[ad_1]
On Saturday, Forbes ran a piece by someone called Panos Mourdoukoutas making a very interesting argument (read: stupid and harmful). Before coming to this argument, however, I want to emphasize again that it has happened on a Saturday. This is not irrelevant – as editor, I can tell you that Saturday is when you run the songs that do not really fill you with pride. Usually you have made an obligation to the writer, and it's easier to manage than no, but you do not want many people to see it. I have no idea if that's what happened to Forbes . I am not a frequent reader of this particular publication, but I have never thought of them as a clickbait click making factory. My enlightened guess is that they had to make it work, for one reason or another, and tried to sneak under the radar.
It did not work. You Can not Hide a Title Like This:
"Amazon Should Replace Local Libraries To Save Taxpayers' Money"
People, we reached it. We have achieved advanced capitalism, as defined by servile devotion to the free market and big business, and contempt for the well-being (intellectual or otherwise) of real people. If Citizens United was the judicial apex of heartless capitalism, that is the philosophical version
The trial is short – only 589 words – and even these are fundamentally redundant. All you need to know is in the title: Replace libraries with Amazon stores. And it can be refuted with two simple points:
1. Books (and etc.) at Amazon cost money.
2. The books (and others) of a library are a public service and are free at the point of use. They cost the average US taxpayer over the age of 18 about $ 4.50 a month
That does not say all that libraries offer, of course. Beyond books and movies, music and Internet access, there is a community space that includes programs for children, seniors and veterans, professional help and research databases. Even if it only scratches the surface, libraries are a public good in the true sense of the word, and one of the last things that buy this country. For a thread on all the wonderful services offered by public libraries, read here .
It is therefore not surprising that the capitalists want to come next. Let's take a closer look at Mourdoukoutas's argument, paragraph by paragraph.
Amazon should open its own bookstores in all local communities. They can replace local libraries and save taxpayers a lot of money while increasing the value of their stock.
First, if Amazon decided to open its own libraries in local communities, it would kill local libraries, not libraries. Which is exactly what Amazon does now. Since libraries are tax-funded, there should be some sort of government reform that kills libraries separately from any action taken by Amazon. This is what the author actually asks – kill public libraries, and justify it with bullshit on Amazon.
In addition, you must like people who are very concerned about the stock market value of Amazon. Jeff Bezos is not enough lackeys?
There was a time when local libraries offered the local community many services in exchange for their taxes. They brought books, magazines and magazines to the masses through a loan system. Residents could borrow any book that they wanted, read it and send it back to someone else to read it.
Yes, and that is what is happening again. This mystical time you are talking about is now. But thanks for the definition of "library", I guess?
They also provided residents with a comfortable place to enjoy their books. They provided people with a place where they could do their research in peace with the help of friendly librarians. Libraries served as a place where residents could hold their community events, but it was a function they shared with the school auditoriums. There is no shortage of places to hold community events.
Oh boy, it's going on. He only used 589 words, but he will pass two paragraphs defining the libraries. Also, I like that his first real attempt to undermine the concept of a library is basically, "Eh, it's just a glorified school auditorium."
Libraries slowly began to serve the local community more. Libraries have introduced video rentals and free internet access. The modern local library still provides these services, but they are not free. Owners must be funded by taxpayers in the form of a "library tax". This tax generally adds to school taxes, which are already high in some communities.
FOLKS, WE ARE IN PARAGRAPH THREE. This is three paragraphs of the definition of a library. Plus, I love his radical change, but "they are not free." As if the system of using public funds to finance the libraries was brand new. Where does he think the library funding came from? Free public libraries supported by taxation are a concept that dates back to 1833. If Mourdoukoutas wrote his article in 1834, maybe his "THEY WILL TAKE YOUR PRECIOUS TAX DOLLARS!" But 184 years later? Feels a little stale, amigo.
Meanwhile, they do not have the same value as before. The reasons are obvious.
Kill me now. Do not make me read the rest. The only real way to ruin the public library for me at this point is to tell me that this essay is available there.
Such a reason is the rise of "third places" such as Starbucks. They offer residents a comfortable place to read, surf the web, meet their friends and associates, and enjoy an excellent drink. This is why some people have started using their loyalty card at Starbucks more than they are using their library card.
Oh yes, the famous "third places", which are quite the term that he wants here, and not the one that actually means a social environment that is not work or home " , and that includes … yup, the public libraries.
Also, what is the argument here? What does Starbucks make redundant libraries? Can you get free books from Starbucks? Do they provide learning programs for children? Or is it just another private enterprise that this guy thinks he can combine to replace libraries?
