var json_comments = new Array("

$\"user-pic\"$

JulesNoctambule

July 3, 2009 3:41 PM

Moderate | Flag for review

Our county is considering closing four libraries and stopping a book mobile program because of budget cuts. Given the public reaction to that idea, I can only imagine that we'd have riots in the street if they so much as considered anything along the lines of what Ohio is trying. It's too bad that such enriching community centers are often the first under the axe when money gets tight.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

shepd

July 3, 2009 3:44 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Let's see... when people need free education and entertainment the most the government is going to cut it? What?!

3 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

bohemian

July 3, 2009 9:33 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@shepd: Where I currently live has no county library system at all. The community library requires a $7 fee for a card but is just a high school library open to the public. No reference or non fiction books, minimal inventory and no inter library loan option. So it is utterly useless. I have no library.

We have a fairly large stockpile of books we own. I have just given up and go buy used copies of academic books or non fiction I need to read.

Libraries were a popular public service in the Victorian era because they brought information and education to the people in an equal fashion to everyone. Too many people either do not value knowledge or see no problem putting a class divide on it. Ironically it is the conservatives that also want to dump public education and have no problem with college not being affordable that see libraries as a waste of money.

$\"user-pic\"$

Trai_Dep

July 3, 2009 11:52 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@bohemian: Yet half the internet sheds tears when Billy Mays dies.
Sigh.

$\"user-pic\"$

Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!)

July 3, 2009 6:31 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@shepd: It's also when they cut funding for community colleges, when laid-off workers are going back to school to retrain!

","

$\"user-pic\"$

July 3, 2009 3:51 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Not technically free if you consider you pay taxes. Though free in the sense that people who draw up budgets expect them to be run for free.

You won't know how important they are until they're gone.

1 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

ShariC

July 4, 2009 10:17 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

@sir_eccles: Yes, you pay taxes for libraries, but most people pay less than $5 a year. Some areas spend less than a dollar a year on public libraries depending on the area.

The amount of money it takes to support a library from taxes is actually quite low, but the states keep cutting support anyway. Remember that this is all something decided at the state and local level. If you care, write your senator and representatives and tell them it matters to you that your tax money be directed toward libraries. Tell them it factors into your voting choices. It wouldn't take many letters to make them think twice.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

Andy Shaw

July 3, 2009 3:53 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

My comment on the petition site mentioned(awaiting moderation there):

This is a scam to get you people to agree to tax increases, just like when the local school board threatens after school programs and sports if you don't vote for their tax referendum. Hold strong and read at home for a few months, it wont last. Let them shut down government.

The real problem is entitlement spending, make them deal with it, don't send letters and petitions for your pet program, it only feeds the problem. Don't play along.

7 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

gaywolverine

July 4, 2009 7:53 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@Andy Shaw: You can't be serious in your argument. When local school boards said they needed more money for many school programs they DID cut them. There are fewer music and art programs in the schools, and some school systems don't have it at all. They also cut sports or if not, put a tax in another form called \"pay to play\". Of course, the statistics about students who have art, music, or sports tend to stay out of getting into trouble, it actually is more cost effective than having to add more police, or juvenile detention facilities to deal with youth with nothing to do.
As for libraries, in many communities it is where seniors and the poor can get computer and internet access and lessons to allow them opportunities to find better jobs and better lives.

The fact is, when you cut one thing, it hurts something else. Usually budget cuts cause an increase in the need for something else. I prefer libraries over prisons any day.

$\"user-pic\"$

TheFlamingoKing

July 7, 2009 10:57 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@gaywolverine: In the US, it's generally worse for a politician to be seen as \"soft on crime\" than \"soft on education\". Most politicians would sign a bill allocating more money for the prison system than the education system in a heartbeat.

$\"user-pic\"$

drrictus

July 6, 2009 4:18 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@gaywolverine: You apparantly don't understand Andy's thesis: more money for me, now.

(This is the same thesis Gary Busey applies to cocaine.)

$\"user-pic\"$

BytheSea

July 4, 2009 12:59 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

@Andy Shaw: Except they already have cut library budgets 50% in 2000 and again years later.

$\"user-pic\"$

July 3, 2009 5:34 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@Andy Shaw: Uh, your comment doesn't make any sense, except in a paranoid, completely anti-tax, ignorant republican kind of way. I live in Ohio. I believe our last local library tax issue around here passed when it came up for a vote. There are NO library tax increases planned for the next election (yet).

Every state in the nation is dealing with a lower amount of funding (tax money rolling in), and our elected officials decided that their bloated salaries and perks are untouchable. Never mind the fact that the State Supreme Court ruled (over 9000 times) that the school funding system in this state is illegal/unconstitutional etc. The people in office need to be held PERSONALLY and FINANCIALLY ACCOUNTABLE for their policies.

Libraries provide valuable service to everyone, regardless of income or tax liability. If you choose not to take advantage of the wealth of knowledge available to you, that's just fine, more for me. I, personally, am a voracious reader, and I can't really afford the $10,000+ it would take each and every year to buy a hard copy of the numerous things I read, as well as copies of every movie I watch that are from the library.

$\"user-pic\"$

TheFlamingoKing

July 7, 2009 10:55 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@SexCpotatoes: I think it's funny that you call his thoughts paranoid and ignorant in your first paragraph, and then basically reaffirm his point in your second paragraph.

The legislature could come up with the money to keep the libraries, correct? You mention that the tax increases pass, right? So where is the money going instead? Oh, as you say, it's going to the politicians \"bloated salaries\" and \"untouchable perks\".

As Andy Shaw stated, they take away funding from programs like libraries in order to keep funding this year's salary raise and their local pet projects. Then, they point to not enough tax money as the reason why they had to cancel services the citizens feel are important for government to provide. Then they use that as an excuse to raise taxes or increase the size of government. This is not new.

I'm just tired of being \"insulted\" by being called anti-tax. That really doesn't hurt, you know. Taxation is theft, based on the assumption that the government owns you and has rights to a part of your labor by default, and can take it by force if necessary. Every chance I have to reduce that is more freedom, the cornerstone of what makes America great.

