“Amazon Should Replace Local Libraries to Save Taxpayers Money”

RMCO said:
In the world of Wikipedia and the ease at which digital information can be altered, libraries serve a very valuable role as archives of our printed history. I've got no issue with maintaining that tax burden on myself.
Click to expand...

Liberals would love if they could completely control and ban books they don't agree with. Change definitions of words when it suits them. The list goes on and on. Libraries are a liberals worst enemy.
 
rudy said:
First the fact your wife takes your kids doesn't refute my point, might even mean that your mom took you as a kid and only further it. Ultimately you are the one here posting and defending the library exactly as you are programmed from childhood to do. I know its a really hard pill to swallow to think we might actually not be making the best decision and instead just running with our emotions.

Now lets talk about virtue signaling, library proponents often make the argument that the library provides much needed access to reading material to the underprivileged. But ultimately its still just a selfish endeavor that is empty in real value. Just like public transportation and many other virtue signaled ideals that actually serve the opposite purpose in practice. First you admit yourself that you heavily use the library, there fore it is in your best interest to convince others to continue funding it in its current state and possibly expand it. This is a purely selfish motive, however you make the argument that it serves the underprivileged. Underprivileged people have lots of problem, largely they cant get ahead in life because they lack resources to make themselves more efficient, it becomes a feedback mechanism the rich get richer the poor get poorer. What is the most valuable resource every human has? Answer is time. Asking people whom are poor and have to waste hours of time getting on inefficient bus systems, walking in the rain and snow, and all the other inefficiencies was fine when that was the only option, but its not now. We can deliver all the reading material electronically directly to these people where ever they are and eliminate all the inefficiency associated with traveling to the library, organizing the physical media in the library and running the library. This in turn gives those underprivileged people more time to invest in themselves, or the people they care about and waste less of their time traveling to and from an arbitrary point.
Click to expand...

I’m sorry I said anything, to be quite honest you come off a bit unnerving.
 
rudy said:
First the fact your wife takes your kids doesn't refute my point, might even mean that your mom took you as a kid and only further it. Ultimately you are the one here posting and defending the library exactly as you are programmed from childhood to do. I know its a really hard pill to swallow to think we might actually not be making the best decision and instead just running with our emotions.

Now lets talk about virtue signaling, library proponents often make the argument that the library provides much needed access to reading material to the underprivileged. But ultimately its still just a selfish endeavor that is empty in real value. Just like public transportation and many other virtue signaled ideals that actually serve the opposite purpose in practice. First you admit yourself that you heavily use the library, there fore it is in your best interest to convince others to continue funding it in its current state and possibly expand it. This is a purely selfish motive, however you make the argument that it serves the underprivileged. Underprivileged people have lots of problem, largely they cant get ahead in life because they lack resources to make themselves more efficient, it becomes a feedback mechanism the rich get richer the poor get poorer. What is the most valuable resource every human has? Answer is time. Asking people whom are poor and have to waste hours of time getting on inefficient bus systems, walking in the rain and snow, and all the other inefficiencies was fine when that was the only option, but its not now. We can deliver all the reading material electronically directly to these people where ever they are and eliminate all the inefficiency associated with traveling to the library, organizing the physical media in the library and running the library. This in turn gives those underprivileged people more time to invest in themselves, or the people they care about and waste less of their time traveling to and from an arbitrary point.
Click to expand...

Rich get richer and poor get poorer...I would buy that (and do to an extent for sure) if I hadn’t met all my wealthy friends who came here with nothing.
 
"Have prisons maintain local libraries, CHEAP labor."

"Why are the pages in this Kama Sutra book all glued togeth... shit..."
 
tetris42 said:
I'd say you're right and you're wrong. Everything you said about the efficiency I would argue is correct, however, in order to eliminate that, you need other levels of support in the first place. In this very thread, people were commenting how many homeless were in the library as it is. Your scenario only works if people also have a home, internet access, electricity, and a computer. We're sure as hell not solving homelessness, there are far, far more empty homes than there are homeless. And the majority are not people who choose to be that way, what's staggering is about 25% of the homeless are employed.

So it's not that you're wrong in concept, it's more like you're talking about the last step without having the foundation to build it on.
Click to expand...

What part of the foundation are we missing? How about applying the library money and resources to solve that instead.
 
Teenyman45 said:
I started cringing when I first heard of school teachers and university professor begin accepting sources linked to wiki.

