> After the smoke clears from the election, I am
> wondering if anyone thinks that there could be 
> interest in a smoke-free Minneapolis campaign.

There may be interest, but I strongly oppose this
idea. Government buildings and other public spaces
that need to be accessable to everyone should be (and
are) non smoking. Privately owned businesses should be
allowed to decide for themselves whether or not they
wish to be smoking, non smoking, or zoned.

I've got a friend who is a fairly rabid right winger.
We tend to disagree a lot, but I can see how concepts
like this are the sort of thing that trigger his
libertarian oriented fears.

Here's an excerpt from his song "Socialism Slavery":

"I can hear them come marching
They come to kick down my door
Just because I was smoking
In a house with a baby next door"

If liberals and progressives want the "right" to take
their suggestions regarding social services and the
environment seriously, they need to stay out of
private businesses and people's personal lives.

> California's public health policy was based on the 
> premise that employees should not have to risk 
> second hand smoke damage to their health as a 
> condition of employment.  

It is the best argument I've heard put forth for the
concept, but it still doesn't fly. Employees choose
where they work. If they don't want to work for a
place that has smoking, they shouldn't do so.

If they want to have their place of work go
non-smoking, they should organize and convince
management to do so. 

If no one wants to work at a place that has smoking,
those places are going to have to pay higher salaries
or go out of business. I'd imagine non-smoking
businesses could make a case to health insurance
providers to reduce their costs as well.

That's how the free market's supposed to work, anyway.

> Of course, most of us who don't smoke would greatly
> enjoy being able to hear music and go dancing
> without inhaling second hand smoke as well.

You should have a right to do so, but those of us who
like smokey blues bars and irish pubs should have a
right to enjoy those as well.

> It has always amazed me why bars don't try this
> policy voluntarily given the number of people who do

> not go out because of people blowing "exhaust
> fumes" in their face.

This, to me, is the crux of the matter and the right
approach.

If a bar, coffee house, or club wants to go non
smoking, they should do so and market themselves to
people who want to go to smoke free environments. If
there are enough people who go there, the business
will succeed. If the business has other merits as
well, it's likely that even smokers will also attend.

There are also places like Cahoots in St. Paul that
has a non-smoking front room, a smoking backroom and a
big steel door and a hallway seperating the two. The
barrista is located in the non-smoking room.

If your complaint is that there aren't any (or enough)
non smoking venues, you're probably not alone. Sounds
like a good business opportunity to me, good luck on
it! I've got some friends who will want to know about
the opening.

In general, this is a subject where people who I
generally agree with end up looking really bad. It's
fascist and totalitarian! What right does anyone have
to tell a person that they can't go to a privately
owned bar and have a scotch and a cigar?

Socialism when it comes to making sure people can eat,
be educated, get basic housing and health care, etc.
is a good thing.

Socialism when it comes to over-controlling private
businesses and telling individuals what choices they
can and can not make is a bad thing.

Free markets and freedom of choice for me, thanks.

- Jason Goray, Sheridan, NE
Having a hard time picturing Hard Times, Halftime Rec,
or Ground Zero w/o the haze.


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/
_______________________________________

Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:mpls@;mnforum.org
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to