Seems that the smokers have better social life.
-
I noticed that smokers have more fun than non-smokers at their workplaces. While we (non-smokers) spend all day working, they gather to have a cigarette and a little chat with their fellow smokers. Is this specific for California (the non-smoking state), or it happens everywhere? I vote pro drink :beer:
As the co-owner of a small software business and a smoker we stipulated in our lease of office space that we could smoke.All of our employees are smokers. The building has about 30 other business in it and we usually have 5-10 people for the other offices in during the day taking smoke breaks. We generate a lot of good will and have gotten some work from this. Plus we get all the gossip, invites to almost all the parties, tickest to sporting events, and a few other bennies. The clean air nazis can moan and groan all they want to. Somewhere else. I have a sign over my desk that says "Thank you for not asking me not to smoke" Richard If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and a man. - Pudd'nhead Wilson's Calendar
-
I noticed that smokers have more fun than non-smokers at their workplaces. While we (non-smokers) spend all day working, they gather to have a cigarette and a little chat with their fellow smokers. Is this specific for California (the non-smoking state), or it happens everywhere? I vote pro drink :beer:
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: or it happens everywhere? Yes, I believe its true also, worldwide from my travels. Also who make the most money out of smokers is ugly Goverments and not the Tobacco Industry! Why aren't all the taxes put back into anti-smoking plans if it was truly bad for you. Statistcally speaking Smokers should get lower Medical Insurance, ask an actaurry, they don't live as long and so don't bleed the health systems for as long. (Remember most smokers just fall over and die.) [Now I'll get ready to get flamed] The medical profession causes more Cancer than smoking does! [Flame protector sheilds are UP] Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
I live in Bob's HungOut now
Colin is a big fan of William Goldberg and Frank Tipler and of course Billy Connerly
-
As the co-owner of a small software business and a smoker we stipulated in our lease of office space that we could smoke.All of our employees are smokers. The building has about 30 other business in it and we usually have 5-10 people for the other offices in during the day taking smoke breaks. We generate a lot of good will and have gotten some work from this. Plus we get all the gossip, invites to almost all the parties, tickest to sporting events, and a few other bennies. The clean air nazis can moan and groan all they want to. Somewhere else. I have a sign over my desk that says "Thank you for not asking me not to smoke" Richard If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and a man. - Pudd'nhead Wilson's Calendar
My boss used to smoke and so were a few guys in our company so we used to be able to smoke everywhere inside. But then my boss quit smoking and other smokers left company. I am the only one left who smokes. People around were constantly whining about me smoking by my desk, so I walk outside for my smoke breaks now. I do that because I can appreciate their point of view and their dislike to smoke. But I guess, now they complain that I have more breaks than them. They have never told me anything, but at least some of them are probably thinking that... Amazing...
-
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: or it happens everywhere? Yes, I believe its true also, worldwide from my travels. Also who make the most money out of smokers is ugly Goverments and not the Tobacco Industry! Why aren't all the taxes put back into anti-smoking plans if it was truly bad for you. Statistcally speaking Smokers should get lower Medical Insurance, ask an actaurry, they don't live as long and so don't bleed the health systems for as long. (Remember most smokers just fall over and die.) [Now I'll get ready to get flamed] The medical profession causes more Cancer than smoking does! [Flame protector sheilds are UP] Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
I live in Bob's HungOut now
Colin is a big fan of William Goldberg and Frank Tipler and of course Billy Connerly
Colin Davies wrote: The medical profession causes more Cancer than smoking does! I agree. And all those people who are running around worring about eating and breathing right get all kind of health problems because of worring too much. Beside that, all those "diet", "fat free", "taste free" and other ugly chemically manufactured crap that people consume is more dangerous than smoking will ever be.
-
As the co-owner of a small software business and a smoker we stipulated in our lease of office space that we could smoke.All of our employees are smokers. The building has about 30 other business in it and we usually have 5-10 people for the other offices in during the day taking smoke breaks. We generate a lot of good will and have gotten some work from this. Plus we get all the gossip, invites to almost all the parties, tickest to sporting events, and a few other bennies. The clean air nazis can moan and groan all they want to. Somewhere else. I have a sign over my desk that says "Thank you for not asking me not to smoke" Richard If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and a man. - Pudd'nhead Wilson's Calendar
-
Colin Davies wrote: The medical profession causes more Cancer than smoking does! I agree. And all those people who are running around worring about eating and breathing right get all kind of health problems because of worring too much. Beside that, all those "diet", "fat free", "taste free" and other ugly chemically manufactured crap that people consume is more dangerous than smoking will ever be.
There is probably more risk of heart attacks and diabetes from obesity than from smoking anyway. And since people gain weight when they quit smoking, it only makes sense to continue on smoking. I feel that insurance companies should recognize and reward this approach. Along the same lines, smokers consume alot less food and that helps to ensure there will be more to feed the hungry masses ... So smoking is really a humanitarian effort... a bodily sacrifice that is done for the good of the world. :) BB
-
They're happy because they have an excuse to get outside and be away from work for a few minutes. Just keep your damn cancer clouds away from me. ;) --Mike-- My really out-of-date homepage "Not our fault we are intellectually superior to the rest of the office." -- Paul Watson in the Lounge, 12/12/2001 Sonork - 100.10414 AcidHelm Big fan of Alyson Hannigan.
Michael Dunn wrote: Big fan of Alyson Hannigan. American Pie 1 & 2 did a great job of making her look like a flute-toting band dork. :) She looks a lot different on that web page, though. Jon Sagara "There are lies, damned lies and statistics." -- Mark Twain.
