| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Phil_K
Joined: 25 Jan 2007 Posts: 2041 Location: A World of my Own
|
Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 4:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thank you - I didn't know about that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kosherpickle
Joined: 24 Nov 2006 Posts: 93
|
Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 8:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It cracks me up every time it comes to fruition. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jonniboy
Joined: 18 Jun 2006 Posts: 751 Location: Panama City, Panama
|
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 12:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'd support it all if it wasn't the thin end of the wedge. I'm one of those social smokers who 'bums cigarettes' as Guy puts it. (In Ireland we call them chipper smokers though I'm not sure if that a British / American English difference or just an Ireland thing.)
In Latvia originally it was banned by default except where premises could show that they have a hermetically sealed room for smokers. Curiously places which deal in water pipes, an increasingly trendy thing in Riga, seem to be exempt. In practice it's resulted in about 95% of places becoming smoke free. A nice compromise as those who didn't want to smoke in sub zero temperatures still have places to go to. In practice, in some of 'em due to the number of smokers crammed in, it's often better to go outside anyway.
Unfortunately they're now talking about banning smoking in public altogether in Riga which seems to me a step too far.
It was the same in UK. Originally bars were to be given the choice - to serve food or allow smoking but then the legislation got changed. I just don't have confidence in governments who start down this public health route. In Ireland, it was smoking at first but then it became alcohol with happy hours now illegal and restrictive bar opening hours. What next - fatty foods, car use? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guy Courchesne

Joined: 10 Mar 2003 Posts: 9650 Location: Mexico City
|
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| What next - fatty foods |
I think New York state already has legislation in this area...not sure if it's law or if I simply read about proposals. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
MO39

Joined: 28 Jan 2004 Posts: 1970 Location: El ombligo de la Rep�blica Mexicana
|
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 3:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| New York City has recently passed a law encouraging restaurants to stop using partially hydrogenated or trans fats in their kitchens. These substances are incredibly unhealthy - their main use is as a preservative rather than to add flavor to foods. There are lots more details about this on the internet, if anyone cares to investigate it further. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
dixie

Joined: 23 Apr 2006 Posts: 644 Location: D.F
|
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 5:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
There are a ton of things that are bad for us, but until recently, with all of our scientific knowledge, and ability, these bads things were allowed, and sometimes encouraged.
Really, if we make all of the "bad" things illegal, what is going to stop the population from growing more out of control, and thus, consuming the earth at a rate that cannot be tolerated?
Sounds harsh, but how many people cannot afford or have access to simple daily food intake needs? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guy Courchesne

Joined: 10 Mar 2003 Posts: 9650 Location: Mexico City
|
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 5:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| MO39 wrote: |
| New York City has recently passed a law encouraging restaurants to stop using partially hydrogenated or trans fats in their kitchens. These substances are incredibly unhealthy - their main use is as a preservative rather than to add flavor to foods. There are lots more details about this on the internet, if anyone cares to investigate it further. |
Thank you...that's what I'd read. McDonald's and Burger King soon to be pushed out of NYC and into New Jersey? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
MO39

Joined: 28 Jan 2004 Posts: 1970 Location: El ombligo de la Rep�blica Mexicana
|
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 5:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Well, New Jersey gets a bad enough rap as it is - it doesn't need all of NYC's MacDonalds fast food joints! Actually, all the MacDonald''s management has to do is to think of a way to make its "tasty treats" using healthier ingredients. I wonder if that would raise their prices... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
notamiss

Joined: 20 Jun 2007 Posts: 908 Location: El 5o pino del la CDMX
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
MELEE

Joined: 22 Jan 2003 Posts: 2583 Location: The Mexican Hinterland
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
dixie

Joined: 23 Apr 2006 Posts: 644 Location: D.F
|
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 6:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gotta love how they are putting out the no-smoking campaign, and you you can still freely smoke at the UN!
Seriously though, again I have to ask, why not just make cigarettes illegal?... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
MO39

Joined: 28 Jan 2004 Posts: 1970 Location: El ombligo de la Rep�blica Mexicana
|
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dixie wrote: |
Gotta love how they are putting out the no-smoking campaign, and you you can still freely smoke at the UN!
Seriously though, again I have to ask, why not just make cigarettes illegal?... |
Your logic is impeccable, but we have to keep in mind the power of the tobacco lobby, not to mention the government revenue acquired from taxes on tobacco products. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
M@tt
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Posts: 473 Location: here and there
|
Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 1:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
did anyone else read about the recent study that concluded it is cheaper for the government to treat obese people and smokers, who will die quite soon, rather than healthy people, who live too long and end up with long, drawn out problems later in life? it was in response to the argument that smokers and fat people cost the health care system too much money.
i think you should just be able to shoot people that are really annoying. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guy Courchesne

Joined: 10 Mar 2003 Posts: 9650 Location: Mexico City
|
Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 1:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| i think you should just be able to shoot people that are really annoying. |
Snooty French waiters...
Mexico organ grinders..
Fran Drescher...
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Phil_K
Joined: 25 Jan 2007 Posts: 2041 Location: A World of my Own
|
Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 3:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| i think you should just be able to shoot people that are really annoying. |
Please, please make that law!!!!
I will add:
Franeleros, particularly those old men who put on a kind of uniform to look official and blow a whistle which I want to ram down their throat. (and people who encourage them by giving them money).
98% of Mexican drivers who don't have a clue how to drive and particularly those who are so damn lazy they ignore one-way streets.
Newsreaders who give opinions instead of facts.
Hypocrites who offer "peace" in mass every Sunday and then don't respect the tranquility of their neighbors.
AMLO.
Parents who let their children ride in shopping carts (rather than in the seat provided).
People who don't pay taxes but want all the privileges this pays for.
Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth etc.
Cyclists.
People who park their cars completely blocking the sidewalk.
Bookshop owners who only have the book you want covered in plastic so you can't see what's inside.
Students.
Mexican policemen
People who put "baby on board" signs in their cars
Ambulantes
etc, etc
Thank you, I feel better now.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|