It is true that everything has a monetary value, but money cannot/shouldn't determine everything.

I read a blog entry about a worrying issue, "Can we afford to cuts to the British Library Funding?"
According to the post and another discussion on the Guardian, if the cuts come to fruition, it will inevitably result in limit opening, service charge, and difficulties in securing its comprehensive collections.

Eventually, I think, it will become another more serious question of the nature of knowledge.
If any of the possible changes of library services has to be enacted due to the cuts, the change somehow implies that the access to knowledge is limited to the privileged--the privileged, I mean those who can afford service charges, and those who can make it to the library at a specific opening hours. I admit that I sound a bit hysteric at this point. But behind the mere political question of cuts in budget, there lies another issue of how we treat words, history, and culture.

Of course I am speaking of this issue from the view point of a reader who benifits from free library service. Surely I am now one of the privileged and am worried if I might not be able to enjoy it any longer. It's a selfish complaint as it appears, but the issue is worrying in that monetary worth seems to rule everything . Any change to the BL funding is very likely to result in a more foundational problem for a public library like BL: decisions have to be made between what publication has to be catalogued and what can be abandoned. What follows this decision, then, can be an alternation in its collection policy, that is, the structure of knowledge will be restructured. What will happen if the structure of knowledge is reshaped is unkown to us. However, the problem for me is more that, shall we allow money decides everything about the future of culture?
Can we afford the price, in its both literal and metaphorical sense, that the cuts of funding might incur?

Yes, perhaps, some would say, this change is also part of the cultural development.