Re: Why do you want families to pay more?

["Glenda R. Snodgrass" <grs@TheNetEffect.com>]

> families? What difference does it make to singles? I understand where
> Tereasa would be upset because her mother and her rent the same space
> and have to pay seperatly, when married people get a discount. But that
> could be solved with a group policy. Why change the family rates? Geezz,
> you guys, what do you have against families? Families have enough to pay
> out for. 

We don't have anything against families.  What do you have against
singles?  Probably nothing.  However, the current fee structure is heavily
weighted to give married adults a discount on their dues, just because
they're married.  

You say "that could be solved with a group policy" ... why, that's exactly
what we have proposed!  Were you able to read Teresa's post to RC (Monday,
I believe) which outlined our proposal in detail? We want to replace a
family membership with a group membership, that would enable adults
(whether single or married) to opt for a single copy of EN to be shared
among them, in exchange for a discount on individual membership rates --
essentially extending the existing family discount to all adults,
regardless of marital status.  Our proposal also includes discounts for
juniors, whether or not their parents are AERC members -- in fact, our
proposal creates new discounts for juniors that are not available now.  We
want to see the actual administrative costs of membership apportioned to
each adult member equally, whether married or single, or married to an
AERC member or not, and portion of that cost apportioned to juniors.  In
this way, all adults are subsidizing junior memberships to a certain
degree, but no adults are subsidizing other adults (which unfortunately is
the case now).  

We are not "against families." We ARE against a fee structure that is
inequitable, that gives a discount to certain individuals due to social
factors (marriage, blood relation) rather than based on the strict
economic value of the membership.  The analysis of the history of AERC
dues posted earlier in the week showed very clearly that the family
membership rate has not risen in proportion to the individual rate, which
is not only patently unfair to individual members (whether single or
married to someone who doesn't ride endurance), but unfair to the AERC
itself, which is trying to provide services to more members while
receiving less money per member to cover the costs of providing services.
We believe that this oversight needs to be rectified for the good of the
AERC as a whole.

Glenda & Lakota
Mobile, AL
AERC # M18819 & H27310
SE Region