I can find you literally hundreds of posts from people insisting that ADA is nothing but a small-business-killing shakedown, that it's makework for lawyers, that it's doing nothing to help the disabled, and that it's just as bad if not worse than DEI. What makes your claim better than theirs?
It's obviously doing something for the disabled. Reserved disabled parking spots and wheelchair-accessible building entrances are requirements of the ADA. It seems reasonable to think it "improves people's lives". A whole bunch of contrary opinions are not necessarily reasons for disagreement as much as they are simply disagreement.
I've no problem with the govt making sure that disabled people get accommodation so they can participate in civic life. I do have a problem with the govt requiring private individuals to pay for it, "handle the load", etc. even engaged in public accommodation: because it's obvious that a 20,000 sq ft publicly trade Delaware class C corp retailer has room for ramps and generous allocations of space around swinging doors, bathrooms etc. But if I rent a 500 sq foot postage stamp shop in NYC to open my dream counter service juice store which is a step up from the sidewalk, it's just too much of a burden for a new business of which 9 out of 10 fail anyway. You think juice store owners have anything against disabled people? they don't.
We all need to pay for it, not pass feel good legislation that shoves it down the throats of sole proprieter LLCs.
I’ve never seen an actually disabled person use one. They’re always occupied by cars with placards but the people are pretty clearly abled or able enough to walk across the parking lot.
the first link had one comment in support of the move, and a single, dissenting (yet reasonable) reply.2nd article had no comments whatsoever. Remember, the claim I'm responding to was "literally hundreds of posts from people insisting that ADA is nothing but a small-business-killing shakedown, that it's makework for lawyers, that it's doing nothing to help the disabled"