$\"user-pic\"$

July 3, 2009 5:27 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@Andy Shaw: You say \"it won't last\". But when the government takes things away it rarely, if ever, gives them back. Take, for example, the TSA. Give an inch and they take a whole beepin' mile. Can't let them take that first inch.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

July 3, 2009 3:53 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

\"About 70% of public libraries in Ohio are funded solely by this fund ...\"

I think I see the problem. Depending on one source for all funding is stupid. They should encourage partnerships with ALL ,and I mean ALL interested parties. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to see major governmental funding crises ahead (think-California in all 50 states ) when Social Security and Medicare run out of money.The grizzled old frumps are going to march to the polls and reelect whoever will make sure that they get THEIR check every month,libraries (and schools and roads and bridges) be dammned.

Shitstorm's coming. Better get ready.

6 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

gaywolverine

July 4, 2009 7:58 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@Snarkysnake: Actually California's problem stems from ONE issue. Direct democracy. They are limited in their ability to raise any taxes without a 2/3rds majority, but that law only required 50 per cent of the people to vote yes on it. The direct democracy DEMANDS many things be funded because it is in the constitution. So you cant raise taxes, and you cant cut many things, so explain how to make up for deficits? There is no way to do it. When you allow voters direct choice they make a knee jerk reaction as opposed to realizing what it will hurt in the long run

$\"user-pic\"$

July 5, 2009 5:46 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Direct democracy sucks. No argument there. But the alternative is a small group of powerful career politicians raising taxes every time they need more money to buy the votes needed to stay in office.(Which is , um , every two years) Empires are built ,taxpayers are screwed. I like the 2/3 majority thing. That means that a tax increase has to be really neded before it can beimplemented.
Now . How did we get here? Because politicians won't do whats best for more than their narrow political base. Staying in power becomes the end in itself ,instead of whats best for the greatest number of citizens.What you see going on in California right now is just the naked power politics of the productive ,taxpaying population telling the government and the freeloading leeches that they won't give any more money.Simple as that. They have this 2/3 majority trump card to play which will ensure that the leeches can't take 100% of their pay without climbing some really high hurdles. God help the electricians ,plumbers ,assembly line personnel and such if it is ever repealed.The \"rich\" can just up and move to a more tax friendly state. The aforementioned can't do that.

Supermajorities paralyze government. This is a good thing.

$\"user-pic\"$

Kogenta

July 3, 2009 6:31 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@Snarkysnake: I wonder what the other 30% of public libraries get partial funding from? I can only reasonably see that those libraries are charging membership fees to supplement their income.

$\"user-pic\"$

jayphat

July 4, 2009 12:51 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

@Kogenta: My local library charges a fee for the internet access and holds a public donation booksale every yet.

$\"user-pic\"$

Shivved

July 3, 2009 7:09 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@Kogenta: Libraries in my library district (in the Hudson Valley of NY) are financed by local taxes. They might get some money from the state, but we pay library taxes as well.

$\"user-pic\"$

July 3, 2009 6:45 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

\"I can only reasonably see that those libraries are charging membership fees to supplement their income.\"

Well ,maybe they need to . Maybe they need to become library/bookstores . Maybe they need to host functions after hours for which they are paid. Maybe they should charge a fee for high speed internet (dial up would still be free).How about naming rights to local businesses ? How about courting local philanthropists and set up a trust like a college endowment that can't be screwed with by grasping ,greedy politicians ? The point here being that any entity that is dependent on only one source of revenue is asking for trouble. I love my local library and use it extensively , but our governments (local ,state ,national) are BROKE. The pain for entities like this are just beginning. Smart stewards of this invaluable resource will see this and plan accordingly.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

PsiCop

July 3, 2009 3:54 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Given that funding cuts are coming to all government agencies, at all levels, around the country, due to falling tax revenues; and recovery is not going to be soon ... I suggest that, even if the funding is saved this year, it could be axed in the next, or the one after, etc. In other words, coercing the state of Ohio to keep funding libraries is going to be an arduous, perpetual battle, a kind of rear-guard retreat action, with no hope of any kind of final victory (which would be an iron-clad promise that libraries would be perpetually funded 100% with no cuts).

This means any campaign to maintain these funds should also be supplemented by fundraising to compensate for any loss in funding, once it comes down the pike. Time to set up a private, non-profit \"Ohio Library Benefit Fund.\" Collect charitable donations to make up for government funding losses.

The same principle applies everywhere else, and whatever government spending one holds dear. Don't merely demand that government maintain that funding level ... go out and solicit donations to make up any deficits. Depending on government to fund everyone's wishes is simply not reasonable any more. For better or worse, it's time for people to pitch in and support the things they need ... by donations, if need be.

Let's be honest about it ... if something is enough of a benefit to society that tax money should be spent on it, then doesn't it stand to reason that it could also be supported by private donations? With tax revenues collapsing, governments no longer have unlimited funds at their disposal. Something needs to fill in the gaps, and private largesse is as good as anything else.

I know, it sounds harsh ... but I'm only being realistic. If the goal is to save Ohio's libraries, following only one tactic — coercing government to maintain funding — may not prove to be enough. Multiple strategies are needed.

8 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!)

July 3, 2009 6:34 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@PsiCop: \"This means any campaign to maintain these funds should also be supplemented by fundraising to compensate for any loss in funding, once it comes down the pike.\"

The problem is that if you do this, you penalize good fundraisers by pulling their public funding. This is why there's such an incentive to spend every last time in your budget because if you didn't spend it, you didn't need it. We need some kind of system that rewards frugality and forward-thinking and development of monetary reserves, instead of punishing those organizations by cutting their funding.

$\"user-pic\"$

Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!)

July 3, 2009 6:35 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!): *every last dime

$\"user-pic\"$

TCama

July 3, 2009 5:10 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@PsiCop: if something is enough of a benefit to society that tax money should be spent on it, then doesn't it stand to reason that it could also be supported by private donations?

No no no no no. If something is enough of a benefit to society, you make it (or keep it) public, not private. Public benefit ... why not public funding? Private funding is for private benefits.

Your logic could be extended to schools ... if they really do benefit society, couldn't private funding keep them alive? Or roads ... if they really benefit society, privatize them!

That's not how privatization works. If something is a public benefit, keep control of it public.

