If coffee's still legal, of course.
In MA, Brookline (along with parts of Cambridge)is the root and source of anti-smoking Nazi activity and has been for years. I would be surprised to hear that there actually were more than one or two smoking restaurants in Brookline prior to the ban, and those in the declasse section.
A study by Cornell University researchers found that a smoke-free policy attracted more businessand revenue to restaurants than it drove away. The study examined how New Yorkers’ dining habitsand spending patterns changed in the four months following New York City’s Smoke-Free Air Actimplementation. The results showed that non-smokers are eating out more, and are more thanmaking up for the lost revenues caused by smokers not eating out as frequently. (David Corsun et.al., “Should NYC’s Restaurateurs Lighten Up?” Cornel Hotel and Restaurant AdministrationQuarterly, April 1996.)•
Bogus, New York City didn't really have what you could consider a smoking ban at this time. Smoking was only banned in the dinning areas of restaurants that had more than 35 tables (which is a pretty good sized restaurant) and you could smoke at the bar or lounge.
A survey of Massachusetts adults, published in the American Journal of Public Health (Dec. 1997)found that an overwhelming 89% of respondents would go out to bars more often or the sameamount if all bars in the state were 100% smoke free.•
Bull, A push poll. 89% of the adult population doesn't go out to bars to begin with and won't no matter what the smoking policy is.
A study of the aggregate restaurant sales data from West Lake Hills, Texas (a suburb of Austin)found that the city’s smoke-free ordinance enacted in June 1993 did not decrease sales revenueamong restaurants. (“Assessment of the Impact of a 100% Smoke-Free Ordinance on RestaurantSales West Lake Hills, Texas,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, Centers for Disease Controland Prevention, May 19, 1995.)•
Really than why are there no restaurants in Wake Hills Texas left?
A study of the economic impact of smoke-free bar ordinances on bar sales in seven Californiacommunities found no significant impact on business. Published in the American Journal of PublicHealth, the University of California study (Dr. Stanton Glantz and Lisa Smith) examined sales taxreceipts for five California cities and two counties that have laws requiring bars to be 100% smokefree. They found that none of these communities suffered any significant loss of business due to thesmoke-free bar ordinances. In fact, relative to total retail sales, bar sales actually increased in all butone of the communities.• A study of 15 communities in California and Colorado concluded that smoke-free ordinances donot hurt restaurant sales. (Stanton Glantz and Lisa Smith, “The Effect of Ordinances RequiringSmoke-Free Restaurants on Restaurant Sales,” American Journal of Public Health, July 1994.)• The publishers of Zagat Restaurant Guides found in their annual survey of more than 16,000 NewYork City restaurant patrons that eating out had increased in the six months since the city’s cleanindoor air law took effect. (Nov. 15, 1995, Press Release, 1996 Zagat NYC Restaurant Survey.)•
Stan the sham Glantz is not a doctor he's an electrician, He is lying. Nuff Said
A study of the aggregate meal tax receipts in Brookline, Massachusetts found that a smoke-freepolicy for all restaurants did not have a measurable immediate effect on the city’s total restaurantbusiness. (“Preliminary Analysis of the Economic Impact of Brookline’s Restaurant Smoking Ban,”Health Economics Research Inc., November 20, 1995.)•
Garbage again because they only measured "Meal Tax receipts"
Why didn't they measure the whole restaurant buisness? The obviously reason is the restaurants were hurt. A restaurant can lose a significant part of their profits and the Meal tax receipts won't necessary change. Plus that includes things like McDonalds.
A study of restaurant sales data in Flagstaff, Arizona, found that the city’s restaurant smoking bandid not adversely affect restaurant sales. (John Sciacca et. al., “Prohibiting Smoking in Restaurants:Effects on Restaurant Sales.”)
Just like NYC previously there is no real smoking ban in Flagstaff, The ban is only for the "Dining" areas of restaurants. So you can still smoke at the bar or lounge.
Now look at the current NY studies.
One in 10 jobs in the New York pub and bar sector have been lost since the city introduced its ban on smoking in the workplace in March.
http://www.thepublican.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=11342&d=32&h=24&f=23&dateformat=%o %B %Y
Cig Ban Leaves Lot Of 'Empties'
http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/75483.htm
Plus is Smoking is so unpopular than why are New Jersey Bars booming? If people were looking for smoke free places than New Jersey should be hurting because the non-smokers would be going to New York, but that isn't happening..
New York's smoking ban is a boon for out-of-state bars and restaurants
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/08/02/national0357EDT0441.DTL
Butts ban in city a boon in Jersey