I post ACTUAL facts and you come back with studies????? you've got to be kidding.
And using anything with Stanton Glantz's name on it is bogus - he has publicly stated that if a study isn't coming up with the results he wants it gets scrapped (I'm paraphrasing)
The "studies" you provide from NY are from years before the TOTAL ban.
Where are the numbers from the casinos in Delaware since the ban went into effect there??? Of course you won't post them because they show you are wrong.
Where are your studies showing that businesses that were smoke-free by choice are being hurt by these ordinances and laws taking away the market niche they had created for themselves????
I have never stated that ALL businesses are hurt by bans - but you are so tunnel visioned in your anti-smoker glee that you refuse to acknowlege the fact that many businesses are harmed by them. Not bad management or bad food as you claim - smoking bans.
Some day I really hope you will wake up and actually look at the entire picture. You don't like smoking in a restaurant speak to the owner or open your own, don't go running to the government to force all businesses to cater to your wishes. That to me is like the parents of a child with a peanut allergy forcing the school district to prohibit any other child in the school from bringing a PB&J sandwich in his or her lunch box.
And using anything with Stanton Glantz's name on it is bogus - he has publicly stated that if a study isn't coming up with the results he wants it gets scrapped (I'm paraphrasing) The euphemism ole Stan the sham uses for scrapping a study doesn't come up the way he wants he claims is the study wasn't the best designed study.
From his study looking at 97 other studies (Many/Most of which were his own previous ones)
Review of the quality of studies on the economic effects of smoke-free policies on the hospitality industry
Conclusion: All of the best designed studies report no impact or a positive impact of smoke-free restaurant and bar laws on sales or employment. Policymakers can act to protect workers and patrons from the toxins in secondhand smoke confident in rejecting industry claims that there will be an adverse economic impact.
Well who do you think defines which are the best designed studies, He does of course and any study that didn't come to his conclusion of course didn't make it as a best designed study.