Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Mears

Funny, they pass legislation that is supposedly about protecting health and put that protected person out of work. Therefore they become poverty striken and are now esposed to an entirely new set of risks to their health.


4 posted on 06/10/2004 8:28:24 AM PDT by CSM (Liberals may see Saddam's mass graves in Iraq as half-full, but I prefer to see them as half-empty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: CSM

Anyone with a brain knows the bans have NOTHING to do with health and everything to do with control and the bottom line of the pharmaceutical companies annual report.

I wish they'd just ban the selling of cigs and we could all go and find our own bootlegger.It would be easier than all this bullshit!



6 posted on 06/10/2004 8:35:01 AM PDT by Mears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: CSM
Funny, they pass legislation that is supposedly about protecting health and put that protected person out of work. Therefore they become poverty striken and are now esposed to an entirely new set of risks to their health.

But don't you see? As with all liberals it's their intentions that count.

11 posted on 06/10/2004 9:09:02 AM PDT by yankeedame ("Born with the gift of laughter & a sense that the world was mad.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: CSM

Further, a vast majority of New Yorkers have said in recent polls that they are happy with the new law. One survey shows that many regular restaurantgoers see a smoke-free environment as an attraction.

The early evidence, however, is that many businesses are unharmed. In fact, though rumors swirl in an environment where every bit of news is trumpeted by the side it favors, a reporter could not verify that one bar, restaurant or club, of the more than 20,000 in the city, had closed solely because of the smoking ban.

The ban does not appear to have deterred businesses from opening in New York City. The New York State Liquor Authority, which issues licenses to establishments that serve alcohol, received 127 applications from city businesses last month, compared to 126 in November 2002. The number of licenses granted by the authority in that same period rose to 106 last month, from 75 the year before.

The city's Health Department, which enforces the smoking ban, has also analyzed monthly employment numbers and found no overall job loss in the food service and drinking industry. Critics have countered that such findings are politically motivated, and cannot show when establishments cut back shifts and absorb revenue losses. But many restaurants and bars refuse to divulge their finances, making it difficult to gauge the validity of their complaints.

Polls back the city's contention that New Yorkers have welcomed the ban. A New York Times poll in June showed that 56 percent of the 962 respondents said they approved of the smoking ban. A Quinnipiac University poll in October found that 62 percent supported the ban.

Tim Zagat, the publisher of restaurant guides, surveyed more than 29,000 of his volunteer reviewers this year and found that 96 percent said they would eat out as much, if not more, with the smoking ban. Only 4 percent said they would eat out less. "I don't care how you cut it," Mr. Zagat said. "I think it's long-term good for


12 posted on 06/10/2004 9:17:49 AM PDT by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson