| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
transmogrifier
Joined: 02 Jan 2012
Location: Seoul, South Korea
|
 Posted: Fri Aug 30, 2013 4:44 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Captain Corea wrote: |
I'm more of the "NO, I'm not going with ya if you're smoking there."
My mom came to Korea to visit after my daughter was born. I told her clearly that there'd be no smoking allowed in our home. If she wanted to smoke, she'd have to go outside the building.
I had no qualms saying that to her. |
Why would you have any qualms? Isn't that how having your own house and rules work? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Captain Corea
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 30, 2013 4:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| transmogrifier wrote: |
| Captain Corea wrote: |
I'm more of the "NO, I'm not going with ya if you're smoking there."
My mom came to Korea to visit after my daughter was born. I told her clearly that there'd be no smoking allowed in our home. If she wanted to smoke, she'd have to go outside the building.
I had no qualms saying that to her. |
Why would you have any qualms? Isn't that how having your own house and rules work? |
Some ppl might have trouble telling their parents how to do things.
/shrug
I'm of that "My house, my rules" bit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
transmogrifier
Joined: 02 Jan 2012
Location: Seoul, South Korea
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 30, 2013 4:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| transmogrifier wrote: |
| Captain Corea wrote: |
I'm more of the "NO, I'm not going with ya if you're smoking there."
My mom came to Korea to visit after my daughter was born. I told her clearly that there'd be no smoking allowed in our home. If she wanted to smoke, she'd have to go outside the building.
I had no qualms saying that to her. |
Why would you have any qualms? Isn't that how having your own house and rules work? |
Some ppl might have trouble telling their parents how to do things.
/shrug
I'm of that "My house, my rules" bit. |
Nah, they had their time to order you around. Now it's payback. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
drydell
Joined: 01 Oct 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 30, 2013 5:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
@steelrails - having to walk outside for a ciggie when in a pub on a parity to banning all automobiles - cars/motorcycles/trucks - i.e complete economic meltdown of a country. That's a new level of absurd comparisons!...good god man - get a grip will you!
And as i've said before your excellent idea basically gives pubs an 'opt out' of being a smoking pub... so you're saying to pubs well it's totally up to you - but 30%+ of your customers will probably go to your smoking-ok competition.. and take a large load of their non-smoking friends too who value friendship above the unpleasantness of their friends smoking habit and will suffer the stinky clothes, sore throat and stinging eyes and long term health effects because we are pretty damn understanding... you will change nothing at all by this approach and all bars and pretty much all restaurants will continue to allow smoking to maximize their business potential ...it's called what was happening before a smoking ban happened!..duh
You also think segregating non-smokers from smokers is a desirable goal..do you really not have many non-smoking friends? would you not want to be able to drink with them or -as above - would you just expect them to go to the smoking allowed places? people wouldn't segregate like thast..it's not how the world works..
Smokers just have to get used to not smoking and drinking in a pub together. I know it seems like the most terrifying idea ever to the average smoker.. but it's actually really easy.. think about it - you don't worry about not smoking on buses or in the subway these days - I was one of the most enthusiastic smokers you could have ever known for about 10 years of my life..but having a drink.... and not smoking - is just as good as it was when I was a smoker! seriously...just takes a bit of getting used to |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 30, 2013 2:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
You also think segregating non-smokers from smokers is a desirable goal..do you really not have many non-smoking friends? would you not want to be able to drink with them or -as above - would you just expect them to go to the smoking allowed places? people wouldn't segregate like thast..it's not how the world works..
Smokers just have to get used to not smoking and drinking in a pub together. I know it seems like the most terrifying idea ever to the average smoker.. but it's actually really easy.. think about it - you don't worry about not smoking on buses or in the subway these days - I was one of the most enthusiastic smokers you could have ever known for about 10 years of my life..but having a drink.... and not smoking - is just as good as it was when I was a smoker! seriously...just takes a bit of getting used to |
Why is any of that the government's business? The government is supposed to start regulations because groups of friends split apart to go to different establishments?
| Quote: |
| value friendship above the unpleasantness of their friends smoking habit and will suffer the stinky clothes, sore throat and stinging eyes and long term health effects because we are pretty damn understanding... you will change nothing at all by this approach and all bars and pretty much all restaurants will continue to allow smoking to maximize their business potential ...it's called what was happening before a smoking ban happened!..duh |
So you are claiming it is not economically viable for a non-smoking bar to exist? And why are non-smokers so weak minded as being unable to tell their friends "No, I won't go to a place with smoking"?
I have no problem going to a non-smoking bar or restaurant if my friends insist. That's how things work. You ask your friends not to go somewhere. You don't silently brood about it and then decide to make a bunch of laws behind their back.
Again, why is this issue of friendship one that requires government regulation and police enforcement? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 3:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crescent wrote: |
| You said there should be bars for smokers and now you've said going to the bar is not necessary. So it's not necessary to provide bars for smokers. |
I said that going to the bar is not a necessity in response to you saying that smoking was not a necessity. In any case, arguing the non-necessity of smoking is not an argument for banning smoking. Unless you're really proposing that we ban anything that isn't a necessary function of life.
| crescent wrote: |
| Also, I wouldn't say going to bar is always unnecessary or even a habit. Business and networking is frequently done in bars. |
Didn't you say that bars were for drinking and that how anything else (specifically smoking) became associated with them was irrelevant?
Smoking (like it or not) has been a part of socializing and networking for ages... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crescent
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: yes.
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Getting slippery, are we?
Doing an unnecessary activity in a unnecessary place does not provide a basis for creating a special unnecessary place for that unnecessary activity. Especially when public opinion and health risks form a substantial opposition to that place.
Yes, bars are for drinking, but I didn't say anything else was irrelevant. Smoking may have been a part of socializing for ages, but again that is irrelevant. Having to escort one's wife at all times in public had been a part of socializing for ages too. Until society advanced. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crescent
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: yes.
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Getting slippery, are we?
Doing an unnecessary activity in a unnecessary place does not provide a basis for creating a special unnecessary place for that unnecessary activity. Especially when public opinion and health risks form a substantial opposition to that place.
Yes, bars are for drinking, but I didn't say anything else was irrelevant. Smoking may have been a part of socializing for ages, but again that is irrelevant. Having to escort one's wife at all times in public had been a part of socializing for ages too. Until society advanced. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 4:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crescent wrote: |
| ...public opinion... |
I was unaware there was a vote... That's the issue here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 5:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crescent wrote: |
| Having to escort one's wife at all times in public had been a part of socializing for ages too. Until society advanced. |
Last time I checked they hadn't banned escorting your wife in public yet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mithridates
Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 18, 2013 11:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Survey:
http://www.datanews.co.kr/site/datanews/DTWork.asp?itemIDT=1002910&aID=20130917100634937
Smokers were asked what they would do if prices were raised to 10,000 won a pack. 54% said they would quit, 33% said they would continue to smoke, the rest said they didn't know or refused to answer.
Of all those surveyed (now not just smokers), 52% were in favour of a 2000 won increase, 39% were opposed.
88% were in favour of a smoking ban in 45-pyeong plus bars and restaurants, 10% were opposed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 18, 2013 5:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I was at Olympic Park yesterday. No smoking signs are posted and even though there were lots of workers setting up for this weekend's festival, no one was smoking. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KimchiNinja
Joined: 01 May 2012
Location: Gangnam
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2013 7:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| drydell wrote: |
And as i've said before your excellent idea basically gives pubs an 'opt out' of being a smoking pub... so you're saying to pubs well it's totally up to you - but 30%+ of your customers will probably go to your smoking-ok competition.. and take a large load of their non-smoking friends too who value friendship above the unpleasantness of their friends smoking habit and will suffer the stinky clothes, sore throat and stinging eyes and long term health effects because we are pretty damn understanding... you will change nothing at all by this approach and all bars and pretty much all restaurants will continue to allow smoking to maximize their business potential... |
Correct, market forces do not want the smoking ban. Market forces are the people voting with their wallet. So instead you step in with the government "for their own good". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
geldedgoat
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2013 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| People who refuse to allow a distribution of smoking and non-smoking establishments are simply not acting like reasonable, rational adults. Have your smoke-free family restaurants or trendy nightspots, but give the smokers and those restaurant and bar owners that wish to cater to them some way to interact. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KimchiNinja
Joined: 01 May 2012
Location: Gangnam
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2013 8:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Exactly.
Bathrooms are the appropriate place to fart. Bars are the appropriate place to smoke. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
