Not sure that follows - they've built the library three times in my town, and every, every time at great cost and with no room for expansion. And they fill it with romance novels and juvenile fiction.

Presumably because that's what most people actually read?

Why should your particular taste in books be privileged over others?

Those books are read by a subculture. Characterized by throw-away experiences and rapid turnover, who always want another book but never for long.

I argue, that's not most of us. That's kids and bored stay-at-homes.

I understand that libraries are struggling, but they've mutated by simply following a demographic into a hole. Instead of trying to be more relevant to the rest of us.

You must raelly love that one book, to have it define your entire philosophy around public libraries and the valuelessness of people who like other books.

You don't think your library keeps circulation statistics on each item and plans accordingly? It sounds an awful lot like you're personally insulted that your library caters to people who have different preferences than you.

Read it all again. Its not about preferences. Its about being a library (repository of knowledge available to all) vs just being a day-care center for a thin demographic.

Then you're confusing the mission of a public library and a research library, it seems like you're describing and desiring the latter.

There are ways to fix problems other than just throwing more money at them. A librarian is a caretaker of his library and should use his employed time to do this to the best of his ability.