quittin' smoking

[Christopher tm]

On 3/14/06, Jeremy David <epistemology at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3/14/06, Christopher tm <xopher.tm at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > The Invisible Hand of unfettered capitalism seems unable
> > > to solve this problem.
> >
> > That's when the Highly Visible Oppressive Hand of Fascism steps in. If
> > non-smokers stopped patronizing smoking establishments rather than
> > legislating them out of existence, the results might be more
> > acceptable to everyone.
>
> What's more fascist? The government ignoring a health problem because
> a powerful industry (in this case, the tobacco industry) lobbies the
> government to ignore it? Or the government doing its job and enforcing
> rules to keep?

The anti-tobacco industry is also free to lobby and bribe. Which they
are doing. They are also winning. But it's just no good unless they
get to feel like victims at the same time - "Ooh, the air's stinky!
And it's YOUR FAULT, SMOKER!" I reiterate, why are there no mandatory
shower laws? B.O. is just as offensive and just as
dangerous/safe/whatever as second-hand tobacco smoke.

> > Proprietors are currently and have always been free to open a bar that
> > is non-smoking. Why do so few of them choose to do so without
> > governmental coercement?
>
> Maybe for the same reasons why so few restaurants were clean and safe
> prior to the department of public health enforcing food safety laws?
> Maybe for the same reason why so many drugs and other foods were
> unsafe before the FDA?

Wrong.

Restaurants and drug companies made money before and after regulatory
laws. You're going into McDonald's now and telling them that they may
only serve fries and McNuggets and that their burger-loving patrons
must learn to enjoy McNuggets or stay home.

Also, the "safety" issue is dead. Second-hand smoke has never killed
anyone. You may not like the smell, but it won't kill you. Tainted
food will.

> If every business can stay in business by maintaining the status quo,
> even if the status quo is dangerous, they will not change, because the
> risk is too great to justify it. Not everything that the government
> does is bad. Anarcho-capitalism hasn't worked yet. Balanced
> governments however seem to do a lot of good all over the world.

I am not anti-gov't by any means. I am however very anti legislated
morality. That is all that the Non-Smokers Temperance movement is.

--
Christopher tm (with a brand-new box of Nicotine Polacrilex Gum USP 4
mg., 170 pcs.)

Nunc est masticum.