrecy reflected in current rules.
34 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:11 pm
More time being spent by various members thanking people for stuff (as always).
35 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:12 pm
Starchild @29 I have his laptop and Robert already gave me the code. I’m on.
36 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:13 pm
I don’t think I can elaborate further given the penchant for secrecy reflected in current rules.
No, you can’t, unless you want to be expelled.
37 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:14 pm
Carla said hardcore messaging is working (cites response to her State of the Union rebuttal), which Michael Cloud says was noticed by Jeb Bush staffers. Arvin Vohra echoes this with his experience talking with people involved in Young Americans for Liberty, etc.
38 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:17 pm
Bill Redpath asked about efforts to fundraise from “whales” (big donors). Robert says we got money from an estate last week. A couple other individual donors being followed up with were mentioned (not by name).
39 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:24 pm
Starchild and Carla – some back and forth about candidates vs issues in LP News
40 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:26 pm
I forwarded some of the various written reports and my comments on them to IPR writers.
Anyone have time and inclination to post them?
I would appreciate it if you do.
41 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:27 pm
Carla still giving staff report. I asked her about getting more material into LP News that focuses on libertarian ideas, not just candidates and races, citing language on page 41 of our LNC Policy Manual regarding LP News which I think is not being followed (too much focus on running for office to exclusion of other topics).
42 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:28 pm
Arvin and Carla – game that helps train LP members in outreach/media – I missed some of the details.
43 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:28 pm
Carla talked about a “Who’s Driving” game to be used for outreach, that is going to be featured in LP News. Arvin Vohra spoke highly of the game, says it has a lot of potential.
44 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:29 pm
We might get a demonstration tomorrow afternoon and/or at Freedom Fest
45 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:31 pm
UK LP chair and possibly some other countries equivalents will be at Freedom Fest and LNC meeting … there may be an associated event.
46 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:32 pm
Freedom Fest is said will be a bigger event this year than in past years, we’ll need to move quickly on sponsorship; Carla said she will follow up.
47 George Phillies // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:32 pm
I tried a forward as Paulie asked. How did it work?
Not very well — blocked for moderation, and the format conversion did poorly at best.
48 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:33 pm
Carla talking about drupal upgrades for website.
49 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:34 pm
George – thanks, but I meant IPR writers who can post the files to IPR and/or post them as articles.
50 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:35 pm
I’ll try to do it myself but I’ll be pretty busy this weekend. After that I will be on the bus with no internet. And after that I need to get busy with a new job and may or may not have a computer, so I would prefer if other IPR writers can do it.
51 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:36 pm
Gary E. Johnson asks how often LP News comes out now. Carla says budget and time have constrained to 4 times per year, but Policy Manual says every 2 months. Carla doesn’t think we can do more now, given current constraints.
52 Michael H. Wilson // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:37 pm
LP News has a contribution envelope in it. Before the hard copy is abolished, if that is what is being suggested, it would be useful to know how much in contributions comes in from the news letter via those envelopes.
53 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:37 pm
Rich Tomaso (New Hampshire) mentioned that his members also keen on more issues of LP News (echoing Gary E. Johnson’s concerns).
54 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:40 pm
convention committee ballots being passed out; George, I did not receive the email about this you mentioned on the phone
55 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:44 pm
MHW @ 52 It was discussed at last meeting that it brings in substantial donations, which is why we should still have a paper copy, but I believe we should allow for electronic copies as well.
The argument now is mainly over whether the electronic copies should be delayed or banned from being posted on sites such as this one.
56 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:48 pm
Now arguing over membership level changes again.
57 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:56 pm
Carla’s report finished. Ballots for the convention committee appointments were distributed.
Now we are talking about if/when to implement changes in membership levels — concurrent with moving into new building to save on materials printing costs?
58 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 4:59 pm
Geoff Neale says we aren’t charging enough for basic membership. I strongly disagree.
59 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 5:01 pm
I think Geoff is right, the membership should cost what it did when it was instituted adjusted for inflation. Which is about twice as much as now.
60 Michael H. Wilson // Mar 16, 2013 at 5:04 pm
re 58 that won’t help students or those on fixed incomes. Give me a reason to contribute!
61 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 5:06 pm
Measure to delay change in membership levels until building purchase completed passed 14-4 (I voted in favor).
62 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 5:07 pm
Michael @60 – Yes. As long as dues-paying is tied to voting rights within the LP, the more we raise dues, the more we make our party a pay-to-play organization. I don’t think it should be.
63 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 5:09 pm
MHW
It was 25.00 what – 25 years ago? How did people afford to join then? I agree we need to give people more reasons to contribute. Some of those include spending money on things which will, we hope, bring in more money than they cost.
64 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 5:10 pm
Now discussing new membership levels committee.
65 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 5:14 pm
Geoff says he won’t appoint me to this committee because he says I never compromise.
66 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 5:15 pm
Members appointed include Scott Lieberman, Mark Hinkle, Rich Tomaso…
67 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 5:15 pm
Lark to chair. Hinkle, Lieberman, Cloud, Tomasso to be called membership reflux committee. Lieberman may be declining.
68 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 5:16 pm
Actually I do compromise, just not on stuff I think is too important to allow compromise.
69 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 5:16 pm
Lieberman will accept now that he understands Dr. Lark will chair.
70 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 5:18 pm
Wrights – APRC report. Says stuff goes up too quickly, not enough time for review.
71 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 5:20 pm
Lee Wrights as chair of Advertising & Publications Review Committee is complaining that staff isn’t giving them enough time to review stuff before it goes out, that everything arrives marked “Urgent”
72 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 5:23 pm
Wrights again – Affiliate Support Committee. Agreement with states delayed til May LSLA conference.
73 Starchild // Mar 16, 2013 at 5:24 pm
Lee Wrights now reporting for Affiliate Support Committee. Says there’ve been hangups with working with Libertarian State Leadership Alliance, that they don’t have authority to negotiate on state chairs’ behalf to come up with “Service Level Agreement” along with the LNC.
74 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 5:24 pm
This will be a chance for LNC Chair, Vice Chair and other members to meet with many state chairs at the same time. LSLA can’t act on it as an organization because it exceeds their charter.
75 paulie // Mar 16, 2013 at 5:31 pm
Adjourned for the day
76 Nicholas Sarwark // Mar 16, 2013 at 6:53 pm
If LP News is supposed to come out 6 times a year, but is only being sent out 4 times a year, why should dues go up? Establish a track record of providing value for members before raising the cost of membership, IMHO.
77 Jill Pyeatt // Mar 16, 2013 at 6:57 pm
Paulie: I plan to devote most most of this evening to assorted computer obligations, mostly being IPR. I’d rather Krzysztof spend time writing up what he observed today, so I’ll try to get as many articles posted as possible, including wading through all the new, extremely acrimonious PA correspondence to see if it’s something that should be aired. Making jewelry and decorating my house for spring will be put off until tomorrow, sice all YOU GUYS are more important today!
78 Michael H. Wilson // Mar 16, 2013 at 6:58 pm
Membership is about half of what it was in 2000 as I recall so we gonna raise dues.
I have a suggestion; Econ 101: Price is a barrier.
79 Michael H. Wilson // Mar 16, 2013 at 6:59 pm
And Nicholas at 76 has an excellent idea to start with and much more can be added.
80 Chuck Moulton // Mar 16, 2013 at 7:53 pm
Thanks for the Saturday LNC meeting live blogging, Starchild and Paulie!
81 Krzysztof Lesiak // Mar 16, 2013 at 8:54 pm
I will have the videos from the meeting uploaded to YouTube no later than tomorrow morning
82 LNC Chicago Spring Meeting: Day 2 Coverage | Independent Political Report: Third Party News // Mar 16, 2013 at 9:01 pm
[...] Krzysztof Lesiak on LNC Spring National Committee Meeting Starts Tomorrow In Chicago [...]
83 LNC Spring Meeting in Chicago: Day 2 Coverage | Independent Political Report: Third Party News // Mar 17, 2013 at 12:11 am
[...] LNC Chicago Spring Meeting: Day 2 Coverage | Independent Political Report: Third Party News on LNC Spring National Committee Meeting Starts Tomorrow In Chicago [...]
84 Andy // Mar 17, 2013 at 12:32 am
“Nicholas Sarwark // Mar 16, 2013 at 6:53 pm
If LP News is supposed to come out 6 times a year, but is only being sent out 4 times a year, why should dues go up?”
Dues should go up because they were set a long time ago and they have not kept up with the rate of inflation.
85 paulie // Mar 17, 2013 at 9:28 am
It doesn’t come out as often as it should, along with other things we don’t do enough of, due to not enough funds. More funds = more services = more reason to contribute.
86 Starchild // Mar 17, 2013 at 9:29 am
We’re back in session here in Chicago for the second day of the Libertarian National Committee meeting. Here’s briefly what’s happened so far:
Aaron Starr gave IT committee report
Aaron Starr gave LSLA report (Arvin and I asked about Wagner/Reeves on LSLA list)
Rich Tomaso’s motion regarding filling at-large LNC vacancies is being considered. He has a 13-point procedure in writing.
A proposed amendment to remove his requirement for publishing notice of vacancy in LP News failed on voice vote
87 paulie // Mar 17, 2013 at 9:30 am
Thanks! If you can post the various LNC reports I forwarded I would appreciate it. Or someone else if they can do it. These are written reports, not our observations from the meeting.
88 Starchild // Mar 17, 2013 at 9:31 am
Michael Cloud objecting to Rich’s point #10 requiring approval voting when there are more than 4 candidates.
89 paulie // Mar 17, 2013 at 9:33 am
Dues are less than in 2000 due to inflation, so I don’t think so. Membership is lower because we are not serving our constituency as well, part of which is not enough money to do the things we want to do. Even if we lose some sustaining members in the short run, I don’t think it will be so many that we won’t bring in more money overall, and that will allow us to serve the membership better to quickly get the numbers back up well over what they are now.
90 paulie // Mar 17, 2013 at 9:34 am
Starchild please post comments on the new thread about what’s happening today
91 Starchild // Mar 17, 2013 at 9:37 am
Roll call vote on Rich Tomaso’s motion:
Starchild – yes
Wrights – abstain
Hagen – yes
Johnson – yes
Goldstein – no
Wiener – no
Cloud – no
Hinkle – no
Lark – no
Visek – no
Vohra – yes
Redpath – no
Tomaso – yes
Lieberman – no
Kirland – no
Olsen – no
Blau – no
Neale – abstain
Motion fails 11-5 with 2 abstentions
92 Nicholas Sarwark // Mar 17, 2013 at 10:02 am
@85: Are you saying that the party would publish LP News six times per year if it had more money? Did that come up during the budget discussion? Was there a decision only to publish four times per year?
@89: I just declined to renew my membership in the American Motorcyclist Association after 14 years. They raised the dues by $10 per year and I took that opportunity to consider whether I valued the benefits of membership to spend the money.
The LP needs to get its house in order and start providing value to members before dues are raised. I would not support raising dues until there’s been six months of solid membership growth.
93 paulie // Mar 17, 2013 at 11:26 am
Are you saying that the party would publish LP News six times per year if it had more money? Did that come up during the budget discussion? Was there a decision only to publish four times per year?
Yes, yes and yes.
They raised the dues by $10 per year and I took that opportunity to consider whether I valued the benefits of membership to spend the money.
Yes, I understand how that works, and addressed that point. Are you arguing that the benefits we provide can’t increase if we have more money? My hypothesis is that with higher dues we’ll bring in more money even if we lose some members in the short run, which will allow us to do more to serve our members better, which will then bring in more members (ultimately more than making up for however many we lose).
I understand that whether this will happen is debatable, but your reply doesn’t make it sound like I made myself understood?
The LP needs to get its house in order and start providing value to members before dues are raised. I would not support raising dues until there’s been six months of solid membership growth.
It’s a chicken and egg problem, and I happen to be on the other side of it – I think we’ll get our house in order and get growth subsequent to raising dues. They haven’t kept up with a quarter century of inflation. Over time, that means we have less to do less with. I also support project based fundraising and other ways to increase our bottom line.
94 Nicholas Sarwark // Mar 17, 2013 at 8:19 pm
@93: I understood your point, I just think you’re wrong about the increased revenue from a dues increase offsetting the decline in memberships.
Dues are a loss leader for the party. You want a low barrier to entry for the annual dues, along with effective project-based fundraising and inreach to get people active and contributing more. The party also needs to increase its visibility to the membership so people see what they’re paying dues for.
95 Michael H. Wilson // Mar 17, 2013 at 9:08 pm
@ 93 I must politely disagree. This party has one great resource. Its people but it refuses to use that resource to update the literature, write news releases or training material.
For more than six years I have written to the members of the LNC about this issue but just a few people have taken the time to reply. You and Dr. Lark are amongst that small group.
Periodically I get an email from the national office informing me of something. I have no idea how many people receive that same email. How difficult would it be to email all the membership and ask them to submit short pieces that could be turned into a news release for a specific topic or a brochure? I doubt that the results would be 15,000 replies.
If the LP had better material for the membership it just might see an increase in the numbers.
96 Paulie // Mar 19, 2013 at 5:17 pm
…effective project-based fundraising and inreach to get people active and contributing more. The party also needs to increase its visibility to the membership so people see what they’re paying dues for.
Definitely agreed on all those.
This party has one great resource. Its people but it refuses to use that resource to update the literature, write news releases or training material.
For more than six years I have written to the members of the LNC about this issue but just a few people have taken the time to reply. You and Dr. Lark are amongst that small group.
Agreed on all that too.
How difficult would it be to email all the membership and ask them to submit short pieces that could be turned into a news release for a specific topic or a brochure? I doubt that the results would be 15,000 replies.
I’m with you, but Carla does not like that kind of approach and she’s pretty adamant about not doing anything like that. If I was running the office I would do a lot of that kind of stuff.
97 paulie // Mar 19, 2013 at 8:03 pm
Yep. I try to push this from time to time.
98 paulie // Mar 19, 2013 at 8:04 pm
I don’t remember hearing an update at this meeting. I missed some of it helping to count votes. Was any mention made of progress on updating literature while I was out of the room?
99 Starchild // Mar 19, 2013 at 11:24 pm
Paulie @98 – I don’t recall there being any mention during the meeting of updating literature.
In one sense this is a shame, because I agree with Michael Wilson and others that there’s a strong need for good, updated LP literature.
Notwithstanding this need however, I think the concern I brought up when you and I were talking on the train about the possibility of a speaker’s bureau is worthy of consideration:
Given the lack of commitment by many members of the Libertarian National Committee to a strongly libertarian approach, can the LNC be trusted to do a good job on such a project? Left to their own devices, will committee members really be likely to collectively come up with literature or speakers that meet our party’s needs?
The relatively greater resources at the LNC’s disposal make trying to get the committee to champion projects such as organizing conventions, launching crowdfunding, etc., an understandable choice. But while it may take resources to print outreach literature in large amounts, or to cover speakers’ travel expenses, it costs very little to write outreach material or build lists of speakers who are able to effectively deliver a strong libertarian message.
In both areas, it seems to me that it would be good for the libertarian wing of the LP to focus first on producing content (writing literature and identifying potential speakers), and only then focus on getting the LNC to take up projects that would utilize this content.
100 Starchild // Mar 19, 2013 at 11:36 pm
I strongly agree with Nick Sarwark’s comments @76, @92, and @94 regarding membership dues.
If increasing dues were the only means at our disposal for bringing in more money that would be one thing, but we have better tools available with which to accomplish this goal.
As long as paying dues is tied to the ability to influence the LP (hold party office, vote on policy as a convention delegate, etc.), increasing dues means becoming more of a pay-to-play party.
This would be true even for relatively small dues increase, but would be even more true for a larger increase.
This matters first and foremost as a moral issue of basic fairness and good governance, but it also matters in a practical political sense, because in my observation well-heeled Libertarians are more likely on average than poorer Libertarians to favor a conservative-leaning, top-down approach. (Angela Keaton has pointed out that in her experience as a movement fundraiser, the wealthiest donors paradoxically defy this pattern and tend to be more radical, but I don’t think this group’s numbers are large enough to outweigh the negative political effect that raising dues would have on voting patterns among LP convention delegates.)
101 Jill Pyeatt // Mar 20, 2013 at 12:12 am
I agree with Nicholas and Starchild and suggest we keep the membership fee where it is until there’s a greater value for the money. There are other ways to raise money from people who can afford it.
102 Andy // Mar 20, 2013 at 2:32 am
Starchild said: “If increasing dues were the only means at our disposal for bringing in more money that would be one thing, but we have better tools available with which to accomplish this goal.”
Increasing the dues to have them keep up with the rate of inflation is not really increasing the dues, it is just keeping them in line with what the dues were when they were set, which was in like the 19080′s or early 1990′s I believe. That was a long time ago and the value of the dollar has declined since then. The numeric value of Federal Reserve Notes does not necessarily indicate their value.
103 Andy // Mar 20, 2013 at 2:34 am
“Jill Pyeatt // Mar 20, 2013 at 12:12 am
I agree with Nicholas and Starchild and suggest we keep the membership fee where it is until there’s a greater value for the money.”
The party dues have been dropping for years due to inflation. Raising them to keep up with inflation is not really raising them. This is a concept that Libertarians ought to be able to grasp.
104 Andy // Mar 20, 2013 at 3:02 am
Michael H. Wilson said: “Its people but it refuses to use that resource to update the literature, write news releases or training material.”
I’ve been saying for years that the official LP literature is out of date and needs to be updated more frequently. A lot of it does not look good either.
105 Andy // Mar 20, 2013 at 3:09 am
Nicholas Sarwark said: “Nicholas Sarwark // Mar 17, 2013 at 8:19 pm
@93: I understood your point, I just think you’re wrong about the increased revenue from a dues increase offsetting the decline in memberships.”
I think that if a fund raising letter and a video explaining how the dues were set a long time ago, and how the inflationary policies of the Federal Reserve System have eroded the purchasing power of the US dollar since then, thus making it more difficult for the Libertarian Party to function, much less get ahead, so therefore to make up for this the dues need to be reset at rates which are adjusted for inflation, that most party members will understand and will stay on as dues paying members, and even for those who do not stay on as party members because of this, I think that some of them will return to the party down the road, especially if they seem some signs on increased success.
I would consider offering a special discounted rate to apply only to students to encourage more young people (or even older people who are going back to school) to join the party.