It's not just how easily things can be changed, many people still don't seem to understand just how often material "on the internet" lacks a certain degree of credibility when it comes to information and definitional sources. I still groan when telling an attorney that quoting without irony or sarcasm from "the" urban dictionary.com for a court filing was in no way a good idea. Why "the" urban dictionary, because this person also still refers to the generic source for internet searching as "the google" such as "I'm going to go to the google.com to look something up on the internet."
Click to expand...

Many people also don't realize that something being in print doesn't make it credible. There are various subjects where I have studied them and I am astonished at how many written works are simply full of misinformation. Simply putting something in print doesn't make it any more reliable then writing it on an internet forum. What matters is if someone is actually verifying information. And the only place you really see much of that is in carefully peer reviewed scientific articles. The other thing you have to understand is that even though things on the internet can be manipulated at the very same time they can be easily copied, this means that some people for whatever reason are going to copy information and store it. Now lets say Amazon rewrites history by removing a comment from a book to fit their agenda but prior to that the book had sold to a hundred thousand people and of those people a very tiny fraction of them copied the book for safe keeping, or printed it to read or pass to someone or maybe just to pirate it. If that small fraction is even just 10 people someone might be able to go back and build a case that proves that text was altered, just the same as you expect out of paper. Except the huge advantage the internet has is that its not controlled all by a very small select group and information can travel fast. The advantages out weigh the disadvantages.
 
If amazon gets serious about this extremely regressive crusade of scrapping libraries I will stop doing business with them.. Libraries are one of the few treasures we have in our country that benefits our citizens.. Once libraries go all magically and wonderfully digital, book printing groups will start to majorly fuck with our ability to read books and not to mention edit them all the time.. Granted, i'm sure hitler would have loved having a system like this.. All he would have to do was hit delete and bam, all other opinions from his is gone in an instant.. We must save books and keep them available to the public at any cost.. Too many pie chart enthusiast chomping at the bit to fuck it up as is.. Now amazon? Fuck you amazon.. Your not even the cheapest supplier any more either with your damn algorithm pricing....
 
I like the library. (Love reading printed books) Plus I can go to it if I happen to lose the internet or power at home.
 
rudy said:
Many people also don't realize that something being in print doesn't make it credible. There are various subjects where I have studied them and I am astonished at how many written works are simply full of misinformation. Simply putting something in print doesn't make it any more reliable then writing it on an internet forum. What matters is if someone is actually verifying information. And the only place you really see much of that is in carefully peer reviewed scientific articles. The other thing you have to understand is that even though things on the internet can be manipulated at the very same time they can be easily copied, this means that some people for whatever reason are going to copy information and store it. Now lets say Amazon rewrites history by removing a comment from a book to fit their agenda but prior to that the book had sold to a hundred thousand people and of those people a very tiny fraction of them copied the book for safe keeping, or printed it to read or pass to someone or maybe just to pirate it. If that small fraction is even just 10 people someone might be able to go back and build a case that proves that text was altered, just the same as you expect out of paper. Except the huge advantage the internet has is that its not controlled all by a very small select group and information can travel fast. The advantages out weigh the disadvantages.
Click to expand...

Common thread I’ve seen throughtout these posts has been “most people think” “you have an internal bias you think is right” “in general people believe”

HOLY CROW. YOU are one of those people man. Unless I’m mistaken, and your IQ is in the 200+ range. You’ve taken a lot of liberties with this thread and the responses. THAT, is why I said your posts are unnerving.
 
Overblod said:
When have you last visited a library? Library these days have access to ebooks, movies, computers with internet, printers and LOTs of free events like yoga to lego workshops
Click to expand...

Buddy of mine is a "digital event manager", his wife is a digital archiver for a major library. Libraries moved into the digital age well ahead pf most other institutions and offer far more of a public service than dusty books.

My niece and nephew basically live there and the pool over the summer and my parents are often there for events. I was just at my local library for a crazy interesting author Q&A.

Getting rid of libraries would be a horrible idea.
 
nutzo said:
Don't know what state you are from, but out here in California, that's nonsense.

Worse schools in the state tend to be in inner cities, and the state spending per student tends to be much higher than the suburbs.
As for redirecting money to private schools? that's illegal.

We do have something called charter schools, which are public schools, some of which are run by private companies.
These charter schools receive less funding that the regular public schools, yet have much higher scores and graduation rates.
This is also why many of the charter schools have long waiting lists.
Yet, many of the local school districts try to shut down these charter schools because they want the students (and their funding) for themselves.

My kid started in a private school, moved to homeschool, and is now in a charter high school.
(Couldn't afford a private high school and figured it was more important to save that money for college)
Click to expand...

