[gui-talk] NFB on accessible money

[Seville Allen]

While you didn't appoint, or better possibly say you didn't elect, any blind
organization to speak for you, you are spoken for just by the fact that,
collectively, blind people are heard through a choir of voices or an elected
representative of a blind organization speaking.  This is the same for an
American citizen who doesn't vote.  He may not have voted for our current
American administration, but whether or not he did, the fact is that the
"elected leadership" speaks for the whole organization of citizens. 
So whether or not we join a blindness organization or an American political
party, we will be spoken for by someone who is known as the leader by the
system's definition.  

-----Original Message-----
From: gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
Behalf Of Hoffman, Allen
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 10:18 AM
To: gui-talk at nfbnet.org
Subject: [gui-talk] NFB on accessible money

>From the previous post:
"Blind people traditionally identify paper 
currency by folding bills of different 
denominations in different ways.  "In reality, 
blind people do not routinely find that we have 
been short-changed," Maurer commented.  Machines 
are readily available to identify paper money for 
blind people who run businesses or handle large 
amounts of cash.  "Essentially, the United States 
Treasury has been ordered by the courts to come 
up with a solution for a nonexistent problem," Maurer said."

I tend to generally agree with this, however, I for one never appointed
any organization or one "my voice", and while an organization of the
blind certainly has all rights to voice opinions, saying that this isn't
a problem for blind people is overstepping their perspective.  This is
just like the whole tactile tiles for identifying edges, audible traffic
signals, etc.  Just because some don't "need" or "want" this kind of
solution doesn't mean it isn't "needed" or "wanted" by others.  An
analysis of traffic lights to me seems like if traffic signals that are
observable by people are important for everyone else, then people who
can't see the signal should have a mechanism too, or why have the signal
at all?  People who are blind should not be provided less as a general
rule, not the other way around in hopes of fostering some superman
independent image.  I myself am not superman, but can be pretty
independent.  I can live without money changes, audible traffic signals,
or tactile edges, however, I can live without Braille books, audio
tapes, or screen readers too but why the heck should I?

I get the feeling if ACB had filed for making the sky blue that the NFB
would file to change it.  This kind of bickering just presents an image
of a bunch of people who can't ever be satisfied.