106 Andy // Mar 20, 2013 at 3:10 am
“if they seem some signs on increased success. ”
Should read, “if they see some signs of increased success.”
107 paulie // Mar 20, 2013 at 9:29 am
while it may take resources to print outreach literature in large amounts, or to cover speakers’ travel expenses, it costs very little to write outreach material or build lists of speakers who are able to effectively deliver a strong libertarian message.
In both areas, it seems to me that it would be good for the libertarian wing of the LP to focus first on producing content (writing literature and identifying potential speakers), and only then focus on getting the LNC to take up projects that would utilize this content.
I’ve pushed both ideas on the radical and associated lists, IPR comments, etc many times over the years. Seeing no progress, I’m also going to push them via the LNC, and hope that the content won’t totally suck …IF anything happens. The bigger issue is that little or no progress is being made there, either.
Rich Tomasso had some nice samples of graphics for new literature at the November meeting. And that’s been about it. No one has responded to me about speakers bureau; I’ve brought it up on LNC list quite a few times. Mark Hinkle ran on that issue, and a few others, but never pushed them as chair. He says it was because most of the committee was against him. But why hasn’t he or anyone else pushed it this term?
I’m coming up against this same issue on my state committee. As soon as we are talking about anyone actually doing something to reach the public, we are tied in knots about whether it will be good enough. Meanwhile, very little or nothing is what keeps happening, just as it had for years.
108 paulie // Mar 20, 2013 at 9:33 am
As long as paying dues is tied to the ability to influence the LP (hold party office, vote on policy as a convention delegate, etc.), increasing dues means becoming more of a pay-to-play party.
I favor allowing contributions of time, talent, volunteer effort and other in-kind contributions in lieu of dues.
It’s not just only about the money.
But yes, the fact that our basic dues have not kept up with 25 years of inflation is hurting us. There’s just no way around that.
If more than 25 dollars is excessive now, why wasn’t 25 dollars excessive when 25 dollars had more like 50 of today’s dollars purchasing power?
109 George Phillies // Mar 20, 2013 at 9:36 am
However, when dues were higher the national party also did considerably more.
110 paulie // Mar 20, 2013 at 9:38 am
This matters first and foremost as a moral issue of basic fairness and good governance, but it also matters in a practical political sense, because in my observation well-heeled Libertarians are more likely on average than poorer Libertarians to favor a conservative-leaning, top-down approach.
I understand the concerns.
However, 25 dollars or 50 dollars a YEAR is not a matter of wealthy vs poor. We are talking about 2 vs 4 dollars a MONTH or less than a dollar a week in either case.
And, as I said in the last comment, I strongly favor finding ways to allow contributions of time, effort and value to substitute for cash.
As I mentioned in other comments, I also understand that we need to offer more of value to earn the donations, and I am suggesting various ways we do that.
Despite all these areas of agreement, I think basic dues should roughly speaking keep up with inflation, and we have a quarter century of catching up to do.
111 paulie // Mar 20, 2013 at 9:39 am
However, when dues were higher the national party also did considerably more.
They had more to do it with, and I’d like us to do significantly more again.
112 paulie // Mar 20, 2013 at 10:00 am
suggest we keep the membership fee where it is until there’s a greater value for the money.
Please do a *detailed* budget analysis of the LNC and then suggest specific ways we can provide greater value – what should be cut, if anything, or how exactly we would raise the funds to provide what greater value, or how we can provide greater value at no additional cost. I’ll share your comments with the LNC if you take this up.
There are other ways to raise money from people who can afford it.
I’m pretty sure even a person begging for change on the street or working a minimum wage job can afford a dollar a day, so maybe the issue is having all that money at once. I know 50 bucks can be steep when you spend everything you have by the end of each week and are physically fighting over food the last week of the month before the food stamps arrive – been there, done that.
Maybe the LP should create a yearly dues savings account so people can deposit their pocket change as often as they want and have enough for dues at the end of the year?
I realize there are other ways to raise money from people who can afford it, but we need to give them value for their money, and I’d like everyone’s help who is serious about this in coming up with and phrasing proposals for doing so that can make it through the LNC. You have the LNC discuss list archives so you can be a virtual LNC member and join the discussion through me. You won’t even have to spend thousands of dollars a year traveling to boring and, for the most part, not very productive meetings!
Seriously…I’m spending the time and money…how can I make it not be a waste and actually help make the things that need to happen actually happen? I need some help with this.
113 paulie // Mar 20, 2013 at 10:02 am
Increasing the dues to have them keep up with the rate of inflation is not really increasing the dues, it is just keeping them in line with what the dues were when they were set, which was in like the 19080?s or early 1990?s I believe. That was a long time ago and the value of the dollar has declined since then. The numeric value of Federal Reserve Notes does not necessarily indicate their value.
Exactly!
114 paulie // Mar 20, 2013 at 10:23 am
The party dues have been dropping for years due to inflation. Raising them to keep up with inflation is not really raising them. This is a concept that Libertarians ought to be able to grasp.
http://librivox.org/a-connecticut-yankee-in-king-arthurs-court-by-mark-twain/
A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court
by Mark Twain (1835-1910)
Come and hear the strange tail of The Boss Hank Morgan, a modern day (at the time of publication) Connecticut Yankee who inexplicably finds himself transported to the court of the legendary King Arthur (as the title of the book implies). Hank, or simply, The Boss, as he comes to be most frequently known, quickly uses his modern day knowledge and education to pass himself off as a great magician, to get himself out of all sorts of surprising, (and frequently amusing) situations, as well as to advance the technological and cultural status of the nation in which he finds himself.
In the rather un-subtle sub-text of the story, Twain uses The Boss to express a surprisingly pragmatic and frequently contradictory philosophy. The Boss explores the relative merits of Democracy, and Monarchy, he expresses his views on the “Nature v. Nurture” debate, he frequently speaks forcefully against an established Church, but just as strongly advocates for religion and a variety of churches (just not a compulsory one) and he devotes at least one afternoon to introducing his companions to the concept of inflation. In a far more subtle, yet no less forceful manner, the Boss shares with the reader some views about taxation, slavery (both literal and wage slavery), trade unions, the origins of the German language, the nature of marriage, and probably most powerfully, death.
It is a tall order for a relatively brief text, but Twain manages it all with surprising clarity. No one will agree fully with the Boss on all of these matters, and I would be surprised if Twain himself would. In fact the Boss’s views are so pragmatic, and often contradictory, the reader is left to wonder if Twain himself is alternately speaking through the Boss, and setting him up as a straw man. Either way it is a delightful story and a great piece of American Literature, to say nothing of an excellent argument for education.
(Review written by Steve Andersen)
CHAPTER XXXI
MARCO
We strolled along in a sufficiently indolent fashion now, and
talked. We must dispose of about the amount of time it ought
to take to go to the little hamlet of Abblasoure and put justice
on the track of those murderers and get back home again. And
meantime I had an auxiliary interest which had never paled yet,
never lost its novelty for me since I had been in Arthur’s kingdom:
the behavior–born of nice and exact subdivisions of caste–of chance
passers-by toward each other. Toward the shaven monk who trudged
along with his cowl tilted back and the sweat washing down his
fat jowls, the coal-burner was deeply reverent; to the gentleman
he was abject; with the small farmer and the free mechanic he was
cordial and gossipy; and when a slave passed by with a countenance
respectfully lowered, this chap’s nose was in the air–he couldn’t
even see him. Well, there are times when one would like to hang
the whole human race and finish the farce.
Presently we struck an incident. A small mob of half-naked boys
and girls came tearing out of the woods, scared and shrieking.
The eldest among them were not more than twelve or fourteen years
old. They implored help, but they were so beside themselves that
we couldn’t make out what the matter was. However, we plunged
into the wood, they skurrying in the lead, and the trouble was
quickly revealed: they had hanged a little fellow with a bark rope,
and he was kicking and struggling, in the process of choking to
death. We rescued him, and fetched him around. It was some more
human nature; the admiring little folk imitating their elders;
they were playing mob, and had achieved a success which promised
to be a good deal more serious than they had bargained for.
It was not a dull excursion for me. I managed to put in the time
very well. I made various acquaintanceships, and in my quality
of stranger was able to ask as many questions as I wanted to.
A thing which naturally interested me, as a statesman, was the
matter of wages. I picked up what I could under that head during
the afternoon. A man who hasn’t had much experience, and doesn’t
think, is apt to measure a nation’s prosperity or lack of prosperity
by the mere size of the prevailing wages; if the wages be high, the
nation is prosperous; if low, it isn’t. Which is an error. It
isn’t what sum you get, it’s how much you can buy with it, that’s
the important thing; and it’s that that tells whether your wages
are high in fact or only high in name. I could remember how it
was in the time of our great civil war in the nineteenth century.
In the North a carpenter got three dollars a day, gold valuation;
in the South he got fifty–payable in Confederate shinplasters
worth a dollar a bushel. In the North a suit of overalls cost
three dollars–a day’s wages; in the South it cost seventy-five
–which was two days’ wages. Other things were in proportion.
Consequently, wages were twice as high in the North as they were
in the South, because the one wage had that much more purchasing
power than the other had.
Yes, I made various acquaintances in the hamlet and a thing that
gratified me a good deal was to find our new coins in circulation
–lots of milrays, lots of mills, lots of cents, a good many nickels,
and some silver; all this among the artisans and commonalty
generally; yes, and even some gold–but that was at the bank,
that is to say, the goldsmith’s. I dropped in there while Marco,
the son of Marco, was haggling with a shopkeeper over a quarter
of a pound of salt, and asked for change for a twenty-dollar gold
piece. They furnished it–that is, after they had chewed the piece,
and rung it on the counter, and tried acid on it, and asked me
where I got it, and who I was, and where I was from, and where
I was going to, and when I expected to get there, and perhaps
a couple of hundred more questions; and when they got aground,
I went right on and furnished them a lot of information voluntarily;
told them I owned a dog, and his name was Watch, and my first wife
was a Free Will Baptist, and her grandfather was a Prohibitionist,
and I used to know a man who had two thumbs on each hand and a wart
on the inside of his upper lip, and died in the hope of a glorious
resurrection, and so on, and so on, and so on, till even that
hungry village questioner began to look satisfied, and also a shade
put out; but he had to respect a man of my financial strength,
and so he didn’t give me any lip, but I noticed he took it out of
his underlings, which was a perfectly natural thing to do. Yes,
they changed my twenty, but I judged it strained the bank a little,
which was a thing to be expected, for it was the same as walking
into a paltry village store in the nineteenth century and requiring
the boss of it to change a two thousand-dollar bill for you all
of a sudden. He could do it, maybe; but at the same time he
would wonder how a small farmer happened to be carrying so much
money around in his pocket; which was probably this goldsmith’s
thought, too; for he followed me to the door and stood there gazing
after me with reverent admiration.
Our new money was not only handsomely circulating, but its language
was already glibly in use; that is to say, people had dropped
the names of the former moneys, and spoke of things as being worth
so many dollars or cents or mills or milrays now. It was very
gratifying. We were progressing, that was sure.
I got to know several master mechanics, but about the most interesting
fellow among them was the blacksmith, Dowley. He was a live man
and a brisk talker, and had two journeymen and three apprentices,
and was doing a raging business. In fact, he was getting rich,
hand over fist, and was vastly respected. Marco was very proud of
having such a man for a friend. He had taken me there ostensibly
to let me see the big establishment which bought so much of his
charcoal, but really to let me see what easy and almost familiar
terms he was on with this great man. Dowley and I fraternized
at once; I had had just such picked men, splendid fellows, under
me in the Colt Arms Factory. I was bound to see more of him, so
I invited him to come out to Marco’s Sunday, and dine with us.
Marco was appalled, and held his breath; and when the grandee
accepted, he was so grateful that he almost forgot to be astonished
at the condescension.
Marco’s joy was exuberant–but only for a moment; then he grew
thoughtful, then sad; and when he heard me tell Dowley I should
have Dickon, the boss mason, and Smug, the boss wheelwright, out
there, too, the coal-dust on his face turned to chalk, and he lost
his grip. But I knew what was the matter with him; it was the
expense. He saw ruin before him; he judged that his financial
days were numbered. However, on our way to invite the others,
I said:
“You must allow me to have these friends come; and you must also
allow me to pay the costs.”
His face cleared, and he said with spirit:
“But not all of it, not all of it. Ye cannot well bear a burden
like to this alone.”
I stopped him, and said:
“Now let’s understand each other on the spot, old friend. I am
only a farm bailiff, it is true; but I am not poor, nevertheless.
I have been very fortunate this year–you would be astonished
to know how I have thriven. I tell you the honest truth when I say
I could squander away as many as a dozen feasts like this and never
care _that_ for the expense!” and I snapped my fingers. I could
see myself rise a foot at a time in Marco’s estimation, and when
I fetched out those last words I was become a very tower for style
and altitude. “So you see, you must let me have my way. You
can’t contribute a cent to this orgy, that’s _settled_.”
“It’s grand and good of you–”
“No, it isn’t. You’ve opened your house to Jones and me in the
most generous way; Jones was remarking upon it to-day, just before
you came back from the village; for although he wouldn’t be likely
to say such a thing to you–because Jones isn’t a talker, and is
diffident in society–he has a good heart and a grateful, and
knows how to appreciate it when he is well treated; yes, you and
your wife have been very hospitable toward us–”
“Ah, brother, ’tis nothing–_such_ hospitality!”
“But it _is_ something; the best a man has, freely given, is always
something, and is as good as a prince can do, and ranks right
along beside it–for even a prince can but do his best. And so
we’ll shop around and get up this layout now, and don’t you worry
about the expense. I’m one of the worst spendthrifts that ever
was born. Why, do you know, sometimes in a single week I spend
–but never mind about that–you’d never believe it anyway.”
And so we went gadding along, dropping in here and there, pricing
things, and gossiping with the shopkeepers about the riot, and now
and then running across pathetic reminders of it, in the persons of
shunned and tearful and houseless remnants of families whose homes
had been taken from them and their parents butchered or hanged.
The raiment of Marco and his wife was of coarse tow-linen and
linsey-woolsey respectively, and resembled township maps, it being
made up pretty exclusively of patches which had been added, township
by township, in the course of five or six years, until hardly a
hand’s-breadth of the original garments was surviving and present.
Now I wanted to fit these people out with new suits, on account of
that swell company, and I didn’t know just how to get at it
–with delicacy, until at last it struck me that as I had already
been liberal in inventing wordy gratitude for the king, it would
be just the thing to back it up with evidence of a substantial
sort; so I said:
“And Marco, there’s another thing which you must permit–out of
kindness for Jones–because you wouldn’t want to offend him.
He was very anxious to testify his appreciation in some way, but
he is so diffident he couldn’t venture it himself, and so he begged
me to buy some little things and give them to you and Dame Phyllis
and let him pay for them without your ever knowing they came from
him–you know how a delicate person feels about that sort of thing
–and so I said I would, and we would keep mum. Well, his idea
was, a new outfit of clothes for you both–”
“Oh, it is wastefulness! It may not be, brother, it may not be.
Consider the vastness of the sum–”
“Hang the vastness of the sum! Try to keep quiet for a moment,
and see how it would seem; a body can’t get in a word edgeways,
you talk so much. You ought to cure that, Marco; it isn’t good
form, you know, and it will grow on you if you don’t check it.
Yes, we’ll step in here now and price this man’s stuff–and don’t
forget to remember to not let on to Jones that you know he had
anything to do with it. You can’t think how curiously sensitive
and proud he is. He’s a farmer–pretty fairly well-to-do farmer
–and I’m his bailiff; _but_–the imagination of that man! Why,
sometimes when he forgets himself and gets to blowing off, you’d
think he was one of the swells of the earth; and you might listen
to him a hundred years and never take him for a farmer–especially if
he talked agriculture. He _thinks_ he’s a Sheol of a farmer; thinks
he’s old Grayback from Wayback; but between you and me privately
he don’t know as much about farming as he does about running
a kingdom–still, whatever he talks about, you want to drop your
underjaw and listen, the same as if you had never heard such
incredible wisdom in all your life before, and were afraid you
might die before you got enough of it. That will please Jones.”
It tickled Marco to the marrow to hear about such an odd character;
but it also prepared him for accidents; and in my experience when
you travel with a king who is letting on to be something else and
can’t remember it more than about half the time, you can’t take
too many precautions.
This was the best store we had come across yet; it had everything
in it, in small quantities, from anvils and drygoods all the way
down to fish and pinchbeck jewelry. I concluded I would bunch
my whole invoice right here, and not go pricing around any more.
So I got rid of Marco, by sending him off to invite the mason and
the wheelwright, which left the field free to me. For I never care
to do a thing in a quiet way; it’s got to be theatrical or I don’t
take any interest in it. I showed up money enough, in a careless
way, to corral the shopkeeper’s respect, and then I wrote down
a list of the things I wanted, and handed it to him to see if he
could read it. He could, and was proud to show that he could.
He said he had been educated by a priest, and could both read
and write. He ran it through, and remarked with satisfaction that
it was a pretty heavy bill. Well, and so it was, for a little
concern like that. I was not only providing a swell dinner, but
some odds and ends of extras. I ordered that the things be carted
out and delivered at the dwelling of Marco, the son of Marco,
by Saturday evening, and send me the bill at dinner-time Sunday.
He said I could depend upon his promptness and exactitude, it was
the rule of the house. He also observed that he would throw in
a couple of miller-guns for the Marcos gratis–that everybody
was using them now. He had a mighty opinion of that clever
device. I said:
“And please fill them up to the middle mark, too; and add that
to the bill.”
He would, with pleasure. He filled them, and I took them with
me. I couldn’t venture to tell him that the miller-gun was a
little invention of my own, and that I had officially ordered that
every shopkeeper in the kingdom keep them on hand and sell them
at government price–which was the merest trifle, and the shopkeeper
got that, not the government. We furnished them for nothing.
The king had hardly missed us when we got back at nightfall. He
had early dropped again into his dream of a grand invasion of Gaul
with the whole strength of his kingdom at his back, and the afternoon
had slipped away without his ever coming to himself again.
