Liberals versus Capitalism

**John Scott** · 03-28-2008, 05:17 PM

Our Liberal totalitarian friends are jumping up and down celebrating driving almost 200 restaurants out of business in the Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Bloomington, MN area alone.

Nationwide, the number is no doubt in the tens of thousands.

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/...ut-out-of.html

thegamerslink · 03-29-2008, 09:54 AM

That is so right it's sad. The bottom line, I always figured, and thought that if a business wanted to be smoke free or a business wanted to allow smoking would/should be an issue in a free country that the business owner would decide. I mean who better knows his client base and who faces the consequences from the decision?
And now I know someone is going to scream the argument....smokers are costing me the taxpayer money......well....whether you smoke drink, eat, breath or whatever, your the taxpayer are going to have to cover the health costs of some. Some live to be 100 years old and smoke their entire lives, others die a slow death of cancer at the age of 10 and never touch or be subjected to a cigarette, or bad eating habits, or alcoholism. Stop being so extreme already, live your life the way you want and allow others to do the same.
Just to add too...the same liberals screaming smokers are costing them so much money or whatever are the same ones that support amnesty states for illegal aliens that aren't paying any taxes but using all our tax money for health care and anything else they can get hold of.

jdspc · 03-30-2008, 02:00 AM

Bring it!
We welcome you...
But you must understand that we hold true to old school!
You have an argument with a patron, click of my shotgun, go outside...too easy...Go Out Side...
This is old School...
It freakin works

My new restaurant will be named 'Smoke Inn'...Our tag will be 'Liquor up front and Poker in the Rear'...

You will not find stupid here.........But you will find an argument....

That is just one of my places...

My other restaurant hates everybody.....

heh heh

**Rankenstein** · 03-31-2008, 03:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Scott

Our Liberal totalitarian friends are jumping up and down celebrating driving almost 200 restaurants out of business in the Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Bloomington, MN area alone.

Nationwide, the number is no doubt in the tens of thousands.

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/...ut-out-of.html

It's the same in the UK for pubs and inns - I don't know how much bars are a major player in the community in the US, but in the UK they can often be the focus or hub of whole villages and communities - 500 year old pubs are really not uncommon, a handful are around the 1000 years old mark. (e.g. a very good friend of mine is landlady of a 700 year old pub.) And many are folding/losing business hand over fist because of this kind of thing.

This is our history going up in smoke.

Atom · 03-31-2008, 04:06 AM

Iron City.

Yessirreebob, they ain't no law down there. Ain't been none for over 20 years. Last sheriff barely got out alive.

Iron City Blues

Atom · 03-31-2008, 04:28 AM

Just ask ol' Monkey Tidwell, he'll tell ya.

KeithCash · 03-31-2008, 07:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdspc

Bring it!
We welcome you...
But you must understand that we hold true to old school!
You have an argument with a patron, click of my shotgun, go outside...too easy...Go Out Side...
This is old School...
It freakin works

My new restaurant will be named 'Smoke Inn'...Our tag will be 'Liquor up front and Poker in the Rear'...

You will not find stupid here.........But you will find an argument....

That is just one of my places...

My other restaurant hates everybody.....

heh heh

This could also be a place to hold AA meetings and Gamblers anonymous

Not to mention quite smoking seminars

Zap · 03-31-2008, 07:27 AM

Two points:

1. Gamerslink makes the arguement ...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gamerslink

well....whether you smoke drink, eat, breath or whatever, your the taxpayer are going to have to cover the health costs of some.

If we, as humans, want to live, we have to breathe, drink and eat. We don't have to smoke.
2. That list of bars and restaurants is only showing part of the story. Where's the list of new bars and restaurants opened during the same period? Restaurants and bars in a busy city open and close all the time. And where is the list of closures for the same amount of time previous to the ban for some kind of reference? For all we know, that was a small amount of closures for that stretch of time.

BTW, I'm a smoker, but I don't expose my kids to it anywhere (including my home) and it's nice to know that I can take my kids to a restaurant that won't kill them.

thegamerslink · 03-31-2008, 07:40 AM

I would think a 500-1,000 year old pub would/should most definately fall under some kind of grandfather clause??? LoL

thegamerslink · 03-31-2008, 07:46 AM

I am a smoker too zap, I don't smoke in the house etc either. However the true point of the matter here really isn't whether it is ok to smoke in a business but the evaporation of common rights, I mean things like the seat belt law, whether you are allowed to smoke in a bar, your house, outside, in your car as you drive. Are you allowed to keep the door open when your business is open for customers, stupid things that you'll find all over this country, some counties it's actually illegal to walk down the street wearing lipstick. And like you said you like having a place to go that there aren't smokers, well, that is true with a lot of people, making a market for such a thing and businesses would adapt on their own to accomodate, there doesn't and shouldn't be a law enforcing them to run their business a certain way.

Zap · 03-31-2008, 07:55 AM

You can't compare a smoking ban to some stupid lipstick law, though.
One is clearly harmful to the health of others. The other is not.