Charter schools are an abomination. They take money away from public schools (resulting in them getting worse), and accept only the top tier students in order to increase their prestige (cost).
 
rudy said:
What part of the foundation are we missing? How about applying the library money and resources to solve that instead.
Click to expand...
Because that's waaay farther left than our country's been since the great depression basically. It would essentially be a call to end homelessness via taxes. That would have enormous forces blocking it, not the least of which would be the real estate industry, since a measure like that would directly threaten profit margins.
 
If amazon were to have a free ebook rental program, thats fine. As of right now, they have a ten dollar a month ebook rental program that doesn't have a lot of major releases on it.

Meanwhile, your local library typically either has the major releases, or will take requests to get those releases. Cost is maybe a dollar a week in taxes. Or, and they also offer a printing service, online access, and usually multiple other hosted services throughout the year.
 
Joust said:
... than a library. Period. Literacy in both senses ....
Click to expand...

Failed argument for outright claim of opinion as fact, without supporting evidence or causality. Stopped reading almost immediately. Making a broad absolute without a basis of support isn't just boring, its lazy.
 
James Robinson said:
Failed argument for outright claim of opinion as fact, without supporting evidence or causality. Stopped reading almost immediately. Making a broad absolute without a basis of support isn't just boring, its lazy.
Click to expand...

If you can't keep up with the conversation, it's probably for the best if you stop reading.
 
rudy said:
Many people also don't realize that something being in print doesn't make it credible. There are various subjects where I have studied them and I am astonished at how many written works are simply full of misinformation. Simply putting something in print doesn't make it any more reliable then writing it on an internet forum. What matters is if someone is actually verifying information. And the only place you really see much of that is in carefully peer reviewed scientific articles. The other thing you have to understand is that even though things on the internet can be manipulated at the very same time they can be easily copied, this means that some people for whatever reason are going to copy information and store it. Now lets say Amazon rewrites history by removing a comment from a book to fit their agenda but prior to that the book had sold to a hundred thousand people and of those people a very tiny fraction of them copied the book for safe keeping, or printed it to read or pass to someone or maybe just to pirate it. If that small fraction is even just 10 people someone might be able to go back and build a case that proves that text was altered, just the same as you expect out of paper. Except the huge advantage the internet has is that its not controlled all by a very small select group and information can travel fast. The advantages out weigh the disadvantages.
Click to expand...

Sure, just pulling a random book off the shelf of a library, without knowing the credentials/biases/history of the author and publisher, is no different than pulling a random article from the internet. But generally something in the reference section of a library, copyrighted before print on demand, is deemed to have an elevated level of credibility. However, when you bring up peer review, gotta know the journal and the reviewers as there are far too many pay to publish articles.
 
First, let's get something straight, eliminating libraries will NEVER reduce your taxes. Politicians don't work that way. They'll simply find another way to spend your money on something that eventually kicks back that cash, to them.
Next, I'll bet that the folks that came up with this idea, just happen to own stock in Amazon. I wonder if they'd be interested in doing the same thing, if the replacement book stores were owned by oh, the NAACP.
 
I've noticed a lot of animosity towards Amazon stockholders. You know, it's not like one guy in a silk top hat - it's a lot of moms and pops with a mutual fund investment. You know. Everyday people.
 
tetris42 said:
Because that's waaay farther left than our country's been since the great depression basically. It would essentially be a call to end homelessness via taxes. That would have enormous forces blocking it, not the least of which would be the real estate industry, since a measure like that would directly threaten profit margins.
Click to expand...

Do we really need end homelessness to solve accessibility to information and make the core service a library offers better and more accessible? Why can't a homeless person own a very cheap phone and read on it? They can cause I see lots of them doing it now days. You can bum free wifi in many places, you can find functional phones cheap, even brand new ones, the city could do phone and tablet drives where people donate old unwanted devices. You can find free electricity in many public places. I also think homelessness is quite the red herring. I mean last time I went to my library they asked for proof of residency and an address to check out material. Doesn't sound like that is a homeless friendly policy. Or the libraries could switch over to offering all those services in a more distributed and efficient maner. How about kiosks set up all over town spread out for easy access by many. They have wifi, a touch screen interface, electricity.
 
rudy said:
I think we just should not replace libraries there comes a point where things are so ubiquitous you just need it and you can't rely on it being free and partially accessible. Towns should apply all the money that once went to libraries to improving internet speeds and accessibility. We don't need paper books anymore even the bums with no house have a smart phone and that is all you need to read an unlimited amount of informational and access almost any service you want.
Click to expand...


