Ron Paul & disability rights?

[angrydragon]

KramerDSP, good thoughts, I think you're doing great job.

The rights for disabled are the same as the rights for the individuals. There isn't a difference. Maybe society and employers may or may not look down on a person for being disabled.

Should government authoritatively force other people to give one an edge or assist one more than another individual? No, that would be taking the property rights of that individual away. It would be the disabled individual's right, as with any other individual, just to hire disabled people and screw the rest. Just like owning a house (or renting), the owner/renter chooses who'd they like to be in their home.

Would it be nice if employers and society accommodated disabled people? Yes it would.

This is a difficult problem, like Dr. Paul says with difficult issues, the more local the solution ought to be. With a more free society without the income tax, less regulation, the more prosperous individuals are, the more wealth they'd be allowed to help and give to charities and people with problems.

Charities and caring individuals will are do more things, in a better way, than a government program or department. Governments don't innovate, the market does. The market creates a lot of good for disabled people.

Government just enforces their will, whatever it be, upon all of us, through force to benefit a few. It benefits everyone, all individuals, all colors, all religions, disabled or not, to have a truly free society. The more free, less taxes, less regulations, the better the society. The less free, more taxes and regulations, the worst off we are as a whole.

Is there bad in the market place? Yes.
In the free-market though, the bad will always be weeded out. It's like the hand of God reaching down and taking them out.

In government, there is nothing to weed out the bad, government don't have that incentive to be good or innovative. With the money they take by force via taxation, it wouldn't really matter to them if they do good or bad, they make their money.

The free society and free-market isn't perfect, but it will always get better.

...we as a people will once again have to dedicate ourselves to establishing the proper role a government plays in a free society. That does not involve the redistribution of wealth through force. It does not mean that government dictates the moral and religious standards of the people. It does not allow us to police the world by involving ourselves in every conflict as if it's our responsibility to manage a world American empire.

But it does mean government has a proper role in guaranteeing free markets, protecting voluntary and religious choices and guaranteeing private property ownership, while punishing those who violate these rules – whether foreign or domestic.

In a free society, the government's job is simply to protect liberty – the people do the rest. Let's not give up on a grand experiment that has provided so much for so many. Let's reject the police state.

U.S. House of Representatives, June 27, 2002
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul41.html

 

[torchbearer]

I'm deaf.

Deaf people require an interpreter for school and most social functions. The ADA provides for this. I would never be able to afford school without it. Conservativly, i estimate it costs about 20,000 a year to provide interpreters for myself alone in school. I pay approximately 3500 in tuition a semester not including housing or books.

This is really the only socialist policy that I benefit from, and i'm against them in general.

Conflict of interest?

What would Ron Paul do?

You state would provide social services more efficiently than the ADA.. more money could go to interpreters if it wasn't wasted on government bureaucrats in washington.

 

[torchbearer]

Hmmm. I am seeing exactly the opposite of what I expected. And after reading what Ron said, I am VERY disappointed. Glad I found out this far in the game.
Very disappointing, I assure you.

Was Ron Paul in this thread? I must have missed him...

 

[Corydoras]

Was Ron Paul in this thread? I must have missed him...

Then tell the mods to move it to General and change the title. I'm not sure they will. But you are making a libertarian case against special considerations for the disabled, and not Ron Paul's from his writings and speeches.

Ron Paul is a Republican with libertarian leanings, and it's been twenty years since he ran as a libertarian, and moreover he is a physician who is well aware of the costs of both disability and of keeping the disabled from being educated and working... so really, who knows what he thinks, except that the ADA is bad law?

 

[LeadvilleCompuGeek]

What are you advocating instead, and do you think you will go for another candidate, and if so, which one? This is very interesting to me because, as you may have guessed, I kn3ow a lot about disability issues second-hand.

I'm not sure what I'm going to do.

Why should everyone else be COERCED to pay for your disabilities? This is entirely different from requesting others to help you.

Brutus, that is literally THE most ignorant and bigoted response I have heard of yet, even from other candidates. If you don't know about the situation, ask. When you make such comments like that it only discolors Ron's platform.
I have discussed this issue with neo-nazis, communists, socialist and democrats as well, and your comment is the worst of all.

