Alaska Darin Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 So Colorado joins the rest of the Stalinists by banning smoking in all "public" buildings - with the exception of casinos. Why were casinos exempt? Is the health of their employees and patrons not as important as the others the state is supposedly protecting? Could it be because the state gets a large share of the profits generated there? Nah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 So Colorado joins the rest of the Stalinists by banning smoking in all "public" buildings - with the exception of casinos. Why were casinos exempt? Is the health of their employees and patrons not as important as the others the state is supposedly protecting? Could it be because the state gets a large share of the profits generated there? Nah. 717649[/snapback] AD, you're so pessimistic! Couldn't it be that..... well..... hrm.... um..... hold on still thinking of another reason.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 Philly is passing a smoking ban. The problem is that there are so many exceptions that it really does nothing. The stuff it does do will have a dramatic effect on businesses staying open during football season. Dumbazzes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EC-Bills Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 Philly is passing a smoking ban. The problem is that there are so many exceptions that it really does nothing. The stuff it does do will have a dramatic effect on businesses staying open during football season. Dumbazzes. 717716[/snapback] Champaign, IL just passed a similar ban on smoking. Urbana, IL already has one. While I personally prefer smoke free environments, there's no way this ban should have passed. That should be the call of the business owner(s). Although I have to admit I did find it amusing reading about folks in bowling leagues looking for new places to bowl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 Might as well let them smoke in Casinos, it's no riskier than dropping this month's mortgage payment inside a 1 armed bandit or dropping juniors college fund on the roulette wheel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 So Colorado joins the rest of the Stalinists by banning smoking in all "public" buildings - with the exception of casinos. Why were casinos exempt? Is the health of their employees and patrons not as important as the others the state is supposedly protecting? Could it be because the state gets a large share of the profits generated there? Nah. 717649[/snapback] One would think that States, or the Feds would ban ciggies outright. Ah, but there is that $$$. Cig tax is the 3rd largest source of revenue for my State, Ohio. I've done some rough caluclations - assuming that if the cig revenue was eliminated, OH must find a way to satisfy their $$$ appetite - to the tune of a state tax increase of average $345 per non-smoker. Money currently paid by us filthy folks. This BS about the cost to society by smokers is just that - BS. Smokers die younger, and their disease tend to kill them relatively quickly. They don't cash in their social security contributions. Price-Waterhouse did a study in the early 1990's - their conclusions were that if you don't smoke, offer a light - if there were mass quitting, SS goes broke much sooner. Based on my consumption, I would save $400 bucks per year, but the non-smolking taxpayers will have to pony up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EC-Bills Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 One would think that States, or the Feds would ban ciggies outright. Ah, but there is that $$$. Cig tax is the 3rd largest source of revenue for my State, Ohio. I've done some rough caluclations - assuming that if the cig revenue was eliminated, OH must find a way to satisfy their $$$ appetite - to the tune of a state tax increase of average $345 per non-smoker. Money currently paid by us filthy folks. This BS about the cost to society by smokers is just that - BS. Smokers die younger, and their disease tend to kill them relatively quickly. They don't cash in their social security contributions. Price-Waterhouse did a study in the early 1990's - their conclusions were that if you don't smoke, offer a light - if there were mass quitting, SS goes broke much sooner. Based on my consumption, I would save $400 bucks per year, but the non-smolking taxpayers will have to pony up 717793[/snapback] Way to take one for the team, Cincy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 Every time I hear about another state banning smoking, I get a clearer idea of what a moronic species we are. We have a product that, when coupled with our species, is responsible for half a million deaths annually...accounting for over 22% of all deaths each year. It's a product so bad and so fatal that the very people who make the products are actually forced to spend money to tell you how dangerous their product is, AND offer ways for you to stop using their product. Do we get rid of the product? No. Our options: we put restrictions on where you can use the product to the extent that you can't smoke in your apartment, you can't smoke in a bar, you can't smoke on a plane, you can't smoke in a mall, and you can't even smoke in a property you actually own if the association won't let you. In fact, we are such morons that we have not only set up specific outdoor areas where you can smoke, but we actually have OUTSIDE AREAS where you are not allowed to smoke within 100 yards or so of the area where you ARE allowed to smoke. Yeah. We're a real advanced species. Our flag shouldn't be stars and stripes. It should be a vagina. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted July 3, 2006 Author Share Posted July 3, 2006 Every time I hear about another state banning smoking, I get a clearer idea of what a moronic species we are. We have a product that, when coupled with our species, is responsible for half a million deaths annually...accounting for over 22% of all deaths each year. It's a product so bad and so fatal that the very people who make the products are actually forced to spend money to tell you how dangerous their product is, AND offer ways for you to stop using their product. Do we get rid of the product? No. Our options: we put restrictions on where you can use the product to the extent that you can't smoke in your apartment, you can't smoke in a bar, you can't smoke on a plane, you can't smoke in a mall, and you can't even smoke in a property you actually own if the association won't let you. In fact, we are such morons that we have not only set up specific outdoor areas where you can smoke, but we actually have OUTSIDE AREAS where you are not allowed to smoke within 100 yards or so of the area where you ARE allowed to smoke. Yeah. We're a real advanced species. Our flag shouldn't be stars and stripes. It should be a vagina. 717841[/snapback] Oh, don't worry. Eventually they'll ban it and we'll have street gangs fighting each other for the right to sell it to people for $250 a pack. And the government will declare themselves a vast success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 So Colorado joins the rest of the Stalinists by banning smoking in all "public" buildings - with the exception of casinos. Why were casinos exempt? Is the health of their employees and patrons not as important as the others the state is supposedly protecting? Could it be because the state gets a large share of the profits generated there? Nah. 717649[/snapback] Sad indeed. Many of the same anti-smoking zealots are welcoming a swarm of illegal aliens with open arms as they invade our nation. This might surprise you, but I wish that I could be a liberal. I am a bit older than you AD, and I go back to the day where "liberals" actually wanted people in America to have rights. This is the truth. Now, they are seizing homes from citizens and handing them to big business, banning smoking in privately owned establishments, aiding and abeting an invasion of illegal aliens, fighting to raise taxes at every level, and banning ice cream trucks from ringing bells in NYC (the noise disturbs them). "Conservatives" are not doing much better. They are worried about steroids in baseball and Howard Stern. What a friggin mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 Oh, don't worry. Eventually they'll ban it and we'll have street gangs fighting each other for the right to sell it to people for $250 a pack. And the government will declare themselves a vast success. 717849[/snapback] Followed by lines of people who would, in fact, pay $250 a pack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromagnum Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 Followed by lines of people who would, in fact, pay $250 a pack. 717872[/snapback] Should I buy the 2000 watt sodium vapor lights? or the 2000 watt metal halide lights? For my tobaco growing buisness or find a grow operation in north carolina, willing to supply the cash crop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cantankerous Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 Whatever happened to the U.S. being a "free country" ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 Whatever happened to the U.S. being a "free country" ? 717883[/snapback] The Republic was replaced with Motherment® Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts