[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Membership] Re: Fees/contributions

A 13:34 07/02/99 -0500, Michael Sondow a écrit :
>[The $1 contribution] is a minimum. Those who can pay more are expected
to. >Those who can't,
>and they will be many (there are many people living in underdeveloped
>regions), will be able to join regardless.
>[The cost-per-member of] will be compensated by the many from developed 
>regions who can and will
>pay more. Your argument simply denies membership to those who can't pay
>more. This is not right.

Please, no "rights" and "wrongs". Most proponents of higher fees (or higher
minimum contributions) support different levels for developped/developping
countries. In my message, I made it explicit that I thought a minimum of
$1was too low **in relation to US/Europe's standard of living**. 

>Those who would commit fraud would not balk at paying more. You accomplish
>the reverse by raising the minimum: honest individuals who need to join in
>order to protect their rights, but who haven't large financial resources,
>wouldn't be able to do so, while individuals and organizations intending to
>capture undeserved portions of the membership, who will have the resources,
>will be able to pay.

Well, it all depends on which minimum you're talking about. $35 (to take
ISOC's non-student, non-developping country minimum) is pretty low for one
interested American or an European; however, it makes it too costly for one
company to buy 100,000 votes - considering that besides paying the fees,
you need to convince the person to give you his/her vote too.

>If people are expected to pay what they can afford, there doesn't need to be
>a minimum, or not a high one. It's right that those who benefit most
>financialy from the Internet support those who don't.

OK, but what is to tell you it will happen with your system? Sliding
scales, or  a fee structure depending on who you are and where you live, is
much more likely to achieve some redistribution of resources (provided it's
an objective, which I'm not sure about). After all, the tax system is
usually progressive, because those who benefit most financially from the
Economy don't spontaneously seem to support those who don't.


** Les eLectrophées  -  trophées du commerce électronique  -  19/3/99
** http://www.finances.gouv.fr/mission_commerce_electronique/trophees
Daniel Kaplan                            Consultant
dkaplan@terra-nova.fr        http://www.dkaplan.net
5, rue de la Véga    -   75012 Paris    -    France
Tel +33 (0)1 5333 8881       Fax +33 (0)1 5333 8882