CHAPTER XXXII
DOWLEY’S HUMILIATION
Well, when that cargo arrived toward sunset, Saturday afternoon,
I had my hands full to keep the Marcos from fainting. They were
sure Jones and I were ruined past help, and they blamed themselves
as accessories to this bankruptcy. You see, in addition to the
dinner-materials, which called for a sufficiently round sum,
I had bought a lot of extras for the future comfort of the family:
for instance, a big lot of wheat, a delicacy as rare to the tables
of their class as was ice-cream to a hermit’s; also a sizeable
deal dinner-table; also two entire pounds of salt, which was
another piece of extravagance in those people’s eyes; also crockery,
stools, the clothes, a small cask of beer, and so on. I instructed
the Marcos to keep quiet about this sumptuousness, so as to give
me a chance to surprise the guests and show off a little. Concerning
the new clothes, the simple couple were like children; they were up
and down, all night, to see if it wasn’t nearly daylight, so that
they could put them on, and they were into them at last as much
as an hour before dawn was due. Then their pleasure–not to say
delirium–was so fresh and novel and inspiring that the sight of it
paid me well for the interruptions which my sleep had suffered.
The king had slept just as usual–like the dead. The Marcos could
not thank him for their clothes, that being forbidden; but they
tried every way they could think of to make him see how grateful
they were. Which all went for nothing: he didn’t notice any change.
It turned out to be one of those rich and rare fall days which is
just a June day toned down to a degree where it is heaven to be
out of doors. Toward noon the guests arrived, and we assembled
under a great tree and were soon as sociable as old acquaintances.
Even the king’s reserve melted a little, though it was some little
trouble to him to adjust himself to the name of Jones along at
first. I had asked him to try to not forget that he was a farmer;
but I had also considered it prudent to ask him to let the thing
stand at that, and not elaborate it any. Because he was just the
kind of person you could depend on to spoil a little thing like
that if you didn’t warn him, his tongue was so handy, and his
spirit so willing, and his information so uncertain.
Dowley was in fine feather, and I early got him started, and then
adroitly worked him around onto his own history for a text and
himself for a hero, and then it was good to sit there and hear him
hum. Self-made man, you know. They know how to talk. They do
deserve more credit than any other breed of men, yes, that is true;
and they are among the very first to find it out, too. He told how
he had begun life an orphan lad without money and without friends
able to help him; how he had lived as the slaves of the meanest
master lived; how his day’s work was from sixteen to eighteen hours
long, and yielded him only enough black bread to keep him in a
half-fed condition; how his faithful endeavors finally attracted
the attention of a good blacksmith, who came near knocking him
dead with kindness by suddenly offering, when he was totally
unprepared, to take him as his bound apprentice for nine years
and give him board and clothes and teach him the trade–or “mystery”
as Dowley called it. That was his first great rise, his first
gorgeous stroke of fortune; and you saw that he couldn’t yet speak
of it without a sort of eloquent wonder and delight that such a
gilded promotion should have fallen to the lot of a common human
being. He got no new clothing during his apprenticeship, but on
his graduation day his master tricked him out in spang-new tow-linens
and made him feel unspeakably rich and fine.
“I remember me of that day!” the wheelwright sang out, with
enthusiasm.
“And I likewise!” cried the mason. “I would not believe they
were thine own; in faith I could not.”
“Nor other!” shouted Dowley, with sparkling eyes. “I was like
to lose my character, the neighbors wending I had mayhap been
stealing. It was a great day, a great day; one forgetteth not
days like that.”
Yes, and his master was a fine man, and prosperous, and always
had a great feast of meat twice in the year, and with it white
bread, true wheaten bread; in fact, lived like a lord, so to speak.
And in time Dowley succeeded to the business and married the daughter.
“And now consider what is come to pass,” said he, impressively.
“Two times in every month there is fresh meat upon my table.”
He made a pause here, to let that fact sink home, then added
–”and eight times salt meat.”
“It is even true,” said the wheelwright, with bated breath.
“I know it of mine own knowledge,” said the mason, in the same
reverent fashion.
“On my table appeareth white bread every Sunday in the year,”
added the master smith, with solemnity. “I leave it to your own
consciences, friends, if this is not also true?”
“By my head, yes,” cried the mason.
“I can testify it–and I do,” said the wheelwright.
“And as to furniture, ye shall say yourselves what mine equipment
is.” He waved his hand in fine gesture of granting frank and
unhampered freedom of speech, and added: “Speak as ye are moved;
speak as ye would speak; an I were not here.”
“Ye have five stools, and of the sweetest workmanship at that, albeit
your family is but three,” said the wheelwright, with deep respect.
“And six wooden goblets, and six platters of wood and two of pewter
to eat and drink from withal,” said the mason, impressively. “And
I say it as knowing God is my judge, and we tarry not here alway,
but must answer at the last day for the things said in the body,
be they false or be they sooth.”
“Now ye know what manner of man I am, brother Jones,” said the
smith, with a fine and friendly condescension, “and doubtless ye
would look to find me a man jealous of his due of respect and
but sparing of outgo to strangers till their rating and quality be
assured, but trouble yourself not, as concerning that; wit ye well
ye shall find me a man that regardeth not these matters but is
willing to receive any he as his fellow and equal that carrieth
a right heart in his body, be his worldly estate howsoever modest.
And in token of it, here is my hand; and I say with my own mouth
we are equals–equals”–and he smiled around on the company with
the satisfaction of a god who is doing the handsome and gracious
thing and is quite well aware of it.
The king took the hand with a poorly disguised reluctance, and
let go of it as willingly as a lady lets go of a fish; all of which
had a good effect, for it was mistaken for an embarrassment natural
to one who was being called upon by greatness.
The dame brought out the table now, and set it under the tree.
It caused a visible stir of surprise, it being brand new and a
sumptuous article of deal. But the surprise rose higher still
when the dame, with a body oozing easy indifference at every pore,
but eyes that gave it all away by absolutely flaming with vanity,
slowly unfolded an actual simon-pure tablecloth and spread it.
That was a notch above even the blacksmith’s domestic grandeurs,
and it hit him hard; you could see it. But Marco was in Paradise;
you could see that, too. Then the dame brought two fine new
stools–whew! that was a sensation; it was visible in the eyes of
every guest. Then she brought two more–as calmly as she could.
Sensation again–with awed murmurs. Again she brought two
–walking on air, she was so proud. The guests were petrified, and
the mason muttered:
“There is that about earthly pomps which doth ever move to reverence.”
As the dame turned away, Marco couldn’t help slapping on the climax
while the thing was hot; so he said with what was meant for a
languid composure but was a poor imitation of it:
“These suffice; leave the rest.”
So there were more yet! It was a fine effect. I couldn’t have
played the hand better myself.
From this out, the madam piled up the surprises with a rush that
fired the general astonishment up to a hundred and fifty in the
shade, and at the same time paralyzed expression of it down to
gasped “Oh’s” and “Ah’s,” and mute upliftings of hands and eyes.
She fetched crockery–new, and plenty of it; new wooden goblets
and other table furniture; and beer, fish, chicken, a goose, eggs,
roast beef, roast mutton, a ham, a small roast pig, and a wealth
of genuine white wheaten bread. Take it by and large, that spread
laid everything far and away in the shade that ever that crowd had
seen before. And while they sat there just simply stupefied with
wonder and awe, I sort of waved my hand as if by accident, and
the storekeeper’s son emerged from space and said he had come
to collect.
“That’s all right,” I said, indifferently. “What is the amount?
give us the items.”
Then he read off this bill, while those three amazed men listened,
and serene waves of satisfaction rolled over my soul and alternate
waves of terror and admiration surged over Marco’s:
2 pounds salt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
8 dozen pints beer, in the wood . . . . . 800
3 bushels wheat . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,700
2 pounds fish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
3 hens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400
1 goose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400
3 dozen eggs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
1 roast of beef . . . . . . . . . . . . . 450
1 roast of mutton . . . . . . . . . . . . 400
1 ham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 800
1 sucking pig . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 500
2 crockery dinner sets . . . . . . . . . 6,000
2 men’s suits and underwear . . . . . . . 2,800
1 stuff and 1 linsey-woolsey gown
and underwear . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,600
8 wooden goblets . . . . . . . . . . . . 800
Various table furniture . . . . . . . . .10,000
1 deal table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,000
8 stools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,000
2 miller guns, loaded . . . . . . . . . . 3,000
He ceased. There was a pale and awful silence. Not a limb stirred.
Not a nostril betrayed the passage of breath.
“Is that all?” I asked, in a voice of the most perfect calmness.
“All, fair sir, save that certain matters of light moment are
placed together under a head hight sundries. If it would like
you, I will sepa–”
“It is of no consequence,” I said, accompanying the words with
a gesture of the most utter indifference; “give me the grand
total, please.”
The clerk leaned against the tree to stay himself, and said:
“Thirty-nine thousand one hundred and fifty milrays!”
The wheelwright fell off his stool, the others grabbed the table
to save themselves, and there was a deep and general ejaculation of:
“God be with us in the day of disaster!”
The clerk hastened to say:
“My father chargeth me to say he cannot honorably require you
to pay it all at this time, and therefore only prayeth you–”
I paid no more heed than if it were the idle breeze, but, with an
air of indifference amounting almost to weariness, got out my money
and tossed four dollars on to the table. Ah, you should have seen
them stare!
The clerk was astonished and charmed. He asked me to retain
one of the dollars as security, until he could go to town and
–I interrupted:
“What, and fetch back nine cents? Nonsense! Take the whole.
Keep the change.”
There was an amazed murmur to this effect:
“Verily this being is _made_ of money! He throweth it away even
as if it were dirt.”
The blacksmith was a crushed man.
The clerk took his money and reeled away drunk with fortune. I said
to Marco and his wife:
“Good folk, here is a little trifle for you”–handing the miller-guns
as if it were a matter of no consequence, though each of them
contained fifteen cents in solid cash; and while the poor creatures
went to pieces with astonishment and gratitude, I turned to the
others and said as calmly as one would ask the time of day:
“Well, if we are all ready, I judge the dinner is. Come, fall to.”
Ah, well, it was immense; yes, it was a daisy. I don’t know that
I ever put a situation together better, or got happier spectacular
effects out of the materials available. The blacksmith–well, he
was simply mashed. Land! I wouldn’t have felt what that man was
feeling, for anything in the world. Here he had been blowing and
bragging about his grand meat-feast twice a year, and his fresh
meat twice a month, and his salt meat twice a week, and his white
bread every Sunday the year round–all for a family of three; the
entire cost for the year not above 69.2.6 (sixty-nine cents, two
mills and six milrays), and all of a sudden here comes along a man
who slashes out nearly four dollars on a single blow-out; and not
only that, but acts as if it made him tired to handle such small
sums. Yes, Dowley was a good deal wilted, and shrunk-up and
collapsed; he had the aspect of a bladder-balloon that’s been
stepped on by a cow.
CHAPTER XXXIII
SIXTH CENTURY POLITICAL ECONOMY
However, I made a dead set at him, and before the first third
of the dinner was reached, I had him happy again. It was easy
to do–in a country of ranks and castes. You see, in a country
where they have ranks and castes, a man isn’t ever a man, he is
only part of a man, he can’t ever get his full growth. You prove
your superiority over him in station, or rank, or fortune, and
that’s the end of it–he knuckles down. You can’t insult him
after that. No, I don’t mean quite that; of course you _can_ insult
him, I only mean it’s difficult; and so, unless you’ve got a lot
of useless time on your hands it doesn’t pay to try. I had the
smith’s reverence now, because I was apparently immensely prosperous
and rich; I could have had his adoration if I had had some little
gimcrack title of nobility. And not only his, but any commoner’s
in the land, though he were the mightiest production of all the ages,
in intellect, worth, and character, and I bankrupt in all three.
This was to remain so, as long as England should exist in the
earth. With the spirit of prophecy upon me, I could look into
the future and see her erect statues and monuments to her unspeakable
Georges and other royal and noble clothes-horses, and leave unhonored
the creators of this world–after God–Gutenburg, Watt, Arkwright,
Whitney, Morse, Stephenson, Bell.
The king got his cargo aboard, and then, the talk not turning upon
battle, conquest, or iron-clad duel, he dulled down to drowsiness
and went off to take a nap. Mrs. Marco cleared the table, placed
the beer keg handy, and went away to eat her dinner of leavings
in humble privacy, and the rest of us soon drifted into matters
near and dear to the hearts of our sort–business and wages,
of course. At a first glance, things appeared to be exceeding
prosperous in this little tributary kingdom–whose lord was
King Bagdemagus–as compared with the state of things in my own
region. They had the “protection” system in full force here,
whereas we were working along down toward free-trade, by easy
stages, and were now about half way. Before long, Dowley and I
were doing all the talking, the others hungrily listening. Dowley
warmed to his work, snuffed an advantage in the air, and began
to put questions which he considered pretty awkward ones for me,
and they did have something of that look:
“In your country, brother, what is the wage of a master bailiff,
master hind, carter, shepherd, swineherd?”
“Twenty-five milrays a day; that is to say, a quarter of a cent.”
The smith’s face beamed with joy. He said:
“With us they are allowed the double of it! And what may a mechanic
get–carpenter, dauber, mason, painter, blacksmith, wheelwright,
and the like?”
“On the average, fifty milrays; half a cent a day.”
“Ho-ho! With us they are allowed a hundred! With us any good
mechanic is allowed a cent a day! I count out the tailor, but
not the others–they are all allowed a cent a day, and in driving
times they get more–yes, up to a hundred and ten and even fifteen
milrays a day. I’ve paid a hundred and fifteen myself, within
the week. ‘Rah for protection–to Sheol with free-trade!”
And his face shone upon the company like a sunburst. But I didn’t
scare at all. I rigged up my pile-driver, and allowed myself
fifteen minutes to drive him into the earth–drive him _all_ in
–drive him in till not even the curve of his skull should show
above ground. Here is the way I started in on him. I asked:
“What do you pay a pound for salt?”
“A hundred milrays.”
“We pay forty. What do you pay for beef and mutton–when you
buy it?” That was a neat hit; it made the color come.
“It varieth somewhat, but not much; one may say seventy-five milrays
the pound.”
“_We_ pay thirty-three. What do you pay for eggs?”
“Fifty milrays the dozen.”
“We pay twenty. What do you pay for beer?”
“It costeth us eight and one-half milrays the pint.”
“We get it for four; twenty-five bottles for a cent.
What do you pay for wheat?”
“At the rate of nine hundred milrays the bushel.”
“We pay four hundred. What do you pay for a man’s tow-linen suit?”
“Thirteen cents.”
“We pay six. What do you pay for a stuff gown for the wife of the
laborer or the mechanic?”
“We pay eight cents, four mills.”
“Well, observe the difference: you pay eight cents and four mills,
we pay only four cents.” I prepared now to sock it to him. I said:
“Look here, dear friend, _what’s become of your high wages you
were bragging so about a few minutes ago?_”–and I looked around
on the company with placid satisfaction, for I had slipped up
on him gradually and tied him hand and foot, you see, without his
ever noticing that he was being tied at all. “What’s become of
those noble high wages of yours?–I seem to have knocked the
stuffing all out of them, it appears to me.”
But if you will believe me, he merely looked surprised, that
is all! he didn’t grasp the situation at all, didn’t know he had
walked into a trap, didn’t discover that he was _in_ a trap. I could
have shot him, from sheer vexation. With cloudy eye and a struggling
intellect he fetched this out:
“Marry, I seem not to understand. It is _proved_ that our wages
be double thine; how then may it be that thou’st knocked therefrom
the stuffing?–an miscall not the wonderly word, this being the
first time under grace and providence of God it hath been granted
me to hear it.”
Well, I was stunned; partly with this unlooked-for stupidity on
his part, and partly because his fellows so manifestly sided with
him and were of his mind–if you might call it mind. My position
was simple enough, plain enough; how could it ever be simplified
more? However, I must try:
“Why, look here, brother Dowley, don’t you see? Your wages are
merely higher than ours in _name_, not in _fact_.”
“Hear him! They are the _double_–ye have confessed it yourself.”
“Yes-yes, I don’t deny that at all. But that’s got nothing to do
with it; the _amount_ of the wages in mere coins, with meaningless
names attached to them to know them by, has got nothing to do
with it. The thing is, how much can you _buy_ with your wages?
–that’s the idea. While it is true that with you a good mechanic
is allowed about three dollars and a half a year, and with us only
about a dollar and seventy-five–”
“There–ye’re confessing it again, ye’re confessing it again!”
“Confound it, I’ve never denied it, I tell you! What I say is
this. With us _half_ a dollar buys more than a _dollar_ buys
with you–and THEREFORE it stands to reason and the commonest
kind of common-sense, that our wages are _higher_ than yours.”
He looked dazed, and said, despairingly:
“Verily, I cannot make it out. Ye’ve just said ours are the
higher, and with the same breath ye take it back.”
“Oh, great Scott, isn’t it possible to get such a simple thing
through your head? Now look here–let me illustrate. We pay
four cents for a woman’s stuff gown, you pay 8.4.0, which is
four mills more than _double_. What do you allow a laboring
woman who works on a farm?”
“Two mills a day.”
“Very good; we allow but half as much; we pay her only a tenth
of a cent a day; and–”
“Again ye’re conf–”
“Wait! Now, you see, the thing is very simple; this time you’ll
understand it. For instance, it takes your woman 42 days to earn
her gown, at 2 mills a day–7 weeks’ work; but ours earns hers
in forty days–two days _short_ of 7 weeks. Your woman has a gown,
and her whole seven weeks wages are gone; ours has a gown, and
two days’ wages left, to buy something else with. There–_now_
you understand it!”
He looked–well, he merely looked dubious, it’s the most I can say;
so did the others. I waited–to let the thing work. Dowley spoke
at last–and betrayed the fact that he actually hadn’t gotten away
from his rooted and grounded superstitions yet. He said, with
a trifle of hesitancy:
“But–but–ye cannot fail to grant that two mills a day is better
than one.”
Shucks! Well, of course, I hated to give it up. So I chanced
another flyer:
“Let us suppose a case. Suppose one of your journeymen goes out
and buys the following articles:
“1 pound of salt;
1 dozen eggs;
1 dozen pints of beer;
1 bushel of wheat;
1 tow-linen suit;
5 pounds of beef;
5 pounds of mutton.
“The lot will cost him 32 cents. It takes him 32 working days
to earn the money–5 weeks and 2 days. Let him come to us and
work 32 days at _half_ the wages; he can buy all those things for
a shade under 14 1/2 cents; they will cost him a shade under 29
days’ work, and he will have about half a week’s wages over. Carry
it through the year; he would save nearly a week’s wages every
two months, _your_ man nothing; thus saving five or six weeks’ wages
in a year, your man not a cent. _Now_ I reckon you understand that
‘high wages’ and ‘low wages’ are phrases that don’t mean anything
in the world until you find out which of them will _buy_ the most!”
