The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / News  % width posts: 400

Smoking ban in Polish bars and restaurants (AT LAST!)


convex 20 | 3,978
13 Oct 2010 #61
They've been tried in plenty of places without much elan.

So the people have voted with their wallets?

So you're against personal liberty on the grounds of what you think. Not that bars only sell booze or that gestating women aren't capable of deciding for themselves whether or not they should go out or stay at home in purdah.

You're absolutely right.

And many are not.

Lots of office workers don't like fluorescent bulbs and lack of vitamin d producing rays of the sun, while people working on road crews get plenty of it. Speaking of road crews, when they work with dangerous irritants, they wear protective gear...I think I might have a solution for your workers...

Shrill, hypersensitive nonsense. Show us some of your 'evidence'.

Property rights are the foundation of personal liberty.
jonni 16 | 2,485
13 Oct 2010 #62
So the people have voted with their wallets?

More the bar owners just ignoring the law.

..I think I might have a solution for your workers...

Exactly. danger money and gas masks.

Property rights are the foundation of personal liberty.

Wonderful!
convex 20 | 3,978
13 Oct 2010 #63
More the bar owners just ignoring the law.

How so? There are non smoking bars. If people don't want to go to them...how does that have anything to do with the bar owners?

Exactly. danger money and gas masks.

Those road crews aren't getting paid danger money when they slap down tar. Just give the staff who are worried masks. Problem solved. Why is that not acceptable?

Wonderful!

Indeed. Cornerstone of a free society.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
13 Oct 2010 #64
Guys, yeah, that's what I meant. You wouldn't get an ashtray if you sat in the non-smoking area. They would likely send you out for that. The smoke didn't waft across, maybe due to some directional ventilation.

However, I do see the side of the smokers. They gain access to an addictive substance, get addicted and are then told that they can't indulge in what many see as complementary goods, namely alcohol and tobacco. The tobacco firms can bail out with cash, safe in the knowledge that people will almost always buy their products.
trener zolwia 1 | 940
13 Oct 2010 #65
Most people here

Libs always assembling an invisible army for their manufactured consensus. Lol...

Convicted of what

Why, convicted of being a dishonest Liberal hypocrite, of course. You well know just what thread I am referring to. ;)

Here, clearly you are in favor of smoking bans so you blindly ignore all evidence and all well-reasoned arguments that don't support your emotional view. Very Lib. Very typical. Rather dishonest...
convex 20 | 3,978
13 Oct 2010 #66
And just a little side note, we've got a non smoking room in the bar in Split...why, because it makes good business sense. It's not as big as the non smoking area, and doesn't draw the same amount of people, but hey, it works. We're catering to the crowd.

Why does there need to be legislation? I don't go to restaurants that don't have non smoking sections. I vote with my wallet, why others?
jonni 16 | 2,485
13 Oct 2010 #67
Why, convicted of being a dishonest Liberal hypocrite, of course. You well know just what thread I am referring to. ;)

Further nuttiness. You should get out more.

so you blindly ignore all evidence and all well-reasoned arguments that don't support your emotional view. Very Lib.

Except you've presented neither, just a kind of sophomoric pretend-libertarian, faux Ayn Rand hysteria without even getting that right.

As per usual.

I don't go to restaurants that don't have non smoking sections. I vote with my wallet, why others?

I'm a very heavy smoker and have smoked for about 30 years, but when I go out to restaurants, they are often very good ones - I don't like a meal that I've looked forward to and budgeted for being served in clouds of cigar smoke. I remember when this was common, years ago, and it wasn't nice.
convex 20 | 3,978
13 Oct 2010 #68
I'm a very heavy smoker and have smoked for about 30 years, but when I go out to restaurants, they are often very good ones - I don't like the meal being served in clouds of cigar smoke. I remember when this was common, years ago, and it wasn't nice.

Neither do I. Even in countries, states, and cities where there is no ban, it was taken up voluntarily. Savvy owners who actually listened to what their customers demanded.
trener zolwia 1 | 940
13 Oct 2010 #69
Yeah, most places around here banned cigar smoking until after dinner hours anyway. Reasonable compromise.
jonni 16 | 2,485
13 Oct 2010 #70
Again with the childish denials.

You know, the insults people use can often follow a theme when repeated frequently, one that reflets the insulters inner insecurities.

In fact the only 'alternatives here' are ones previously debated and tried, but proved not to work. You have had nothing fresh to say. In fact the only fresh thing about this issue is the air in mercifully smoke-free bars and restaurants.