$\"user-pic\"$

TheFlamingoKing

July 7, 2009 11:23 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@TCama: Wow, now you're starting to talk my language!

\"Your logic could be extended to schools ... if they really do benefit society, couldn't private funding keep them alive?\"

Absolutely! School choice has proven itself many times, and often, the only barrier becomes the government itself. Read up on Obama shuttering the DC voucher program, a proven private program. The only thing keeping school choice from improving education in America is political acceptance.

\"Or roads ... if they really benefit society, privatize them!\"

Absolutely! Never heard of a toll road? Why do my federal tax dollars pay for road repair in other states?

I live in a state that is increasingly privatizing roads, passing the cost in creation and upkeep off to private companies. Because of this, our state is actually not suffering the same size issue with taxes as other states, because we have more money to pay for things.

Or is this an entitlement thing, where you feel like voters in other states should be paying to fix roads you use daily and they use never?

In both cases, you just dismiss these ideas without any argument as to why it won't work. In my opinion that's a pretty uneducated assessment.

You and I have way different opinions on what the meaning of privatization. To me, just being of public benefit is not enough to burden all taxpayers with it. For one, the government must have the right to do it. For federal matters, our Constitution outlines what the government can and cannot do, and has a clear avenue to amend it if we need to. Local and state governments also have Constitutions and Charters that explain what the function of government is. We cannot have a government that is not limited in scope or function, or else we'll lose all freedom of choice to a system that chooses what's best for the majority (or just for the leaders) and makes everyone use it.

$\"user-pic\"$

PsiCop

July 3, 2009 7:57 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@TCama: That's not how privatization works. If something is a public benefit, keep control of it public.

Your logic assumes an eternal supply of endless tax revenues. Unfortunately the real world has no such thing. There is a limit to what can be collected by taxation. We are already past that limit right now. Something has to give. If it's funding for libraries, why not add in private money?

Or are you assuming there's some kind of vast, untapped, bottomless supply of tax money out there somewhere that governments ought to tap? Can you identify what that is?

$\"user-pic\"$

humphrmi

July 3, 2009 4:20 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@PsiCop: A lot of school districts already went through this years ago, which is why many school districts today either have privately funded music and band programs or none at all. And you're right, it boils down to how important that is to the local constituents (fortunately in my district, band IS important and we have a privately funded, state champion band program.)

I'm a little more worried about libraries though. I remember my own high school years and I don't think I would have gotten through them without an off-campus library.

$\"user-pic\"$

sponica

July 3, 2009 5:08 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@humphrmi: the town I grew up in had a \"Friends of the Library\" which was responsible for a lot of fundraising and ran the annual used book sale. Residents donated their old unwanted books and the library sold them on the town common.

$\"user-pic\"$

July 3, 2009 4:03 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@PsiCop: Agreed, but it has already happened in some locations. The library I work has had all but about $3k of its collection funding removed by the state (and 3k goes nowhere) and staff cuts. So they WILL do it is there is not enough of a pushback.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

catastrophegirl chooses not to fly

July 3, 2009 3:56 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

i think florida went through something similar a few months ago. i don't live there but my friend who is a librarian does and she was telling me that the petition and the repeated constant calls to the representatives worked - they got most of the funding back

","

$\"user-pic\"$

HiPwr

July 3, 2009 3:58 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Don't cut funding for anything and don't raise taxes. The money has to come from somewhere. I vote for cutting funding.

2 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

GuinevereRucker

July 3, 2009 8:51 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@HiPwr: The problem isn't a shortage of money, it's the mismanagement of what exists already.

$\"user-pic\"$

HiPwr

July 3, 2009 9:50 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@GuinevereRucker: I think it is both. They have been used to having the luxury of mismanaging the tax dollars and now that there is less of it, they need to get their shit together.

But it's not like things can change overnight. Back in the day where the revenue was free flowing, they entered into contracts with teachers, police, firemen unions that are now difficult to fund.

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

henwy

July 3, 2009 4:04 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Slash and burn it. We have too many libraries anyway. The ones around here are ghost towns.

4 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

Trai_Dep

July 3, 2009 7:33 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@henwy: Probably because people from your locality are anti-intellectual, anti-learning, let-others-do-their-thinking for-them people like yourself?
The only way you'll get out of the horrible quagmire your locality calls a life is by improving its personal capital. And libraries are a key part of that. Stats back this up: find successful, entrepreneurial, innovative areas and you'll also find busy libraries and a lush public education system fueling it.

$\"user-pic\"$

henwy

July 3, 2009 8:01 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Anti-intellectual? Ha. I'll bet dollars to donuts I have way more education than you do. If you don't have at least a PhD, don't even bother bellying up to the table and just slink away.

As for libraries, every single township has one around here. It's too much capacity for the population. I think there are around 10 public libraries within a 10 minute drive from where I am right now.

$\"user-pic\"$

Trai_Dep

July 3, 2009 9:30 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@henwy: \"Township\"...
New England? MA area? Boston perhaps?
Quite a different ecology than OH, no? If you're not mentioning how poorly your situation compares to the ones at hand, you're being deceitful. Akin to the child of Willy Wonka decrying his days filled with too much sugary goodness.
So perhaps not anti-intellectual, but hypocritical? Overly-entitled?

$\"user-pic\"$

henwy

July 4, 2009 12:40 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Strk 1, 2, nd 3. Yr flr rt s mprssv. 'm strtng t wndr f y cn mng t fnd yr wn ss wth bth hnds nd GPS. wll, hwvr, ppld yr prsvrnc n th fc f vrwhlmng gnrnc. Mst lssr mn wth ny srt slf-rflctn wld hv gvn ps bt y cntn t swng wldly. Gd fr y. ll ths yrs n th shrt bs wll srly nt b n vn.

s fr lbrrs, t's bn rprtd n mny rs tht thr hs bn xtrm ndr tlztn. Tms nd tchnlgy chng. Whl bck n th dy, th lbrry's mn cmpttn ws smn wth cmplt st f th ncylpd Brtnc t hm, thngs r qt bt dffrnt nw nd nfrmtn s fr sr t cm by. Lst tm vstd lbrry thy wr llwng ppl t brrw dvd's, dbks, nd ll bt prvdd cnvnnc str bt stll cldn't brng n th pblc. ct snds lk grt d.

