[nfb-talk] To Be or Not to Be, Irritated
Mike Freeman
k7uij at panix.com
Fri May 9 20:55:25 CDT 2008
Harmeet:
I don't think accessible currency would have an effect on blind persons
and jobs one way or the other. I just don't think there'd be a grand
rush to handle such jobs as cashiering because other equipment (such as
cash registers) would have to be modified and I just don't see the sorts
of establishments we're talking about giving a tinker's damn about
making their gear accessible.
In any event, the real reason I introduced the 2002 currency resolution
was that I did not think it discriminatory that currency isn't
accessible and I feared -- and still fear -- that the lawsuit could have
serious blow-back consequences if the adverse ruling was broader than
the original suit.
Mike Freeman
... "It is human nature to think wisely and act foolishly." -- Anatole
France
----- Original Message -----
From: Sekhon, Harmeet
To: NFB Talk Mailing List
Sent: Friday, May 09, 2008 11:45 AM
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] To Be or Not to Be, Irritated
Joe,
This is, by far, the most thurroghly thought out and meaningful
response
I've read on this subject since it first came up on lists. It sums up
very well what many of us have wanted to say and have not, for one
reason or another. Accessible currency is more a positive than a
negative, in my opinion, when it comes to the blind person seeking
employment. That's especially true if that blind person wants a job
where dealing with paper money is vital to the job duties. Yes, I
know
blind people deal with paper currency now. I do. I know that people
work with it in their jobs with the use of technology. But if it was
accessible, I think it would open far more doors than it would close.
It would improve perceptions of us--or perhaps not improve them--but I
don't think there would really be a backlash. I also believe that you
would see that blind job seekers might become more confident about
what
they can do, rather than a lot of focus on how to obtain the necessary
technology to do it and possible worries about the limitations of that
technology.
Harmeet
-----Original Message-----
From: nfb-talk-bounces+harmeet_sekhon=cable.comcast.com at nfbnet.org
[mailto:nfb-talk-bounces+harmeet_sekhon=cable.comcast.com at nfbnet.org]
On
Behalf Of T. Joseph Carter
Sent: Friday, May 09, 2008 11:20 AM
To: NFB Talk Mailing List
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] To Be or Not to Be, Irritated
Jim,
The wheelchair user analogy you'd likely get from the ACB is the wrong
one. (I consider John in the ACB camp since I see him on their lists
and
every message he posts to ours is in support of their agenda,
regardless
of what he says to us)
When Katie, my GF and a wheelchair user, applies for a job, nobody
really
questions whether or not she can get to work every day because she
lives
in Portland, Oregon. The entire city has curb cuts at every
intersection.
She doesn't need them usually. Any curb or single step of less than
four
inches is easy enough for her to navigate. She can get around
Monmouth
just fine, and Monmouth has old, broken, bumpy, rocky sidewalks on
many
streets, no sidewalks on several, and curb cuts are entirely hit and
miss.
Now, there are times when navigating in this town means she is walking
(rolling?) in the street because there literally isn't anywhere else
for
her to be, but I do the same thing myself, and we stick to the side of
the
road so that cars can easily go around us. Fortunately, in Monmouth,
there isn't that much traffic except around 5pm as the University
office
employees are leaving town.
When I apply for a job, people aren't so sure about me. No of course
I
know this going in and I make sure that within five minutes, there can
be
no doubt that I can do just about anything they could imagine. I know
that if I don't do that, I won't be getting the job. It's that
simple.
That isn't really an argument FOR chirping signals--I don't use the
things, and frankly even the new ones are an irritating interference
to
street crossing. But consider instead the situation with money..
Sighted people don't know and can't imagine how we can avoid being
ripped
off several times a day. I do it, but they can't think of how. Now,
if
they can't imagine how I'm going to identify the money, are they
likely
to
hire me for a position that includes managing money as part of my
daily
job duties? Again, if I can't convince them that I can do it, they
won't
hire me.
In that way, the ACB's efforts to secure a currency the rest of the
world
KNOWS we can use is a very good thing. I'd go a little further and
suggest that we need a way to verify the money is the real thing,
similar
to the way sighted people use that pen that temporarily changes color
when
marked on the higher denomination bills. No cashier I've seen will
take
a
$50 or $100 bill without checking it, and we shouldn't either. Maybe
in
addition to making a purple mark on a real $50, it could smell like
grape
until the mark fades, I don't know. *grin*
For me, the currency thing is less about the poor blind person being
unable to spend money without being ripped off--that happens to
sighted
people about as often as to us, I suspect, and we have a way to know.
It's slow, it's inconvenient, and it's a technology-based solution
that
costs about $$150 too much in my opinion, but it's there. No, for me
the
really big issue is changing that perception that we can't do it.
The other factor is that I'm Catholic and believe strongly in my
faith--it
is a Christian ethic that we do things to help others because it is
the
right thing to do--not because it's easy or because there's no cost
involved with doing it or even because they're hopeless without that
help.
