Pathetic is the only reply I can think of for that post Dano. Just pitifully pathetic.
I promoted a great idea years ago to privatize libraries and now in Philly they are doing exactly that with some of the libraries.
Instead of having government run them off forced taxation, they will instead be funded and run privately:
"Mayor Nutter said yesterday that five of the 11 library branches once scheduled to close permanently on Thursday are instead on track to be taken over by private foundations, wealthy individuals, companies, and community development corporations."
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20...cmpid=16850266
Wow, this is great, I mean it's really not that radical an idea, many people go into Chapters and read the books there for free, then they may buy them. What's wrong with a business that rents books?
Contact your community reps and urge them to privatize libraries, helping to reduce government, the deficit and allow more freedom!
"To argue against any breach of liberty from the ill use that may be made of it, is to argue against liberty itself, since all is capable of being abused." – Lord George Lyttleton (1709-1773)
Your children's future
Total debt:
Pathetic is the only reply I can think of for that post Dano. Just pitifully pathetic.
The tiny amount of tax revenue that is used for libraries is some of the best spent money I know about.
Renting books? Knowledge is the greatest power we can possibly have, and to remove it as a free public service and degrade it to something that is only available for those who can afford it is a travesty.
The public library is one of the greatest services our government has provided its people. It has been a free service during the worst times we have known. It is where everyone can have access to the world's knowledge and literature without being charged.
Sorry, as much as I love seeing the tax burden lowered, there are some things that the government SHOULD provide.
It's probably not that tiny if they are cutting it.
I say renting books, but they might just do the same as regular libraries and charge for media and late charges, who knows, they are always better at trying to find a balance between what customers want and being in the black.
Moreover a lot of these will be run by private charity.
The bigger point is it's private now, no more state control and more economic freedom for all (a hard thing to come by in this age).
"To argue against any breach of liberty from the ill use that may be made of it, is to argue against liberty itself, since all is capable of being abused." – Lord George Lyttleton (1709-1773)
Your children's future
Total debt:
And think of all the Books they will Deem not worthy of being in the corporate Library.
And I am sure you would be all for a private charity deciding which books were suitable and which were blasphemy?
The fact that the poorest family can still gain internet access, read a great deal and learn without shelling out money is the point of a library.
Literacy is an answer to so many problems in our world. Knowledge is what we need more of, and need to spread even more, instead of restricting.
Quote from Cypress:
"Scientists don't use "averages". Maybe armchair supertools on message boards ascribe some meaning to "averages" between two random data points. And maybe clueless amatuers "draw a straight line" through two random end data points to define a "trend". Experts don't.
They use mean annual and five year means in trend analysis. Don't tell me I have to explain the difference to you. "
"To argue against any breach of liberty from the ill use that may be made of it, is to argue against liberty itself, since all is capable of being abused." – Lord George Lyttleton (1709-1773)
Your children's future
Total debt:
My experience with private entities is that they tend to stock more what people demand.
Building on my earlier point, it is quite likely that MORE people and kids will access the library as they are more interested in trying to satisfy their customers rather than follow some bureaucrat's directive of what HE thinks people want.
Less is being cut here because they are being kept alive by private interest, surely them being kept open in ANY capacity is better than them closing? (Hint: This is your test to see whether you go by stubbornness or logic).
"To argue against any breach of liberty from the ill use that may be made of it, is to argue against liberty itself, since all is capable of being abused." – Lord George Lyttleton (1709-1773)
Your children's future
Total debt:
I bet Dano believes he had something to do with this, just like he believes that when people leave or take a break from JPP, it's because he did...
That is bullshit dano... you will eliminate the poors access to the system if you start charging for it. You will also tend to get less of a selection, not a greater selection. Our library system takes requests.
If they have 500 requests for an additional copy of 'movie/book x' or one request for a copy of a movie/book they do not currently carry, they will fill the request for that which they do not currenly have. A for-profit company is going to add that which will make them the most money.
Even turning these over to charities is a bad idea. Because then you are at the mercy of what the charity deems worthy.
Quote from Cypress:
"Scientists don't use "averages". Maybe armchair supertools on message boards ascribe some meaning to "averages" between two random data points. And maybe clueless amatuers "draw a straight line" through two random end data points to define a "trend". Experts don't.
They use mean annual and five year means in trend analysis. Don't tell me I have to explain the difference to you. "
[x] Dano screws up (again)
Here is some additional info that seems to be ignored by the idea of privatizing public libraries.
http://www.publicagenda.org/files/re...ue_summary.pdf
This survey found:
"Most Americans say that if their library shut down because of lack of funding they would feel that something essential and important has been lost, affecting the whole community (78%) In contrast, just 17% said while something important was lost, it really only affects a few people in the community and only 3% said the loss would not be important."
"The American public has a clear sense of what is absolutely crucial in a local library for basic success. More than 8 in 10 Americans believe that keeping services free should be a very high priority. Having enough current books for children, enough reference materials, friendly, knowledgeable library staff, and good programs for children and teens are also considered absolute essentials for libraries."
"Faced with the prospect of local libraries in trouble, even non-users say they would raise taxes rather than cut back services or charge fees. Asked "If local libraries need additional funds to continue operation," increasing taxes to cover the necessary costs was the most popular answer (59% of library users, 47% of non-users) - ahead of "the library charging people who use it" (26% library users, 35% non-users) or "the library reducing the services that it offers" (17% library users, 23% non-users)."
They stock what people demand. So they stock what is popular and see no need to stock the books that are only checked out occasionally?? By that logic, they would have plenty of Reader's Digest and very few pieces of classic literature or reference books.
No, you are not testing whether I am going by logic or stubbornness. In order for that to be a test of those choices I would have to agree with the premise that the libraries be closed regardless of the cost. I do not. I think that the public libraries should be reopened and the politician that saw to their closing should be run out of town. And according to the study I referenced in my previous post, the majority of americans agree with me.
There is almost no service that a city or county provides that is as important as a FREE public library. There are plenty of book stores already. And plenty of second hand book stores. So, by buying a book and reselling it, you are already "renting" books. And a corporation will not stock items that run counter to its interests.
Bookmarks