Yes, but they are libraries. They are not libraries + sanctuaries + charity programs + music programs + religious education programs + paid staff that have nothing to do with the library.

Report comment to moderator

I wondered about that statement, so I looked up some studies about library usage. And I discovered that, while it is correct that low-income people do not check out as many books, they do use the library, just in other ways. They use it more for reference sources (computer or otherwise), and they attend library programs.

Specifically, one study found the following differences among different ethnic groups and income levels:
1) genealogy research was almost six times higher in libraries serving Native Americans than in libraries as a whole.
2) library programs as a whole were much less popular in libraries serving Asian-Americans than libraries serving other minority and ethnic groups.
3) resume writing occurred primarily in libraries serving African-Americans.
4) schoolwork activities occurred more often in libraries serving African-Americans than in the other minority and ethnic groups
5) the use of library as “place” (e.g., as a social gathering place) was more prevalent in libraries serving Asian-Americans than in the other groups.
6) attendance at library programs and the use of audio/visual equipment and phones were the highest within libraries serving lower income populations.

It sounds to me like the lower income people are definitely making use of library resources, and the libraries are learning what resources are most needed by different groups.

I also found, in another study, that 66% of those surveyed had used the library in the past year, that library expenditures averaged $25 per capita (I’m not certain whether this was nationwide or not), that people (i.e. taxpayers) thought more should be spent on libraries, and that over 80% consider public libraries and important and valuable resource for the community.

(If anyone is interested in the links for these, I can provide them, but I did not include them here because other people keep talking about the blog software eating their comments when links are included.)

Report comment to moderator

But I do think communities can rightly choose to have a public library, and I’m hard pressed to find a good alternative to a public park, another feature that everyone pays for and not everyone uses.

Report comment to moderator

Founded in 1848, by an act of the Great and General Court of Massachusetts, the Boston Public Library (BPL) was the first large free municipal library in the United States. The Boston Public Library’s first building of its own was a former schoolhouse located on Mason Street that was opened to the public on March 20, 1854. The Library’s collections approximated 16,000 volumes, and it was obvious from the day the doors were first opened that the quarters were inadequate. In December of that same year the Library’s Commissioners were authorized to locate a new building upon a lot on Boylston Street. The present Copley Square location has been home to the Library since 1895, when architect Charles Follen McKim completed his “palace for the people.”

http://www.bpl.org/guides/history.htm

Report comment to moderator

You wrote this gem in post #16 “If people really want to use the library, they can pay for it and in the end appreciate it a whole lot more. There will be less thefts too, as people realize that they’ll have to either pay quadruple for the book or work off their debt to the owners.”

No one can appreciate something they can’t afford, but need to learn, study and receive an education.

17 Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not highminded, nor trust in uncertain riches, but in the living God, who giveth us richly all things to enjoy;

18 That they do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate;
1 Timothy 6

Report comment to moderator

Report comment to moderator

Report comment to moderator

I don’t know what to say, YOU and I agree on something, anything? It’s about time

Report comment to moderator

If libraries keep providing these types of things, I don’t think they’ll ever go out of style – at least not for families with children. I don’t know how I’d keep my 7 year old supplied with reading material if not for the library. She’s certainly not going to use a Kindle or do all her reading on my computer! And if families with kids keep using the libary, then the children will grow up with a love of books and libraries too.

Report comment to moderator

Hardly. If you go to enough libraries, public and private, you begin to see the bias. With limited resources, there is no choice to be objective. Perhaps the Library of Congress comes the closest.

“then suggest that churches could replace them”

To quote you, this is a strawman. Did I say it was the only avenue for replacing public libraries. BTW, a church library could be a PRIVATE library open to the public. That’s an important distinction. I’ve seen churches spend money on a lot of crazy stuff. I think libraries would be a higher priority especially if there were no public libraries. A transgender organization could certainly start their own library if they wished.

“how many churchgoers do you think are going to approve spending church resources on a public library, and even if they would be willing, how many churches have the resources…”

Why do you always insist on putting private enterprise in a box that would never meet or exceed what government is doing now? There are plenty of small local libraries who have far less resources than many churches these days.

“and have the opportunity to graze through”

You can even do that at a bookstore.

A library is not a “social program,”

Yes it is. A PUBLIC library is a social program even by your own description.

Report comment to moderator