In the excerpts mentioned, the idea of access varies across the different topics the authors focus on, but ultimately have the same idea: access is to provide every person with the same opportunity as everyone else in daily life. In Andersen’s article Navigating Through Ableist Architecture, she clearly addresses the problem of architectural restrictions for people with physical disabilities and how they have led to the exclusion of the disabled population. She further explains how certain cities in the US are using new technology and design to aid people with disabilities such as diagonal crosswalks and alternate ramps and calls for the rest of the country to follow these examples. For the travel industry, Andersen states that access for physically disabled people is limited by the airlines because they have reduced seat sizes and legroom in planes to increase their profits. Airports also limit people with disabilities due to lack of access, causing the disabled people to declare their need for special accommodations. Overall, she concludes that cities and industries should prioritize accessibility, and that once they address the problem, they would actually benefit from it since disabled people make up a large percentage of the population.

In Nicolaci da Costa’s article about the technology gap in the US, he states that nearly half of US families with low income do not have access to internet at home, and one-third do not have access to cell phones. This increases the gap between the classes since lack of technology access in poorer families limits them career-wise and financially. Nicolaci da Costa explains that the problem can be addressed by early intervention, and that by providing lower income families’ children with access to technology, they will grow up with the knowledge needed for careers in new industries and provide them with more equal opportunity.

The US should work to provide both people with physical disabilities and people with financial burdens with access (equal opportunity to people who aren’t limited). Since both groups make up a large percentage of the population (20% physically disabled, 15% living in poverty), providing them with greater access is a significant problem cities and industries face today. For minorities who are a small percentage of the population, it would be very difficult to provide them with specific accommodations in public places. This would not be unethical, since these instances are rare and would be costly to implement everywhere. The focus should be to aid the bigger group of people with physical disabilities and financial hardships.