Ten Years of Banned Smoking in England

[cigrmaster]

Somewhere around 2003 or 2004 the state of R.I went no smoking. No bars, no restaurants, no pool halls. I owned a pool hall(19 solid oak 9 footers with leather drop pockets) at that time and it cost me money. We had a younger clientele who would come play pool just to be able to smoke. We had a cigarette machine that did a brisk business. I had to put a decent looking barrel outside for people to throw their butts in, but people found the need to just throw them in the parking lot. My employees had to sweep up those butts every day.
If memory serves I believe we lost about 15% in business because of the ban. R.I in their usual stupidity tried to say that places like mine and bars and such would gain business because of the ban. That was a huge lie as there were bars who closed down. If it were left up to the business owner the market would have told each of us whether a ban was a good thing or not. If some pool hall went non smoking and I stayed smoking and lost business because of my decision, that is on me. If an employee was a non smoker and didn't like being around it, they didn't have to work at my place. I never hired a non smoker because even though I had 4 huge 1500 CFM Hepa filters and an ozinator, the place still had smoke especially when the place was packed. The filters were set in a series to move the air at so many CFM's per minute. I paid a lot of money to have that system and it went silent when the ban happened.

 

[yazamitaz]

Harris,
It's funny you bring up the scenario of the "non-smoking pool hall vs yours". NJ hates all things that adults enjoy and if you are allowed to enjoy them they tax the hell out of you for it.
I have always wondered if bars, restaurants, pool halls, bowling alleys, etc were allowed to make the choice and let the clientele decide what they prefer. I respect your platform that you didn't hire non-smokers and they also should be able to choose.

 

[davet]

The latest from the geniuses looking out for us in New Brunswick :crazy:

The Smoke-free Places Act prohibits smoking:

•in enclosed public places;

•In indoor work spaces;

•In a public vehicle;

•In a vehicle while another person in the vehicle is under the age of 16;

•In a vehicle used in the course of employment while carrying two or more employees;

•on patios and all similar outdoor public facilities where food and/or alcohol is served and within three metres of the patio’s boundary;

•within nine metres of doorways, windows and air intakes of enclosed public places and indoor workplaces;

•on or within 20 metres of children’s equipment and sports areas located in an outdoor public place;

•on or within nine metres of a public walking or jogging trail in an outdoor public place;

•within the boundaries of provincial parks except within the boundaries of rented campsites, golf courses and designated areas within the park; and

•all regional health authority grounds.

 

[cigrmaster]

yaz, NE states like r.i and n.j live to tax their businesses to the point where they think they are your freaking partner. I screwed the state of r.i for 20 years by not paying them a dime in sales tax. I rolled the dice and won, fck em.

 

[brian64]

NJ is #50 on the list of states I would consider living in. It's got to be pretty f*cked up to rank lower than CA.

 

[tom12]

@seacaptain, Firstly, what is the definition of freedom? freedom 'from' or freedom 'to'. Being British there are aspects of the state that, for me, is useful to have, the NHS, I think about it like this, if I never have to use the NHS and live to a long age then great, if my taxes go to someone who needs it then what's wrong with that? I do not get discriminated against because I am a smoker or if I overeat etc.
It seems to me that there are plenty of people who do not understand that socialism has as many shades of grey as any other political viewpoints or the fact that most people if they saw someone starving by the side of the road would do something to help that person rather than cross the road to avoid them, how do you think civilisation was able to advance to the state we have it today?
As for the smoking side of things, at least in this country you have the paternalistic conservatism originating from Disraeli that modern day Tories look at when considering health based initiatives or Labour's socialistic viewpoint, although you will find that there is cross party consensus when it comes to issues like health and smoking.
I would allow specific buildings where smokers could go to and have more of them. Although there are only a few places left in the UK like this they are around, for instance Shisha bars are able to get away with it, you can also smoke cigarettes, pipes etc. there too.

