by B. » Mon Feb 10, 2025 1:33 pm
I've posted about it before but Scootch and Chin covered it well.
Historically, it doesn't seem members were made for being "earners", with factors like blood/marital relation and/or participation in murder being the biggest deciding factors for membership. By the 1950s, it appears more guys were being inducted for "earning" and naturally this was controversial to some members. Take Valachi for example, who was not an "earner" or an impressive criminal or businessman in any respect before being made but was inducted for his participation in an important double murder -- it makes sense he would be flippant about what the Gambinos were doing, seeing these guys as having "bought" their buttons. But as he broke down in more detail in his Senate testimony, what was actually taking place was closer to what we would now see as "earners" being rewarded with membership simply for the financial benefits they brought to the org. They weren't literally paying a sum of money in exchange for membership, they were being rewarded with membership for business partnerships and earning ability.
I don't believe Freddy Santantonio ever commented on members "buying" membership but when he broke down the different types of members and reasons they are inducted, he said guys who were made for being earners mingled within their own element and weren't really accepted by the other types of members, something to that affect.
I've posted about it before but Scootch and Chin covered it well.
Historically, it doesn't seem members were made for being "earners", with factors like blood/marital relation and/or participation in murder being the biggest deciding factors for membership. By the 1950s, it appears more guys were being inducted for "earning" and naturally this was controversial to some members. Take Valachi for example, who was not an "earner" or an impressive criminal or businessman in any respect before being made but was inducted for his participation in an important double murder -- it makes sense he would be flippant about what the Gambinos were doing, seeing these guys as having "bought" their buttons. But as he broke down in more detail in his Senate testimony, what was actually taking place was closer to what we would now see as "earners" being rewarded with membership simply for the financial benefits they brought to the org. They weren't literally paying a sum of money in exchange for membership, they were being rewarded with membership for business partnerships and earning ability.
I don't believe Freddy Santantonio ever commented on members "buying" membership but when he broke down the different types of members and reasons they are inducted, he said guys who were made for being earners mingled within their own element and weren't really accepted by the other types of members, something to that affect.