Amazon Should Replace Local Libraries to Save Taxpayers Money

This content has been archived. It may no longer be accurate or relevant.

From Forbes:

Amazon should open their own bookstores in all local communities. They can replace local libraries and save taxpayers lots of money, while enhancing the value of their stock.

There was a time local libraries offered the local community lots of services in exchange for their tax money. They would bring books, magazines, and journals to the masses through a borrowing system. Residents could borrow any book they wanted, read it, and return it for someone else to read.

They also provided residents with a comfortable place they could enjoy their books. They provided people with a place 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 this was a function they shared with school auditoriums. There’s no shortage of places to hold community events.

Libraries slowly began to service the local community more. Libraries introduced video rentals and free internet access. The modern local library still provides these services, but they don’t have the same value they used to. The reasons why are obvious.

One such reason is the rise of “third places” such as Starbucks. They provide residents with a comfortable place to read, surf the web, meet their friends and associates, and enjoy a great drink. This is why some people have started using their loyalty card at Starbucks more than they use their library card.

. . . .

Then there’s the rise of digital technology. Technology has turned physical books into collector’s items, effectively eliminating the need for library borrowing services.

Of course, there’s Amazon Books to consider. Amazon have created their own online library that has made it easy for the masses to access both physical and digital copies of books. Amazon Books is a chain of bookstores that does what Amazon originally intended to do; replace the local bookstore. It improves on the bookstore model by adding online searches and coffee shops. Amazon Go basically combines a library with a Starbucks.

At the core, Amazon has provided something better than a local library without the tax fees. This is why Amazon should replace local libraries. The move would save taxpayers money and enhance the stockholder value of Amazon all in one fell swoop.

Link to the rest at Forbes

28 thoughts on “Amazon Should Replace Local Libraries to Save Taxpayers Money”

  1. Why Amazon? Why didn’t Forbes suggest B&N do it while they were king of the hill?

    I’m guessing Forbes is worried that no one reads them unless they’re talking about Amazon …

  2. Allow me to translate:

    Amazon should open their own bookstores in all local communities.

    ‘Amazon should adopt a failed business model because they are the big meanies who had the gall to replace it with something better.’

    They can replace local libraries and save taxpayers lots of money,

    ‘Amazon should spend their money to give me free stuff, because I’m too cheap to spend my own.’

    while enhancing the value of their stock.

    ‘I buy stocks to make myself feel virtuous, and assume everyone else does the same. Profit has no place in business. Now buy my magazine so I can go on getting paid.’

  3. Forbes has obviously never been in a public library outside an affuent community.
    Does Amazon provide free computers for those who don’t have access to them at home? Free training on how to do job searches, resumes, applying for government benefits? Free scanning of family ohotographs? Free preschool learning activities?
    In fact…does Amazon provide ANY free services for those who can’t afford to pay?
    Insisting that everyone pay their own way is also insisting that those without money do without those services. It’s “I’ve got mine, to hell with the rest of you.” That’s not what a compassionate society is all about.

  4. Will Amazon do the equivalent of inter-library loans for physical books that aren’t in my local store? Especially technical books?

    Can they provide the theses and dissertations from the 1930s that haven’t been scanned? (I’m a geologist and much of the early field work is still valid.)

    Having said that, I do miss having a quiet place to read. I don’t expect that in a coffee house, but my local library no longer has a quiet area for studying or contemplating.

    • Will Amazon do the equivalent of inter-library loans for physical books that aren’t in my local store? Especially technical books?

      Of course not. Why should they? They’re not going to do any of this stuff.

  5. They seem to be overlooking the HUGE tax breaks Amazon gets any time it opens a distribution center somewhere. Won’t cost taxpayer money? LOL right.

    • Hate to burst your bubble, but they are indeed just this dumb.

      What’s worse is they think their readers are this dumb too, and they can’t figure out why I won’t please subscribe to them …

  6. And Amazon’s booksellers will be delighted every time they’re asked a reference question, and they’ll do back flips to help patrons find information–such as, is chemotherapy helpful for MS; and how do you properly size a bra; and who invented the condom; and is cabbage juice good for you; and how can I print an IRS form; and how do you cure hams and keep bees; and how many states have towns called Bugscuffle; and how long does it take to drive to Blank City, Texas, because my mother is in prison there; and where is that book that was on the table over there the other day, I don’t know what it’s called, it had a white cover–because they’re dedicated to service and to literacy right down to the bone, and they thrill to the sound of a plea for help, and they have masters degrees to prove it.

    • Funny, I stopped using public libraries partly because there was nobody there who was willing to help me in any of those ways. If I want to know anything like that, I use Google.

  7. As a library trustee, I hear many comments along these lines. I don’t agree, but they keep me on my toes. Each day is an opportunity to show my community what libraries do for them. Articles like this keep me from slacking.