S, t f crsty, wht srt f cmmnty cllg (f tht) dd y ttnd nywy?

$\"user-pic\"$

Trai_Dep

July 4, 2009 12:01 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

@henwy: OK, what locality you hail from then?
I'm wryly amused that someone that has benefited so much personally from the generosity of those passing before you (you do know that, aside from military contractors, schools are among the most subsidized of institutions existing in this country, right?) wants to pull the ladder up once you've earned your sheepskins. I'd be a pretty miserly hypocrite if I did.
I'm a beneficiary as well; unlike you, I'm grateful for those that went before me to allow the circumstances for my degrees. Same with the library system: what kind of person who's had the access to education that we have would try blocking it for everyone else? Not a very ethical person, is who...
@HiPwr: *blush* Thanks. Cali boy here, I didn't realize other places used those darned Yankee terms. :)

$\"user-pic\"$

July 3, 2009 10:49 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@henwy: All this self-aggrandizement is just so refreshing to see, I must say.

I disagree with you on the point of public libraries and take particular exception to your derogatory implications towards community colleges. You might find this shocking, but many Ohioans from varied backgrounds use these services to better themselves and are being hobbled by a lack of support. While even I can agree that reorganization is never a bad idea in areas that are under-utilizing the services, \"slash and burn\" is a wholely unreasonable tactic that will do more harm than good.

TL;DR? Please educate yourself on the specific matter at hand before spouting off, please. It makes you look silly.

$\"user-pic\"$

Trai_Dep

July 4, 2009 12:10 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

@Pink Puppet: Yup. From Franklin to Carnegie, locally supported libraries have been seen as a cornerstone of both our democracy and character. The very concept that a public could access books (then tapes, CDs, DVDs and lately, the internet) without having vast family wealth or being chosen by select clergy or kings was one of the revolutions that we brought into this world, a couple centuries ago.
It's chucklecious when people who should really know better aren't aware of the heritage our library system has, or how much of a core it formed in the philosophical birth of this nation.

$\"user-pic\"$

HiPwr

July 3, 2009 9:51 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@Trai_Dep: Michigan has townships and they are in even worse shape than Ohio.

$\"user-pic\"$

misokitty

July 3, 2009 4:33 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@henwy: That is probably due to a lack of programming and librarians who aren't doing as much as the could to get people into the library. A library isn't just about books, it is a community center as well.

$\"user-pic\"$

sponica

July 3, 2009 5:10 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@misokitty: The town I grew up in had a GREAT library....the town I moved to, a not so great library. Don't get me wrong, the library here tries its best but it is entirely too small for a town of 20-30K people. There WAS a fund set aside to build a new library or expand the old one.....but the enlightened voters decided that the money could be used for other things and raided that fund.
Perhaps this library needs a \"Friends of the Library\" like the town I grew up in.

$\"user-pic\"$

TechnoDestructo

July 3, 2009 6:57 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

They probably have them. Ohio is where most of the cataloging for US libraries is done, so this is kind of like closing mosques in Mecca.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

Anonymous

July 3, 2009 4:12 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Okay, I know you're being cute with the like-netflix-with-books thing, but really, the library has far more than books. Like access to online databases with paid content you can trust. Librarians who have masters degrees to help answer your questions, guide your information search, and help you find a book or movie. Free programs so you can learn to do things, know things, be things. Job search help. Computers free to the public. Wireless. And more.

As far as private funding: most libraries do have a Friends group and a foundation so that they can get private funding. They do partnerships (or should I say, REALLY CHEAP ADVERTISING FOR COMPANIES WHO DONATE ALMOST NOTHING FOR THE PRIVILEGE). They suck up to friends and neighbors and library patrons. Libraries are a public good. There are foundations - like the Gates Foundation - that offer grants to libraries, but they are few and far between and don't want to offer money for day to day operations like salaries or materials. They want the big splash - programs, technology, marketing.

Private funding cannot take the place of public funding. Andrew Carnegie knew this when he mandated that any town that took Carnegie funding for a library have a plan for future public funding.

Ohio has one of the best library systems in the nation. When a library says it is solely funded by the state, it doesn't mean that it has no used booksale, no donations accepted, no grants searched for. It just means that the bulk of the cost is borne by the state. You can't pay your professional librarians and provide appropriate up to date materials with the part that doesn't come from the state.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

QueenieNangified

July 3, 2009 4:12 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

its not quite 50% but its damn close. Strickland not only wants to cut funding to the library, but also to our public schools. The idiot. In the budget I have YET to hear that legislators are taking a pay cut or even a pay freeze. Yes, he says the cuts are across the board, but I have yet to see proof of that, that everything is getting a 30% cut. And he also wants to write in slot machines to bring in extra money, something we Ohioan voters have MAJORLY declined the last 3 times it was brought for us to vote on.Yes, I know times are tough. Yes, I know we need to balance the budget. And yes, our libraries here do get private funding from donations and the like. But I think he's going about it all wrong. Cutting funding to schools and libraries will cause more harm than good.

1 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

Stephmo

July 4, 2009 5:57 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

@QueenieNangified: It's basically 50% because the libraries took a 20% cut for the budget that they're operating under this year. They've already made a ton of changes and cuts to adjust so that the communities aren't as impacted by the 20% cuts (they took it out largely in staff, operating costs and only looked to cut hours where they knew they could).

They're saying 50% in the campaign because it's one cut right after another. And, frankly, if the public hears \"30%\" upfront, they might assume it can be easily absorbed since most voters probably don't realize how much cutting the library has already done.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

July 3, 2009 4:19 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

The money has to come from somewhere. Would the citizens of Ohio prefer a tax increase, cuts to public safety budgets (police, fire, etc.), cuts to schools or cuts to the library? You can't have it all. As was mentioned above, tax revenues are falling everywhere. The status quo simply can't be maintained absent cuts or tax increases. EIther Ohio needs to find other places to cut, or they need to raise taxes. Raising taxes in the current environment is a terrible idea; people already have a hard time paying their bills and buying things. If taxes go up, people will cut spending even further. When people spend less, companies make less. When companies make less, they cut/freeze salaries, cut hiring and lay people off. It's a self-perpetuating cycle. While libraries serve an important community function, they are becoming less and less \"necessary\" given the proliferation of internet access. I'd rather see them close the library, or shorten its hours, than cut police, fire or school funding. It sucks, but it's the reality we currently live in.