It was a crusher.
But, alas! it didn’t crush. No, I had to give it up. What those
people valued was _high wages_; it didn’t seem to be a matter of
any consequence to them whether the high wages would buy anything
or not. They stood for “protection,” and swore by it, which was
reasonable enough, because interested parties had gulled them into
the notion that it was protection which had created their high
wages. I proved to them that in a quarter of a century their wages
had advanced but 30 per cent., while the cost of living had gone
up 100; and that with us, in a shorter time, wages had advanced
40 per cent. while the cost of living had gone steadily down. But
it didn’t do any good. Nothing could unseat their strange beliefs.
Well, I was smarting under a sense of defeat. Undeserved defeat,
but what of that? That didn’t soften the smart any. And to think
of the circumstances! the first statesman of the age, the capablest
man, the best-informed man in the entire world, the loftiest
uncrowned head that had moved through the clouds of any political
firmament for centuries, sitting here apparently defeated in
argument by an ignorant country blacksmith! And I could see that
those others were sorry for me–which made me blush till I could
smell my whiskers scorching. Put yourself in my place; feel as mean
as I did, as ashamed as I felt–wouldn’t _you_ have struck below the
belt to get even? Yes, you would; it is simply human nature.
Well, that is what I did. I am not trying to justify it; I’m only
saying that I was mad, and _anybody_ would have done it.
Well, when I make up my mind to hit a man, I don’t plan out
a love-tap; no, that isn’t my way; as long as I’m going to hit him
at all, I’m going to hit him a lifter. And I don’t jump at him
all of a sudden, and risk making a blundering half-way business
of it; no, I get away off yonder to one side, and work up on him
gradually, so that he never suspects that I’m going to hit him
at all; and by and by, all in a flash, he’s flat on his back, and
he can’t tell for the life of him how it all happened. That is
the way I went for brother Dowley. I started to talking lazy and
comfortable, as if I was just talking to pass the time; and the
oldest man in the world couldn’t have taken the bearings of my
starting place and guessed where I was going to fetch up:
“Boys, there’s a good many curious things about law, and custom,
and usage, and all that sort of thing, when you come to look at it;
yes, and about the drift and progress of human opinion and movement,
too. There are written laws–they perish; but there are also
unwritten laws–_they_ are eternal. Take the unwritten law of wages:
it says they’ve got to advance, little by little, straight through
the centuries. And notice how it works. We know what wages are
now, here and there and yonder; we strike an average, and say that’s
the wages of to-day. We know what the wages were a hundred years
ago, and what they were two hundred years ago; that’s as far back
as we can get, but it suffices to give us the law of progress,
the measure and rate of the periodical augmentation; and so, without
a document to help us, we can come pretty close to determining
what the wages were three and four and five hundred years ago.
Good, so far. Do we stop there? No. We stop looking backward;
we face around and apply the law to the future. My friends, I can
tell you what people’s wages are going to be at any date in the
future you want to know, for hundreds and hundreds of years.”
“What, goodman, what!”
“Yes. In seven hundred years wages will have risen to six times
what they are now, here in your region, and farm hands will be
allowed 3 cents a day, and mechanics 6.”
“I would’t I might die now and live then!” interrupted Smug, the
wheelwright, with a fine avaricious glow in his eye.
“And that isn’t all; they’ll get their board besides–such as it is:
it won’t bloat them. Two hundred and fifty years later–pay attention
now–a mechanic’s wages will be–mind you, this is law, not
guesswork; a mechanic’s wages will then be _twenty_ cents a day!”
There was a general gasp of awed astonishment, Dickon the mason
murmured, with raised eyes and hands:
“More than three weeks’ pay for one day’s work!”
“Riches!–of a truth, yes, riches!” muttered Marco, his breath
coming quick and short, with excitement.
“Wages will keep on rising, little by little, little by little,
as steadily as a tree grows, and at the end of three hundred and
forty years more there’ll be at least _one_ country where the
mechanic’s average wage will be _two hundred_ cents a day!”
It knocked them absolutely dumb! Not a man of them could get
his breath for upwards of two minutes. Then the coal-burner
said prayerfully:
“Might I but live to see it!”
“It is the income of an earl!” said Smug.
“An earl, say ye?” said Dowley; “ye could say more than that and
speak no lie; there’s no earl in the realm of Bagdemagus that hath
an income like to that. Income of an earl–mf! it’s the income
of an angel!”
“Now, then, that is what is going to happen as regards wages.
In that remote day, that man will earn, with _one_ week’s work,
that bill of goods which it takes you upwards of _fifty_ weeks to
earn now. Some other pretty surprising things are going to happen,
too. Brother Dowley, who is it that determines, every spring,
what the particular wage of each kind of mechanic, laborer, and
servant shall be for that year?”
“Sometimes the courts, sometimes the town council; but most of all,
the magistrate. Ye may say, in general terms, it is the magistrate
that fixes the wages.”
“Doesn’t ask any of those poor devils to _help_ him fix their wages
for them, does he?”
“Hm! That _were_ an idea! The master that’s to pay him the money
is the one that’s rightly concerned in that matter, ye will notice.”
“Yes–but I thought the other man might have some little trifle
at stake in it, too; and even his wife and children, poor creatures.
The masters are these: nobles, rich men, the prosperous generally.
These few, who do no work, determine what pay the vast hive shall
have who _do_ work. You see? They’re a ‘combine’–a trade union,
to coin a new phrase–who band themselves together to force their
lowly brother to take what they choose to give. Thirteen hundred
years hence–so says the unwritten law–the ‘combine’ will be the
other way, and then how these fine people’s posterity will fume
and fret and grit their teeth over the insolent tyranny of trade
unions! Yes, indeed! the magistrate will tranquilly arrange the
wages from now clear away down into the nineteenth century; and
then all of a sudden the wage-earner will consider that a couple
of thousand years or so is enough of this one-sided sort of thing;
and he will rise up and take a hand in fixing his wages himself.
Ah, he will have a long and bitter account of wrong and humiliation
to settle.”
“Do ye believe–”
“That he actually will help to fix his own wages? Yes, indeed.
And he will be strong and able, then.”
“Brave times, brave times, of a truth!” sneered the prosperous smith.
“Oh,–and there’s another detail. In that day, a master may hire
a man for only just one day, or one week, or one month at a time,
if he wants to.”
“What?”
“It’s true. Moreover, a magistrate won’t be able to force a man
to work for a master a whole year on a stretch whether the man
wants to or not.”
“Will there be _no_ law or sense in that day?”
“Both of them, Dowley. In that day a man will be his own property,
not the property of magistrate and master. And he can leave town
whenever he wants to, if the wages don’t suit him!–and they can’t
put him in the pillory for it.”
“Perdition catch such an age!” shouted Dowley, in strong indignation.
“An age of dogs, an age barren of reverence for superiors and
respect for authority! The pillory–”
“Oh, wait, brother; say no good word for that institution. I think
the pillory ought to be abolished.”
“A most strange idea. Why?”
“Well, I’ll tell you why. Is a man ever put in the pillory for
a capital crime?”
“No.”
“Is it right to condemn a man to a slight punishment for a small
offense and then kill him?”
There was no answer. I had scored my first point! For the first
time, the smith wasn’t up and ready. The company noticed it.
Good effect.
“You don’t answer, brother. You were about to glorify the pillory
a while ago, and shed some pity on a future age that isn’t going
to use it. I think the pillory ought to be abolished. What
usually happens when a poor fellow is put in the pillory for some
little offense that didn’t amount to anything in the world? The
mob try to have some fun with him, don’t they?”
“Yes.”
“They begin by clodding him; and they laugh themselves to pieces
to see him try to dodge one clod and get hit with another?”
“Yes.”
“Then they throw dead cats at him, don’t they?”
“Yes.”
“Well, then, suppose he has a few personal enemies in that mob
and here and there a man or a woman with a secret grudge against
him–and suppose especially that he is unpopular in the community,
for his pride, or his prosperity, or one thing or another–stones
and bricks take the place of clods and cats presently, don’t they?”
“There is no doubt of it.”
“As a rule he is crippled for life, isn’t he?–jaws broken, teeth
smashed out?–or legs mutilated, gangrened, presently cut off?
–or an eye knocked out, maybe both eyes?”
“It is true, God knoweth it.”
“And if he is unpopular he can depend on _dying_, right there in
the stocks, can’t he?”
“He surely can! One may not deny it.”
“I take it none of _you_ are unpopular–by reason of pride or
insolence, or conspicuous prosperity, or any of those things that
excite envy and malice among the base scum of a village? _You_
wouldn’t think it much of a risk to take a chance in the stocks?”
Dowley winced, visibly. I judged he was hit. But he didn’t betray
it by any spoken word. As for the others, they spoke out plainly,
and with strong feeling. They said they had seen enough of the
stocks to know what a man’s chance in them was, and they would
never consent to enter them if they could compromise on a quick
death by hanging.
“Well, to change the subject–for I think I’ve established my
point that the stocks ought to be abolished. I think some of our
laws are pretty unfair. For instance, if I do a thing which ought
to deliver me to the stocks, and you know I did it and yet keep
still and don’t report me, _you_ will get the stocks if anybody
informs on you.”
