ECONOMIC LOSSES DUE TO SMOKING BANS IN CALIFORNA AND OTHER STATES

United Pro Choice ^ | 3-6-05 | David W. Kuneman and Michael J. McFadden

[Lucky Dog]

Perhaps bringing shades along with you would be prudent just in case the sunshine through the windows blasts all enjoyment away from your pleasure too.

Bit of a reach, don't you think?

Me thinks both are compatible lest only smokers are surviving today

Not sure what you intended with this comment. However, let me point out that more than 80% of lung cancer is directly linked to smoking and the majority of premature heart disease is similarly linked. Consequently, it is safe to say that many smokers are not surviving to day.

[speekinout]

I'm glad to see such research. It confirms the anecdotal evidence I see from our local anti-smoking laws. There have been a number of closings of old-time restaurants and bars. Several others who spent a lot of money to segregate smoking and non-smoking areas with high-tech ventilation either went under or are barely surviving.
And one "new town" area that was promised to have many restaurants and small shops has turned out to be mostly carry-outs. High scale carry-outs, but still carry-out. Even their businesses might get hurt more if the anti-smoking cadre manages to get the laws changed so that smoking outdoors is also illegal. (In nice weather, many people buy from the carry-outs and eat in the picnic areas).

[Gabz]

Prohibiting smoking is no different than any of those other restrictions on a "private" business.

Actually it is, on many levels.........but primarily the fact that all the other restrictions were in place and agreed upon before openning the doors to "some" members of the public.

As to my "selfish views," it is those who wish to smoke that are exhibiting selfishness.

Not if it is the owner that is the smoker. You dictating his use of his property is selfish. No one has to patronize an establishment where they do no like the atmosphere. telling him he can't smoke in his own place is like mandating he serve certain types of food because you don't like what he is currently serving. If you don't like the place, go elsewhere or better yet, spend your own money and open your own place and leave small business people alone.

[Lucky Dog]

Actually it is, on many levels.........but primarily the fact that all the other restrictions were in place and agreed upon before openning the doors to "some" members of the public.

Do you think that there were no business in existence when any of those previous restrcitions were enacted? Do you think that the owners of those businesses should have been exempted just because their businesses existed prior to the law's enactment?

You dictating his use of his property is selfish.

If he opens his (or her) business to the public, then he or she is restricted by law what he or she can do in the business. This true for any business. For example, a smoker may not smoke in an explosive manufacturing business, even if it is his, nor may a smoker light up in the operating room of a private hospital, even if it his business.

[Gabz]

Mixing apples and oranges only tells me you have no case other than your own selfish desires.

If you want to eat in a smoke free restaurant talk to the owner, not the government, or find another place to your liking.

[Lucky Dog]

Mixing apples and oranges only tells me you have no case other than your own selfish desires

You still have not countered the argument that everyone has to breathe, but no one has to smoke. Therefore, how is it my selfish desires rather than the smoker's selfish desires?

If you want to eat in a smoke free restaurant talk to the owner, not the government, or find another place to your liking

My counter is just as simple: if you don't like living in a state that restricts smoking in any business open to the public then stop whining and move to a different state. The states where the people's representatives have passed a law for the safety, and enjoyment of the public of that business have acted for the majority of the public.

[SheLion]

I take words seriously now and your words are a frivolous attempt at conveying a mindset of government knows all mentality. Oh, by the way I am a comfortable post open heart surgery smoker with a a true conviction for personal rights.

There you go! Well said!

[SheLion]

Not sure what you intended with this comment. However, let me point out that more than 80% of lung cancer is directly linked to smoking and the majority of premature heart disease is similarly linked. Consequently, it is safe to say that many smokers are not surviving to day.

You are full of it! I'm tired of you spewing your lies.

Smoking Does Not

Cause Lung Cancer

(According to WHO/CDC Data)*

By:  James P. Siepmann, MD

(excerpt) You don't see this type of information being reported, and we hear things like, "if you smoke you will die", but when we actually look at the data, lung cancer accounts for only 2% of the annual deaths worldwide and only 3% in the US.**

Failure of Lung Cancer Drug Stumps Researchers

So, NON smokers also get lung cancer? Aren't we constantly told that we will get lung cancer because we smoke? Sorry non-smokers. This one is for you.