2 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

b.k.

July 3, 2009 6:43 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@Esquire99: \"Would the citizens of Ohio prefer a tax increase, cuts to public safety budgets (police, fire, etc.), cuts to schools or cuts to the library?\"

We don't get to prefer anything. We are already seeing cuts to police, fire, and emergency dispatch. The libraries and schools are next in line, not first. If we don't vote for an income tax increase next month, we lose even more firefighters and police officers.

$\"user-pic\"$

morlo

July 3, 2009 6:05 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@Esquire99: Look around at the money being spent in your community. You'll probably see that at 1/3 of it disappears without a trace into various unjustifiable \"projects\" and \"positions\" that are little more than fronts to cover the theft of taxpayer money. The past few years government revenue soared, and now they have to return to normal levels of funding. So they cut services first, while continuing to reward themselves and their friends.

Originally legislation was supposed to be a part time job (and is in some states). Until legislators and their many staffers are working real jobs that actually contribute to the tax base, any budget cuts will be hypocritical.

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

B*

July 3, 2009 4:23 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Yes, it's a scam to scare us into accepting higher taxes. But allowing them to cut library funding isn't the answer. My vote is for paying Ohio politicians minimum wage until the budget is fixed.

3 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

Jason Nugent

July 3, 2009 9:28 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@Beki: Agreed..I'd love to see something like that happen. For once I'd shocked/impressed if a city official somewhere would stand up and say: \"You know what, times are hard, so executive staff will be taking a collective 5% pay cut to help with budget difficulties.\"

$\"user-pic\"$

July 3, 2009 5:08 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@Beki: Taking it one step further, enact a lein on all Ohio politicians' future household earnings so they live at poverty level---until the budget is fixed.

That will prevent them from skipping town and leaving the citizens with the detritus of their poor management.

$\"user-pic\"$

henwy

July 3, 2009 8:57 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@bravohotel01: That would be great since the fix they would impose would be just to raise taxes across teh board until the budget is fixed. Then everyone 'wins' together.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

takes_so_little

July 3, 2009 4:29 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I don't care how few people take advantage of it; in a democracy, there should be as free a flow of information as possible.

4 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

panzerschreck1

July 3, 2009 5:01 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@takes_so_little:

sup internet

$\"user-pic\"$

Trai_Dep

July 4, 2009 12:14 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

@panzerschreck1: If you feel that web surfing equivalent to reading, you need to check out more books. :)

$\"user-pic\"$

sponica

July 3, 2009 5:12 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@panzerschreck1: not everyone HAS internet....and in this economic climate libraries have been doubling as job search centers. Where else is there a staff that will help you EDIT your resume FOR FREE?

$\"user-pic\"$

July 3, 2009 4:37 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@takes_so_little:
I agree, but I think as time has passed, a public library is less and less necessary to permit/foster that free flow of information.

","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

Eldritch

July 3, 2009 4:39 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I'm not religious, libraries are the closet thing to a church to me and doing this to them is sick. My MLS is gonna be USELESS in a year, huh?

Libraries are good. They have books and information, they're wonderful insitutions and to just cut their budgets so harshly is incredible. Here's an idea, why doesn't that governor take a pay cut?

2 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

July 3, 2009 4:42 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@Eldritch:
Why should the Governor/Legislators take pay cuts? They are already (generally) paid far below what they would make in the private sector. It's their job to make these kinds of decisions; why should they take a pay cut because of it?

$\"user-pic\"$

henwy

July 3, 2009 8:58 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Because god forbid esquire should eat their MLS, which I always found to be a rather useless degree overall.

$\"user-pic\"$

July 5, 2009 4:18 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

@henwy:
I don't think I've ever been this happy to see someone on Consumerist get the ban-hammer. You are a pompous, elitist, little, trolling twit; and I'm glad to see you gone.

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

P_Smith

July 3, 2009 4:53 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

How about incorporating public libraries with college and university libraries, combining funding to reduce costs? Or how about public cooperatives and volunteer groups to staff them, especially in rural areas?

I'm all for and support libraries and librarians, and tax money should fund them, and full funding should be restored if the economy improves. But if trusted volunteers can be a way to reduce staffing and operating costs in the short term, why not try it? One would think it's better to have two full time librarians and an all volunteer staff than have no library at all.

1 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

TechnoDestructo

July 3, 2009 6:00 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

They already are in some places to some extent.

The problem with that generally, though, is that their collections don't overlap very much, and their missions don't overlap very much. This is particularly important when it comes to electronic resources from private vendors, as the library could end up paying more for additional potential users who are non-users. (Depending on how integrated they are, of course).

Also, that gives them multiple masters, and when there is a disagreement between the local government and the university, the library gets caught in the middle (and it gets to take all the blame).

A community college library is a lot more similar to a public library. That could work pretty well, and in many cases the community college and the library both have the same parent organization already. (This sort of integration also occurs, BTW)

","

$\"user-pic\"$

July 3, 2009 4:55 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I bet the libertarians are absolutely ecstatic over the shuttering of this socialist institution.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

Anonymous

July 3, 2009 4:57 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

The thing is, the state budget shortfall is only 6%. Libraries are being cut by about 50% -- and this comes on the heels of eight solid years of cuts already. Governor Strickland calls it \"shared sacrifice\". But libraries -- which make up barely 1% of the annual budget -- are being asked to carry 14% of this year's budget cuts. What about that is \"shared\"?

","

$\"user-pic\"$

panzerschreck1

July 3, 2009 4:59 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

libraries are just government sponsored piracy anyways.

1 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

TechnoDestructo

July 3, 2009 6:01 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@panzerschreck1:

And yet publishers are generally pretty enthusiastic about them.

A couple of thousand extra sales...most of which would not cut into private sales, BTW...is a couple of thousand extra sales. Particularly for non-bestsellers.

