I feel like you have switched contexts, without enough notice. These comments started because of an article about scientists working around copyright restricti

I feel like you have switched contexts, without enough notice. These comments started because of an article about scientists working around copyright restrictions. This thread started off as a complaint about the cost of getting access to foundational papers in a research field. I pointed out a cheaper mechanism for getting access, via the local library. Hence, I thought that's what you were talking about, which is why my examples were to research libraries in the US. I'm going to go back to your original statement, which is "I think people in the US don't realize how much better the US library system is than most of the rest of the world. Even the developed world!" I think most people are aware that the US is a wealthy country, and therefore expect that the US library system should be above the world average. That is what you elaborated on now. But your original statement suggested that the library quality in the US was appreciably above what one would expect for a country as rich as the US. Yet you listed a number of countries which are comparable in wealth to the US, and which have comparable library systems. (Germany, the Nordic countries, etc.) Therefore, it doesn't seem like the US's library system is better than what most people would expect. Had you said "The US has a good library system", I would not have asked for clarification. But you said people in the US don't know just how good it is, even when compared to countries on a similar economic level. Which doesn't appear to be the case.