ADA and similar regulations create massive unintended consequences. I might hire someone with a disability if I know that I can fire them if it doesn't work out (same as with anyone else), however, once the ADA gives them a huge club of infinite legal fees and endless hassle I'm going to find ways to NOT hire someone with a disability so they don't even get a chance to prove that they could be an asset to my company. The risk is just too high.

There is no risk from hiring the impaired/disabled. Only risk your buisness faces is that you did not do enough research.

Actually, precisely for this and many other similar reasons, my business has NO employees. Only partners.

Then perhaps you should discuss that very same issue with representatives of SCORE or the local SBDC. You will find different.

Then tell the mods to move it to General and change the title. I'm not sure they will. But you are making a libertarian case against special considerations for the disabled, and not Ron Paul's from his writings and speeches.

Amazing. Ask about his stance & opinion and automatically people think special considerations are demanded. I did read a few of Ron's articles, and I'm still not sure of his stance as he did not appear to approach that issue specifically.

Ron Paul is a Republican with libertarian leanings, and it's been twenty years since he ran as a libertarian, and moreover he is a physician who is well aware of the costs of both disability and of keeping the disabled from being educated and working... so really, who knows what he thinks, except that the ADA is bad law?

IF thre was an article that specifically addressed this issue, which is what I have been looking for, then we would have the answer. Is the ADA a bad law? No, it really isn't. I have worked in a wide variety of fields, including being a small business owner and I have worked with people with disabilities as well as living with several impairments myself. If properly applied the ADA is not a bad law and there is no harm to the business. The ADA protects the rights and abilities of the disabled & impaired community and does not infringe on anyone or any business. There are already several laws that came before the ADA that have far more detrimental effect than the ADA does.

I expected you guys to at least know what you're talking about, but I see that you don't.

I have tried Ron's site/e-mail contact form, but found it wasn't working. Might be my browser, I don't know. I called the (703) number, and the young man there referred me to Ron's congressional site. We'll see what I find out.

Before I change my mind on who I support I'm going to make darn well sure why. While *I* may not decide who I support based on the bloggers and forum members, I know there's a number of people out there that do.

 

[MadTheologian]

I'm not here to whine about what I have experienced. I'm here to find out Ron's position on this. My apologies for getting a bit personal.

You know...it's okay to ask about those matters. I am in the same boat as well. I have suffered prejudice for being one with Asperger's Syndrome-- even by those within my former field. Thank God that I have friends and allies who stood by me and encouraged me. And as for those who I left, they will reap what they sow.

And I'm getting a better deal in life today, thanks to the geek culture. I'm trying to grok Java...but it takes time and there are resources. That's the thing. There are resources and mentors-- I asked for help. They care not whether one is disabled. They do care though if I can master a nested loop.

The state with its byzantine rules and regulations has pigeon-holed us, with "IEPs", and its "little short bus" segregation. No real solutions, just more segregation-- which foments bigotry within communities.

What those with disabilities ask for is their own voices, so they can get help as they want it-- and kind, proactive ears to listen. Not some self-appointed condensing do-gooder with "Their Best Intentions," their own voices. Real careers and opportunities to learn, not some two-bit token job. Solutions, not pity. And even if some do not make a sound, not being able to speak does not mean not having anything to say. I am hoping that Dr Paul's message will include that.

 

[LeadvilleCompuGeek]

Was Ron Paul in this thread? I must have missed him...

My apologies. I meant what he said in his writings.

You know...it's okay to ask about those matters. I am in the same boat as well. I have suffered prejudice for being one with Asperger's Syndrome-- even by those within my former field. Thank God that I have friends and allies who stood by me and encouraged me. And as for those who I left, they will reap what they sow.

And I'm getting a better deal in life today, thanks to the geek culture. I'm trying to grok Java...but it takes time and there are resources. That's the thing. There are resources and mentors-- I asked for help. They care not whether one is disabled. They do care though if I can master a nested loop.

The state with its byzantine rules and regulations has pigeon-holed us, with "IEPs", and its "little short bus" segregation. No real solutions, just more segregation-- which foments bigotry within communities.