    I read some comments and make notes on issues that might need attention in our branches. That is helpful.

    But most of all, I believe public libraries do more for their communities than libraries do for their patrons. Sure, we provide many free services: books, videos, network, magazines, a place to read, story time, reference services. We work with literacy groups to teach reading and our foundation makes sure that every baby born in the county goes home with a few free books to keep and resources for parenting help. And that is wonderful.

    But the critics are right: with an efficient enough system and thin enough margins, Amazon might be able to do the same thing. Never mind that Amazon does it to make a buck, the library does it to improve the community, which means that Amazon will inevitably evolve toward greater profitability, not greater community good.

    But you don’t have to use free services to benefit from the library. You benefit every time a kid shows up at the library instead of hanging out on a street corner and making trouble. You benefit when someone out of work finds a job through the services a library provides. You benefit when someone starts a business using resources we make available. You benefit when a business moves to your community because they know that their employees are set to thrive in a community that provides resources for good citizenship.

    Why do you suppose many big contributors to our foundation are businesses, not individuals?

    I will not spend more time on this comment because I doubt that words here matter much. What matters is getting out there and benefiting my fellow citizen with the management skills and expertise I have been lucky enough to acquire. I will now shut up and get to work. I have a contract to review.

    • Never mind that Amazon does it to make a buck, the library does it to improve the community, which means that Amazon will inevitably evolve toward greater profitability, not greater community good.

      Easy availability of a wide selection of books at lower prices from Amazon has been a great benefit to the community. And Amazon profited.

      Communities have benefited from lots of products from which companies profited.

      • “Communities have benefited from lots of products from which companies profited.”

        That’s great. But community benefits are an inadvertent side effect. Corporations exist to increase shareholder value. A manager who thinks about anything else is not doing his job. Check it with Milton Friedman. I would not have it any other way.

        But that just underscores that entities like public libraries that exist for the common good are vital.

        • That’s great. But community benefits are an inadvertent side effect. Corporations exist to increase shareholder value.

          No. The benefits are intended. Corporations increase shareholder value by satisfying needs of consumers and communities. This is exactly what Milton Friedman said.

          Entities that provide for the common good are indeed vital. The increase in the common good matters, not the mindset of of the owners, directors, or managers of the entity that provides that increase.

          • For anyone who has an NYT subscription, here’s a link to original Friedman column. https://www.nytimes.com/1970/09/13/archives/a-friedman-doctrine-the-social-responsibility-of-business-is-to.html (The Times ought to be ashamed of the quality of the scan.)

            When I was an undergraduate around the time of the column, Friedman used to occasionally have lunch with the students in the cafeteria of the dorm I lived in and he often held forth on subjects like this one. A lot of his thinking has been contradicted in late years by his fellow Nobel Prize winning Chicago economist, Richard Thaler, but I give Friedman a lot of credit for calling a spade a spade. One of the disappointments of working in the corporate world was watching the facades fall the instant stock prices went down.

            • There is no contradiction between opposing the idea of corporate citizenship and advocating for making profit by meeting consumer needs. Friedman saw meeting consumer needs as the most beneficial thing it could do for society.

              There are zillions of products all around us that enhance our lives. The social utility measures the benefit, not the mindset of the producer.

              Likewise a politician can campaign for more funding for libraries even if his only motivation is his own self-promotion. If the library gets more funding, the benefit accrues to the community regardless of why the politician advocated for it.

          • Milton Friedman pretty much single-handedly destroyed the idea of good corporate citizenship:

            He did indeed say it was the responsibility of business to make a profit. And he strongly held that profit was made by satisfying consumers’ needs.

            He saw “corporate citizenship” as a diversion from the overall social good that derives from meeting consumers needs. Corporate citizenship has nothing to do with meeting the demand of consumers.

  8. This is a horrible idea, horrible! I want my library intact. Instead, Amazon should donate money to the libraries – that would be a much better idea.

  9. The people at Forbes are idiots. Do they not realize, inside their shiny bubble, that many people who frequent libraries can’t afford to buy books? Many also don’t have computers, or access to any of the other services offered by many libraries to help the community.

    What a bunch of elitist nonsense. The editors and owners should be ashamed.

  10. Utterly incoherent.

    The linked post appears to be gone.

    Forbes has this huffpost-like thing that allows you to post almost anything there. Forbes doesn’t edit it in any way. IMO, it’s not a good thing for them to do with their brand, but whatever…

    Forbes CommunityVoice™ allows professional fee-based membership groups (“communities”) to connect directly with the Forbes audience by enabling them to create content – and participate in the conversation – on the Forbes digital publishing platform. Each topic-based CommunityVoice™ is produced and managed by the group.

    Opinions expressed within Forbes CommunityVoice™ are those of the participating individuals.

Comments are closed.