Smokers

[Androvski]

Ain't freedom wonderful?



Usually relocation is a good choice. It depends on where you are talking about. If I own a private business and I allow smoking, then a non-smoker either has the choice to deal with it or work somewhere else. If I am in my home or other private property, you have the choice to stand down-wind or leave. If you are talking about a restaurant or other private establishment open to the public, you have the choice of patronizing one of the majority of restaurants today that do not allow smoking. See - life is full of choices that do not require using the government to restrict a legal activity on private property.



Your livelihood depends on having a job, not necessarily that job. As with any situation, if the workplace conditions do not suit you, and there is nothing illegal going on, I would suggest you seek employment elsewhere. Again, ain't freedom wonderful?



As I have said, if you own the business and as a business owner you choose to prohibit smoking - bully for you! That's more of that freedom thing. As a business owner you certainly have the right to fire an employee who breaks the rules you set in place. Again though, if you have the right to fire me for smoking, that must also give me the right to fire you for not smoking if that is my choice as a business owner.

I don't know what the unemployment levels are in Georgia,but they must be extremely low if people there can change jobs and relocate whenever they feel like it!
Many people have to take whatever employment they can get and their livelihood most certainly does depend on"that job"!
As for restaurants-bars etc,I agree it is the individuals option whether they go there or not,but we re not discussing places where we spend comparatively short periods of time in, we are talking about somewhere where we spend a considerable percentage of our lives.
As for your home,it is your right to merrily smoke yourself to death there if you so desire,as you said,"ain't freedom wonderful"and I'm sure that even the most anti-smoking guest can tolerate it for the short period of their visit.

 

[walrus]

I don't know what the unemployment levels are in Georgia,but they must be extremely low if people there can change jobs and relocate whenever they feel like it!

You missed my point entirely. I never suggested that finding new employment is that easy, in fact I think someone should weigh very carefully the pros and cons before making such a change. I did suggest that if a person finds that their employer allowing a legal activity to take place in a private business is an intolerable working condition, their only remedy should be to find different employment.

Many people have to take whatever employment they can get and their livelihood most certainly does depend on"that job"!

You are not entitled to a job. You are certainly not entitled to a job in which all of the conditions meet your specifications. If you feel that is the case, I would suggest sticking with government jobs. Private business in a free market should be allowed to regulate itself in most instances, and certainly in this one.

As for restaurants-bars etc,I agree it is the individuals option whether they go there or not,but we re not discussing places where we spend comparatively short periods of time in, we are talking about somewhere where we spend a considerable percentage of our lives.

And if you believe that others smoking is a great risk to your life, or if it is simply that offensive to you then I would suggest you not take that particular job. I feel that offshore tuna fishing is a dangerous job, and I am quite sure I would find the conditions intolerable. Therefore, I will not seek employment in the offshore tuna fishing industry. I am not going to take the job and then start demanding they change the way they run their business or I will sue.

As for your home,it is your right to merrily smoke yourself to death there if you so desire,as you said,"ain't freedom wonderful"and I'm sure that even the most anti-smoking guest can tolerate it for the short period of their visit.

I really hope we haven't reached a point where my right to pursue a legal activity within my privately owned home even has to be affirmed.

Let me clarify where my positions on this lie. I could care less about smoking, this is a simple issue of employer's rights and private property rights. The subject in question could be abnormally strong cologne and I would feel the same way in both instances. If you own a business and want to ban smoking in and out of your business and want to refuse to allow people to even bring cigarettes onto your property that is your right. It is not, however, the right of the government to tell me what legal activities I can allow on my private property, nor is it their right to tell when or when I can not terminate my private employee.

Fantasea, Georgia (and most of the south) are "at will" states.

 

[Androvski]

If a job is'nt dangerous by it's nature,then it should not be made so unnecessarily!and if it is inherently hazardous then the risks should not be augmented by adding another.
Smoking should be banned in every(enclosed) workplace in every country by law,the option being removed from the employer,who by permitting it would then be breaking the law.
What goes on in individuals homes is up to them and their families.If they are prepared to pollute the air their loved ones breath with carcinogenic toxins and their family is prepared to tolerate that,so be it.
I would not care about people bringing cigarettes etc into the workplace,so long as they went outside to smoke.

