How do you distinguish social capital from common-or-garden capital?

Is it social capital to threaten to lock people up so as to force them to give you money so you can spend it on whatever you think would build trust and reciprocity? If they don't like it, they'll be bound together - in handcuffs to a constable - is that it?

I like libraries and have used them all my life. But I don't have any illusions but that what's happening is that some people who would rather spend their money on something else are being forced into paying for books for my satisfaction. I don't pretend that some greater good is created by their having been compelled to pay, that could not have been created by the voluntary payments of all those who want to enjoy library services. I don't pretend to know that the benefit they have been forced to forego would not have created greater value as judged by them, or by the rest of society.

There certainly will be a lot of debate in England re: library closures in the very near term. This should show exactly the level of support for them.
My local library is very busy 6 days a week. Similar to the stats in this article, I would guess that it would be one of the busiest public spaces in the area outside of shopping centres.
Governments will mess with them at their peril.

I think that libraries are great places, but I also think that
their use by date is already there, based on technology.

With the advent of the Ipad and many similar tablets, then a huge
online library, with people like Google involved, it will become
far easier, cheaper, and more practical to simply download the
books of interest.

It saves all that paper, saves having to wait for a book, it
can be kept for future reference, etc.

So I'd say that the days of the librarian are numbered.

Yabby, I see your point about easy, cheaper and so forth, but I don't agree. To me books have a life of their own. I collect as many as I can afford (or inherit from family and friends), and there is so much more to them than just print. My old books and magazines look, feel, smell and I believe read differently to those that are only <10yrs old. To me, reading from a computer screen is terribly sterile.

And so too for my children who I take to our local library usually every Sat morning. They enjoy the drive, seeing the familiar faces and talking to the librarians, and the pleasure of just wandering past walls of books, and picking here, dabbling there. A library is very much more than seeking information. Electronic delivery is soleless and passive, so because it doesn't engage your senses like holding a book does, I believe you tend not to learn or remember as much.

I hope there will always be a place for a library.

If libraries go

Communities would suffer

Loss of intellect

Good on the people of Stony Stratford for fighting to keep their library services. It is an example of what our government might expect should library services be reduced.

Perceptions of government waste is in the eye of the beholder but library services have a positive impact and benefit for communities. I remember taking my little ones to the story time mornings to be followed up by picking out books to read and watching their excited faces. I must admit I have not been to a public library for a few years now having access to many documents and publications at work, access to a departmental library and now tend to buy books (new and secondhand) that I would like to read or swap books with friends and family. Many later get donated to Lifeline or similar.

But library 'attendance' where I live is high. The internet and downloads cannot replace the reading of a real paper book IMO, but each to their own.

It will be up to citizens to determine what services they want for their tax dollar, and to fight to keep libraries going should they be threatened. Sometimes the public lose the fight and sometimes they win.

Ah Peter! The idea that all taxation is theft and all community spending is waste does have a simplistic appeal, but it ignores that fact that taxpayers gain from community as well as fund it.
Yes the poor gain disproportionally from Libraries, but the wealthy also gain by not having the poor completely downtrodden.
I cannot believe that folks here in Australia, one of the best examples of the value of community spending, are falling for the "only private profiteers make wealth" arguments from the Right. (The group that justifies $16Million salaries for bankers)
If taxation and community spending is so bad...how come the most advanced nations all have social spending, and those that don't tend to be too chaotic for stable profitable business to be successful? If social spending is *so* bad for wealth generation...how come China is now producing most of the world's consumer products and has the fastest growing middle class?
The real issue is deciding what government should spend money on: Supporting massive profits for unsustainable businesses? (Privatised monopolies, private health & education, wealthy parents), or quality resources that can be used by all.
BTW. The Internet will change the reading landscape...but only when authors go to readers directly and remove the parasitical publishing industry, who are currently using legal means to hold back technology. Hopefully Apple will fix this through sheer force! (ie. *real* competition achieving wealth through creative destruction)

*And so too for my children who I take to our local library usually every Sat morning.*

Yellow Kracken, I think its wonderful that you are teaching your
kids the habit of reading etc. Sadly too many parents don't bother.
I too have a great library which I treasure.

But over time, I've noticed that people slowly adapt to what
is most convenient and so over time, no doubt the majority of the
population will do exactly that.

I remember protesting, when our local bank branch was going to close.
I thought it was madness. I was wrong. Now, something like 70-80%
of bank transactions are done via the internet. The one girl left in
what is now a bank kiosk, spends most of her day twiddling her thumbs.

I recently wanted to buy a copy of Robert Winston's "Human Instinct"
It was on Ebay for 6 bucks, so I bought it. All found with a couple
of clicks.

But the great advantage that I see with electronic books, is that
they are searchable Feed in the keyword and hey presto, you have
the page instantly. That makes it all very convenient.

Forget computer screens, the new tablets coming out are lightweight,
easy to use and will improve dramatically in the next few years.
I can already see myself changing my newspaper subscriptions to
electronic form, as frankly I simply don't need the huge amount of
supplements, classifieds and other pages that I don't read. All that
paper and ink wasted. We'll save a hell of a lot of trees, going
electronic.

So yes, there will be resistance to change, but it will happen.
Younger ones will grow up with electronic books and think nothing
of downloading them. So those libraries will become much
quieter places.

For me it's about being in the company of actual people rather than sat in front of a screen at home. There is something invigorating about leaving the house and going somewhere...this is not an inconvenience, it is a pleasure. If you are too time poor (crap phrase that - we all have the same amount every day, its just some accept that we don't have to do everything) to do this, then I feel for you...perhaps your priorities are not right.

However, I agree with yabby that the generation growing up now will have a different view - which is why my books are available as ebooks - even if I don't use the technology myself. But when their battery dies, I'll still have my book to read...possibly by candlelight!