 

[perdurabo]

It's Liberty. Individual Sovereignty. So no, taxes,cannot be redistributed to my neighbor. Thats theft.

 

[tom12]

Fire service, police, ambulances, road repairs etc. If you are part of society then you sign the social contract, if you want a place without effective government you need only look at the failed states in the world and I doubt you would want to live there, Hobbes state of nature comes to mind. Individual freedom means not only rights but responsibilities as well.

 

[perdurabo]

Effective government is limited government. The social contract is natural law, And has nothing to do with firemen, police officers, or services. But that legitimate governments are instituted among the people; and that the just powers of the government are derived from the consent of the people.
America’s founders rejected an income tax entirely, but when they spoke of taxes they recognized the need for uniformity and equal protection to all citizens. “[A]ll duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States,” reads the US Constitution. A progressive income tax disregards the idea of the uniformity of taxes. Madison states in Federlaist No. 10 , “The apportionment of taxes on the various descriptions of property is an act which seems to require the most exact impartiality; yet there is, perhaps, no legislative act in which greater opportunity and temptation are given to a predominant party to trample on the rules of justice." In other words an income tax is unlawful, oppressive, and is theft. So no, a NHS or any other "welfare state service" is not within the US Government's responsibility. At least not as it was intended.
Local services such Fire, Police, etc. are state and city responsibilities. And, yes, they are linked to the civil society.

 

[PaulTheScandinavian]

Perdurabo:Cannabis laws You ask me? Strictly forbidden the use and trade,but you hardly get Jailed if you got weed for only personal use,

 

[deathmetal]

I want to avoid being obligated to those who are below me. Keep Darwinism going. I am very tired of the human tendency to subsidize the failing just so we can have "kumbaya" feelings. Most people are idiots, let them die off, and then the rest of us can have a decent life without morons constantly cropping up and screwing it up. This is why natural selection was invented in the first place. There is no Utopia (period) but there is also no good life without a mountain of skulls.

 

[seacaptain]

@seacaptain, Firstly, what is the definition of freedom? freedom 'from' or freedom 'to'. Being British there are aspects of the state that, for me, is useful to have, the NHS, I think about it like this, if I never have to use the NHS and live to a long age then great, if my taxes go to someone who needs it then what's wrong with that? I do not get discriminated against because I am a smoker or if I overeat etc.

I lived in England (Suffolk) for over a year, so I'm well aware of NHS and it's failings through rationing, denial of service and outright corruption. Just do a search on NHS rationing and you'll come up with thousands of stories of people suffering and not getting the help they need. Indeed, there's no discrimination, everyone is treated equally miserably.
Well, there's some discrimination after all, the NHS refused to treat baby Charlie Gard and even refused to let his parents move him (held him captive) to another country and pay for his medical treatment themselves. Oh, but the NHS has plenty of money for sex changes to treat people with "gender dysphoria".
I can't really think of a more morally corrupt and financially inefficient socialist system than national "healthcare".
As to freedom, that would be each person being responsible for, and paying for their own healthcare themselves instead of having the government take money from others by force.

 

[tom12]

Interesting points perdurabo, I do know that wasn't something like income tax or similar considered unconstitutional by the Supreme Court but Congress overturned it?
seacaptain, while I am not focussing on any particular cases, Charlie Gard has issues over becoming a political football between certain groups. I can certainly think of a more corrupt system, one being where doctors dole out pills like sweets because they have shares in the company (which country has a major opioid epidemic at the moment? or where millions suffer because they have no healthcare? While there are faults with it I could find you hundreds of thousands of cases where the NHS has helped people or done the best they can for end of life care without being thousands of pounds in debt after their treatment. At least I can get treatment, as said before, without being penalised for my own lifestyle choices and who are you to say that "gender dysphoria" isn't a concern for some people?
And some people cannot be responsible, mentally ill, those with severe disabilities etc.
'There is no Utopia (period) but there is also no good life without a mountain of skulls.' That sounds very close to social Dawinism, and who decides who is a moron or not?