I disagree completely.

Libraries were never resources for the poor. They are resources for every citizen and they remain valuable even if many citizens do not see that value.

And we don't need our local governments to try and "improve" our internet speeds and access. Such things are business services and the Federal Government spends enough of our money for such things.

If some city is having their own issues then they can certainly work to fix them. So if your local city has shitty service and wants to dump it's library to improve their service, that is their choice, their money. But I don't need you trying to decide that for everyone else.
 
Overblod said:
These big corporation should be forced to be broken down, just like Bell was in the 80s... but our govt is too corrupt now to do anything about it...
Click to expand...

That indeed may become the fate of Amazon, but I don't think our government is too corrupt to do it if it needs doing. Not for an instant.
 
lcpiper said:
I disagree completely.

Libraries were never resources for the poor. They are resources for every citizen and they remain valuable even if many citizens do not see that value.

And we don't need our local governments to try and "improve" our internet speeds and access. Such things are business services and the Federal Government spends enough of our money for such things.

If some city is having their own issues then they can certainly work to fix them. So if your local city has shitty service and wants to dump it's library to improve their service, that is their choice, their money. But I don't need you trying to decide that for everyone else.
Click to expand...

Yes libraries are resources for everyone however the poor come into play and ultimately become the most important discussion point because all other factions have the resources to get what the library offers independent of the library or through electronic more efficiently. If some rich person wants a library its hard for them to convince people to foot a tax bill for it, even a middle class person but through virtue signaling you can make a hard to argue against point by using the poor as the focus of why things need to be the way they are.
I have no problem with this and think the that it is important to make resources available to the poor. However how that is done now needs to be rethought with modern technology. The answer has been obvious for a long time for the middle and upper class they have had computers and internet for a while now. More recently mobile devices have become commonplace, what is really changing is now electronic devices are so cheap and plentiful the physical library just isn't needed in many cases.
 
Good, now only those with money will have access to books and proper education, so that we can properly subjugate the rest of the populace. We can let them live in small houses on our land, and they can "repay" this kindness with their menial labor. Since they do not have any education, we can also remove their ability to vote, they wouldn't even know what they are voting about anyhow. The new Utopia... soon! /s

In seriousness, libraries are one of the few "social programs" I agree with, because they can be used by anyone (including those with no electronic devices) to try to better themselves (and requires their own effort to do so). The per taxpayer impact is pretty minimal. Of all of the things taxpayer money is used for, this is one of the last i would focus on when trying to make cuts.
Plus, where else would all of the homeless people go in order to get their porn time?
 
rudy said:
Yes libraries are resources for everyone however the poor come into play and ultimately become the most important discussion point because all other factions have the resources to get what the library offers independent of the library or through electronic more efficiently. If some rich person wants a library its hard for them to convince people to foot a tax bill for it, even a middle class person but through virtue signaling you can make a hard to argue against point by using the poor as the focus of why things need to be the way they are.
I have no problem with this and think the that it is important to make resources available to the poor. However how that is done now needs to be rethought with modern technology. The answer has been obvious for a long time for the middle and upper class they have had computers and internet for a while now. More recently mobile devices have become commonplace, what is really changing is now electronic devices are so cheap and plentiful the physical library just isn't needed in many cases.
Click to expand...


Not true at all. There are many things available through local libraries that are not necessarily available online or free of charge. Furthermore a library is it's own place that can be very conductive to research. A home on the other hand may or may not be as tranquil in comparison. Of course not all libraries are the same and neither are all home spaces. But for many people, not just the poor, public libraries are the best they have.
 
Libraries if anything need to grow. Books are becoming rare to own for individuals. (not REALLY rare yet but less and less published each year in the US.) Every major city in the US should have a library not unlike the fabled library of Alexandria.
 
if a Country goes digital only regarding books what to do if the Government decided to "burn all books" that are digital? All they need do is eliminate the battery supply. This is just one of the many reasons physical books need to stay. Another is, that digital kids have no idea what old books smell like unless they've gone to a church or old library in town. You can shove your nose into your iPad but there's few things like smelling the pages of an old book as you open it too read. Everything seems to be going more and more sterile these days except mankind's hearts :(
 
_l_ said:
if a Country goes digital only regarding books what to do if the Government decided to "burn all books" that are digital? All they need do is eliminate the battery supply. This is just one of the many reasons physical books need to stay. Another is, that digital kids have no idea what old books smell like unless they've gone to a church or old library in town. You can shove your nose into your iPad but there's few things like smelling the pages of an old book as you open it too read. Everything seems to be going more and more sterile these days except mankind's hearts :(
Click to expand...