Would a currency that a blind person could (relatively) quickly and
safely
identify without trusted assistance or some slow $200 gadget be
helpful
to
us? Absolutely it would. If it is done the right way, the per-person
costs are downright reasonable (even if the numbers get large when you
look at sum totals), and it gives the general public one less thing to
think we can't do. For these reasons, it should be done.
Now, is this lawsuit by the ACB the right vehicle to do it? Probably
not.
Are some of their claims about the plight of the blind person, cheated
at
every turn a bit ridiculous? From our perspective, very much so. But
the
judge included in his findings of fact that sufficient accessibility
to
the currency isn't there. That finding is no longer up for
debate--you
don't appeal findings of fact. The findings of law are another
matter.
GIVEN that the currency is was found to be not sufficiently accessible
(which is better than saying inaccessible because the latter isn't
true),
does the law demand that the government do something about it? The
ACB
and the judge say yes. The government says no, and they appealed the
judge's decision. Now under these circumstances, I hope the ACB wins
the
appeal and that either the government decides not to appeal to the
supreme
court OR that the supreme court decides not to hear the case--I would
expect the supreme court to rule against the ACB and take a hammer and
chisel to the Rehab Act in the process. ACB and NFB would both be
held
responsible in my mind if that happens--the ACB for pursuing this
through
the courts rather than through the legislators, and the NFB for giving
them ammunition to do it when we rightly should have stayed out of it.
Incidentally, am I the only one who thinks it is silly that the
government
can afford to:
- send everyone a kicker check
- bail out big banks who made bad loans
- possibly bail out homeowners who took loans they can't afford
- drop the gas tax for the summer, despite economists' claims this
would
be a bad idea
- provide every single household in the country not one but TWO
set-top
TV boxes just about for free
.... but they cannot afford to give vendors a tax break so they can
update
their machines to accept a new format to the paper currency gradually
over
the next FIFTEEN YEARS it would take to accomplish such a changeover?
Remember class, politicians' first duty is to their re-election
campaign.
Joseph
On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 10:05:45PM -0600, Jim Marks wrote:
> John, I am saying you're shooting at the wrong targets. You seem
like
a
> bright enough guy, so I presume you're aim is deliberate. No one
said
that
> accessible money or audible pedestrian signals are the cause of the
> prejudice. However, they can be and often are the symptoms of the
> prejudice. Spare us the analogies about wheelchair users and
sighted
people
> getting something we poor blind people do not get. Blind people
know
we
> have to look to ourselves in the things that count. The way I see
it,
> accessible money doesn't really matter that much, and audible
pedestrian
> signals can be harmful, especially if they are forced on us by
knotheads who
> don't really believe in the abilities of the blind. You troll here
telling
> the most powerful organization of the blind that we are somehow
cramping
> your style. Well, you know what? We're going to do it our way.
And
our
> aim is more than just a matter of bravado and twisting of words. If
you
> would simply examine your beliefs and compare them with the ones
most
> Federationists hold, you might learn a thing or two. There was a
time
when
> I thought and acted like you are here on NFB-Talk. I woke up to the
fact
> that there are no real curb cuts for the blind and that no one was
looking
> out for the interests of the blind except for those who understand
the
> personal responsibility and positive attitudes bit. You will not
fix
> blindness with accessibility alone. Plus, the more you believe in
the
> abilities of the blind, the less accessibility you will want.
>
> John, I have one last something to tell you. If you don't want to
know,
> don't look down. If you were to look down, you would see that you
are
> standing on the shoulders of Federationists. We're going to be
there
for
> you regardless of how you spit, fuss, and shake your tiny fists.
Best
to
> you. I really mean it.
>
>
> -------
> Jim Marks
> blind.grizzly at gmail.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nfb-talk-bounces+blind.grizzly=gmail.com at nfbnet.org
> [mailto:nfb-talk-bounces+blind.grizzly=gmail.com at nfbnet.org] On
Behalf
Of
> John G. Heim
> Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 7:32 PM
> To: NFB Talk Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] To Be or Not to Be, Irritated
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> Holy cow! We don't *HAVE* accessible money. To suggest that this
guy's
> attitude is the result of accessible money or audible walk signals
is
> ridiculous.
>
> If someone already thinks blind people can't do anything, how in the
world
> are you going to convince him otherwise if you can't even tell your
own
> money apart?
>
> Man, this is ridiculous. I've never seen such a series of absurd
> rationalizations in my life.
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfb-talk mailing list
> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
for
nfb-talk:
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk/tjosephcarter%40gmail.com
_______________________________________________
nfb-talk mailing list
nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nfb-talk:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk/harmeet_sekhon%40cable.co
mcast.com
_______________________________________________
nfb-talk mailing list
nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nfb-talk:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk/k7uij%40panix.com
More information about the nfb-talk
mailing list