“Ah, but that would serve you but right,” said Dowley, “for you
_must_ inform. So saith the law.”
The others coincided.
“Well, all right, let it go, since you vote me down. But there’s
one thing which certainly isn’t fair. The magistrate fixes a
mechanic’s wage at one cent a day, for instance. The law says that
if any master shall venture, even under utmost press of business,
to pay anything _over_ that cent a day, even for a single day, he
shall be both fined and pilloried for it; and whoever knows he did
it and doesn’t inform, they also shall be fined and pilloried. Now
it seems to me unfair, Dowley, and a deadly peril to all of us,
that because you thoughtlessly confessed, a while ago, that within
a week you have paid a cent and fifteen mil–”
Oh, I tell _you_ it was a smasher! You ought to have seen them to
go to pieces, the whole gang. I had just slipped up on poor
smiling and complacent Dowley so nice and easy and softly, that
he never suspected anything was going to happen till the blow
came crashing down and knocked him all to rags.
A fine effect. In fact, as fine as any I ever produced, with so
little time to work it up in.
But I saw in a moment that I had overdone the thing a little.
I was expecting to scare them, but I wasn’t expecting to scare
them to death. They were mighty near it, though. You see they
had been a whole lifetime learning to appreciate the pillory; and
to have that thing staring them in the face, and every one of them
distinctly at the mercy of me, a stranger, if I chose to go and
report–well, it was awful, and they couldn’t seem to recover
from the shock, they couldn’t seem to pull themselves together.
Pale, shaky, dumb, pitiful? Why, they weren’t any better than
so many dead men. It was very uncomfortable. Of course, I thought
they would appeal to me to keep mum, and then we would shake hands,
and take a drink all round, and laugh it off, and there an end.
But no; you see I was an unknown person, among a cruelly oppressed
and suspicious people, a people always accustomed to having advantage
taken of their helplessness, and never expecting just or kind
treatment from any but their own families and very closest intimates.
Appeal to _me_ to be gentle, to be fair, to be generous? Of course,
they wanted to, but they couldn’t dare.
115 paulie // Mar 20, 2013 at 10:24 am
I’ve been saying for years that the official LP literature is out of date and needs to be updated more frequently. A lot of it does not look good either.
Same here!
116 Nicholas Sarwark // Mar 20, 2013 at 10:26 am
Getting people to pay dues is getting their information for further contact for fundraising and outreach. That barrier to entry should be as small as possible. At present, dues bring in about $300K of a $1M annual budget. Every $5 increase would get the LNC about $60K more in annual budget, assuming no loss in membership from the price increase. Increasing dues without establishing a track record of action is suicidal for the LP.
Andy/Paulie: I understand inflation, but the fact remains that the LP provides far less in terms of outreach (LP News, current literature) or political action than it did when I joined in 1999. If what you get for your dues has dropped, then an automatic increase in dues to keep up with inflation is not a good idea.
Buy the building, fix ballot access laws in a couple of states, rebuild some affiliates, improve the literature, and stop the infighting on the LNC. Then raise the dues.
117 paulie // Mar 20, 2013 at 10:26 am
I think that if a fund raising letter and a video explaining how the dues were set a long time ago, and how the inflationary policies of the Federal Reserve System have eroded the purchasing power of the US dollar since then, thus making it more difficult for the Libertarian Party to function, much less get ahead, so therefore to make up for this the dues need to be reset at rates which are adjusted for inflation, that most party members will understand and will stay on as dues paying members, and even for those who do not stay on as party members because of this, I think that some of them will return to the party down the road, especially if they see some signs of increased success.
I would consider offering a special discounted rate to apply only to students to encourage more young people (or even older people who are going back to school) to join the party.
All good ideas.
118 paulie // Mar 20, 2013 at 5:05 pm
So why did zero dues fail? Or do you think it worked well?
One penny? Or zero?
That’s pretty substantial. Another 200 or 300 k would be a pretty big deal. Since that would allow us to do more, I think it would soon mean a lot more than that.
I’d like to establish a track record of action. It’s a bit of a chicken and egg problem as far as money goes. I’m open to other ideas that I can present to LNC to make our track record of action better. Please review the LNC discussion archives so you have some idea of what we are up against.
I agree. I would like some help in making the arguments on the LNC to change that.
Lack of money seems to be the excuse for not trying a lot of things, and I have to admit that I don’t have an answer, other than better crowd funding … but we need to flesh out exactly how it will be done.
If you can help me write and argue for a proposal that gets through the committee, I would certainly appreciate it.
Fundraising is kicking off.
That will the major focus of the new ballot access committee.
Several of us are working on that.
I’m looking for concrete proposals on the best way to do that. As with many other things, lack of money is one of the biggest excuses.
As far as I know there has been infighting on each and every LNC since the beginning of time. There’s infighting on the RNC, DNC and every past iteration of those committees. There’s infighting on every party committee I have ever heard of. If you could tell me how to avoid infighting on a committee of 20+ people who are elected by LP delegates, regions, and LNC members when vacancies arise, I’d love to know!
I don’t think we are worse than past LNCs when it comes to infighting, although this is the first one I have actually been on, I’ve observed the last 3 pretty closely and have heard stories going back further.
I agree all those things need to be done. Our only disagreement is that you believe raising dues can and must happen last.
119 Nicholas Sarwark // Mar 23, 2013 at 2:24 pm
Because nobody at National had a plan for how to make it work. It works fine here in Colorado and by most accounts in Oregon, both states where no dues are required for party membership.
Dues should be high enough to make the decision to join a real one and imply some value, so not a tiny amount. After that, they should offset most, if not all, of the fixed cost of member servicing.
To get those numbers, you would need dues to be between $40 and $50 per year AND not lose any members. That’s unrealistic.
I’ve read all the archives to date. My suggestions were based on that as well as what I think are good ideas.
All LNCs have infighting at some level. Be more like Arvin and focus on concrete proposals for action and don’t engage with any of the non-action-related discussions. That goes double for anything with personal attacks. That’s my solution.
If the LNC doesn’t re-establish the trust of party members, they will balk in large numbers at any dues increase. You (and the rest of the LNC) are welcome to do the experiment to confirm (or reject) my hypothesis, but it seems like a bad idea to me.
120 George Phillies // Mar 23, 2013 at 2:55 pm
I will somewhat disagree. Infighting on the LNC on a large scale is relatively recent. Before then (later 90′s, early 2000s) one side or the other was totally outnumbered and would have one or two people at most on the committee. Before then is yet another question.
121 paulie // Mar 23, 2013 at 9:00 pm
I didn’t pay close attention to LNC til 2006/7, but you may be right. I’ve heard second hand of infighting before that.
122 paulie // Mar 23, 2013 at 9:02 pm
I don’t think that model would work for national.
At least, I know for sure what happened when it was tried. About a third of the ten membership stopped paying any money to national at all, and never came back when the dues were reinstated. The number of free members and non-member donors didn’t rise either.
123 paulie // Mar 23, 2013 at 9:03 pm
I’m not sure they do anymore. In fact I’m pretty sure national loses money on members who only pay minimal sustaining dues.
124 paulie // Mar 23, 2013 at 9:07 pm
If we lost one third of the members with dues being doubled, we’d still bring in more money off dues. If we lost half, we would break even. That’s aside from additional gifts. It’s possible we would lose money overall, but I don’t think that is what would happen. I also think we would gain back more than enough members to make up for any that we lose once we start using the money to provide more and better members services. But that’s obviously debatable, so I understand why you don’t agree with me.
125 paulie // Mar 23, 2013 at 9:11 pm
That’s what I’m trying to do, but without much success. I’d like to turn my ideas into action items. Help with motion language, or anything else than can be done to navigate the rules and bureaucracy, would be more than welcome.
126 paulie // Mar 23, 2013 at 9:13 pm
Actually you on the bylaws committee have more of a say on it than us on the LNC right now, since it is now apparently in the bylaws and out of the hands of the LNC. Either way it will be up to the convention delegates, not any committee.
127 Chuck Moulton // Mar 23, 2013 at 11:07 pm
When we went to zero dues the treasurer (who presented the proposal) cooked the books. It was presented to the LNC as $x is membership revenue, $y is contribution revenue, $z is membership servicing cost, so switch to zero dues (contribution only) tobsave money. The reality was a lot of the $y in contribution revenue was additional contributions from people filling out membership forms. With zero dues we lost not only the $x membership revenue, but also a lot of the $y contribution revenue.
People like being able to say they are card carrying members of the Libertarian Party. They are willing to pay extra money beyond contributions for that privilege. Having card carrying members both helps with outreach and generates revenue. In my opinion membership is valuable and ought to be retained.
If dues are raised, they shouldn’t be doubled. Dues should be raised gradually (e.g., $5/year) until they hit a new target. However, I think dues are really fine as is… we should be trying to double our membership, double our volunteer base, double our candidates. Revenue is a lagging indicator of success, not a leading indicator.
I’m very impressed with the growth I see on Facebook and the volunteer organizing Arvin has been doing. Keep the LNC busy so they don’t meddle with it and the LP will grow by leaps and bounds. Revenue will follow in a few years.
128 Michael H. Wilson // Mar 23, 2013 at 11:40 pm
I have felt that dues were a crutch. I think the LP needs to get serious about raising funds and from what I see it has not been for some years. Give me a reason to contribute and I might just do so.
Leave a Comment