I'm encouraged to hear that things are also improving in Sweden, although respectfully I'll reserve judgement about the problem being "fixed" until I hear it from a handicapped person. It's remarkable how much we overlook - I recall one disagreement with coworkers over the presence of a step to get into the restaurant they had just entered.
I can readily scale a curb or pair of steps with a stroller in a way that a wheelchair user cannot (or can only with difficulty/risk).
For example, there is a well-known road full of small boutique shops, cafes, etc. in a city where I used to live. Some of those places were visibly adapted to allow things like wheelchair access, ticking all the relevant legal boxes under our disability discrimination laws. Some of them were in older buildings that couldn't easily provide the physical allowances that we'd probably design in from the start today, but they had friendly staff who were very willing to help wheelchair users or others with disabilities, and these places also seemed to be well regarded by local people who needed that help. So far, so good.
It's hard to tell exactly what happened next because there's so much hearsay with these things, but it appears that one day someone in a wheelchair decided to retain a lawyer and possibly just went along that street bringing legal actions against anywhere that wasn't absolutely compliant with the letter of the law. This posed an existential threat to some of those small businesses, even though in fact they were very disabled-friendly and often had regular customers with disabilities who were quick to come to their defence. I'm not sure how those legal actions were resolved or whether they're still ongoing, and there were some other unrelated local problems that certainly weren't making life any easier for the people running those establishments around the same time so it's hard to know whether the businesses that have closed were closed because of this. But if nothing else, this use of the legal system by apparently just one single individual has surely caused a huge amount of distress to many good people and possibly cost a lot of businesses what was for them a lot of money without necessarily making anything materially better for the people these laws were supposed to protect.
As the saying goes, this is why we can't have nice things.
So the father fought against disabled people's rights and the son killed the country's aerospace sector.
What a dynasty!
Not sure what you mean by "killing the aerospace sector", but it's very off topic, which is why you're getting downvoted. If you're referring to cancelling the F-35 procurement, that's just declining to throw good money after bad. That project was a disaster.
Wow, ok. I assumed it was the father since the ADA was discussed in congress back in the 80's.
> Not sure what you mean by "killing the aerospace sector"
Well, he went from writing a check to Lockheed to writing a check to Boeing.
But I'm talking about the Bombardier CSeries. It failed to get mainstream media coverage. It reached production and had healthy sales numbers. It was Bombardier's second clean sheet design (after the Global) to reach market and had the potential to be stretched to seat counts comparable to smaller 737 and A319.
President Trump levied tariffs on it and that's what prompted a takeover by Airbus (for 1$!). What did the Trudeau government do meanwhile to protect it -and by extension Canada's aerospace sector? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. It's crazy how he basically bowed down immediately.
https://airwaysmag.com/industry/commerce-department-sides-bo...