I mean do we really need to keep bringing trees down just to produce a smell while reading? :p

I do get what you are saying though. I do think it would be easier to eliminate books that electronic versions of them. Would make for an interesting movie though (or book).
 
  • Like
Reactions: _l_
like this
lcpiper said:
Not true at all. There are many things available through local libraries that are not necessarily available online or free of charge. Furthermore a library is it's own place that can be very conductive to research. A home on the other hand may or may not be as tranquil in comparison. Of course not all libraries are the same and neither are all home spaces. But for many people, not just the poor, public libraries are the best they have.
Click to expand...

Of course not all libraries are the same. At my local library the woman at the research desk is damn good looking and has an amazing rack on her.

On a more serious note. The resources of a library can benefit all, no matter how rich or poor. If someone is doing research for a paper for school do you really think that a rich family is going to buy five or ten or twenty different books just because the books might have references for the paper? Unless that rich family wants to become poor due to really shitty purchasing decisions I don't think it's very likely. Just because someone might be rich doesn't mean they should or will spend money especially when it doesn't make any sense.
 
lcpiper said:
Not true at all. There are many things available through local libraries that are not necessarily available online or free of charge. Furthermore a library is it's own place that can be very conductive to research. A home on the other hand may or may not be as tranquil in comparison. Of course not all libraries are the same and neither are all home spaces. But for many people, not just the poor, public libraries are the best they have.
Click to expand...

What are these things and why cant they be delivered more efficiently some other way?
 
“Amazon Should Replace Local Libraries to Save Taxpayers Money”

How is buying books from Amazon saving you money? Is that like a "buy more save more" kind of economics?

Reminds me of all these TV commercials "Buy 2 get 1 free & Save!". If I only need / want 1 , buying two isn't saving me any money is it?
 
rudy said:
What are these things and why cant they be delivered more efficiently some other way?
Click to expand...

And what solution do you propose for free of charge delivery for the services a library provides? Amazon will not do it for free. They will charge.
 
meltdowner said:
Liberals would love if they could completely control and ban books they don't agree with. Change definitions of words when it suits them. The list goes on and on. Libraries are a liberals worst enemy.
Click to expand...

That's funny, literally every "banned" book ever in the US has been by conservatives... Did you think liberals don't like freedom of speech or something? Or is this just incredibly deadpan sarcasm/trolling?
 
kju1 said:
And what solution do you propose for free of charge delivery for the services a library provides? Amazon will not do it for free. They will charge.
Click to expand...

Additionally, how will you maintain non-profit driven control over Amazon's service, even if it is "free"? I don't want Amazon deciding what I can and can't read - I want my local librarian, whom I can talk to and have input over, to control what is available. If I don't like it, I can at least campaign for a different board of directors for the library, but frankly, most librarians are *thrilled* to get advice on books and media to acquire, unlike Amazon, which is limited to the books they have a contract for, and that's mostly determined by what they think they can profit off of.
 
tempertantrum said:
That's funny, literally every "banned" book ever in the US has been by conservatives... Did you think liberals don't like freedom of speech or something? Or is this just incredibly deadpan sarcasm/trolling?
Click to expand...

The liberals banned all evidence of Jade Helm and Bowling Green. Or why don't I see the proof they really affected people? /s
 
tempertantrum said:
That's funny, literally every "banned" book ever in the US has been by conservatives... Did you think liberals don't like freedom of speech or something? Or is this just incredibly deadpan sarcasm/trolling?
Click to expand...

Actually, I don't know what either of you are talking about. Can you name one book that has been banned by the US Federal Government?

Some schools and libraries have banned books. Of course we have some schools and libraries that service specific groups, like a Catholic School for instance. I don't have a real problem with it as long as it's not a Federal action and that the books aren't in some way illegal and can be found and acquired without great trouble.

Now if you find a book that I can't buy, then we can talk.

Actually, I'll go a step farther, this expose talks about all this book banning and names several titles;
https://www.mintpressnews.com/us-still-bans-suppresses-books-despite-the-forbidden-bookshelf/207064/

I'll just start from the top of the list;
https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_...+of+creation&rh=i:aps,k:the+lords+of+creation

https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias=aps&field-keywords=the+phoenix+program

https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_...palastine&rh=i:aps,k:underground+to+palastine

OK, the first three were easy enough to find all on Amazon so I'm pretty sure every one of these "banned" books will be there and available and not even expensive to buy, like $10-$15 each.
 
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top