A victory - not only in the discussion, but also for people who don't want to breath others' nicotine, carbon, saltpetre and cyanide fumes.
convex 20 | 3,978
13 Oct 2010 #71
In fact the only 'alternatives here' are ones previously debated and tried, but proved not to work.

Proved not to work in achieving which goal exactly?

Worker Health - masks and the option to work somewhere else

Patron Health - the option of going to a non smoking establishment

Where's the problem?
jonni 16 | 2,485
13 Oct 2010 #72
Proved not to work in achieving which goal exactly?

Comfort and health of other customers, of course, as well as most importantly a reduction in nicotine consumption which has huge ramificatrions on public health issues, child poverty, commercial exploitation of the developing world and workplace absenteeism. There is nothing good about tobacco.

Are you gonna call me 'gay' like you did to those other peeps

You mean Polonius3 and his constant threads on homosexuality, a subject that obviously occupies his mind. Who or what are "peeps", by the way.

They did not prove not to work because they weren't even tried and others clearly would work. But blind zealots, like yourself, refuse to even consider many alternatives

Amazing, really. Different jurisdictions have tried many possibilities over the years, but most are moving to total bans, whether you like it or not.

bent on enforcing their nannying liberty-killing on others. Only a certain sort would consider this a "victory"

More of the same tosh. :-)))
trener zolwia 1 | 940
13 Oct 2010 #73
as well as most importantly a reduction in nicotine consumption.

There's that nannying.
convex 20 | 3,978
13 Oct 2010 #74
Comfort and health of other customers, of course, as well as most importantly a reduction in nicotine consumption.

There is plenty of comfort and healthy air in non smoking bars, wouldn't you agree?

Regarding the second bit, are people are too stupid to make their own decisions?
jonni 16 | 2,485
13 Oct 2010 #75
There is plenty of comfort and healthy air in non smoking bars, wouldn't you agree?

Yes.

Regarding the second bit, are people are too stupid to make their own decisions?

It would certainly seem so.
convex 20 | 3,978
13 Oct 2010 #76
Yes.

You have the choice, at least here, to go to them. Right now, tonight even.

It would certainly seem so.

Why stop with smoking? Since we know what's best for people, lets start some other campaigns. These arguments start giving credibility to other people who want to limit plenty of other things that are known to be bad for other people.
jonni 16 | 2,485
13 Oct 2010 #77
You have the choice, at least here, to go to them. Right now, tonight even.

I do indeed. I'm in the UK this month. My nearest pubs are my local (Varsovian knows it). It's a conspicuously affluent place. Few if any of the customers smoke. The next one (near the cigarette shop that I'll go to in a few minutes) is the very opposite. It does smoking lock-ins, but I tend to avoid it because the customers are a sad, sad bunch.

Why stop with smoking? Since we know what's best for people, lets start some other campaigns. These arguments start giving credibility to other people who want to limit plenty of other things that are known to be bad for other people.

Like compulsory seatbelts, sober driving, not having sex with your children, and making sure landlords have the gas installations checked.

Hell, some nannying folks sure do think they know what's best for all of us free-thinkers.
convex 20 | 3,978
13 Oct 2010 #78
I do indeed. I'm in the UK this month.

I do too, and I live in Poland, with no compulsory law.

Like compulsory seatbelts, sober driving, not having sex with your children, and making sure landlords have the gas installations checked.

seatbelt laws for adults, don't agree.
drunk driving laws on public roads obviously make sense, as you have the capacity to harm others based on no decision of their own.
not having sex with your children, again, you're harming someone who hasn't reached the age of majority.
gas installations, eh?
jonni 16 | 2,485
13 Oct 2010 #79
gas installations, eh?

Tenants of low rent flats and bedsits being gassed due to landlords not having the installation serviced. The free market didn't want it, but there were too many fatalities. Now we have to get a service certificate yearly.
smurf 39 | 1,981
13 Oct 2010 #80
It'd be fantastic if the ban comes into effect, it worked in all the countries that it's been introduced to so far, dont see why it wont work in Poland.

We should all remember that only between 15-20% of the population of any country smokes, so why should the other 80% put up with your cancer sticks
convex 20 | 3,978
13 Oct 2010 #81
Tenants of low rent flats and bedsits being gassed due to landlords not having the installation serviced. The free market didn't want it, but there were too many fatalities. Now we have to get a service certificate yearly.

