Here's a good cartoon from New York City:
Posted on 01/20/2007 1:19:51 PM PST by sh0tgun willie
Jane Gravelle: After the Clinton administration proposed a fairly substantial increase in the cigarette tax as a way of funding health care reform, my colleague Dennis Zimmerman and I wrote a paper entitled "Cigarette Taxes to Fund Health Care Reform and Economic Analysis."* The part of the paper I'd like to talk about is the justifications for increasing the cigarette tax. I'm an economist, so I start with the presumptions that people have subjective preferences about what they like to do and how they spend their money and that, in general, we want to allow people to enjoy their lifetime resources in accord with those preferences. We would intervene in those decisions only under certain kinds of circumstances that we try to delineate and measure.
(Excerpt) Read more at cato.org ...
Gee, I've read all the same great thinkers and have yet to find anything said about "conservative" meaning support of more government, higher taxes on certain groups, or restrictions on such basic rights as private property and freedom of association.
The major difference between you and me is not the fact I choose to smoke tobacco, but the fact that I oppose non-essential intrusive government and you support it.
You have no right to just walk into or onto my private property, whether it is my home or my business unless I grant you the right to do so. The fact you do not understand that concept is your problem, not mine.
Here's a good cartoon from New York City:
I cannot believe someone who post on FR is proud to be a FACIST.
Oh really?
People Ban: TX Austin Federal judge strikes part of ban
A federal judge struck down a portion of Austin's smoking ban, ruling Wednesday that bar owners can't be held liable if a patron ignores "no smoking" signs.
Another Ban Failed: TX Bellaire
Bellaire says NO to ban
People Ban: TX League City
League City Update
People Ban: TX Wichita Falls
Wichita Falls Update
People Ban: TX State Alert
State Update
People Ban: TX Abilene
Abilene Update
Look up Godwin's Law when you get the chance. You know, I've actually known some real-honest-to-god fascists in my day, and it humors me to no end that some lunatics on FR think that it's "fascist" to discourage and limit the effects of the single most preventable cause of death in the developed world. If that's all that "fascists" did, the world would be a lot better place.
Gabz, even if you granted me the right, I still wouldn't enter your home or business.
| TX | Coppera's Cove | Grant's Bar and Grill | Uptown Cafe | Closed | 100% | 100% | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| TX | Corpus Christi | Katz 21, P.O.E.T.S, Q Pub | Taverns | 36% | All plaintiffs in a lawsuit against the city of Corpus Christi. They asked a federal judge to temporarily suspend the ban, partially because of lost revenues. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| TX | Dallas | Matt's No Place | Restaurant | Closed | 100% | 100% | Business simply dried up, restaurateur Matt Martinez said, after the City Council enacted a smoking ban in restaurants and other public places. "I just got fed up," said Martinez, "You work to get a clientele and build your business, and then the city comes and takes it from you." | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| TX | Round Rock | China One | Restaurant | Closed | 100% | 100% | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| TX | San Antonio | Good Time Charlie's | Restaurant | 30% | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| TX | Victoria | Ramsey's Restaurant | Restaurant | 25% | Reaves said the city's timing on enacting the ban was not good. "They should have waited until after the holidays," he said. "This will kill the restaurant industry." | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
While a few bars in Austin still permit smoking, most bars still comply with the ban. Moreover, even in the bars that still permit smoking a far fewer number of patrons smoke as compared to before the ban.
THANK You!!!
Bars and Restaurants failed every day before there were smoking bans and continue after the smoking bans. The secret to such businesses success is not smoking but rather the quality of the product and service.
I agree with you about that in general.
If you read the (long) article from the Cato Institute conference that was linked to at the very beginning of this thread, you will see that all four individuals there - especially the last two - pretty much agree with us as well. That's an example of why Cato Institute is the leading libertarian policy think tank in the country.
--Few people remember or acknowledge that if it weren't for tobacco, this nation might not have arisen. The wealth generated in the colonies by exporting tabacco played a crucial role in developing this country's financial independence from the British throne.--
Bad argument. Slave labor supported the tobacco industry.
"The single most preventable cause of death"
Well, I don't believe that, but if it were it would not be of any public concern to save me from myself. Hmm..please public and government..don't let me put that Frito in my mouth.
Thank you very much. I've been dealing with this issue since the late 1980s and have been trying to explain it will not stop here, but most folks have just laughed at me.
I know plenty of people that have opposed seat belt and helmet laws that fully support smoking ban laws and can not understand the correlation.
You know, given how these paranoiacs are convinced that we're planning to have jackbooted thugs round up all the smokers of the world and send them to concentration camps, I briefly considered posting "Of course smokers have rights. They have the right to remain silent, the right to speak to an attorney, and to have an attorney present during any questioning..." but thought better of it. That might drive them over the edge.
LOL You must have left out the sarcasm tag or you're yanking my chain. Some statists gravitate to the right some to the left. Where are they going to go? The Statist Party? I can just hear their motto... "We're from the government. We're here to help ourselves by telling you what you can't do."
Of course before smoking bans, something like 90% of new bars and restaurants go out of business too...
Section One: The Right of the People to be secure in their Addictions shall not be infringed
Great idea!
Yeah, that isn't going to work out so well. The libs will immediately start interpreting this to mean that there can be "reasonable" controls on addictions, including banning any of them that they don't like. They'll also come up with the line that the addictions amendment only applies to the addicted militia, and isn't an individual right.
Of course that only underscores the importance of appointing conservatives to the Supreme and lower courts, who will respect the original intent of the author of the 28th Amendment -- a.k.a me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.