The Facts About The Smoking Ban. If you're a business owner or not, this is a must read!

The Facts Online ^ | 11-01-03 | Dave Hitt

[Gabz]

I agree with you about the idiots in Delaware government. But your own words make your stance on the smoking ban even more confusing to me.

I would think that as a business owner hurt by the over controlling government you would be on the side of the small businesses being hurt by the smoking ban.

As I said, I have nothing against your desire for smoke-free venues. What I don't understand, is your apparent support of more business-unfriendly government mandates against others. A lot of these people do not have the option of closing up and moving else where as you did. And many of them are long time friends and so it pains me to see them being financially impacted by people who would never have set foot in their establishments to begin with.

I have finished paying property taxes in Delaware, but because I didn't move to Virginia until the spring I'm going to have a hefty tax return to file in Delaware for this year. For both income and the sale of my Dover home. But after calling Kent County home for more than 20 years it is rather hard to just walk away from many of the things I was involved in over the years, so I am there on a frequent basis.

If you're ever going to be down Rte 13 in Accomac County drop me a FReepmail. We can grab lunch in Pizza Hut, as it's the only totally non-smoking restaurant I am aware of in the area (except foro fast food joints). I'm sure there are others, I just haven't been in them as they tend to be more along the lines of "family" restaurants and I prefer to have a glass of wine or a beer when I am out for a meal. Most (not all) of the restaurants around here have smoking and non-smoking sections, the smoking sections generally being twice the size of non-smoking even in the more upscale places.

[hotshot]

And I pay $150 more a month in health insurance so you can "enjoy" your addiction. Never forget a friend from Federalsburg, MD that smoked through the hole in his throat after they took his tongue, voice box, jaw and other smoke related injury to himself out. "enjoy!"

[lodwick]

Puff bttt

[cherinfl]

I certainly will enjoy myself!!! Your friend still continued to smoke after the surgery and I bet he enjoyed every puff!!!!!!!!!!!

[swarthyguy]

You think the ninnynanny fascisti in granny shoes CARE?

Laughing. They love it. Whatever the economic price, this is a good thing in their state power drenched intoxicated haze.

Unemployed smokers can't afford smokes anymore anyway, with the exorbitant taxes levied.

I just look forward to new nanny laws that po even the unsmoker.

I'm surprised the enviros haven't used the smoking precedents to go after the internal combustion engine.

Massachusetts goes statewide with its ban May 2004.

[CSM]

"And I pay $150 more a month in health insurance so you can "enjoy" your addiction."

That is a strawman argument and you know it. But if you want to talk like that, I also pay an extra $150 a month for health insurance, my extra costs are due to so many retirees living longer and taking more drugs than at any time in history. I haven't needed to go to the doctor but twice in the last 10 years and yet I seem to have a constant increase in the cost of my health insurance.

I say we ban perscription drugs in this country. It would be better for all of society by reducing everyone's cost of health insurance!

I bet you hate major increases in government programs. Oh, except the expansion of the prescription drug coverage! That one would benefit you.

[cinFLA]

Well, when a business closes, what good is it then!

Even if the above is true, then it is the nasty ol' smokers to blame for taking their business away from these establishments. Boo on the smokers for taking food from the childrens' mouths.

[hotshot]

Look I think it would be great to have separate smoking area such as English's in North Salisbury. Md. I think that Delaware went to far on its total ban. Florida is just as bad. Let's kiss and make up!(but brush your teeth if you just smoked please!)

[jsbankston]

If the above-mentioned bars and restaurants closed due to smoking ban in their jurisdiction why is it that not ALL bars in restaurants on those jurisdictions also closed?

[CSM]

"Even if the above is true, then it is the nasty ol' smokers to blame for taking their business away from these establishments. Boo on the smokers for taking food from the childrens' mouths."

Yep, the same lack of logic you use to support your pro WOD stance. The next step in your logic will be government legislation forcing the smokers to spend a certain amount of money in bars and restaurants. Of course, you too believe in personal freedom and liberty, as long as it is convenient for you.