 

[Fantasea]

I would not care about people bringing cigarettes etc into the workplace,so long as they went outside to smoke.

Are they going outside to on their own time? Or, on company time?

 

[Fantasea]

There is a much bigger issue which is that of cigarette taxes. I live in cook county right now, where the cigarette tax is well over 200%, as opposed to the 18% tax in Iowa City, where I go to school. Now these taxes are typically proposed and endorsed by democrats, who support a progressive tax system. There is a great deal of statistical significance to the fact that the poorer you are, the more likely you are to smoke, and so these taxes are by far the most regressive taxes in the United states. Ironic, right?

Who can argue with Democratic tax policy? The principle is that all of the money one earns belongs to the government, except the amount it allows one to keep. And they struggle mightily to reduce that amount to the absolute minimum any which way they can.

 

[Androvski]

Are they going outside to on their own time? Or, on company time?

That would have to be during breaks only.

 

[Androvski]

As a self employed landscape gardener working outside,I would'nt really care if someone working with me smoked,so long as they continued with their work.My Son will be starting work in an accountants office soon,so I'm more concerned about him.
Where he'll be training does'nt permit smoking,but where he will end up working may have a different policy(I know Walrus,he can choose where he works).He feels as strongly as I do about this issue,having witnessed my Mother's death through lung Cancer.

 

[Fantasea]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fantasea
Are they going outside to on their own time? Or, on company time?

That would have to be during breaks only.

What are the addicts to do when the nicotine wears off and the shakes begin between breaks?

 

[Fantasea]

You live, just bite your lip and start counting the minutes till the next break. Also, it's good if you find a job that allows you quite a few short breaks. Like at the Mercantile Exchange, when things get going it's exciting as hell, but most of the time nothing's going on, and you're just here so that when something happens, something can be done, so I get to go have a smoke every hour. Same with when I worked at an ice cream store. As a smoker, it's definately something I consider when I am job hunting.

You call that living?

Have you ever stopped to consider the full cost to you of smoking?

If your addiction forces you to pass up a job you'd like, then you have lost control, haven't you? Your addiction has become your master, dictating what you may and may not do. You have become the obedient slave.

When is it time to break the chains?

 

[walrus]

You call that living?

Have you ever stopped to consider the full cost to you of smoking?

If your addiction forces you to pass up a job you'd like, then you have lost control, haven't you? Your addiction has become your master, dictating what you may and may not do. You have become the obedient slave.

When is it time to break the chains?

Why do you care? Why do any of you care what individuals who are not under your control do with their lives, their businesses, or their private property? If you are hoping to convince someone that smoking is bad, don't bother. By the year 2005, either a person has heard that smoking is bad and chooses to do it anyway, or they are so incredibly mis-informed that your heads-up isn't likely to be the shining solution.

I still fail to see how so many people get stuck on a trivial little subject that they have their own agenda wrapped around (smoking) and in order to "stick it to" a group that they do not like they are perfectly willing to turn over yet another aspect of private property rights to the government. NO ONE who possibly considers themselves conservative can be for the government's proscription of a legal activity on private property and be worthy of the name. This is so contrary to the concepts of free market and private enterprise that I find it hard to believe I am still repeating this. So, to sum up, if you are a liberal who believes that the government knows what's best for all of us and you are comfortable turning over your decisions to them - by all means support this legislation. If you hold yourself out to be a person who is for limited government intervention and individual rights - it is not possible for you to support this.

Freedom is allowing someone to do something you hate, because their freedom is tied into your own.

 

[Fantasea]

I've been smoking for 11 years now, so I've had plenty of time to consider the full cost of smoking.
I still don't believe that because smoking is bad justifies all of the persecution smokers suffer because of it. I mean, christ, I made a dumb decision when I was 9 years old, and because of it my county views me as a commodity that they can suck dry, and the nonsmokers don't view it as a problem, even when I couldn't afford to eat because of the cigarette taxes, because it was my decision, and thus I should be punished, and of course the threat of lung cancer and emphazyma aren't enough, and they also view it as ok to tell me how to live my life thinking they're on some moral high ground because they don't smoke.
Last time I checked this country was about the right to live your life as you see fit, and me, I like smoking cigarettes, and some businesses like allowing customers to smoke cigarettes, but for some ridiculous reason a bunch of arrogant pricks decided that they needed to tell us how to live, saying that business owners can't make decisions about how to run their business on issues like whether or not they want to allow smoking in their establishment, and they just love the fact that they've thrust me nearly into poverty solely because I made a decision that they don't like. I personally think they're f*cking facists.

