Rethinking Government: Why We Need Library Rental Fees

The Atlantic:

As a municipal official (selectman) and taxpayer, I often wonder why government evenly distributes taxes when there are clearly ways to lower the burden across the general tax base by charging fees for services that are used by specific groups. Take into consideration the following example:

Read the whole story: The Atlantic

Comments

[Amber Berglund]

01:51 PM on 07/24/2011

This is a bad idea.

The author of this article, maybe hasn't been to a Library in a while, because they still are a place where members of the community socialize. Weekly activities are held at Libraries across the country...I don't think he knows what he's writing about.

There should be more tax support for Libraries. Regular citizens should donate books, and volunteer, there should be greater effort to support Libraries, without placing a financial burden on the poorest and the youngest citizens in the community.

Even Ray Bradbury mentioned that the freedom and access to books in the public library allowed him to develop his writing talents.

Here's an idea...why not cut the defense budget, end the war(s) and invest American Tax Payer dollars in the Public Library system.

[Naie]

08:07 AM on 07/24/2011

Yes, we should charge parents borrowing stacks of picture books to read to their children $.50 per book. Brilliant idea. Way to limit burgeoning young readers by making them pay for the privilege of reading. Isn't our country behind on literacy enough as it is?

[Joe Padilla]

03:06 AM on 07/24/2011

As a municipal official, you probably make 40% more than your private sector counterparts.

Zip it.

Books at the library should be free.

[proggirl]

12:23 AM on 07/24/2011

As an addendum to my last post, when MN passed its revenue bill for the new Twins stadium, there was a clause stipulating that part of the taxes collected by the stadium be used to keep libraries open longer.
Note the baseballs in the hours chart here. Every baseball symbol is a library that continues to benefit from this.
http://www.hclib.org/pub/info/locations.cfm
I'm not a big baseball fan, but you guys can have your stadium if I can have my library.

[proggirl]

12:19 AM on 07/24/2011

The article is woefully out of touch. This has been going on here in Minneapolis (only with bestsellers) for years now.
http://www.bloomingtonlibrary.org/find/books_&_reading/readers_corner/rental_books/
Other books remain free to check out, and the long waiting lists for the latest blockbusters are largely gone. As a result, more people are reading books not on the current bestseller lists, and expanding their horizons a tad.
I think the mistake is in seeing it as an either/or, when a measured approach could benefit all.

[blacksmithn]

07:57 PM on 07/23/2011

Yes, by all means, let's restrict access to knowledge to only those who can afford to pay for it. After all, that concept has worked so well for us with health care.

[madcityy]

11:35 AM on 07/23/2011

no feessssssssssssssssssssssss to read bookkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkssssssssssssssss

that w/b so anti human in the usaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa..................

all cant afford to buy books.........................now more than ever,,we need to read books and leave the computers,etcccccccccccccccccccc.............

[Cael]

12:25 AM on 07/23/2011

Education is one of, if not the most important things, we can give our children. Much of that comes from books. If we have to spend money to help educate people then that money is well spent.

The amount of money we spend after the fact to fight literacy and issues involving ignorance is exponentially larger then what we would pay upfront to properly educate society.

Maybe we should start being a society that focuses on prevention and not pouring money on putting out fires after the fact.

[birdinanest]

11:22 PM on 07/22/2011

As a librarian in a public library, I think this is a very bad idea. As mentioned in other posts, why set up barriers to access information and knowledge? We welcome all to the library, regardless of their financial status.

[Joel Mendez]

09:18 AM on 07/23/2011

"...why set up barriers to access informatio­n and knowledge?" easy: to keep poor people stupid and unable to rise above slave wage work. if conservatives can underfund public schools,and deny them access to books, they can ensure that they remain in firm control of what people think-because they'd be too stupid to know any better.

[Joe Padilla]

03:08 AM on 07/24/2011

Please be fair. This guy never said he was conservative and being a public employee has an 80% chance of being liberal.