 

[seacaptain]

seacaptain, while I am not focussing on any particular cases, Charlie Gard has issues over becoming a political football between certain groups.

Only because NHS made it a political football. His parents raised millions of dollars (people voluntarily giving), and they wanted to take him out of the UK for treatment. The benevolent, caring NHS wouldn't allow it because like all socialists, they think they know what's best for people.

I can certainly think of a more corrupt system, one being where doctors dole out pills like sweets because they have shares in the company (which country has a major opioid epidemic at the moment?

The difference being, no one is using government force to take my money and pay for it. Who are you to say how people should spend their own money?

At least I can get treatment, as said before, without being penalised for my own lifestyle choices and who are you to say that "gender dysphoria" isn't a concern for some people?

If you're using the government to take my money by force to pay for your "gender dysphoria", then it's absolutely my business. Don't like it? Then pay for it yourself.

 

[perdurabo]

Tom, the American people lack virtue, so do the leaders they pick.
Scholars can debate all day about the constitutionality of an income tax, but Madison was clear and concise. The Supreme Court is a branch of government, not Robed Gods to grace us with their holy wisdom. They are to interpret laws according to the original intent of the Constitution. Congress failed in its duty to the American citizens in 1913. They played class ware-fare in a classless Free Market Society. Because of their lack of virtue, we have gotten what we deserve. Soft Tyranny.
Of course Britain and the US are two different systems. I'm not going to juxtapose US Constitutional Law onto that of a ParliamentarySystem/Constitutional Monatchy. Apples and Oranges.

NHS has helped people or done the best they can for the end of life care without being thousands of pounds in debt after their treatment,

No they will not be in debt; just their citizens, their families, and their country. All because of the lack of responsibility to themselves.

 

[perdurabo]

To answer your question, Congress can't overturn a Supreme Court decision. What they do is ignore the decision and the American people are too stupid to vote the idiots out. Neither can the Supreme Court make law. But Cheif Justice Roberts did just that with Obamacare. Because we lack virtue, nothing has been done about it and Obamacare still rattles down the road.

 

[brian64]

A progressive income tax disregards the idea of the uniformity of taxes

And what makes it even worse is:

Why an Income Tax is Not Necessary to Fund the U.S. Government
100% of what is collected is absorbed solely by interest on the Federal Government contributions to transfer payments.
http://www.devvy.com/notax.html

 

[tom12]

perdurabo, it's interesting that in terms of what we are both talking about is a symbol of what we both hold dear or at least have very strong feelings for. The Constitution, obviously, has it's roots in the American Revolution, the NHS has its past tied with WW2 and troops returning from war wanting themselves and their families taken care of.

 

[lazar]

Wow, I'm gone for a couple of days and you guys have descended into some nightmarish eugenics version of Libertarian social Darwinism. I'm not sure what's worse, this or the "calling Nazis bad people is being just as bad as Nazis" thread.
As for the NHS, I never had a single problem with it in nearly 20 years - never a single waiting list, never a sign of corruption or poor service, and that's in 4 different areas of the UK. Neither did my wife, who would likely not be alive today without the NHS. I can't believe anyone would argue for the superiority of pre-Obamacare U.S. healthcare (a.k.a., let the poor die) over the NHS. :crazy: The problems it has are primarily due to under-funding by the Tory government, and will very soon be exacerbated by a mass exodus of European healthcare professionals, and potential privatization and sell-off to U.S corporations which seems to be part of Theresa May's grand strategy to destroy the country and claw back the failing class system.
It's eternally weird to me how so many people are happy for their taxes to go kill people other countries, but not to save their fellow citizens. Nice priorities.

 

[warren]

In the US we have free medical care for everyone, even illegals, a minority pays for it though. Just go to any emergency room and they must treat you. It's the law.
Me? I trust my fellow citizens to look after themselves. Those that can't have various safety nets. Those that won't pay their way take advantage of the various systems available for the needy. If someone goes without, it is due to a personal choice or ignorance.