What those with disabilities ask for is their own voices, so they can get help as they want it-- and kind, proactive ears to listen. Not some self-appointed condensing do-gooder with "Their Best Intentions," their own voices. Real careers and opportunities to learn, not some two-bit token job. Solutions, not pity. And even if some do not make a sound, not being able to speak does not mean not having anything to say. I am hoping that Dr Paul's message will include that.

My opinion is if it's ok to refuse to hire someone based on disability, then it's ok to refuse to hire based on race or religion. What so many people, here especially, fail to see is when you attack or restrict the rights of a few, you really justify the attack on and restriction of the rights of others.

The Americans with Disabilities Act really is a good law, the problem that poses as a threat to businesses and the disabled community alike is the lack of enforcement. Right now it's something the EEOC or USDoJ can enforce for any willy nilly reason to any extent they so wish. It doesn't matter what the written law says, they re-write it to suit their motives. Businesses can be and are unlawfully prosecuted for non-compliance when the due process outlines in the ADA is ignored. Members of the disabled community face a tremendous amount of scrutiny and ridicule, and yes even have to open their entire lives to the agency investigating the complaint. And the defendant gets those same medical records. When I did a complaint with the EEOC against Wal Mart, they gave Wal Mart everything on me. Including records going back to when I was 7 years old getting a tonsilectomy. Totally unrelated. If there was a federal group overseeing the operations of those agencies, making sure they are compliant with the written laws regarding the ADA, this would never have happened. Right now, all I can do is sue the federal government, and since I don't have the money to hire a lawyer, I'm SOL. As I was saying about attacking & restricting the rights of a few. If I was black and I was unlawfully discriminated against, the USDoJ & EEOC would be crawling all over Wal Mart. If you go look into their history you'll find that is a rare act they commit. Anything else though, commonplace.

So when Torchbearer talks about individual rights, I become confused. Individual rights for who? Normal people only, anyone with a disability now has none? How is that right? With just Torchbearer saying that, I can ignore it. If RP said it, I would certainly NOT support him.

One unique problem is when a person has a non-visible impairment. The criticism one gets when an employer, or as I found my congressman (Doug Lamborn) and my senator (Wayne Allard) are even more biased. If they don't approve of your impairment, you get no representation. Is that the individual right to choose that Torchbearer was talking about? Like I told Allard's office, they best deport me NOW. Deport me or represent me. I am his constituent. But no, I have an impairment he apparently doesn't approve of, so forget it. THAT is one of my beefs. Trying to imagine I actually voted for the sonofabitch.


Even in the aforementioned issues and known stances, right now I see far more benefit to RP being president than anyone else. Most importantly is that he doesn't flip flop. Kerry & Romney both, hell they might as well be called the pancake boys because they have flip flopped so often. Are they well done yet? RP has yet to change his views. He's steadfast, and that is good. Most importantly, he is seeking mostly donations for his campaign. Others use their own money. That is the kind of honesty people want and need.

We can dicker about the specifics on disability rights later. I wish there was more to RP's writing that this, but such is life. We have to concentrate on getting him into office.

I think that the lack of public view on disability rights will be a downfall. The disabled are not prohibited from voting. And any candidate that promises them more rights, more goodies, more anything, ANYTHING more than what RP has said, and I guarantee you where their vote will go.

And Torchbearer, you'll be astonished when you find out how many disabled/handicapped/impaired people are out there.

 

[Mark Mosconi]

I'll be honest, I really don't know a lot about this topic, so maybe I shouldn't say too much. I do think that disabled people are kicked around a lot, and that should not be. They have the same rights as everyone else, but sadly, they are often mistreated. I also know many disabled people personally who can work, and I believe, can be good workers, but choose not to because they get incentives from the government not to. I also know some disabled people who have worked for YEARS with disabilities and are some of the most dedicated workers I know. I have an extreme respect for those who do that.

But as far as what Ron's opinion is in this matter in general, I'm not sure that we can truly say, without consulting Ron. I think maybe it would be a good idea to try to seek out his opinion on the matter, since it is an important question. I think it's unfair for us to try to put words in Ron Paul's mouth about this issue. I certainly wouldn't feel comfortable trying to ASSUME what he might say about it.

