Site Search:
 
TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Smoking banned at bars in Itaewon/Yongsan-gu
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 9, 10, 11 ... 16, 17, 18  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> General Discussion Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Yagremohbhg



Joined: 04 Oct 2012
Location: Busan

PostPosted: Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ilikekimchi wrote:
Yagremohbhg wrote:
I'm with rails on this. No harm in having an easy to install and cheap to maintain air extraction unit in a 'smoker's area' in any pub and restaurant.

Many pubs and bars in the UK have been forced to close down due to the lost custom of smokers.

Smokers are the more fun people anyway, usually.


No.

They are third class tirds who are a drain on public healthcare in western countries. FUN YAY

Smokers are failures in adaptation. They fail to adapt, but they succeed in enjoying poison and lung cancer. Smokers are not wieners, they are WINNERS, in reduced cardio capacity, paying more on disposable taxes on cigarettes, and emphasema.

Call it an even trade off!


And alcohol causes liver and colon and intestinal cancer. Yay. er, wait, why are we not banning that too....?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CentralCali



Joined: 17 May 2007

PostPosted: Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I can't believe something as amazingly obvious as this has to be said in words; however, it is now evident that it must be:

We vegetarians will have absolutely no effect on our bodies from the meat on our neighbor's plate because--here comes the obvious part--we are not putting the meat into our bodies.

Is that clear enough or do I have to dumb it down even more?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Yagremohbhg



Joined: 04 Oct 2012
Location: Busan

PostPosted: Sat Dec 15, 2012 10:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CentralCali wrote:
I can't believe something as amazingly obvious as this has to be said in words; however, it is now evident that it must be:

We vegetarians will have absolutely no effect on our bodies from the meat on our neighbor's plate because--here comes the obvious part--we are not putting the meat into our bodies.

Is that clear enough or do I have to dumb it down even more?


Just for fun, see if you can.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Moondoggy



Joined: 07 Jun 2011

PostPosted: Sat Dec 15, 2012 10:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ilikekimchi wrote:
Yagremohbhg wrote:
I'm with rails on this. No harm in having an easy to install and cheap to maintain air extraction unit in a 'smoker's area' in any pub and restaurant.

Many pubs and bars in the UK have been forced to close down due to the lost custom of smokers.

Smokers are the more fun people anyway, usually.


No.

They are third class tirds who are a drain on public healthcare in western countries. FUN YAY

Smokers are failures in adaptation. They fail to adapt, but they succeed in enjoying poison and lung cancer. Smokers are not wieners, they are WINNERS, in reduced cardio capacity, paying more on disposable taxes on cigarettes, and emphasema.

Call it an even trade off!


^I agree with you 100%. And this is it if you want me to name one thing that I don't miss about Korea.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
god of English



Joined: 23 Jan 2009

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 12:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Steelrails wrote:
Fine. Then are you proposing to make it illegal?

No, although I favor banning smoking everywhere except in one's home, with the caveat that it's not done in the presence of children. I think smoking in the presence of children should be a crime.

I wouldn't have any objections to a complete ban however. As a Canadian tax payer, I'd rather see my tax dollars go to some worthy social services than some addict's chemotherapy treatment.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
god of English



Joined: 23 Jan 2009

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 12:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Steelrails wrote:
Also, almost every restaurant caters to meat eaters. Do vegetarians DEMAND that menus be changed to suit them? No, they open their own restaurants or dine somewhere else, possibly at home. You do not have a right to dining out anymore than someone has a right to smoke.

Yagremohbhg wrote:
And alcohol causes liver and colon and intestinal cancer. Yay. er, wait, why are we not banning that too....?

Please look up "passive smoking" or "second hand smoke" before trying to construct another analogy and embarrassing yourself further.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Yagremohbhg



Joined: 04 Oct 2012
Location: Busan

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 12:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

god of English wrote:
Steelrails wrote:
Also, almost every restaurant caters to meat eaters. Do vegetarians DEMAND that menus be changed to suit them? No, they open their own restaurants or dine somewhere else, possibly at home. You do not have a right to dining out anymore than someone has a right to smoke.

Yagremohbhg wrote:
And alcohol causes liver and colon and intestinal cancer. Yay. er, wait, why are we not banning that too....?

Please look up "passive smoking" or "second hand smoke" before trying to construct another analogy and embarrassing yourself further.


Again, just have a smoker's section with a door and an air ventilation system.

Half your patrons successfully catered for and no passive smoking. Yay!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
god of English



Joined: 23 Jan 2009

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 1:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yagremohbhg wrote:
Again, just have a smoker's section with a door and an air ventilation system.

Half your patrons successfully catered for and no passive smoking. Yay!

I'd be fine with that as long as the smoking section is completely enclosed in glass. I don't see why smokers should be given prime areas like balconies and terraces just because they stink.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Steelrails



Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 2:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CentralCali wrote:
I can't believe something as amazingly obvious as this has to be said in words; however, it is now evident that it must be:

We vegetarians will have absolutely no effect on our bodies from the meat on our neighbor's plate because--here comes the obvious part--we are not putting the meat into our bodies.

Is that clear enough or do I have to dumb it down even more?


But that's not the issue. The issue is with you entering a private businesses and DEMANDING that they change services that have existed, in some cases since day one, and are enjoyed by long-time customers.

No one forces you to enter a non-smoking restaurant. Therefore you should have no claim on whether or not smoking is permitted. It's like buying a ticket to a strip club and being offended that there is nudity and sexual content. It's like being offended at profanity on cable TV. No one forces you to have any contact.

As for workplaces, again no one forces anyone to work in a hazardous job. No one is forced to be a coal miner or firefighter or crab fisherman. People voluntarily choose to do hazardous work for whatever reason.