","","","","","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

bdgbill

July 3, 2009 5:12 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Sometime in the last 10-15 years, the libraries in my town transformed into glorified homeless shelters. I can't imagine letting children hang around unsupervised in the public library the way I used to.

God forbid a librarian throw out a urine soaked psycho for sleeping in the liabrary. The ACLU would have her crucified in public. Even though I loved spending time in the public library when I was a kid, I wouldn't mind seeing them shut down. They have been made obsolete by the internet and made dangerous and unuseable by todays politically correct laws.

3 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

TechnoDestructo

July 3, 2009 6:08 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Some libraries keep cans of lysol around for such people.

Seriously, though, what is your solution to this problem? What criterion do you use to decide who stays and who goes? Is it hygiene? People who bathe can't be dangerous? People who don't are homeless?

Okay, I grew up in a place where a lot of people didn't have running water. The public library actually had a sign at the door asking people not to bother others about their hygiene.

The only fair criterion for ejecting someone is whether they are actually harming other people or library resources...behavior that would get them removed from any public space, including the street.

$\"user-pic\"$

Monica Harris

July 3, 2009 5:45 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@bdgbill: Some libraries have become de facto homeless centers because social service budgets have been slashed to the point where there is no where else for these people to go. Libraries are used by more people and are stretched in more more ways than many other public institutions for a very low taxpayer cost. You're not the only one noticing this change: [www.nytimes.com]

In my experience people who call libraries obsolete haven't been to a library lately.

$\"user-pic\"$

TechnoDestructo

July 3, 2009 6:03 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@Monica Harris:

Libraries aren't obsolete in the US and will not be as long as the US lacks cheap public internet access (no, free-wifi does not count).

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

Thaddeus

July 3, 2009 5:29 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

And after all that work redoing the one in Lakewood...

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

HooFoot

July 3, 2009 5:43 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@PsiCop: The state of PA is facing a similar 50 percent proposed state hudget cut, but I just can't get on board the \"contact your representatives and stop this!\" bandwagon.

My local library system made their own budget cuts a month ago and laid off some of their staff. I wasn't even aware of this until I read it last week in a Friends of the Library newsletter. I have no noticed absolutely no difference in the level service despite these drastic cuts. This leads me to believe that there is a lot of bloat and waste that needs to be trimmed. Yes it's sad that a few people lost their jobs, and I realize that nobody wants to lose a penny of funding if they can help it, but it's not as if the library completely ceased to exist.

3 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

July 4, 2009 12:48 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

@HooFoot: Go and ask the library for a copy of their budget. It should be very clear where the money is going. Generally speaking, almost all of a budget goes to:
1) Materials
2) Staff wages/benefits
3) Technology
Where libraries are generally forced to cut is in the materials and technology budget. They might move from a four year to a six year replacement program on their computers (what we had to do) and cut their materials budget (we cut all but a couple thousand).

Can you tell a difference immediately? Of course not. But after a few years of this (keeping in mind any funding cut is unlikely to ever come back), the materials are in a sad state. I hope you enjoy your Windows 98 for Dummies book, because that is the most recent one you are going to get.

$\"user-pic\"$

TechnoDestructo

July 3, 2009 6:10 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Or it could just mean that they didn't cut anything that YOU use.

$\"user-pic\"$

henwy

July 3, 2009 9:00 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@TechnoDestructo:

Which is a win.

$\"user-pic\"$

Trai_Dep

July 3, 2009 9:31 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@henwy: Doesn't scale well, does it?

","","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

bodah

July 3, 2009 6:03 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

According to [www.cincinnatilibrary.org] there is progress being made in the funding.

\"Thank You for your support
Your messages to our legislators voicing how important libraries are for our residents have been heard! Our legislators have expressed their support for libraries.

We encourage you to check the Library's website for funding updates. We believe the budget process will continue for several more weeks.

Thank you again for your wonderful support.\"

1 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

Trai_Dep

July 4, 2009 12:24 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

@bodah: That's heartening. I hope it's successful beyond measure.
As happened when some legislators tried censoring Harry Potter or Michael Moore, librarians tread softly but wear steel-toe boots. Designed by Rosa Klebb.

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

Raymond Frake

July 3, 2009 6:04 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

With this generation of kids reading less and less; closing libraries seems like the totally wrong thing to do. These are the seemingly small things that ripple through our society that don't manifest themselves till years later. As a nation we're already one of the most ignorant, now we can work on being one of those least literate, as well.

","","","","","","","","","","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

Anonymous

July 3, 2009 7:21 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

You are all missing the point. Cutting funding to libraries is a threat to our freedom of information. Sure, most information and misinformation is on the internet (for now - let's hope that we don't get China style ISP censorship going on), but shutter the doors of your local library and you cut off an arm that has a balanced and unbiased depository of data in a multitude of formats that is open to all, no matter what tax bracket you are in. What is happening in Ohio now is also on the table in Connecticut and many other states, and in each case the library opponents cry about taxes and the homeless stinking up our public buildings (the latter of which is the result of much larger social issues), but if you start closing libraries, the dominoes will start to fall hard. For those who don't use the library, your arguments are weak - it is like arguing that we shouldn't use tax money for schools because \"I don't like school.\" With the recession in full swing, there has been an increase in library usage, librarians are taking furloughs/pay cuts/hiring freezes, and are doing more with less. Best of luck to all the librarians in Ohio, but more importantly to the library patrons there who benefit greatly from the services and free access to information that the libraries provide.

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

July 3, 2009 7:49 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Every state should just eliminate funding for libraries, except for maybe one central state library where rare, fragile books are kept until they can be scanned and stored in digital format. Over the past five or so years, every book I've ever wanted to read, including old ones that are long out of print, I can find online in e-book form for free. The faster we can scan paper books into digital form, the faster libraries will become obsolete.

I know a lot of people would go ape over eliminating funding for libraries altogether, but I'm in agreement with the commenter who said that if the community really cares about something like a library, they'll support it through private donations. My tax money shouldn't go to support a service that I never use. I suppose I'm a radical on this because I have the same opinion of public education. Schools shouldn't receive a penny of public funding. They should be privately run and privately funded, with some very basic, broad rules set out by the government to ensure basic educational needs are met while still allowing a lot of variety between schools.