For those who follow at home, here is a list of things that do not look like libraries at all, but that Panos Mourdoukoutas is sure are exactly the same things:
1. An Amazon store
2. Classrooms of the school
3. Starbucks
In addition to this, streaming services such as Netflix and Amazon Prime have replaced video rentals. They provide television and film content to the masses at an affordable price. Real video rental services like Blockbuster have completely disappeared.
It's the best part of any article because the truth is that Netflix and Amazon Prime cost more per month than the average tax dollars that go to fund a library . And they do not offer nearly as much! But he just called them "affordable", so clearly that a library must be downright cheap, right? Right Panos?
Then there is the rise of digital technology. Technology has turned physical books into collectibles, eliminating the need to borrow libraries.
He did not remotely transform physical books into collectibles, silly.
B. Even if that were the case, it would not eliminate the need to borrow books in their new digital formats, because these books still cost money. And by the way, know where you can borrow eBooks? Public libraries!
C. This guy is a professor of real economics. Why does he write and form arguments like he'd never visited a public library? Well,
Of course, there are Amazon books to consider. Amazon has created its own online library that has facilitated mass access to both physical and digital copies of books.
Is this free? No? They do not give books for free? So it's not the same as a library.
Amazon Books is a chain of bookstores that does what Amazon intended to do at the origin; replace the local library. It improves the bookstore model by adding online searches and cafes.
Yes, that kills local affairs!
Amazon Go basically combines a library with a Starbucks.
No, he combines Starbucks with a bookstore. That's what Barnes & Noble and Borders does as well. But as it is not free at the point of use, it has nothing to do with libraries.
And the expansion in the local library space will be an opportunity for the technology giant
. Basically, Amazon has provided something better than a local library without taxes. This is why Amazon should replace local libraries. The move would save taxpayer money and enhance the value of Amazon shareholders in one fell swoop.
First, it would only save me money until I literally wanted a book a month. But forget this, because it misses the main point: if you are not ready to sacrifice a few tax dollars for public libraries, you are basically a bad person. It's pretty simple – for a little money that he will not miss even, Panos wants to deprive his entire community, and communities across America. Why? Because, like most extremist capitalists, any sense of empathy or public welfare has been erased from his brain. He cares about no one but himself, and it is the most essential capitalism.
To be fair, polls in libraries do not seem to confirm the idea that public libraries do not have the same value as before
. "On the other hand, let me introduce two paragraphs of evidence that a publisher has probably forced me to add, and that proves that all my argument is phony."
Apparently, more data is needed to confirm a trend. But the opportunity for Amazon to enhance shareholder value remains.
What a moving conclusion! It may be ruinous to close public libraries, he confirms, and the arguments behind my essay may be absolutely false, but at least my King Jeff Bezos will make a few dollars more than he does. will absolutely not pass to the workers to skip the breaks to go to the service of their master.
As I noted earlier, Mourdoukoutas is a professor at the University of Long Island. He has also co-authored a book on leadership that no one has read, so I'm not sure of his intention or the interest that he has for Amazon as a company. Whatever the case may be, his argument was immediately posted on the Internet, and at this point, I'm just doing it all. I agree with that, though, for a reason perfectly described by Amanda Mull:
I know that there are problems with the Twitter crowd but people like Mr. Let Amazon Be The Library Locale are seldom told that they are stupid shit bags in real life and it has happened thousands of times here today and I think it is beautiful
– Amanda Mull (@amandamull) July 22, 2018
Some other worthy thoughts:
And if instead of closing libraries, Amazon paid taxes.
how many books would that buy?
– nora @ yr local library (@tinygorgon) July 22, 2018
Article surprisingly misinformed in Forbes. It lacks somehow the facts that libraries are free, not everyone can afford a cappuccino and that Amazon is basically an ultra-capitalist anti-library avoiding taxes. https://t.co/BXwVfkUIGU
– Ian Anstice (@publiclibnews) July 22, 2018
Local libraries should replace Amazon to save the lives of workers
– Lyta Gold (@fluttersnipe) July 22, 2018
In the end, it's the story of a privileged man (a man like me!) Who wants to end a public service that massively helps poor. He would throw them all under the bus if that meant a few dollars less on his tax bill, and more profit for the whole Amazon. It's sick, it's hateful, and it's so philosophically so ugly. It is also a perfect incarnation of uncontrolled capitalism taken to its logical end – the free market in its vicious essence.
[ad_2]
Source link
