http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4014597.stm

The government is proposing in a few years time, a smoking ban in all cafes, bars/pubs, workplaces and restaurants in England. There was also some talk, i think about an outright ban of smoking in public places but that i dont think that will happen. Anyway, what are your thoughts?

Personally as a non-smoker im happy with this decision. But then again there are a lot smokers out there, and the workplace ban is pretty harsh, but always i think there will be a way around it. I think in scotland already this banned has been in effect for a few years and i dont think there has been many problems.

New York has been dealing with that for quite a while now. I'm a non-smoker as well, and honestly welcome it. I dont mind it so much at bars, but when I'm eating its nasty.

It felt weird when I was at a bar in Connecticut in friends, and one of them lit up. I instantly went on defense, only to realize its ok.

Aren't workplace bans already in place? and usually by the companies themselves?? Sorry, I'm not aware of how the law works everywhere.

I know this ban already exists in some parts of Canada (maybe someone from Ontario can enlighten me) .. I have mixed feelings about this one.

I'll post this again:

The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.
-Ayn Rand

which is why I had mixed feelings about this one ... i do not understand why a restaurant type scenario cannot be created where there are smoking and no smoking sections.

In our area it is a matter that is left up to each individual business, which is the way it should be. As for governmental buildings, they are all designated as non smoking areas as the general public can't necessarily decide not to patronize those buildings.

Am I personally happy it about? As a non-smoker, yes, definitely.

But do I think it is fair? No, not really.

Leaving things up to each individual business? Boy, you must be mad! Next thing you'll tell me is that you let each one of them set the prices how they see fit??

Im happy about it.We have those laws in P.R.I find smoking cigs just as nasty as smoking Pot.Its totaly disgusting.

Tony what if all businesses are owned by smokers. and they do not allow for a single smoke free area ... what are non smokers suppose to do about that ... smoking is one of the few things I think is not jus someone's freedom to do anywhere they like, because of second hand smoke .. whether for health reasons or a general distaste for it.

Hell no! We don't go that far. This isn't a completely free world like Iraq.

Start their own businesses.

Touche.

BTW, my aunt in Germany smokes in her office. On a government job, no less.

Germany needs to be liberated.

It is very interesting that you bring it up. I saw an interesting report on smoking at work in Germany and how it is going to change soon.

Almost all of the national restaraunt chains provide a non-smoking section, or are completely smoke free. I'm a non-smoker and have never had a problem finding a place to eat. There are a few places in my area that you can't avoid the smoke, so I rarely eat there.

Questions about unrealistic situations deserve unrealistic answers.

yes but if a chick can change in the boy's locker room, I'm more than entitled to eat at ANY restaurant in a smoke free environment : )

In Italy you'd wait hours in line at the bank and the teller would just sit back, relax, and suck down a ocuple cigs. Honestly, it doesn't bother me too much, so I'm with Tony on this one. I think its pretty unappetizing when eating, but frankly, that's the restaurant's call. If all they do is get smokers, and everyone else who could appreciate their cooking has gone elsewhere, then they'll have to make the call to keep it that way of not. I've never seen a restaurant where the plates are really expensive, that allows smoking. The restaurant considers it something that could ruin subtle tastes of food, etc. Mostly, smoking I've seen (In Chicago, because Boston and NY didn't have it) has been in diners and some coffee shops. It didn't bother me, I just went elsewhere if I didn't want to deal with it. I guess I don't have nearly as big an issue with banning smoking in restaurants and public buildings as I do in bars. Public buildings, people are not their by choice. If you need to get your drivers license, you can't just up and go somewhere else to get it if you don't like breathing second hand smoke. So there shouldn't be smoking there. But privately owned businesses. Its your call. Bars...I've just noticed that in bars were a couldn't smoke I end up drinking waaaaaay more (I know...shocker). So bars probably would do it on purpose just to make more money, lol. But I do think there should be some recreational spaces for it, and late night establishments that 11 year olds don't wonder into would actually be the best place. Plus, I could not picture a rockabilly bar with The King playing in the background not being at least a little bit smoky.

-Dolce

Dolce, have you read anything by Mises?

Mises? Hmmmmm, is this libertarian lit? My roommate in Rome was, and she gave me some stuff to read. I did, but I don't remember who wrote it.

-Dolce

Yes. Mises and Heyek are two leading Austrian-school libertarians.

I was alluding to the fact that you're a closet-libertarian, but you still lack the confidence in the free markets, hence you should read some of Mises's stuff

Listen, I think I've made it pretty clear that I am alot more comfortable addressing social issues than economic and international ones. Yes, in the social realm, I believe to each his own, and I don't believe it is the government's job to advocate some of it over the other's. But as to labor, education, etc. No, I'm not so sure where I stand on what the government should or shouldn't be doing. Though, as of late, I am getting more and more sure of what it shouldn't be doing. I guess I let the candidates set the discussions on that and I just listen. While most people's hiearchy of voting issues tended to put stuff like gay marriage and stem cell research at the bottom of the list, that's still ontop of mine. Probably because I have a stronger vision of where I think this ocuntry should be when it comes to civil liberties. Something I don't have as clear an image of in other situations.

-Dolce

Well, the report presented a following calculation.

An employee works 36 hours a week and earns around €2,880 a month. He smokes about one cig an hour. That means around 36 cigs a week. Smoking one cig takes him about 4-5 minutes. With these (more or less realistic) calculations the the company he works for loses around €2,850 just because of the time he spends smoking and not working. Considering Germany's economical situation at the moment, companies cannot afford that.

That's gotta be the dumbest reason for banning smoking. It's actually approaching in stupidity France's decision to cut the workweek to 35 hours to reduce unemployment.

The report assumes that if an employee wasn't smoking, he'd be working during those 4-5 minutes, which is not at all a valid assumption to make. And it fails to take into account that employees who are not allowed to smoke during work hours are likely to become disgruntled.