Just because the habit is disgusting to you, and perhaps carries some risk, like say, unprotected homosexual anal sex, doesn't mean the act should be banned.

No one forces you to enter a smoking establishment. This is the crux of the issue.

FOR THE HUNDREDTH TIME

HOW ARE YOU FORCED TO ENTER A RESTAURANT?

ANSWER THE QUESTION.

Please, why is it so hard to get a straight answer out of a group of people who claim to have all the answers on this issue?

Why can no one here who is against smoking come up with a sentence that starts with "I am forced to enter a restaurant because...."

You can't make that sentence, because you aren't. Therefore your argument about being forced to be exposed to smoke falls apart. You CHOOSE to expose yourself to smoke when you enter a smoking restaurant. If you don't want to be exposed, dine somewhere else. It's that simple.


Last edited by Steelrails on Sun Dec 16, 2012 2:33 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Yagremohbhg



Joined: 04 Oct 2012
Location: Busan

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 2:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

god of English wrote:
Yagremohbhg wrote:
Again, just have a smoker's section with a door and an air ventilation system.

Half your patrons successfully catered for and no passive smoking. Yay!

I'd be fine with that as long as the smoking section is completely enclosed in glass. I don't see why smokers should be given prime areas like balconies and terraces just because they stink.


As a smoker, I'd be fine with that too, air ventilation is easy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Steelrails



Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 2:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I wouldn't have any objections to a complete ban however.


So the experience of alcohol and narcotic prohibition doesn't register with you?

What? You think if cigarettes are outlawed, suddenly everyone will stop smoking and no one will sell tobacco?

Quote:
I don't see why smokers should be given prime areas like balconies and terraces just because they stink.


See, here's my problem with the anti-smoking crowd. They think they own the place. They think they get to make the rules.

Dude, the person who owns and operates the business and put up the investment cost should be the one who gets to make that decision, not you.

I know you think you are more enlightened than everyone else and that life should stop and start at your convenience, but that's not how things should work.

If the owner tells the smokers to go sit and smoke in some rotten dungeon strewn with garbage, fine. If he gives them all the comforts of a 5 star hotel suite while the non-smokers are crowded around a trough, fine.

That's what the non-smoking crowd doesn't get. This issue isn't about smoking. It's about the rights of privacy, respect for private business, enabling choice and the free market of customer service for business owners, and about the freedom of association.

Smokers should be able to freely associate with other smokers and open and operate restaurants, bars, and night clubs that cater to smokers.

Please tell me why it should be illegal for smokers to operate businesses exclusively for smokers?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TheUrbanMyth



Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: It's not a superiority complex when you really are superior

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 4:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Steelrails wrote:
[
FOR THE HUNDREDTH TIME

HOW ARE YOU FORCED TO ENTER A RESTAURANT?

ANSWER THE QUESTION.

.



When you work there?

When you are hungry and there are no other establishments around and it's too far to your house?

When you are dragged along to a school lunch?

But such things aside it is not being forced to enter a restaurant that I personally object to...but being forced to LEAVE a restaurant that when I entered was smoke-free. But during my meal someone came in and lit up.
Conversely if I see someone smoking before I order I'll go somewhere else or eat at home.

Now answer this question. When are you FORCED to light up in a restaurant (particularly when no one else is smoking)?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
god of English



Joined: 23 Jan 2009

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 4:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Steelrails wrote:
So the experience of alcohol and narcotic prohibition doesn't register with you?

What? You think if cigarettes are outlawed, suddenly everyone will stop smoking and no one will sell tobacco?

I meant exactly what I wrote: "I wouldn't have any objections to a complete ban".

Quote:
Please tell me why it should be illegal for smokers to operate businesses exclusively for smokers?

For me, it's an issue of public health for workers and customers, both non-smokers *and* smokers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
drydell



Joined: 01 Oct 2009

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 4:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

@Steelrails
Working in a restaurant or bar stops being hazardous when the smokers are asked to light up outside. Problem solved.

Firefighting, hunting tigers etc etc are inherently dangerous occupations - it's a silly comparison.

To try to answer your question let me put it like this....

Prior to the smoking ban in the UK almost every pub in the country was a smoking pub. Why? Pubs aren't interested in public health - they are interested in making as much money as possible. Even though smokers are a minority - they (smokers)would all avoid non-smoking pubs if both exist and their non-smoking friends would feel obligated to go to the smoky pubs (because unlike your characterization non-smokers are pretty damn accommodating to placate smokers). Hence almost zero pubs would voluntarily become smoke-free (bad for business). this means the majority (non-smokers) who would like to socialize and go out for a drink are forced to go into smoky pubs or else stay at home.

that is why a general ban is the best solution. look matey...I can see that having a drink/meal and a smoke at the same time is the most important thing in the world for you (i remember that feeling) - but it's coming - get used to it - you can nip outside and have a chat with others there - people from many countries have now got used to it - you will too... and you will remember these rants and probably feel a bit daft..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cdninkorea



Joined: 27 Jan 2006
Location: Seoul

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 4:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Steelrails: Give up, brother. You've fought the good fight. You've presented your argument in as many ways as you can and as clearly as you can. Your logic is inescapable, and the only thing people who disagree with you can do is either ignore your arguments (like the person who said that a person who works at a restaurant is forced to be there, a point you've addressed more than once), or give an illogical reply and pretend they've refuted you.

You can't argue with irrationality: the other side is convinced that their whims can be substituted for truth, and there's no getting through.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> General Discussion Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 9, 10, 11 ... 16, 17, 18  Next
Page 10 of 18

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2013 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International