Bazooka_From_Viduka 0 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 I ask again, why do you think someone applying to stack shelves in Tescos doesn't have to put up with passive smoking? People don't go to Tesco to relax and have a good time, they go there to shop, people do go to the pub to have a smoke and a drink, it's socially accepted. it's a job involving exposure to people who might smoke, there's no difference from an employment perspective and as for socially acceptable, don't make me laugh, you're living in the fifties Every job exposes you to people who might smoke, there's a difference between where it is and isn't socially acceptable. what's so special about these other places then? why isn't it acceptable to smoke in Tescos? Are you telling me that it's socially unacceptable to smoke in a bar? I've never seen anyone get shit for having a cigarette in a pub. did you ever actually count the amount of smokers and non-smokers in a pub recently? I would say it was becoming increasingly unnacceptable by the day, irrespective of the ban coming in or not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 31199 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 I've already explained to you why there's a difference in smoking in Tesco and smoking in a bar, surely you can see the difference? And define socially unacceptable, I wouldn't say people are frowned upon in pubs for lighting up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gejon 2 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 I would say (at a guess) smokers probably like longer, would like to know who cost the NHS more money though. Smokers who are in and out for various smoking related illnesses or those who don't smoke and live that bit longer. Tax on tobacco raises £10.5bn a year, NHS expenditure on smoking related illnesses is £1.7bn, those figures come from an anti-smoking website. http://www.ash.org.uk/html/smuggling/html/whytax99.html The argument that smokers cost the NHS money is a false one. Cheers. Still wouldn't hope that people still smoked so it saves me a bit of money. Anyway I am sure they will just lump even more cost onto drivers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 I would say (at a guess) smokers probably like longer, would like to know who cost the NHS more money though. Smokers who are in and out for various smoking related illnesses or those who don't smoke and live that bit longer. Tax on tobacco raises £10.5bn a year, NHS expenditure on smoking related illnesses is £1.7bn, those figures come from an anti-smoking website. http://www.ash.org.uk/html/smuggling/html/whytax99.html The argument that smokers cost the NHS money is a false one. Yeah but surely there is no compensation on earth for smelly clothes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka_From_Viduka 0 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 I've already explained to you why there's a difference in smoking in Tesco and smoking in a bar, surely you can see the difference? And define socially unacceptable, I wouldn't say people are frowned upon in pubs for lighting up. you said people go to Tescos to shop and go to pubs to relax I can't see how that excuses discrimination in who gets to work where tbh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasepud 59 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 Me make things up? Thats a bit rich isn't it Parklife? What you assume I said is clearly not what I said that much is clear. In the general population who lives longer on average smokers or non-smokers? Be careful. Depends, do these non smokers go to the pub? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 31199 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 I've already explained to you why there's a difference in smoking in Tesco and smoking in a bar, surely you can see the difference? And define socially unacceptable, I wouldn't say people are frowned upon in pubs for lighting up. you said people go to Tescos to shop and go to pubs to relax I can't see how that excuses discrimination in who gets to work where tbh There's no discrimination in who gets to work there, just a difference in who might want to work there. It's the same in any job, if you don't like the conditions then don't work there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka_From_Viduka 0 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 I've already explained to you why there's a difference in smoking in Tesco and smoking in a bar, surely you can see the difference? And define socially unacceptable, I wouldn't say people are frowned upon in pubs for lighting up. you said people go to Tescos to shop and go to pubs to relax I can't see how that excuses discrimination in who gets to work where tbh There's no discrimination in who gets to work there, just a difference in who might want to work there err. that's discrimination.... no-one willingly wants to passive smoke, and it's a risk that has nothing to do with the job why should some jobs expose workers and some shouldn't? It's got nothing to do with job conditions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 I've already explained to you why there's a difference in smoking in Tesco and smoking in a bar, surely you can see the difference? And define socially unacceptable, I wouldn't say people are frowned upon in pubs for lighting up. you