Another case study for logic and ethics

I've had a series of examples about how people need to use their faith and reasoning abilities better if we are ever to dig ourselves out of the terrible mess that society and the human spirit is in today. Another case study has come to my attention that we can use to retrain our brains and draw upon faith in order to improve conditions.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,356727,00.html

snip

Since all paper money feels pretty much the same, the government is denying blind people meaningful access to the currency, the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled Tuesday. The decision could force the Treasury Department to make bills of different sizes or print them with raised markings or other distinguishing features.
The American Council of the Blind sued for such changes, but the government has been fighting the case for about six years.
The U.S. acknowledges the current design hinders blind people, but it argues that they have adapted. Some rely on store clerks to help, some use credit cards and others fold certain corners to help distinguish between bills.
"I don't think we should have to rely on people to tell us what our money is," said Mitch Pomerantz, the Council of the Blind president.

***
OK, in brief, here is that status. The United States, unlike most other countries, has a history of uniform size currency, where various bills cannot be distinguished by touch (their size for example). Some, not all, advocates for the blind have argued that this is discriminatory, while the government has resisted making the requested size changes. So this has been for years in the court system.

Here's the errors in logic and the omission of faith. The first error in logic is to use the word "discriminatory." This ignores fact finding opportunity about why bills have been the same size throughout USA history. It probably has to do with economics. The USA at some point in its history decided to, with democratic zeal, use one size fits all machinery to print both small denomination bills and large. The government saved money this way and it was consistent with the democratic spirit of the founding of this country. Other countries have big fat bills for big denominations not because they cared about the blind. They did it so that they could print currency that is "aristocratic," portraying their values in increasing size and artistic scale. So to call the USA's democratic, bland and uniform system of currency "discriminatory" is an inaccurate mindset that is a barrier to positive problem solving and fact finding. The money that the USA saved over all these years of using the same printing presses and corporations having vending machines that only need accommodate one size is a real savings that benefited all segments of the economy, including the blind.

However, times change and it is charitable to examine where better accommodation can be made. This is the second error in logic, and the omission of faith. There is no reason that the government should not have been glad to do a study of options that they could pursue to make the currency more accommodating to the blind. Why would anyone have to be forced to do a study of options? For example, instead of changing the size of the bills, could they use papers with different texture? Why not gladly commission a study of alternatives? It's ridiculous and uncharitable that advocates to blind have to latch onto one solution that they think up themselves (right or wrong) and then sue. A government that is well informed by charitable concern for all segments of the population should have had no problem funding a study of alternatives and then identify the cost/ benefits of each alternative.

So both sides have been in error and have actually hindered prompt, friendly and cost effective resolution of this problem. If a study had been commissioned years ago we might have found that one alternative made a lot of sense and could have been implemented along with the security changes that were recently made to bills. Like I said, what if a special texture paper were used for the $20 bill? It is the same size but feels different. Vendors could have tested if these rougher bills, for example, would still work in vending machines, ATMs and so forth. We could have had a friendly partial solution by now. And the supplier of paper to the US Mint might have had a new opportunity to provide new paperstock for the new $20 bill, meaning USA jobs and so forth.

Acrimony and victim mentality hinders progress. It's flat out obvious.