The state, not the smokers, took the business away. The smokers are just living by the rules the state has set up.

[cinFLA]

The state, not the smokers, took the business away. The smokers are just living by the rules the state has set up.

No. The smokers left; probably because without smoking they realized just how bad the food was at these places ....

[cinFLA]

If the above-mentioned bars and restaurants closed due to smoking ban in their jurisdiction why is it that not ALL bars in restaurants on those jurisdictions also closed?

Because some had better food and better managers.

[CSM]

"If the above-mentioned bars and restaurants closed due to smoking ban in their jurisdiction why is it that not ALL bars in restaurants on those jurisdictions also closed?"

It is really amazing to me how many freepers don't have an economic clue. How about, when a market demand decreases, the market decreases and the remaining demand is met. If all of the dissatisfied non-smokers were already going out to eat and socialize with adult beverages, then this ban is allowing those establishments to maintain their business. The place that had the predominate smoking customer base can no longer afford to stay open. The few customers that will now want to go out, will be supported by less restaurants or bars.

[jimt]

Thanks for the post !

[CSM]

"No. The smokers left;"

No, the smokers were driven away by the state. Are all citizens obligated to ensure that all businesses started are economically viable? Or is it up to the market to determine naturally? The state has unfairly weakened the businesses that were once strong and are now weak and dead!

By your logic, we can blame non smokers for not allowing the businesses to make more revenue than they were already making. The non smokers caused them to lose profits before the ban. We should have been able to force non smokers into these places before the ban.

You really are a mental midget, which is typical of an anti freedom fighter!

[jsbankston]

Because some had better food and better managers.

So what you are saying is that some bars and restaurants fail because their food and/or management is sub-par and when competing against similar businesses that have better food and better management they fail?

Therefore, the smoking ban has nothing to do with these businesses failing but rather they fail because their product is not as good as their competitor.

Gee, I love Capitalism!

[cinFLA]

The state has unfairly weakened the businesses that were once strong and are now weak and dead!

Provide a basis for your claim.

[cinFLA]

Strange. I just called two of the restuarants you listed as closed and they are serving lunch! Hmmmmm

[Gabz]

I really wish you had said that when you first came on this thread - instead of what you did say in the beginging :-)

But seriously, FReepmail me if y'all are going to be passing through Accomac county. I'm only a couple of miles from the Maryland line. I have lots of non-smoking friends and we always cooperate with each other when it comes to socializing. I was being sarcastic with my reference to Pizza Hut, I don't particularly care for the place, but our daughter won a certificate for a pizza in their pumpkin decorating contest through school and there was no way we were going to get out of taking her there last weekend!!!

[CSM]

"Therefore, the smoking ban has nothing to do with these businesses failing but rather they fail because their product is not as good as their competitor.

Gee, I love Capitalism!"

Yes, I agree that this is a lesson in capitalism. The fact is that the market now has fewer customers to win to their business. Therefore, fewer customers, means less revenue available. There will occur competition between all restaurants and bars for this limited revenue. This competition will continue until the capacity to serve the available customers has balanced with the number of customers available. That means that businesses will continue to fail until the right capacity is available to serve the market. It also means that there will occur a decrease in product offered. The same phenomonon occurs when Walmart moves into a town. The difference is that the capacity increased, choices increased, the market freely chose which capacity to use and which capacity to eliminate.

That is not the way things are happening here. If you remove the people that would like the world to revolve around themselves (like you), we had a relatively satisfied market. The capacity had already balanced to the market's needs. We then dissatisfied a large percentage of that market. In the absence of satisfaction these available customers left the market. Now, we have to balance the capacity available by eliminating it.

Now, what caused the number of available customers to decrease? That was caused by the government legislation, that has not been disputed by anyone. If you would like to show any other event that caused the number of avialable customers to decrease, then feel free.

If you can't understand this then I would suggest taking a basic econ course at your local CC. That would be enough to give you the basic economic understanding you are obviously lacking.