The last time I heard a diatribe like this, it came from a person who tried to kick the habit and failed so many times that he finally gave up and accepted his fate.

If my math is correct, at age 20, you have been a nicotine addict for over half your life. Things won't get any better, cheaper, or safer. I doubt that, during your 'teen years, the down side of smoking was foremost in your thoughts.

One of the reasons the 'fascists' are concerned is that the cost to Medicare and Medic-Aid for smoking pulmonary diseases and cancers is spiraling and shows no sign of leveling off. You can expect the taxes to also continue to spiral.

 

[walrus]

The last time I heard a diatribe like this, it came from a person who tried to kick the habit and failed so many times that he finally gave up and accepted his fate.

I still am not sure why you care, but oh well...

One of the reasons the 'fascists' are concerned is that the cost to Medicare and Medic-Aid for smoking pulmonary diseases and cancers is spiraling and shows no sign of leveling off. You can expect the taxes to also continue to spiral.

It doesn't even require much imagination to see what other activities we can allow the government to take control of using this reasoning. Obesity anyone? How can we allow these obese people to continue eating whatever they want while our tax dollars pay for their strokes, heart disease, and diabetes? How about people who don't exercise? A recent WHO study showed that sedentary people are almost at the same risk for heart disease as smokers. Shouldn't we pass a law requiring everyone to exercise twenty minutes a day? How about people who eat too many sweets? Between dental bills and diabetes I am sure chocoholics bump your insurance premiums and taxes up significantly. How about people whose irresponsible lifestyles cause them to contract a STD? Shouldn't we make it illegal to have unprotected sex?

Some of this might make sense if you were arguing for the illegalization of cigarettes, but you aren't. You are simply arguing that it is the right of the Federal government to dictate which legal activities I can and can not practice on my own private property. It amazes me the number of people who claim to be for limited government and personal freedom who see nothing wrong with giving the government this power over private lives.

 

[Androvski]

What are the addicts to do when the nicotine wears off and the shakes begin between breaks?

1 Give up,2 Chew copious amounts of gum,3 (and I like this bit)Suffer,because if smoking was permitted the non smokers,who are likely these days to be in the majority,would be the one's to suffer,through no fault of their own.

 

[Androvski]

I still am not sure why you care, but oh well...



It doesn't even require much imagination to see what other activities we can allow the government to take control of using this reasoning. Obesity anyone? How can we allow these obese people to continue eating whatever they want while our tax dollars pay for their strokes, heart disease, and diabetes? How about people who don't exercise? A recent WHO study showed that sedentary people are almost at the same risk for heart disease as smokers. Shouldn't we pass a law requiring everyone to exercise twenty minutes a day? How about people who eat too many sweets? Between dental bills and diabetes I am sure chocoholics bump your insurance premiums and taxes up significantly. How about people whose irresponsible lifestyles cause them to contract a STD? Shouldn't we make it illegal to have unprotected sex?

Some of this might make sense if you were arguing for the illegalization of cigarettes, but you aren't. You are simply arguing that it is the right of the Federal government to dictate which legal activities I can and can not practice on my own private property. It amazes me the number of people who claim to be for limited government and personal freedom who see nothing wrong with giving the government this power over private lives.

Obesity harms the obese,STD's harm the careless,smoking potentially harms everyones health.All the other vices you mentioned just dent our bank balance(I'm sure you'll agree health is more important).Private lives are not private,when an offensive(to many)act is carried out in public,affecting those around who are not participating in the act.
I think YOU are missing the point!no one wants to stop you doing what you want on your own property,only in public.I doubt that smoking will ever be made illegal on your side of the pond or here.Anyway marijuana is illegal in both our countries,does that stop people?