Yes, there are some centers of anti-intellectualism that would be glad to let libraries and schools waste away if they were given the choice, but it should be THEIR choice to make.

2 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

TechnoDestructo

July 3, 2009 8:07 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

First of all, libraries aren't just books. They also offer access to private databases, many of which you probably could not afford to access as an individual.

Second, they are the only source of internet access for many people. People who either cannot afford a computer and internet service, or who just don't happen to have a notebook with them. Even people who could afford to use an internet cafe, or (ugh) Kinkos may be out of luck if they need to get online, because many communities do not have these things. FREE WIFI ALONE DOES NOT COUNT.

Oh, and perhaps I should not pay for police services if I live in a low-crime area, or I should not pay for fire departments if I have a home sprinkler system and I tend my yard in a fire-defensible manner.

You DO use their services, BTW, whether you know it or not, because you benefit from living in a society where even the poor are relatively well-educated. (Same reason you use public schools even if you and your family never set foot in them.)

If you want to live in Libertopia, sunny Somalia awaits.

$\"user-pic\"$

July 3, 2009 8:15 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@TechnoDestructo:

If I had a need for those private databases or for internet access via the library, then I would be willing to pay a small fee for library membership. Taking money from me through taxes to provide someone else with those things, whether or not I get some vague, indirect benefit from it, is no better than stealing.

And yes, communities should have the opportunity to vote on whether services like police and fire protection are provided by their local government, by private companies, or by nobody at all. Again, it should be THEIR choice, and those who disagree are free to move to another community which better reflects their views.

$\"user-pic\"$

TechnoDestructo

July 3, 2009 8:26 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Except that when they choose local government, it's stealing.

","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

geekzapoppin

July 3, 2009 8:01 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Want to know how much Library Tax I paid this year? $.57

That's it. The most anyone pays is a few dollars. For less than a horrendous meal at McDonald's I get free books, movies, music, and programming for an entire year. People who are jobless and poor have a place to look for a job. Children have a place to come for programs that help teach them to read. The community has a place to hold meetings.

Any person who thinks that the benefits of having a Public Library outweigh the cost of a few dollars a year should be ashamed of themselves.

","","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

July 3, 2009 8:34 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I live in Ohio and feel so ashamed. I'm reminded of all the past years when I was constantly thinking \"2 billion dollars a week in Iraq.\"

","","","","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

chiieddy

July 3, 2009 9:29 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Libraries in MA are town based. I had to vote for a property tax increase in order to keep my town's library.

","","","","","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

kenposan

July 3, 2009 11:12 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I live in Ohio and the company I work for contracts with the State. We were forced to take a $2M annual budget cut to keep our contract. Given that our budget is 90% wages/benefits, we didn't have much wiggle room but we managed through good management to only cut about 5 positions.

I'll have to agree with HooFoot. Everyone needs to take their lumps and trim some fat. My local library is on the chopping block and I'd be sad to see it close, but I am sure there is fat that could be trimmed to keep it open.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

henwy

July 3, 2009 11:28 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I'm sure many Ohioans do, and many more Ohioans don't. I think I'll go with the majority on this one. If the minority is so certain that their lives would be irreparably damaged by not having a library at full funding they can choose to donate money to the library. Maybe if more of these libraries had private support, they wouldn't be so dependent upon public funds and this way, those who really value them can support them directly. And if people decide it's just not important enough, well, that's telling too.

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

xoforoct wishes he lived in chasm city

July 3, 2009 11:56 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Seeing as how I work at a library, I can truly say that this is not a good move. Libraries provide so much good to the community, why shut them down?

","","","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

henwy

July 4, 2009 12:30 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

@Trai_Dep: I have no idea WTF you're smoking but I'd pass it off to the next person in line before the gibbering gets out of control. I benefited so much from the generosity of others? Many of us pay something called taxes, spazzy. People didn't pay for my education out of the generosity of their hearts. It's funded through property taxes, which are pretty damn high around here. As for post-high school, well I paid my tuition for undergrad and I excelled enough that the schools themselves paid me for the masters and PhD. Generosity doesn't play into it. We were mutually scratching one another's backs. I got an education and they got some incredibly cheap educated labor out of it.

1 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

Trai_Dep

July 4, 2009 12:36 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

@henwy: You're simply ignorant of the economics of higher ed. The tokens you mention don't come anywhere close to the true cost of your degrees. Rather, you've been a sponge sucking up the generosity of others.
Which is fine: so have I. But at least I'm adult enough to admit it. And humane enough to be grateful for it. And broad-minded enough to admire how much our country has benefited from these efforts, of which libraries are an integral part.
So we can compare apples to apples, we're talking about Ohio here. Which system are you talking about?

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

jayphat

July 4, 2009 12:48 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

Close libraries? OK. Build expensive transit system from one of the state to the other, requiring subsidies forever after its built, ending in a city with no cab/ public transportation? HELL YEAH!

I hate our governor with a passion.

2 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

TechnoDestructo

July 4, 2009 1:21 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

\"Build expensive transit system from one of the state to the other, requiring subsidies forever after its built, ending in a city with no cab/ public transportation?\"

You just described almost every road in the United States.

$\"user-pic\"$

jayphat

July 4, 2009 6:46 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@TechnoDestructo: Yes, but people use CARS on the road to get from somewhere they are, to somewhere they want to be, with little opposition. This mass transit serves little to no purpose other than show, would cost untold amounts of money over its lifetime, and have only 5 stops. Thats pointless. And it only goes at 80 MPH. Raise the speed limit, and you'ld get between these cities faster driving because you wouldn't have to stop at a terminal.

","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

BytheSea

July 4, 2009 12:53 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

In PA, they want to shut down the loan system and most of the computerized databases. From PA Save our Libraries:

Senate Bill 850 cuts deepest of all. Were it to become law, books, DVDs, access to computers, lending between libraries, online databases, programs for kids, and professional staff would be slashed to the bone. The POWER Library databases that schools and public libraries count on would come to an end. There would be no more Keystone Funds for library buildings or improvements. In short, it would be a disaster for Pennsylvanians who need and depend on quality library services.

