From a distance, what's gone so wrong for so long in Camden seems overwhelming.
Look closer and most of the city's calamities emerge as the result of individual decisions - many made by elected officials, often under fiscal duress.

For the latest example, consider Mayor Dana Redd's singularly shortsighted plan to eviscerate the modest but well-patronized Camden Free Public Library.

Her proposal to cut funding by about 70 percent (!) likely will force the Fairview branch to close within weeks and will put the Centerville and main downtown branches out of business by year's end. Layoffs of 13 of the system's 21 employees could come sooner.

The city library board is scheduled to meet Aug. 6 to figure out what to do. As for the domino effects and unintended consequences of losses like these, more in a moment.

First, let's be fair to Redd, who's both in a tough spot and far from alone in trying to balance the books on the backs of, well, books. Perhaps eager to show King Cut in the governor's office that they, too, can get tough on spending, Newark, Trenton, and several other municipalities also plan to reduce library services.

New Jersey's libraries may be particularly vulnerable these days because of their association with learning, an activity, in turn, associated with teachers, whose satanic labor union, we are frequently told, is the source of all the state's woes.

The issue of library cuts typically gets framed as a choice between keeping kids off the street or keeping cops on the street. Redd so far is no exception. ("I must first and foremost protect public safety," she insists.)

But the mayor's plan to reduce city library funding from $935,000 to $281,000 is "pretty devastating," says Jerry Szpila, the system's interim director. "We have three buildings and 21 employees, and the math is the math."

Furloughs - that brand of bottom-line duct tape so beloved by bean counters everywhere - won't be enough to do the trick.

"My administration has to make tough but necessary decisions . . . to balance a budget that will benefit Camden taxpayers," Redd says, or rather writes, in one of the proclamation-like statements she favors over chatting with journalists.

"Since we are still in the process of finalizing the budget, we will hold any comments until we introduce a budget to City Council," the mayor adds. Or types, or dictates, or whatever.

(Memo to whoever advises or directs Her Honor to avoid reporters: The Dana Redd I know is perfectly capable of answering questions. All by herself!)

Speaking of questions, a likely one is whether city voters would approve becoming a part of, and paying into, the Camden County Library system. As of Wednesday, the county had "not been approached" on the matter, according to spokeswoman Joyce Gabriel.

If such a proposal were approved, it would not require the county to step in to run any of the three facilities, including the $4 million Centerville branch it built and turned over to the city for $1 in 2005.

There will be those who see any public money spent in Camden as a waste. They will cheer closing city libraries as evidence that the bloodthirsty beastie called government is at long last being tamed.

But in the real world, the loss of places to read, or to be read to, or to search online for a job is a practical, not a philosophical, matter. It would mean another loss in a city that's undergone far too many losses.

Consider: In 1950, Camden had 43,267 manufacturing jobs.

In 2008, there were 1,942.

To figure out the significance of losses like that, we need the facts. The sort of facts we can - for now - get at a public library in Camden.