That's unfortunate. I'm guessing that was a bit more expensive than installing detectors and saving the rest of the money for suing landlords who don't meet their contractual obligations of providing a safe domicile. Dunno, not many gassings in the US. Guessing that the cost of that inspection is passed on to the renter?
jonni 16 | 2,485
13 Oct 2010 #82
Maybe - the problem was people not waking up in the morning due to carbon monoxide poisoning. A few landlords went to jail because of this. Personally I had the gas taken out when I started to rent the entire house out, for a whole raft of reasons.
convex 20 | 3,978
13 Oct 2010 #83
We should all remember that only between 15-20% of the population of any country smokes, so why should the other 80% put up with your cancer sticks

Again, you don't have to. You can go to a non smoking bar, restaurant, and pretty much everywhere else, it's a non issue.

Just out of curiosity, why aren't there more non smoking bars if they're in such demand? Would seem like a quick way to get rich if you have 80% of the market, or?

Maybe - but the problem was people not waking up in the morning due to carbon monoxide poisoning. A few landlords went to jail because of this. Personally I had the gas taken out when I started to rent the building, for a whole raft of reasons.

That's terrible, really. I mean, detectors are dirt cheap. Like smoke detectors, you don't see many here.
smurf 39 | 1,981
13 Oct 2010 #84
Again, you don't have to. You can go to a non smoking bar, restaurant, and pretty much everywhere else, it's a non issue.

I don't have to go to the pub????
man, I'm Irish, yes I do have to go to the fuckin pub, I love pubs, really love them, actually the one thing I really miss about home is the pub culture, it's not the same here, ye all sit down in pubs...wtf is that all about, how can you meet people if you're sitting down :-P

I've never seen a non-smoking bar in Kato, maybe there is one, probably isn't though, not much of a nightlife here y'know?

I don't know if there's a demand, but what I'm saying is that everywhere the non-smoking bar policy has been introduced it has worked, I used to smoke and it was a great way to meet people, going outside for a smoke, borrowing a lighter and strike up a conversation....although if there's no seats to sit down on then maybe the Poles stay there (^_^)
convex 20 | 3,978
13 Oct 2010 #85
I don't have to go to the pub????

You don't have to put up with peoples cancer sticks.

I've never seen a non-smoking bar in Kato, maybe there is one, probably isn't though, not much of a nightlife here y'know?

looks like there are a couple on lokalbezpapierosa...

I don't know if there's a demand, but what I'm saying is that everywhere the non-smoking bar policy has been introduced it has worked

What has worked?

Out of curiosity, do you think that there is a large demand for non smoking pubs?
trener zolwia 1 | 940
13 Oct 2010 #86
it worked in all the countries that it's been introduced to so far

Define "worked". I'd say it has not "worked" here.
smurf 39 | 1,981
13 Oct 2010 #87
What has worked?

the smoking ban

Define "worked". I'd say it has not "worked" here.

There isn't a smoking ban in Poland...is there? Naw there isn't, there's non-smoking sections in pubs but thats a moronic idea, as smoke is carried by air and you cant stop the smoke gettin into non-smoking sections
convex 20 | 3,978
13 Oct 2010 #88
the smoking ban

At what? What is it attempting to achieve, and why should property rights be violated to achieve it when there are other solutions?

There isn't a smoking ban in Poland...is there? Naw there isn't, there's non-smoking sections in pubs but thats a moronic idea, as smoke is carried by air and you cant stop the smoke gettin into non-smoking sections

Again, go to a non smoking pub. Hell, start one, I've got some capital if you can show that people want it. You have the good idea, I'll finance it.
trener zolwia 1 | 940
13 Oct 2010 #89
There isn't a smoking ban in Poland...is there?

I'm in the US. I say smoking bans have not "worked" here. They hurt bar and casino businesses at a time when they can least afford it, and send peeps out into the cold to smoke...

there's non-smoking sections in pubs but thats a moronic idea, as smoke is carried by air and you cant stop the smoke gettin into non-smoking sections

Not necessarily. Only a closed-minded sort would refuse to even consider such reasonable compromises, along with other ones.
SeanBM 35 | 5,808
13 Oct 2010 #90
At what? What is it attempting to achieve, and why should property rights be violated to achieve it when there are other solutions?

Because it's about a nanny state taking away your liberties until people will be mollycoddled so much they will suffocate from the cotton wool in their helmets.

Arse to it!


Home / News / Smoking ban in Polish bars and restaurants (AT LAST!)
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.