[SheLion]

You post at FREE Republic because you are all for freedom... but only the freedoms you approve of. Please move to a small country run by one person and then in a few years come back with a real understanding of the word freedom.

[Lucky Dog]

You are full of it! I'm tired of you spewing your lies.

"Spewing" my lies??? Doesn't this wording strike you as a bit over the top, emotionally? I suggest you consult the CDC statistics rather just the one you quoted. There are dozens of studies that provide a definitive link between smoking and lung cancer as well as heart diease. Why do you think health insurance companies charge smokers more?

Sorry non-smokers. This one is for you.

I really don't care if you smoke. I care if you subject me or my loved ones to your second-hand smoke. I care if you make me pay through my taxes that support medicare for indigent smokers who have spent all their money on thier habit and its results. I care if you are responsible for taking up medical research money that could be going to cure some disease that the sufferer can not prevent through a simple act of will.

[EGPWS]

Bit of a reach, don't you think?

I'm not the one reaching my FRiend. I'm just the one replying to a reaching post.

[EGPWS]

I care if you make me pay through my taxes that support medicare for indigent smokers who have spent all their money on thier habit and its results.

In other words YOU are for government subsidized personal regulation even when it is legal.

I'm just the messenger, so don't chastise me, just take a long look in the mirror.

[SheLion]

I really don't care if you smoke. I care if you subject me or my loved ones to your second-hand smoke. I care if you make me pay through my taxes that support medicare for indigent smokers who have spent all their money on thier habit and its results. I care if you are responsible for taking up medical research money that could be going to cure some disease that the sufferer can not prevent through a simple act of will.

You are hopeless.  You have been mind controlled so bad by the anti's that you will never want to hear any other side but the side you desire to believe.

And smokers do NOT cost you anymore for health care.  If you would take some time to read the links provided, you would understand more.  But you are hidden deep inside your own skull and there is nothing else that can penetrate it.

And don't worry!  You will never see me!  Ever.  Smoke or no smoke.  Your kind I have no desire to ever meet.

Read the damn link.  Maybe you will learn something!

The BIG LIE That Smoking is an Economic Burden To Society
 

[EGPWS]

I really don't care if you smoke.

ROTFLMAO!

I feel a "Bob and Tom" moment coming on.

[EGPWS]

You are hopeless.

Well said and to the point SheLion!

[SheLion]

Well said and to the point SheLion!

Well I am sick and tired of these half baked idiots.

It's their view or no view. They can't even be opened up for a decent discussion or debate.

[Lucky Dog]

You post at FREE Republic because you are all for freedom... but only the freedoms you approve of.

I am for "liberty." Freedom without responsibility is not "liberty"... it is "license" according to the founding fathers. The will of the people as expressed through their elected representatives is within the bounds of "liberty" as long as there is no infringement upon the constitutions of either the individual state or the US.

Please move to a small country run by one person and then in a few years come back with a real understanding of the word freedom.

I have lived all over the world (eight years overseas) and in multiple states. Additionally, I have served in two combat theaters. Consequently, I think that I have earned the right to say that I have a "real" understanding of the word freedom. I don't need lessons from you, thank you.

[EGPWS]

It's their view or no view. They can't even be opened up for a decent discussion or debate.

Opening up would render their debate undebatable. thus rendering their debate undebatable!

[Gabz]

This has nothing to do with wether I wish to smoke or you do not wish to be around it.......it has to do with the desire of the owner as to the clientele he wishes to cater........and from the numbers presented here, and numbers many of us have been posting over the years, smoking bans are detrimental to business.......in other words, your selfishness has hurt a small business man.......I hope you are proud of yourself.

As to not liking a state that resticts smoking and moving.............I used to live in Delaware.....i no longer do........and that smoking ban passed before NY's....I saw first hand how the ban devastated the businesses of many of my friends. The anal retentive anti-smokers who insisted they would go out more when the ban was passed never materialized - typical liberal selfish socialists - do as I say not as I do.

Open your own smoke-free place if it means so much to you an leave small business people alone.

[EGPWS]

I have lived all over the world (eight years overseas) and in multiple states. Additionally, I have served in two combat theaters. Consequently, I think that I have earned the right to say that I have a "real" understanding of the word freedom. I don't need lessons from you, thank you.

Let's give Lucky Dog a commendation!

All Together now.........

OOOOOH, AAAAAAAAH!