 

[nickcoons]

My opinion is if it's ok to refuse to hire someone based on disability, then it's ok to refuse to hire based on race or religion.

Yes, it should be okay based on any of those factors.

What so many people, here especially, fail to see is when you attack or restrict the rights of a few, you really justify the attack on and restriction of the rights of others.

What rights is someone attacking if employers discriminate against someone because of their race, religion, or disability? If I'm an employer, then I created the job. It's mine to do with as I wish, not anyone else's. No one has a right to a job, so no rights are being attacked if someone is discriminated against.

 

[Minuteman]

Im not sure, I'll have to do some research through Pauls stances.

My opinion, even though I know you are not looking for opinions, is this.

As others have stated, it is infringment on the rights of the individual. These laws have a tendency to breed discontent for the special interest group they are meant to protect. In a free market, social views would dictate policy. A business would risk its reputation and market viablility by discriminating against such persons.

Through public relations through special interest groups, which I believe would be more abundant, one would be more likely to influence the market and cripple such practices.

Of course, it wouldnt happen over night. We in this country have been bred to not see the individual, but the "group" they belong to, which lumps group stereotypes on the individual further increasing the gap of inequality.

 

[JohnM]

Yes, it should be okay based on any of those factors.

Hmmm. That would make an interesting poll. Should it be legal to discriminate on basis of race, religion, or disability?

What is the true libertarian position?

(Oh, and what does Dr Paul say?)

 

[ladyliberty]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DT2YET6sg5I
This is a clip from Penn and Teller regarding ADA - I apologize if this has already been posted.

 

[Corydoras]

I think that the lack of public view on disability rights will be a downfall. The disabled are not prohibited from voting. And any candidate that promises them more rights, more goodies, more anything, ANYTHING more than what RP has said, and I guarantee you where their vote will go.

I have known very, very few severely disabled people (with either visible or invisible disabilities) who were not Democrats. The disabilities rights movement, as I've encountered it, is solidly Democrat and solidly behind the entitlement system. In fact, all of the severely disabled people I have known who are Republicans think of themselves as Christian voters first and disabled voters second.

I think there are very many other people who do not put their interests as disabled people first. Many people who actually would qualify as disabled don't think of themselves as such, because they're working and they've never needed adaptive equipment.

 

[nickcoons]

Hmmm. That would make an interesting poll. Should it be legal to discriminate on basis of race, religion, or disability?

That would make an interesting poll.

What is the true libertarian position?

Just what I wrote in my previous post .

 

[Original_Intent]

Yes, it should be okay based on any of those factors.



What rights is someone attacking if employers discriminate against someone because of their race, religion, or disability? If I'm an employer, then I created the job. It's mine to do with as I wish, not anyone else's. No one has a right to a job, so no rights are being attacked if someone is discriminated against.

I agree with this. and customers (both those discriminated against and those not) have a right to say "I will not support a business that discriminates like that!"

Let the market decide. A person should have the right to hire on whatever basis he wants.

 

[LeadvilleCompuGeek]

While I understand what you gentlemen are saying, unfortunately I can't say much more as this isn't a bitching session. All I can say is I hope none of you go through this.

Enough said, as Mark said-

But as far as what Ron's opinion is in this matter in general, I'm not sure that we can truly say, without consulting Ron. I think maybe it would be a good idea to try to seek out his opinion on the matter, since it is an important question. I think it's unfair for us to try to put words in Ron Paul's mouth about this issue. I certainly wouldn't feel comfortable trying to ASSUME what he might say about it.

 

[Corydoras]

unfortunately I can't say much more as this isn't a bitching session. All I can say is I hope none of you go through this.

That doesn't make sense. Why not educate us?

 

[Brutus]

LeadvilleCompuGeek,

Well, then by all means, break into my house and steal my property to support yourself. Just have the honesty to do it yourself.

 

[Brutus]

Or, was there an argument there besides calling me bigoted and ignorant? I must have missed it.

If you can't see the difference between COERCING help and asking for help then I think you are pretty ignorant.

 

[ASayre]

(clearing)