What isn’t cheap about Blockbuster? I can rent a movie for a week for a couple of pounds. I suspect that the only definition of cheap you recognize is “free”, correct?
The position that “governments should not spend money on things businesses are already doing” isn’t particularly controversial. It just hasn’t got through to the librarians, yet.
I’m not interested in how much it costs.
Nobody is claiming otherwise; it isn’t a question about relative worth of media, it’s a question about what the free market is already supplying, and where it is appropriate for government to step in and provide a service.
I’ll repeat:
Book lending: OK.
Videos and games: not OK.
Performances like this should be charged for, too.
I’m not throwing out anything as if it’s gospel, and it’s rather bemusing you’d throw that accusation at me, seeing you’re the one that’s pulling numbers out of your ass, and I’m merely working with what you’re telling me.
So, let’s suppose some unknown percentage of libraries, X, receive donated consoles. For the purposes of this thread, we’re talking about the 100-X% of libraries who purchase their consoles. Is that clear enough for you?
(I think we can both take it as given that X =/= 100, can’t we?)