Every jurisdiction has it's share of stupid laws. They're a fact of life and some of them are even amusing.

And, you say that businesses should be allowed to run as the owner sees fit. But, you'd probably be upset if you learned that your favourite restaurant was never inspected by anyone for health violations. Right?
What's the difference there?

**Rankenstein** · 03-31-2008, 08:07 AM

After looking more closely at the effect of the ban in the UK, I see it's currently running at four pubs closing down every day:
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/...307985,00.html

It might be an issue of individual health, but what happens when the ban affects the health of the community? That's certainly the case in the countryside, whereas cities can weather it somewhat but even so, 2% of all urban pubs have closed in the last year.

It sucks.

thegamerslink · 03-31-2008, 08:23 AM

You miss the point. The point is you have the choice not to go to the places that allow smoking. It's not up to government to control these things, it's up to the companies themselves, and up to the consumer to make these things happen.
You can't dictate that a business that say has 100 customers, 75 that smoke either casually or immensely and 25 that don't has to not allow smoking just because 10 of the 25 find it beyond acceptable to be around the 75 others. If those 10 don't like it then those 10 should simply choose not to go there. The business then can decide whether keeping those 10 is worth banning smoking somehow or to find a way to accomodate them....not have governments tell them what they can or can't do....You have to keep the free enterprise and power of the consumer system going and by making these laws you are destroying it. That would be like if you had told me when I still owned my computer store that I can sell pc's but I can't sell them if they have linux on them because you find it offensive.....if you find it offensive don't go around it that simple....and we aren't talking just places to go eat, we are talking bars, or cigar stores, every place of business that are affected by these types of green river ordinances....

And I can't walk in and see if an eatery is using expired meat or washing their hands before preparing back in the kitchen, I can however see if people sitting in the dining area are smoking....that is a big difference.....and again, they have to post the grade they are given so me the consumer can choose whether to eat there or not.....they don't get closed down unless they fail...but they do have to display the grade they were given

thegamerslink · 03-31-2008, 08:31 AM

And I just had another thought because this is stupid. If I were to go into a city or town that had this law. I opened an office one that I didn't have customers come in to, just a place that I go and do my work for the reason lets say I don't have dsl or cable at my house so I open an office to do my computer work over highspeed internet but I'm not an open for business type business....If it's found out that I smoke while I'm sitting at my desk I'm breaking the city laws and can be fined or arrested for it???? So who am I endangering in such a case and who's health other than mine am I putting at risk??

Zap · 03-31-2008, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thegamerslink

You miss the point. The point is you have the choice not to go to the places that allow smoking. It's not up to government to control these things, it's up to the companies themselves, and up to the consumer to make these things happen.

I don't think so. Read below...

Quote:

Originally Posted by thegamerslink

they have to post the grade they are given so me the consumer can choose whether to eat there or not.....they don't get closed down unless they fail...but they do have to display the grade they were given

Following your logic... Why bother to grade (or even inspect) them at all? Why not just let the public decide which bars and restaurants they think are clean? That's consumerism, right? Why force them to wash their hands or throw out food that has landed on the floor. The public will decide which businesses survive. That's the free market system.

And, I can walk into a restaurant that nobody is smoking in, sit down, order my food and while I'm waiting for my food to arrive at the table, a group of 10 smokers walks in and sits down. Just because I don't see any when I walk in, doesn't mean my kids and I will be allowed a smoke free meal.
And what's the big deal, anyway? Just head outside for the 5 minutes it takes to smoke a cigarette.
We don't allow smoking at gas stations, schools, on airplanes, in hospitals and a whole list of other places. Why should a ban be OK there but not where people are trying to eat food?

thegamerslink · 03-31-2008, 09:34 AM

Getting back to the real subject of the smoking ban as a whole. Would you take your child to a bar or pub? Do you generally take your children to a cigar shop? The law itself is to broad and to general and it is discriminatory towards those that smoke. When you walked into a place to eat in the past if memory serves they had designated smoking areas and non smoking areas. It would have been better to stipulate requirements for a smoking area i.e. distance from non-smoking area, ventilation techniques etc than to outlaw it all together, and when you walked into someplace that you eat at it usually did display the signs of smoking and non smoking, if it didn't then you ask before you sit down. Or, if you want make it a law that if it only has so many square feet and they do nothing but serve food then no smoking. Just like a lot of places said no liquor sales on Sunday unless you serve food.

As for hospitals, gas stations, and planes....actually it wasn't very long ago that you could smoke in hospitals, I'm only 40 and I remember when that ban came into effect because I was working at The Naval Hospital in Long Beach back then....As for planes that is not only an enclosed space but also a pressurized space pretty much a no brainer and as for gas stations, you can smoke at a gas station as long as you are a safe distance from the pumps...smoking at the pumps is just suicidal and the business owners have had this in effect long before anyone thought of making it a law just from common sense.