3 ms·
I'm not convinced it's that obvious. Making something free for some, but not others could stir up resentment ("why should I pay for your use of the library?"),
by mattkrause 9y ago
I'm not convinced it's that obvious.
Making something free for some, but not others could stir up resentment ("why should I pay for your use of the library?"), which would make it easier to cut funding in the future. This could lead to a spiral of increasing fees (or decreased service) -> smaller constituency -> less funding.
I'm also not sure that the marginal user costs a library very much. I doubt that a library with twice as many potential patrons needs twice as many books or two times the staff, for example.
- stretchwithme 9y agoLike food stamps? Are people upset about that? A month's worth of food costs a lot more than using a book for a month.
- mattkrause 9y agoUhh....yes? In the US, Republicans have been talking about "welfare queens" and people buying lobsters with food stamps for literally decades. This strategy has apparently worked for them, even though benefit fraud is supposedly quite rare. On the flip side, it's virtually impossible to cut Social Security and Medicare in the US, in part because the programs are not means-tested and everyone hopes to get something back from them.