The Cold Hearted Amateur Economist Studying the Annual Budget ($113.4 million proposed 2023) for the Chicago Public Library to state "This Is a Stupidly Great Deal."
I am not a professional economist.
To be clear, and to start with, I do not run economic data for real world scenarios for clients or governments or any institutions.
I do run fantasy economic models for fantasy worlds (elves, dwarves, dragons, etc.) for private clients (nerds with more cash than time).
But
to be clear
I am not a real world economist.
So there will be variables I don't know/care about.
The Chicago (hi, I live in Chicago) public library proposed budget
for 2023 is
$113,400,000
(source)
Which is a lot of money, objectively speaking, when you look at it as an annual price tag of "I need $113,400,000. For, um, this year. Next year it'll be more."
In addition to being an amateur economist, as I call myself, because I deal exclusively in fantasy-world economics exclusively
I was a professional graphic designer for many years
and have dealt with charts, graphs, information displays, etc.
for a really long time
From the above source, 24.3% (about $27,556,200) is provided by grants, leaving 75.7% (about $85,843,800) to raise.
Still a big chunk of cash.
Damn near $86 million bucks.
That would buy so many zines.
Is it worth it?! LET'S GO BACK TO "I WAS A FORMER GRAPHIC DESIGNER" and dealt with charts and things, a lot, to raise cash for weird projects, a lot.
$85,843,800 (above figure to raise) divided by 365 (sorry leap year, we're being un-generous) is $235,188.49 a day.
Nearly.
A quarter.
Million dollars.
A day.
Wow.
But wait...
...there is more than one person living in Chicago.
Which means that it is NOT a daily bill to ONE person for $235,188.49. It is a daily bill for for 1/2,665,039 PEOPLE, given the city's population.
(source)
To be fair, not everyone pays taxes, for a variety of reasons.
Since I'm not a professional economist, let's be brutally unfair and guess only 1/3 of the city pays taxes. It's far more than that, but, yknow...
...amateur economist privilege.
2,665,039 x 0.33 = 879,462.87... we'll... just round... up... this isn't SAW.
FUN FACT, though! You can borrow SAW from the Chicago Public Library for $0.00!
Resuming the point!
Daily bill of $235,188.49 sent to a collective of 879,463 people whom paying taxes to fund the library using the above math.
(Folks astute in math are going to immediately get my end point that this is cheap)
$235,188.49 (daily budget) divided by 879,463 (people)
is...
$0.26742283643 or rounded up
$0.27 per day.
The Chicago Public Library costs less than $0.30 per day per tax payer to cover the entire city.
Less.
Than $0.30.
Per day.
Per tax payer.
...wow.
You can do similar math by checking your local library's budget and comparing it to your local population and being as ungenerous, or more specific if you wish to get a closer-to-accurate number, when comparing tax payers.
If you want to say "1 out of every 3 people paying taxes is too high" (it's not, but let's just say it is for the sake of furthering my point of "the library is an intensely great deal) and instead... say...
1 out of every 5 people pay taxes
because you want to be a contrarian for whatever personal reasons
1/5 = 20%, 20% of 2,665,039 people is 533,008 (rounded up, per above SAW rules)
$235,188.49 (daily budget) divided by 533,008 (people in this ultra contrarian numbers formula) is $0.44124757977, or, $0.44 per day per tax payer.
Using 1/3 as a tax payer base is extremely low. It's easier math. I chose it to make a point.
Pushing it further to 1/5 as a tax payer base raises the daily cost by ($0.44-0.27) $0.17.
Use your local library. Your literal pocket change pays for it.
This is a "I love the library" post sponsored by the library research I am doing for a private client and work that'll be used for future Netherworld Post releases.
87 notes
·
View notes
The audiobook situation in general makes me livid. Like I said in those tags, I'm lucky because the library I work for has a relatively solid funding stream, so I can at least get a fair few of the things I want to read in audio format.
This is vital because I process books well aurally, and being able to listen to them while doing another task somewhat curbs my focus issues and helps me do both things. If I cannot get a book in audio format (or a format that I can apply TTS to, which itself is a huge pain to do and requires removal of DRM), I usually just don't read it.
Now, audiobooks are already expensive. To an extent they have to be because both the author and the voice actor need to get paid. That's understandable, really.
But then you have the hellish intersection of Audible's semi-closed ~exclusive~ ecosystem and publishers charging libraries heavily inflated prices for limited-length rights. This means that your selection, as someone who prefers or straight up needs audiobooks, is always going to be a lot more limited if you're trying to go through legal channels. I'm not even someone who has severe vision issues, just someone with focus and sometimes neurological issues that make reading print/ebooks harder than it should be. I can do it if I REALLY want to. I can only imagine what it's like if you can't read without audio.
I work in the cataloguing department, and when anyone points out to the person ordering that our digital audiobook selection is limited and there are holes in the collection, she's like- but audiobooks are expensive! And for libraries, they really, really, really are.
(When we can get a title at all. Because those Audible titles are harder to get, and because publishers can also make us wait until well after the digital title's release date to purchase a copy at all, even if we have the money and want to.)
3 notes
·
View notes