[braythwayt]

I have a feeling that as a Canadian, I really cannot cross the chasm between our society and America's, but I'll try.

Here in Toronto, the libraries are open to the public. Borrowing material or using their online facilities requires membership, still known as "having a library card," and for that you need to live, work, or study in Toronto.

(Update, courtesy xatt: There are also paid memberships available for those who don't qualify for free membership, approximately CAD10/month: https://www.torontopubliclibrary.ca/using-the-library/your-l.... But physical access to the library is free to everyone.)

I also think there are other allowances, such as if you care for a relative who lives there, but the gist is:

1. Anybody can walk in and use the physical library, and; 2. There are additional resources for those who have a connection to the jurisdiction.

There are similar things around community centres. During public swim, everybody can swim. During certain programs, you may need to be a member of the facility. I am aware that some physical parks have special programs, and you may need to register with the city and be a resident to use them.

But the park itself is public, and anybody can go there. You just may not be able to drop into an outdoor yoga program.

So clearly, we have a two-tier system, and the broadest tier is literally "everyone." The second tier is the size of a municipality.

In a certain very generous sense, Toronto's libraries, community centres, and park programs are similar to "gated" parks for a neighbourhood, as they have some features/programs that require membership and/or some connection to the municipality.

But in another, they are manifestly different. Neighbourhood parks are usually set up to exclude "the wrong people." They're about constructing gated communities, with all the classist and racist implications associated with these structures.

Whereas, public libraries are exactly what they say on the tin: They're for the public. Rich, poor, from near, or far.

[dahart]

Nearly all parks and libraries and other public places & services in the US are exactly what you describe... there is no such chasm. The reason this article was written is because of one single ugly exception to what is a vast system of public access to community centers, libraries, parks and other open spaces. Please don't make assumptions and jump to the incorrect conclusion that a single example suddenly means that's how it works everywhere.

[braythwayt]

I have been to excellent public facilities in the US. Excellence is not evenly distributed anywhere, but the discrepancies of available public services between rich and poor neighbourhoods, between predominantly white and predominantly black neighbourhoods have been stark in my (n=1, granted!) observation of the US.

I think that the reality for the underclass in the US is that in theory, public services, voting, parks, community centres, education, jobs, and so forth are equally available, but that is not how it works in practice.

[dahart]

Excellence is not evenly distributed anywhere in the world including Canada, right? But the goal post seems to be walking away from me a little here. I'd agree that the US has social issues between rich and poor. Weren't we discussing actual stated policy restrictions to public access above? That's what the article is reporting on, and what @Arainach was talking about, isn't it?

What would be the solution to the much bigger problem you're bringing up? Perhaps the problem is that we allow our citizens to become poor in the US, not that we have some of our public facilities located near rich people?

[rmk]

Foothill park is located miles away from urban Palo Alto, in the midst of many other open-space preserves, which are all open to the public. Except this one. In fact, there is a guard house where you are asked for proof of Palo Alto residence, and are unceremoniously turned away if you can not produce said evidence. This is very unusual; I have never encountered such a thing anywhere else in the United States.

This is also emblematic of Palo Alto for me: hypocrisy through and through. Residents make a big fuss about being liberal: signs up on every other house declaring the occupants' high-minded support of illegal immigrants, gay, transgender, and bi people, the "reality" of science, and so on. At the same time, the city rips up comfortable benches on the sidewalks and puts in benches that are so uncomfortable, they make you think why the city bothered with this stuff (as you can guess, they are there to discourage homeless/indigent people from sleeping on them). City residents also made a big fuss about a neighborhood (private) girls' school from expanding enrollment (lots of flimsy reasons given, but the real reason is that the increase in traffic would have made a small dent in already astronomical home values).

I could go on and on, but on the whole, my take on this: Serves them right, and they deserve to lose. We need more cases like this to show these people they still live in the United States.

[dan_quixote]

That sounds identical to anywhere I've ever lived in the US

[nicoburns]

> Borrowing material or using their online facilities requires membership, still known as "having a library card," and for that you need to live, work, or study in Toronto.

I'm surprised at that. Here in the UK you can generally get a temporary library card pretty easily (as in, walk up to the counter and fill out a form and get one there and then easy) if you don't live in the area

[xattt]

TPL still offers paid memberships to non-Toronto residents.

[braythwayt]

Fact check... TRUE!

https://www.torontopubliclibrary.ca/using-the-library/your-l...

[0xffff2]

Not sure the chasm is as big as you think. This is exactly how things operate for the most part in the US as well.

[lawrenceyan]

Doesn't Toronto have one of the highest levels of wealth inequality in the world?