Qfwfq Posted June 15, 2005 Report Share Posted June 15, 2005 Q- do you know if it's hurt businesses at all? Most likely it would be bars, or bowling alleys (if ya got those in Italia )The only complainers have been those that produce and sell tobacco/products, hell, it would have taken King Solomon's wisdom to have predicted that! I don't smoke, but I usually think private business owners can choose how to run their own place.Can they also choose to whip their own employees? All right, all right, let's be serious, what I mean is, is it OK for a company owner to allow some employees to make others sick? It's a delicate issue because there is enough trouble anyway with abuse of authority on the workplace. Not everybody in a company can ask all others to be respectful of their rights, laws are necessary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qfwfq Posted June 15, 2005 Report Share Posted June 15, 2005 If I remember right, I think bars and restauraunts still have the option to have a smoking area as long as it complies to certain criteria, which are fairly strong. Most decided to just have the whole place non-smoking and they say that most customers are favourable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bumab Posted June 15, 2005 Report Share Posted June 15, 2005 Can they also choose to whip their own employees? All right, all right, let's be serious, what I mean is, is it OK for a company owner to allow some employees to make others sick? It's a delicate issue because there is enough trouble anyway with abuse of authority on the workplace. Not everybody in a company can ask all others to be respectful of their rights, laws are necessary. Touchè. True, true, of course they wouldn't have to work there. But I also understand the plight of the working poor, in many cases, who can't work much of anywhere else. Since I'm usually pro-union (for the protection of the poor, although I rarely see unions where they could do a lot of good, like the fish industry, where I've worked, and often see bloated unions doing very, very little, like the grocery industry...), I should probably make my position a little more self-consistant... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartock Posted June 15, 2005 Report Share Posted June 15, 2005 So's alcohol. Hell, refined sugar causes worse health problems, due to abuse. I don't smoke, but I usually think private business owners can choose how to run their own place. But, if it doesn't turn out to have any ill effects, I might change my mind...with sugar intake u only harm ur self but with smoking u harm others the same way and with alcohol if we get drunk drivers and the huligans who get drunk to kill the fans of the opposite teem then there should also be a ban on public alcohol drinking.i think private business owners are maneging a public space so they have to fallow the rules of the public space. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qfwfq Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 I agree with Bartock, I think I forgot to mention the distinction about some things not harming others.of course they wouldn't have to work there. But I also understand the plight of the working poor, in many cases, who can't work much of anywhere else.I'm not exactly "working poor", but I can tell you I've been putting up with a hell of a lot, further to commuting, because it hasn't been easy to find anything better. The current boss here is a Big Bully but times are tough all around. At least I've been putting up with less smoke than some time ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockytriton Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 First of all I have to say that until 2 months ago I was a non-smoker, at the moment I smoke now and then...I know how extreme it is ins some nations about smoking in public (recently all my university became no-smoking area), and there are discussion about 100% no.smoking trains.... i think this is all hypocrite simply because smog seems to have much higher effects (cf. medical science thread).There is people pointing the finger as soon as they see a smoker, claiming that against their health (which is true), but what makes me upset is that it is all relative: passive smoke is bad, but living in the smog (with high Ozon levels,etc) is much worse.Well that's what I think. I don't know if this was covered or not, I didn't read all the replies, but what about Hitler? If someone commits a murder, say a hate crime, he kills a jewish guy because he hates jews. Is it then ok for him to say, hey, I just killed one person! Look at Hitler! I'm no Hitler! Should we then let him off because it's relative? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanctus Posted June 16, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 No, but concentrate our efforts on stopping hitler (he doesn't deserve capital H) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanctus Posted June 16, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 Bartock, to answer your question about pollution of sigarette smoke. I agree many water drops make a sea, but if you add a molecule to the sea it doesn't matter (even if super many molecules make a drop but it is of an order of 10^25 smaller). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bumab Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 I'm not exactly "working poor", but I can tell you I've been putting up with a hell of a lot, further to commuting, because it hasn't been easy to find anything better. The current boss here is a Big Bully but times are tough all around. At least I've been putting up with less smoke than some time ago. Didn't mean offense (if any was taken). I've worked jobs like that before, many times in several places. If anything makes me vote for a ban, it will be for their health, not mine. I can choose to avoid smoke. Also, cigarette smoke indoors is far worse then crossing the street. Small little bars contain the smoke quite well sometimes. I've gotten a nicotine buzz just standing in some of them in Alaska. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartock Posted June 17, 2005 Report Share Posted June 17, 2005 Bartock, to answer your question about pollution of sigarette smoke. I agree many water drops make a sea, but if you add a molecule to the sea it doesn't matter (even if super many molecules make a drop but it is of an order of 10^25 smaller).even a molecule counts :rant: .intentional addition to the misery of others even at the level of adding a molecule counts and r guilty as charged. :rant: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockytriton Posted June 17, 2005 Report Share Posted June 17, 2005 No, but concentrate our efforts on stopping hitler (he doesn't deserve capital H) Oh ok, so we should concentrate our efforts only on extreme things and let everything else just go to hell? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanctus Posted June 18, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 18, 2005 No Rokcytron, I meant people is making a huge effort for something that doesn't deserve a huge effort. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harzburgite Posted June 18, 2005 Report Share Posted June 18, 2005 Hypocrisy, on the other hand, is companies like BP and Shell flooding our televisions with beautiful footage of forests and nature scenes etc., all for the sake of covering the fact that they are the biggest pollutants. I trust this is not straying too far off topic, but Shell and BP create very little pollution. It is the average citizen of developed countries who use their products directly and indirectly who are guilty of pollution. I suggest that seeking to blame them for producing a product we choose to use is a better example of hypocrisy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanctus Posted June 18, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 18, 2005 I trust this is not straying too far off topic, but Shell and BP create very little pollution. It is the average citizen of developed countries who use their products directly and indirectly who are guilty of pollution. I suggest that seeking to blame them for producing a product we choose to use is a better example of hypocrisy. Read up who cut heaps of the rainforest in South-middleAmerica/Africa then we might speak again about who they didn't pollute. But yes we are going off topic if you like to discuss this we can make a new thread. Sorry to be so direct, but I should study so I don't have much time....and welcome to the forum! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geokker Posted June 23, 2005 Report Share Posted June 23, 2005 Non-smokers seem to have a disproportionately irritated view because smoking is just so obviously bad. There just aren't any upsides. It's smoke! Run! Run! Remember, smoking isn't pleasurable, the relief from the addiction is. Also, I hate the smell and my clothes reeking. But I'll never give up. (Joke.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qfwfq Posted June 23, 2005 Report Share Posted June 23, 2005 I trust this is not straying too far off topic, but Shell and BP create very little pollution.Also read about the Ogoni. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bumab Posted June 23, 2005 Report Share Posted June 23, 2005 Try some reading on how Shell prospects, drills, and harvests in Africa before saying they don't pollute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.