In this case, a venerable hamburger joint in California. http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-...artFeed+(Breitbart+Feed)&utm_content=My+Yahoo ADA was well meaning when passed, but by now has been perverted into an egregious job-killer.
I am guessing Michelle Obama is behind this. Too many children were eating here, had to shut them down. On a serious note, wtf is wrong with our government.
In a situation like this, since the place was very likely operating and built before the law was passed, they should have been able to add in extra table arrangements that did meet the height requirements. If that's not what the law says, it's what it should say. Not sure this is what the act was meant to accomplish, and I have to suspect that someone was specifically wanting to shut this place down and this is the technicality they used to do it.
You make a good point. Most ADA sanctions are complaint driven. More government regulation just gives more snotty people an excuse and means to be awful to someone else. I had a spinal cord injury and was in a wheel chair for a couple of years. It isn't easy getting around. Most handicapped people realize that older buildings are challenging to get around in. Of course, if you don't like the access challenges, don't patronize the business, but shutting them down the business is only going to create less access.
They should have taken out a loan, lowered the counters and wrote that off as a mandatory expense of doing business since it was to comply with a change in the law when they filed their taxes. I didn't see them bother to get an extension to comply with that intent they likely could have gotten one. Its no different than they passed the ADA all changes needed were business expenses to comply with a Federal Law and were therefore deductable.
You know nothing about business, business expenses, business deductions, the permitting process, or the costs of retrofitting buildings to comply with ADA standards, I have volunteered to help retrofit business to comply with the ADA. I am beginning to believe that it is a whole lot cheaper in about half the cases to tear down the building and build a new one, than to retrofit to ADA standards. Remember that once you pull a permit for an ADA retrofit, the entire building can be required to meet all present day building codes. So if you tear out a counter to meet ADA, you will also have to update all wiring, all plumbing, and everything else. It isn't a matter of moving a table, it is tearing the building down to the studs, and you may have to replace the studs as well.
^^^this^^^ Yessir - that'll show 'em. The ADA is used by whomever to punish a business that didn't provide "proper" access to handicapped folk - shutting them down - and guaranteeing that these handicap folk don't have access to this business at all. Brilliant.
this is great news. The employees will now be able to get a livable wage on UE and welfare and receive health care thanks to Obama. Nancy should be trumpeting this victory. Also, the local economy will be stimulated with the influx of unemployment dollars which have a 7-10x multiplier vs good ole fashioned earned income. The local economy will benefit from the closure
Wasnt the ADA act Bush's doing and then added to by Bush2? Just another example showing that it is both parties that expand our government. The other problem comes in when we selectively enforce this stuff.
Yes it was meant to drive smaller businesses out of business. That well meaning baloney is how they get this stuff rolling. In the end regulations such as these eliminate competition for the top dogs, discourage new business, and create monopolies for the government favorites, who are getting exemptions/tax breaks that provide loopholes/or grants to off set the costs, the smaller businesses will never be eligible for. Pay attention to who these regulations impact the most, and who doesn't seem to be effected. This country has been played by the best government corporate money can buy for too long, but idiot voters continue to prop up the two party scam in spite of it's obvious cronyism tactics.
Was this instigated by business, or another idiot in Government who has more power than sense? You've made an accusation here, and I'd like to see if you can provide evidence of the point of origin of the ADA. Regardless, business - big and small - look for any angle to improve their market position. It just so happens that Government and the useful idiots within it have given big business a perfect tool to implement such things. This is not the fault of big business; they are using every legal advantage that they can in order to improve their companies. This is the fault of Government for growing into such an intrusive tumor.
Follow the money. All you have to do is ask yourself, who benefits the most by placing regulations on business? Then ask, who loses the most? The small businesses are always the most negatively effected. It's the same kind of scams that has been going on since the 'Whiskey Rebellions' when the rich/elites flexed their political muscle and the best government money can buy intervenes to enforce their cronyism way. Over the years they have become more creative about it, but if the government is pushing for something there is an ulterior motive behind it, and the majority of the time the rich/elites money and greed is at the root. They depend on the gullible for their ignorance to allow the misuse of government to continue.