A conservative would vote to shut the library down. A liberal would find a way to jack your money.

[Elizabeth Guerra]

12:05 PM on 07/23/2011

As a library student, I agree. But what I find scary is that there has been a robust conversation about this problem for awhile, and no real changes yet. So you have business people, conservatives, etc. putting in their two cents, and they have no real knowledge of what libraries do, what they cost, what they need... Maybe it is time for radical ideas to be considered, although not this one.

[an]

07:47 PM on 07/22/2011

the point of a public library system is to promote free knowledge.

[Joel Mendez]

09:19 AM on 07/23/2011

which is something many in this country- particularly conservatives-don't want to happen. it's really the same concept behind tripe like 'abstinence only' programs. keeping people stupid is the only sure way to control them. ask Aldous Huxley.

[signgrrl]

11:05 PM on 07/25/2011

it's also the guiding principle behind No Child Left Behind.

[GraceNotes]

05:16 PM on 07/22/2011

According to my boss, (the library director) fines and fees account for about 5% of our operating budget. Nominal fees for lending books or computer use would bump that up to about 10%. There are a few dozen subscription libraries in the United States, compared to more than 16,000 free public libraries. The market model does not work for us.

[ChrisR]

02:27 PM on 07/22/2011

There should be NO fees for older books/paperbacks or resource material (or VHS rentals and LPs - yes they still be there :o).

I see no problem with fees for brand new hardcover novels, dvds or even excessive time on the library web (or if they're accessing entertainment sites rather than research/news sites - or if they cleared their viewing history without permission - though there's other ways to get that info).

I also see no problem charging fees for those who ruin the physical object beyond normal wear and tear.

As far as replacing libraries with the web:
A clay tablet from 4000 years ago can still be read. Good luck playing an 8-track from 40 years ago. Be very very careful what you store your media on before throwing away the original material, as folks think the web can replace a library - and they're shutting down the libraries.
Physical books are the best.

Fun fact: bands who recorded digitally 20 years ago have learned they are now unable to remaster that old music, as the old apps used then for, say, drum sounds, no longer exist: they literally need to add new drums.

Technology is great, but stupid.

[msblynne]

12:45 PM on 07/22/2011

Bad idea, anything that puts barriers between people and knowledge in this context is a bad thing. Get revenues elsewhere. Access to books can change a person's life, his or her perspective on higher education, to a fundamental understanding of how and why things work. Rich people generally don't go to libraries, the people who do often have no other options. Find somewhere else to get the money, free access to knowledge should be sacrosanct for what it does for us as a nation of thinkers and learners long term.

[Vikingdave]

01:21 PM on 07/22/2011

Morning Natasha. Could not agree more. Just think If all those Bagger ditto-heads low info voters spent more time at the library. Well, the result could be cataclysmic.

[msblynne]

02:07 PM on 07/22/2011

VD my friend! Long time, no hear. Hope that you are withstanding this brutal heatwave. Can't wait till Sunday when things get a little better. Take care, my wise friend.

[rockyoumonkeys]

12:43 PM on 07/22/2011

I wouldn't be opposed to library fees if I didn't think the government would use it as an excuse to just stop giving money to public libraries. If the fees were supplemental, and either went to the town or to improve the library, as opposed to simply keeping the library functional, I'd be happy to pay (and I don't even use the library.)

[Wookiee1972]

12:37 PM on 07/22/2011

This nearly made me physically ill.

Libraries are the last place where information is free - both in the monetary sense and in the sense that anyone can access anything.

50 cents a book can add up really quick when you're working on a paper and need access to several books, especially if you or your family is poor.

this is a sick, sick, sick idea.

[doglove]

01:49 AM on 07/23/2011

I take out 3 to 4 books a week. I am happy they are free and would like it to stay that way. But given the choice between losing my library or paying, I would pay. It saddens me that so many communities have lost this great resource.