They’re still books but if the seller misrepresented the item then certainly report that as fraud. Was there anything in the seller’s location or description that indicated the condition or format of what you’d receive?

Ad hom

Market dominance =/= monopoly. Monopolies are government creations. There’s nothing disgusting about it; no one is forcing people into these contracts.

You’re starting with a false premise: “returned.” They weren’t theirs to begin with. They are entering into voluntary agreements and agreeing to terms and conditions including compensation.

Edward Trencom’s Nose. Three Bags Full. Let the Right One In. The 7 1/2 Deaths of Evelyn Hardcastle

Fight back? No one is fighting anyone in the first place. It’s not extortion.

“Your definition of rights is arbitrary”

I’m finished with this.

I didn’t give a definition of rights.

It absolutely is a refutation. You are confusing wants with needs (as well as not understanding what a right is).

Neither of those are needs. You are confusing wants with needs.

Libraries don’t serve a single “human right.” Rights are negative, not positive. I think you’re greatly misunderstanding my position. I’m not advocating for abolishing libraries or any of their services.

You’re the one making the claim. It’s on you to back it up but you block me and call me a name instead. So who’s the lazy one?

I’ve replied to this same response elsewhere but for accuracy’s sake please provide the quote and citation in full. Thanks.

Respectfully, I couldn’t care less what Ben Franklin said. That’s not a compelling position. I would suggest that taxation, the mode for which these libraries largely exist and are funded, is tyranny. I think the market would deliver a superior product and variety of product, and more importantly it would be done through voluntary instead of coercive means

Of course you’re forced to pay taxes. Nothing about taxation is voluntary. I’m obviously not arguing for the abolishment of libraries. You aren’t paying attention.

You absolutely are forced.

“Libraries are a good thing.”

I agree. Why are you arguing a straw man?

Unfortunately there is cost and even worse that cost is forced rather than paid voluntarily.

No it wouldn’t. The example you’re looking for would be akin to Blockbuster or Netflix. But there would certainly be different models in the market with different pricing structures including no cost options

No, rights are not created by humans or government. The government most certainly does silence speech and censors. You have zero sway over the government and more sway as a consumer in the market as businesses succeed or fail based on reaction to market signals snd indicators.

It’s not antithetical to the “idea” of libraries at all. Of course privately-owned libraries would be profit driven but public libraries don’t provide needs, the services are wants. You assume that some of these wants wouldn’t be offered at no cost to the customer or that there wouldn’t be “inexpensive access.” You assume that there wouldn’t be non-profit models, charitable models, or donation-based models. The beauty of the market is that opportunity exists to meet various wants.

Food is a need, so why not have the government take over grocery stores instead? I think you’d agree that would be a terrible idea.

Why isn’t it a stellar idea?

No thanks. That has nothing to do with my point. My point is get libraries out the hands of government entirely. In other words end “public” libraries and transition or replace them into privately-owned and market-driven products.

No, get them out of the hands of government.

Get libraries out of the hands of government