Cash For Old Books
I heartily approve of the government’s Cash For Clunkers program. It’s a pleasure to finally see money going directly to consumers for buying a new product (a car) and thereby aiding a troubled auto industry. But I also think this program is discriminatory. Why, after all, should only old and no longer wanted vehicles get a government subsidy? Why should only motorists get a government buying aid? And why should only car makers enjoy the resulting spin off benefits?
I not only write books, I also read a lot of them, and indeed have a hefty collection of old titles in my bookcase. I would love to be able to walk into a bookstore, hand in the titles I no longer want around the house for a bit of government cash that could be applied to the purchase of new titles—many of which I would love to buy but can’t currently afford.
I should add that there are probably more book readers than car drivers in this country. And I can definitely say that the publishing industry is in straits as dire as car makers, and could certainly use a boost from government.
There’s also the libraries angle. I love libraries. Always have. Always will. But in Philadelphia where I live they are currently a challenged institution. They have already been closed on weekends because of budget restrictions, and the mayor here has even said they might have to be closed altogether if the state doesn’t resolve its seemingly endless effort to reach a balanced budget. More salient to this piece, Philly’s libraries have also had to cut down dramatically on book purchases, which, for a reader like myself is very painful stuff indeed.
A cash for old books program would be a tremendous boom to hard pressed libraries in my town and yours as well. So let’s do it. And as for the old books brought in, let’s not, emphasis NOT, destroy them the way car clunkers are now being destroyed. That would be sinful. Instead, let’s ship them overseas to foreign lands where a great many people hunger for English language aids, and where many schools are woefully short on books.
Save libraries. Save the publishing industry. Save literacy from the Newspeak idiocy called twittering.
Cash for old books! All power to the literate classes!
Share This
Related Posts
-
Stains on a Legacy
Posted on Apr 26, 2013
-
Do “Reforms” Ever Hurt The Rich?
Posted on Apr 25, 2013
-
Banking at Heart of Cyprus Economic Collapse
Posted on Mar 23, 2013
-
Sheryl Sandberg’s Revolutionary “Lean In”
Posted on Mar 13, 2013
funny. you've got my vote.
Seriously, I agree about funding consumers directly, and wish we had a LOT more of that. However, I do think it should meet national priorities. Hence, replacing gas guzzling autos works, as does my favorite, green building. With over 120 million energy inefficient homes to retrofit, we can turn around the building industry, employ many millions of workers, reduce our energy needs and dependence on foreign oil, increase our national security and reduce the stress on our environment. Since it's primarily installation, the funds spread to everywhere with a home or office to fix, with no chance of the profits going overseas. As for the manufactured goods, many of those are also made in the USA: doors and windows, insulation, roofing materials, more insulation, furnaces, water heaters, refrigerators and more. All fit nicely into a 21st century green economy at which this country could actually excel and lead.
Yes, let's artificially inflate demand in various sectors of the economy. Nothing bad has ever come of that.
I understand the desire to influence the decisions of consumers such that we account for the common good (I am in favor of increasing the gas tax, and offsetting it by a fixed tax credit), but cash for clunkers, and similar hypothetical programs, go way over the line. They are the equivalent of the government saying “if you won't spend your money, we'll take it from you and give it to someone who will.”
http://sovereignmind.wordpress.com/2009/08/09/c…
Michael, you and I are definitely kindred spirits. I read a lot. I've probably read at least 100 books in the past year. I love books. In fact, I live and breathe books. I don't eat them. Yet.
And I have a lot of them. Well over a thousand, although I've never cataloged them (one of my to-do projects). There are definitely a lot at this point that I would not mind parting with, and getting cash for them would be awesome.
And I'll add to your shout-out for libraries. One incalculable blessing about where I live now is that I am walking distance (two blocks!) from my town's library. My library, too, is not open on weekend during the summer, but from the day after Labor Day to the end of June, they are open from 9 am to 9 pm three days a week, and from 9 am to 5 pm the other days. They are only closed on Sundays.
To me, a library is a spiritual place. It's a place that feeds my soul as well as my mind. When I had no Internet connection at home (which has happened several times in the past year, for financial reasons), I only had to walk two blocks to have a computer with access to the Internet.
I know that we live in a car culture, and that, objectively, it's difficult or impossible to survive in many parts of the country (if not most) w/o a car. Having said that, I value libraries a zillion times more than cars. I don't have a car anymore, and being lucky enough to live in an area where most of the things I need are within walking distance, I only miss having one a little bit. I can live w/o one, put it that way. I could not live (at least not in any meaningful sense of that word) without libraries. They are essential and absolutely irreplaceable.
You can either Lease or buy a new car to use the cash for clunkers program. It has to be new vehicles and not used ones.
Henry
Blogger
http://www.cashforclunkersfacts.info
http://www.cashforclunkersfacts.info
You guys do know about used book stores, right? When my wife and I combined households and bookshelves, we had to trim down. The resulting credit at the used book store has provided free reading material for years now.
As for “artificially inflating demand” adel, wake up. We have an artificially created demand for corn syrup (100% tariff on imported sugar + price supports for corn), for cotton ($4.5 billion tax dollars to support the 5.9 billion US cotton industry), US steel, oranges, rice, huge tax incentives for business investment etc. Surprise! We use tax policy to achieve policy objectives. If you're a flat-earther free marketeer, consider that 40% of the world's population lives on less than $2 a day. $2 a day! And for 20% it's under $1 a day. Do you really think American workers can compete with that, or should?
If your free market zeal extends to that far reach of extremism, tell me how our nation survives with a 100% trade imbalance, as we lose every product manufacturing capability to cheap imports and write off all our agricultural exports by dropping the price supports. If free market zealots would get their heads out of the theoretical clouds and take a look at the real world, maybe we could formulate sound policies that consider what industries we consider important and protect them from oblivion.
Wow, GD. Jump to conclusions much? How many “flat-earther free marketeers” do you know that support a gas tax? I'm well aware of the concept of externalities and the role of tax policy to account for them. I oppose this particular tax policy, not every tax policy. Do you think there are no grounds to oppose a particular tax policy, unless one is a zealot?
And as for your protectionist rant (which has nothing to do with this topic), why do you think that a farmer in brazil should not have the same standard of living as a farmer in the us who produces the same good? If we are to maintain our high standard of living, it will be because we continue to innovate, not because we shield ourselves because we are somehow entitled to our wealth.