• SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    They wouldn’t have spent 60k on books over that time, they’ve only saved that much because the books were free. If they had to pay for the books they would have been more selective and less liberal in the amount.

    Spending $150 a week is just a lot of money to spend on books, it’s only that much because of the free price tag, so it’s extremely disingenuous to use that amount as people wouldn’t realistically spend that.

    • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yeah, libraries are so deceitful! It’s all a big conspiracy to promote literacy and give people books that they don’t even need!!! I can’t believe they’re forcing us to take advantage of them like this!

      • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        A more realistic metric would be used books (also reflects the quality of all but brand new fresh books which are a rarity obviously), but you can’t quantify that price, so yes using new is disingenuous, but go off on a rant I guess? I think it’s a great idea, but let’s not kid ourselves that people would actually be spending that amount on books. It’s great for a feel good story though, I’ll give you that.