said people go to Tescos to shop and go to pubs to relax I can't see how that excuses discrimination in who gets to work where tbh There's no discrimination in who gets to work there, just a difference in who might want to work there err. that's discrimination.... no-one willingly wants to passive smoke, and it's a risk that has nothing to do with the job why should some jobs expose workers and some shouldn't? It's got nothing to do with job conditions Just get smokers to smoke in smoky pubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka_From_Viduka 0 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 I've already explained to you why there's a difference in smoking in Tesco and smoking in a bar, surely you can see the difference? And define socially unacceptable, I wouldn't say people are frowned upon in pubs for lighting up. you said people go to Tescos to shop and go to pubs to relax I can't see how that excuses discrimination in who gets to work where tbh There's no discrimination in who gets to work there, just a difference in who might want to work there err. that's discrimination.... no-one willingly wants to passive smoke, and it's a risk that has nothing to do with the job why should some jobs expose workers and some shouldn't? It's got nothing to do with job conditions Just get smokers to smoke in smoky pubs. presumably you meant work, and again, that's discrimination i'm afraid I'd be all for it if you consequently got rid of every other piece of daft discrimination/rights/equality/safety legislation, but that's never going to happen is it, so pubs should be no exception just to satiate lazy smokers, who believe it or not are now the minority Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rikko 20 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 If the pub has a smokey atmosphere, then the staff should be provided with "danger money" to compensate them for the damage done to them. Thats the way it works in other industries! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gejon 2 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 (edited) I would say (at a guess) smokers probably like longer, would like to know who cost the NHS more money though. Smokers who are in and out for various smoking related illnesses or those who don't smoke and live that bit longer. Tax on tobacco raises £10.5bn a year, NHS expenditure on smoking related illnesses is £1.7bn, those figures come from an anti-smoking website. http://www.ash.org.uk/html/smuggling/html/whytax99.html The argument that smokers cost the NHS money is a false one. Yeah but surely there is no compensation on earth for smelly clothes. Some don't mind smelling like an ashtray, a lot do Edited June 30, 2007 by Gejon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka_From_Viduka 0 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 If the pub has a smokey atmosphere, then the staff should be provided with "danger money" to compensate them for the damage done to them. Thats the way it works in other industries! there is no danger apparently, it's just the nasty government scaring everybody, even though they make more money than they spend due to smoking work that one out if you can Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radgina 1 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 is this still going on ........................ I am off to my smoking party now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 Among the general drinking public is the desire to ban smoking as strong as the desire to retain the right to have a pint and a fag? I don't think so, if the public really demanded smoke free bars then why hasn't the market catered to this demand through more pubs going smoke free voluntarily? Surely if the ban really had the public's support then these smoke free establishments would already exist? But these pubs were popular. Also the reaction of the smoking NAZI's would put anyone off. And lastly if you live in Ireland what has it got to do with you? Actually I'm kinda interested in whether a kinda reverse gas mask (which you could smoking inside but nothing got out) would be legal. And if not why not? Patent one. Heh I don't think it would sell much, it is more an interest in exactly how draconian the law is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 If the pub has a smokey atmosphere, then the staff should be provided with "danger money" to compensate them for the damage done to them. Thats the way it works in other industries! there is no danger apparently, it's just the nasty government scaring everybody, even though they make more money than they spend due to smoking work that one out if you can Yup bans for; alcohol, cars, mines (explosive and dug) and wars on the way! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 (edited) Is it really THAT difficult for a smoker to go outside? If you haven't been a smoker then you perhaps don't realise how satisfying it is to sit down with a fag and a pint, it adds to the pub experience. I have been a smoker and yes it was satisfying however I also find it satisfying having a wank but Im sure its not acceptable to drop me kegs and crack one off in the Dog and Duck on a Saturday afternoon. Gordon's 2nd term pledge is to ban wanking tbh. (scientific evidence suggests it makes you, and in some cases others, blind ) Edited June 30, 2007 by Fop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka_From_Viduka 0 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 If the pub has a smokey atmosphere, then the staff should be provided with "danger money" to compensate them for the damage done to them. Thats the way it works in other industries! there is no danger apparently, it's just the nasty government scaring everybody, even though they make more money than they spend due to smoking work that one out if you can Yup bans for; alcohol, cars, mines (explosive and dug) and wars on the way! fail to see even the slightest of relevance of your post to mine anti-personel landmines are banned btw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 Vic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 If the pub has a smokey atmosphere, then the staff should be provided with "danger money" to compensate them for the damage done to them. Thats the way it works in other industries! there is no danger apparently, it's just the nasty government scaring everybody, even though they make more money than they spend due to smoking work that one out if you can Yup bans for; alcohol, cars, mines (explosive and dug) and wars on the way! fail to see even the slightest of relevance of your post to mine I fail to see the slightest relevance of any of your posts to anything, but different strokes I guess. anti-personel landmines are banned btw Not by the United States, Russia, China, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Burma, Syria, and Cuba. Not that has much relevance to anything though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka_From_Viduka 0 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 Vic you didn't explain the first time, so I doubt another will be forthcoming but here goes... que? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka_From_Viduka 0 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 If the pub has a smokey atmosphere, then the staff should be provided with "danger money" to compensate them for the damage done to them. Thats the way it works in other industries! there is no danger apparently, it's just the nasty government scaring everybody, even though they make more money than they spend due to smoking work that one out if you can Yup bans for; alcohol, cars, mines (explosive and dug) and wars on the way! fail to see even the slightest of relevance of your post to mine I fail to see the slightest relevance of any of your posts to anything, but different strokes I guess. whereas you kind of specialise in the non-comment comment though eh? god knows how anyone ever gets an answer from you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 If the pub has a smokey atmosphere, then the staff should be provided with "danger money" to compensate them for the damage done to them. Thats the way it works in other industries! there is no danger apparently, it's just the nasty government scaring everybody, even though they make more money than they spend due to smoking work that one out if you can Yup bans for; alcohol, cars, mines (explosive and dug) and wars on the way! fail to see even the slightest of relevance of your post to mine I fail to see the slightest relevance of any of your posts to anything, but different strokes I guess. whereas you kind of specialise in the non-comment comment though eh? I'd ban them tbh, with a nice scare tactic and lies (and maybe leaflet) campaign. god knows how anyone ever gets an answer from you Usually by asking a sensible question (ground breaking I know). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka_From_Viduka 0 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 If the pub has a smokey atmosphere, then the staff should be provided with "danger money" to compensate them for the damage done to them. Thats the way it works in other industries! there is no danger apparently, it's just the nasty government scaring everybody, even though they make more money than they spend due to smoking work that one out if you can Yup bans for; alcohol, cars, mines (explosive and dug) and wars on the way! fail to see even the slightest of relevance of your post to mine I fail to see the slightest relevance of any of your posts to anything, but different strokes I guess. whereas you kind of specialise in the non-comment comment though eh? I'd ban them tbh, with a nice scare tactic and lies (and maybe leaflet) campaign. god knows how anyone ever gets an answer from you Usually by asking a sensible question (ground breaking I know). sensible questions like 'what are you on about regarding this post...' followed by pages of nonsense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimburst 0 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 I work in a service station café doing a whole heap of shit...anyway, The staff room is a smokers room, and the cloakroom is incorporated into the hallway next door. The smokers room stinks up any clothes in the cloakroom, and as a result I come back from work with clothes that stink. I'm glad the smoking ban has come through, but I hope clubs dont stink of sweaty barstewards now... It will certainly increase my alcohol intake substantially, because the only thing stopping me going to the pub is the fucking smell of your clothes afterwards. I'm not fussed about passive smoking just my clothes... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now