","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

henwy

July 4, 2009 1:54 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

Ahh, I get it. You suffer from an advanced case of self-loathing. Obviously, someone has told you from the time you were very young that you weren't worth anything and that the only way you could succeed is with the generosity of and handouts from others. Now, I have no clue how justified this message you received is, but you should also know that there are plenty of people out there who earned everything they achieved. There's a reason why economists say that we should put more money into (certain types of) higher education, because for each dollar spent, we reap well more than a dollar worth of benefit. This is not charity, but enlightened self interest. When the U of Chicago paid for my education and gave me a stipend to pursue my degree, it wasn't because they were choosing to be generous. I taught classes, I did scientific research, and I published articles. During my time there, I even wrote and got a R03 funded, which brought the university a straight 100k over 3 years. Generosity had nothing to do with it.

As for libraries, times change and they're simply not as integral as they once were. Even if you must have the printed word, we're moving into a word where POD is likely just around the corner. Look at the recent article on the consumerist about it. There's no reason not to cut back on libraries despite their position as a sacred cow to some old timers. Consolidate, same some cash, and see if the community even needed the extra library resources to begin with.

4 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

July 6, 2009 5:14 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@henwy: Just because somebody chooses to acknowledge that they wouldn't be where they are without the assistance of others - whether in direct or indirect form - hardly means that they have a case of \"self-loathing.\" Being able to recognize and appreciate the things others have done that have benefited you (the very concept of public education is something that's not even close to free) is a sign of maturity and a well-formed ethical system. The fact that the University of Chicago even exists is in large part due to the generosity of numerous individuals.

Nobody's asking you to bow down and give all your worldly goods to the poor, or to act like a helpless child who has had his hand held his whole life. All anybody is saying is that it's incredibly short-sighted and ethically questionable to say that you did everything in your life 100% for yourself (which is impossible), and to turn your nose up at anything that doesn't directly and immediately benefit you and you alone.

$\"user-pic\"$

Trai_Dep

July 4, 2009 5:18 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@henwy: What an ethically stunted little boy you are.
Although, it makes more since that you're from the same school as the Chicago Boys.
Umm, you do realize that between the aftermath of the Asian currency crisis and our Shadow Bank conflagration, your philosophical underpinnings are completely eviscerated? Your whole Private Market Uber Alles - Everywhere creed has been relegated to the dustbin of history? You need to catch up: the world's passed you by.

$\"user-pic\"$

drrictus

July 6, 2009 4:28 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@Trai_Dep: Generalissimo Francisco Friedman is still dead.

Or, as his accountant would say: depreciated fully.

$\"user-pic\"$

Stephmo

July 4, 2009 5:52 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

@henwy: What's so hilarious is your empirical evidence.

After all, with your impressive academic credentials, I'm sure you're all over data gathering - even if it's a \"soft\" PhD of sorts.

So, where does your population data come from - the one that says your libraries are ghost towns? Did you walk into one once and notice that there weren't a lot of people in close proximity and declare, \"NO BLACK SWANS!\" Or do you ask your library system to send you data every week? Oh - maybe you call a sampling of the township populations in the 10 townships around you to find people who were in the library at various times and ask them approximately how many people were in the libraries and make all sorts of fancy scatter charts where you have HUGE dots centered around the \"ghost town\" portion of your analysis?

And I'm sure that you've plotted out your 10 township libraries with populations for each township showing the approximate household and person population (median and average!) that each library services vs. the state data vs. national data and funding for each?

I mean, you wouldn't just come in and declare something without actual backup just so you could get into a pissing war where you eventually get to unzip your virtual pants and throw down your PhD penis as if it were the biggest in the room, would you?

","

$\"user-pic\"$

frogman31680

July 4, 2009 5:30 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

Ohio does have one of the best library systems. My family actually use the library on a regular basis. My child is enrolled in the summer reading program there. Our family has \"Movie Night\" and we get our movie from the library.

My child has developed so much from the gathering with other children in the programs.

This is probably one of the most mourned deaths that will happen if they do decide to cut the library system.

","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

henwy

July 4, 2009 7:14 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

Swing and a miss. Though you were right that I am the sort of person who likes evidence. Where you were wrong is that I had none. Before I posted I actually did a couple of lit searches on libraries and utilization. It turns out that under-utilization has been a major problem for a few years now. The articles aren't hard to find. Just search through the database. I also did take a look at the actual number of libraries in my vicinity. My estimate was actually on the low side. There are 13 within 5 miles, not counting those within schools and one in a community college.

I'll admit that this isn't a topic unfamiliar to me since I have two friends who are currently librarians (though at the university level) and it's a topic we've discussed before.

1 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

Stephmo

July 4, 2009 2:16 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@henwy: Links to your evidence or it doesn't exist.

I call major BS on your claims.

And collegiate universities are not usable by the general public for the checking out of materials. Yeah - there's a pharmaceutical library within 20 minutes of me - it should be shut down! Because it's redundant. You are pretty much the worst logician ever.

And \"my friends are librarians!\" Hah, that's a good one. \"Although at the university level...\" Hah-hah. So University and Academic Libraries are exactly the same as community libraries.

Wow, you certainly scammed someone out of an education - well, if you're not just lying on the other side of a keyboard. Because no one ever does that.

Again - if you don't reply with links, you're a liar. Liar, liar, liar.

It's that simple.

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

July 4, 2009 11:24 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

And what comes next? A huge beautiful bonfire where we burn all those useless books? For just the cost of a few of your daily text messages, folks (maybe just the ones you make while driving), you can financially rescue your library for your grandchildren.

","","","","","","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

Anonymous

July 5, 2009 1:37 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I have mixed feelings about this, honestly. I live in Ohio, but I also go to The Ohio State University.

The funding being cut from the libraries, etc. is being used to help freeze tuition costs for in-state students such as myself for the third year in a row. Which is really nice. I'm paying nearly $3000/quarter just to go to school at OSU, never mind put a roof over my head and feed myself. I already feel terrible for my out-of-state friends who got an increase for next year.

A tuition hike would probably force me out of the university, and as a result, out of my major (which is only offered at 3 universities in the state).

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

July 6, 2009 10:29 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

well if you're an anti-socialist this should be music to your ears...

","","","","","","");