Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Terrible of him to react with hostility to being called names.
Terrible of him to take the money and give it to charity.
Terrible of him to charge far less for his time than Sarah Palin, barely more than Bristol Palin, or Snookie.

What a jerk.

It's not his job to be the budgetary oversight guy. What kind of efforts do celebs go to on TV to win that kind of cash for their charities, on Top Chef Masters, or Celebrity Apprentice, or the like? Many of them probably wouldn't if they weren't also promoting themselves on national TV. Gaiman took the money, spoke at a library near his home, and donated the money.

biccat wrote:Would you spend $70 to go see Neil Gaiman speak at a public library? I wouldn't, and I doubt you would draw a crowd of 500 for that price, even in Minneapolis.

In Minneapolis? Sure, no problem. Besides being extremely liberal, it has a huge arts movement connected to its massive off-Broadway scene.

Hell, I have a couple friends working in environmental justice up there who organized speaking engagements for Van Jones that charged ~$100 per person, and they regularly drew 6-700.

Maybe Gaiman will go back to the UK and stop helping to pay Minnesota and the USA's public debt with his taxes.

Gaimen said he was paid 33K (presumably he has the bank statements). Not that thats what was initially agreed on (which is what your story commented on). I was commenting on the actual payout. Please read what I was actually writing.

And given the tone of his response, he comes out as looking like kind of a jerk. Not GRRM level jerkiness, but definitely a jerk.

I don't think he sounds too bad. Dean sounds like a simpering childish gakker. Gaimen just mocked him. He took the money and then immediately gave it to charity so you're not going to be able to push much of a greed angle there.

I would say personally NG has done more for me than any politician! I think the speaking fee was high, but it's what was offered to him! What is he supposed to do? There are far less deserving people getting paid far more for speaking appearances. I can think of a few Republican politicians that have been paid far more and were worth far less!

Snookie got 35k from Rutgers

It was 32k actually

asimo77 wrote:

Snookie got 35k from Rutgers

It was 32k actually

Presumably Rutgers got a new strain of herpes in exchange.

Except snookie got the new strain... Slutgers has a reputation

Hurm, frgsinwntr I see your location is stated to be NJ...You wouldn't happen to be a Rutgers (New Brunswick) student too would you?

As for the Slutgers thing, I remember they had a whole section of an orientation meeting revolving around that reputation. I think they identified a new strain of something or other at the labs here, of course everyone misinterpreted that as we had created our own unique disease. Honestly as a commuter I don't really care, I'm just here for the philosophy department.

Ok that was alot of OT rambling, mea culpa.

Matt Dean.....Born 1966
Ely, Minnesota

there's yer problem right there. Ely.

Given $33,600 is almost exactly 75% of $45,000, and 25% agent's fee is common place, then it's almost certainly the case that Gaiman's figure was what he received after commission.

Whether he was paid $33,600 or $45,000, it's a lot of money. Not that that's Gaiman's fault, he takes what he's offered, and he even gave it all to charity (including back to charities for libraries, so...) Would any of you refuse to take the money, and if you did take it, would you give it to charity?

But there isn't much to defend spending $45,000 for a guy to come and speak at a venue that only holds 500 people. They were willing to pay so much because they were operating on a use it or lose program. Which isn't so much the library's fault, they were just responding the system they've been presented with, the problem is that Minnesota is still operating with a use it or lose it system that just about every government realised was ridiculous in the late 80s and early 90s.

Identifying those kinds of issues, and reforming budgeting processes to drive efficiencies are the kinds of things that useful, productive ministers of government do. If Dean had recognised this problem, and talked about needing to drive budget efficiencies by modernising the way the state allocates funding and sets priorities.

The problem is that isn't what Dean has done. Instead he just launched some random attack on Neil Gaiman and then apologised to because his mother told him off. And having a politician come out and make such a stupid claim, then apologise because his mother told him off is funny, but it's also a big symptom about the problem in US politics. Dean just came out with the same old useless patter of the oh-so-angry right wing, here is a person who got too much money off of taxpayers, let us all hate him, grrrr, how we hate him so.

It's utterly useless in terms of actually controlling deficits, but seems to be enough for deficit hawks. And that's a problem.

Heck in my local school district they have speakers come in at the first of the year and talk to all the teachers and staff. They do a few ours of speaking and motivational type stuff. They usually get paid a lot more than what Gaiman got. Heck one guy got about $100,000 last year for a few hours. I would have much rather had Gaiman talking about Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles for the same amount of time.