Libraries are a service that We the People have decided are a good thing to provide free to everyone.
Books can be read for free, information should be accessible to all, and all entirely free from any distortions or restrictions caused by a profit motive or 'invested interests'.
So, where is the profit in privatizing libraries unless access will no longer be for all, information will no longer be undistorted, etc?
Because you didn't read the article. They're a private company that runs libraries on behalf of municipalities. It's possible through economies of scale and not having to pay government salaries.
They do pay a decent wage though, unlike the subsistence level for-profit necessarily aims for.
This kind of 'on-behalf-of' scheme nearly always ends in the agent accumulating power, and abusing it for profit. That's particularly sensitive when it comes to information infrastructure. We expect Fox, Facebook, CNBC, etc to be garbage, but Libraries?
a county government running libraries for their own county doesn't operate on the same scale as corporation that runs libraries for dozens/hundreds of counties across the country.
The profit comes from squeezing money out of the staffers who will no longer be getting a salary, pension, benefits, etc. This same business approach has been used for decades in certain aspects of public education and other parts of the public sector, which is why public education and government in the United States are universally regarded as working really well. (ahem)
> So, where is the profit in privatizing libraries unless access will no longer be for all, information will no longer be undistorted, etc?
The libraries that are taking this approach are probably already pretty budget limited. The sad thing would be if it becomes a norm in some states because of political reasons.
Yes.
> Libraries are a service that We the People have decided are a good thing to provide free to everyone
Yes. And any time there's a public good, there's a billionaire willing to advocate taking it away again so profit can be made from it.
It's like all those millions of acres of pristine, unlogged rainforest: it's just sitting there waiting to be turned into profit.
Older books, even classics, even very rare books, are being "removed" from collections, almost always a euphemism for "destroyed." For example, in my large multi-county library system, there are a single digit number, total, of all the works of ancient Greece and Rome. Even the ILL network has a lot of holes in it. This was not the case a few decades ago - the library is how I was accidentally exposed to them and acquired a lifelong interest in ancient history. There are more copies of a single example of the hyped-up forgettable ideological fare that gets churned out and forgotten on an annual basis.
Typically when I bring this up, people tell me that it's all available online anyway. Sure, big-name classical works are. A lot of niche books (on narrow technical or scientific subjects, or local history, for example) are being lost forever. And accidental exposure to physical copies of books is a huge and important method of discovery.
So to be honest, I don't think libraries can get any worse. I honestly don't think most people understand the scale of the destruction going on right now.
There was a piece about privatizing the police and it had cops having exchanges like this [0]:
““Home Depot™ Presents the Police!®” I said, flashing my badge”
““Subway™ Eat Fresh and Freeze, Scumbag!®” I yelled.”
“I slapped a pair of Oikos™ Greek Yogurt Presents Handcuffs® on the guy.”
[0]: https://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-shouts/l-p-d-libertari...
End stage capitalism is a thing.