Very true, and I am sorry to hear about your injury. I hope you are much better now. I am not without sympathy for those with disabilities, but people have a choice about which establishments they frequent. If one establishments offers wheelchair accessibility and one does not, then the one offering it will make more money. Let the marketplace sort it out.
Just because you can see 'big business' gaining from making the barrier to competitive entry higher does not mean that 'big business' instigated ADA. I tend to think that that is not how it went down, but - unlike you - I'm not sure. You seem sure - and 'sure' requires evidence other than your hunch and an irresponsible claim of culpability. I can clearly see the plausibility of some "do-gooder" liberal instigating the legislation of the ADA - that's why I'm interested in seeing if you can provide more than a regurgitation of your claim here. I'm assuming you cannot?
Not necessarily. They (the customer) may be willing to accept certain difficulties to get the merchandise they want rather than having to take whatever is available after government intervention/intrusion. Smaller businesses used to make arrangements for their customers with special needs. They didn't need the government to tell them how they were required to run their businesses. The burger stand we had when I was younger would come outside and take orders for people in wheelchairs etc... The grocer would deliver groceries to his handicapped customers or work out arrangements with others to get them their groceries, the pizza parlor would allow the elderly folks to drive up to the back door and honk, etc... Discrimination is one thing but dictating the height of a counter, and then demanding the entire building be gutted and rebuilt to meet new building codes when they were already grandfathered is ridiculous, unless there is a realistic safety concern. There is a reason why there are very few mom and pop establishments, and government intrusion is one of the biggest, and it was an orchestrated effort by the best government corporate money can buy that, shall we say, influenced the situation to the point it is today.
A local place closed because of the ADA...because complying WOULD have required a new building! (The 100+ year old building's layout meant that getting some halls and doorways wide enough just couldn't be done.)
Wait a second the ADA was in effect for over two decades, they had twenty plus years to comply and they didn't and now they complain about the law? Why should I care I don't think the law is great and I'm disabled but since its usually good for business to be handicapped friendly, it was deductible as an expense and they would have had a grace period when the law was enacted to comply they should have.
When regulations close down businesses, the consumer is also hurt. Did anybody ask consumers about such stuff?
You didn't read Lee's post, did you. (That is not a question.) Unlike you, he actually knows what he is talking about.
When ADA was passed, it was sold to the people on the basis of helping out blind/deaf/wheelchair-bound people (only) and the accent was on public places like sidewalks. But Congress put no enforcement apparatus in place and left it to litigators to have it enforced. So ADA has grown to the point that all sorts of things are now "disabilities" and there are no limits on the "accommodations" required. Time to repeal ADA and start over, with a limited set of disabilities and a reasonable set of accommodations.
This is not a recent law they had two decades plus to comply. Lets say its true and I know it can be inconvenient to comply then you appeal to the Congress for relief as a community. I do agree it should never have applied to non-public locations and entities and private businesses should choose to comply as they wish and tax breaks apply to encourage compliance I feel this also about the racial and other discrimination laws use public pressure but not force. If ACME doesn't want to hire blacks or women why force them but the community can respond by not doing business with them and using social pressure to get them to comply and government entities can say we won't help you. But my arguement is still the law is the law, they had two decades here plus to make changes or to re-locate if needed but they chose not to and so again why should I be upset they have to obey the law its the law. And relatives had businesses that had to comply and oddly they did it over the years as needed and doing so the costs were more modest, and tax breaks were there. They waited until now that is the real issue they could have done this as needed or could do business differently if this was just a carry-out place the counters and access would be far less a relative did that. They made their ice cream and hot dog place from seated to carry out with outside covered benches all compliant with the ADA and saved money in the long run.