-
There is probably more risk of heart attacks and diabetes from obesity than from smoking anyway. And since people gain weight when they quit smoking, it only makes sense to continue on smoking. I feel that insurance companies should recognize and reward this approach. Along the same lines, smokers consume alot less food and that helps to ensure there will be more to feed the hungry masses ... So smoking is really a humanitarian effort... a bodily sacrifice that is done for the good of the world. :) BB
Sure, the health department could set billboards along the freeway saying: "Do the world a favor, light one today!" :-D I'm unfortunately starting to become a bit aggressive towards smokers. Here in Ottawa, you can't smoke in public places, even bars and restaurants, which is a very good thing. At least you don't smell like tobacco when you get back home from a night out! I don't mind the fact that people smoke, I just don't like the idea that they are free to smoke with non-smokers around. Smoker's rights??:rolleyes: --------------- www.edovia.com
-
Sure, the health department could set billboards along the freeway saying: "Do the world a favor, light one today!" :-D I'm unfortunately starting to become a bit aggressive towards smokers. Here in Ottawa, you can't smoke in public places, even bars and restaurants, which is a very good thing. At least you don't smell like tobacco when you get back home from a night out! I don't mind the fact that people smoke, I just don't like the idea that they are free to smoke with non-smokers around. Smoker's rights??:rolleyes: --------------- www.edovia.com
-
Well I am a non-smoker and enjoy the smell of smoke. Why not allow smokers one small pleasure in life and invest in a bottle of Fabreeze? Just a thought.
I don't want to get involved too deep in the smoking debate, but what about your health? Of course, there's nothing to mention about it if you are exposed to smoking once a week, but for some people it's more like every day. Some of you will say: "Well, if you don't like the smoke and all, just don't come here" or something. Like it's us, the non-smokers, that have to comply with the smokers. It should be the other way around! It's like saying: "Ok, I'm getting drunk tonight and I'll drive home, so if you don't get run over and killed, stay home!" :rolleyes: --------------- www.edovia.com
-
I don't want to get involved too deep in the smoking debate, but what about your health? Of course, there's nothing to mention about it if you are exposed to smoking once a week, but for some people it's more like every day. Some of you will say: "Well, if you don't like the smoke and all, just don't come here" or something. Like it's us, the non-smokers, that have to comply with the smokers. It should be the other way around! It's like saying: "Ok, I'm getting drunk tonight and I'll drive home, so if you don't get run over and killed, stay home!" :rolleyes: --------------- www.edovia.com
Let's say that people who wear bright red clothes are really bothering me. It hurts my eyes. Now if most of the people in the country felt the same way as I do, would it be appropriate for us to ban all the people in red from the streets?
-
Let's say that people who wear bright red clothes are really bothering me. It hurts my eyes. Now if most of the people in the country felt the same way as I do, would it be appropriate for us to ban all the people in red from the streets?
We are talking about a health hazard here, not fashion! Your comment is then irrelevant ;) I'm not saying to ban smokers, but why is it that when 4 people go to a restaurant and only one of them smokes, the group needs to go in the smoking section? This behaviour makes me sick, it should be for the smoker to comply to the non-smoker, that's all! --------------- www.edovia.com
-
We are talking about a health hazard here, not fashion! Your comment is then irrelevant ;) I'm not saying to ban smokers, but why is it that when 4 people go to a restaurant and only one of them smokes, the group needs to go in the smoking section? This behaviour makes me sick, it should be for the smoker to comply to the non-smoker, that's all! --------------- www.edovia.com
Why do you consider your right not to smoke a priority over my right to smoke. Why should I give up my right to satisfy your right and not the other way around? Just because you happened to be in majority? You choose to go in smoking section because obviously you prefer smoking person's company over the "supposed" dangers of smoke inhalation and over the inconvenience of smelling like smoke. Smoking person does not drag you in there by force, does he? I choose not to smoke around people who I care about and who do not like smoke. But I do not recognize anybody's right to tell me not to smoke. The only reason I obey by the rules of "smoking" and "non-smoking" sections in restaurants is because I've been forced to obey these rules by majority. I do not feel it is fair. Anybody who doesn't want to be around me while I am doing stuff that I choose to be doing is free to get the hell away from me.
-
Why do you consider your right not to smoke a priority over my right to smoke. Why should I give up my right to satisfy your right and not the other way around? Just because you happened to be in majority? You choose to go in smoking section because obviously you prefer smoking person's company over the "supposed" dangers of smoke inhalation and over the inconvenience of smelling like smoke. Smoking person does not drag you in there by force, does he? I choose not to smoke around people who I care about and who do not like smoke. But I do not recognize anybody's right to tell me not to smoke. The only reason I obey by the rules of "smoking" and "non-smoking" sections in restaurants is because I've been forced to obey these rules by majority. I do not feel it is fair. Anybody who doesn't want to be around me while I am doing stuff that I choose to be doing is free to get the hell away from me.
I just feel that since smoking has been proved as a health hazard, that smokers should comply to others since they somewhat represent a threath to health. It's not because I'm in the majority, it's because smoking is bad. Isn't that enough of a reason??? I don't want to direct any personal attacks, but your way of thinking is typical of a smoker! There' This could go on for hours, if not days and we seem to be both stubborn so nobody's gonna win this match... --------------- www.edovia.com
-
Why do you consider your right not to smoke a priority over my right to smoke. Why should I give up my right to satisfy your right and not the other way around? Just because you happened to be in majority? You choose to go in smoking section because obviously you prefer smoking person's company over the "supposed" dangers of smoke inhalation and over the inconvenience of smelling like smoke. Smoking person does not drag you in there by force, does he? I choose not to smoke around people who I care about and who do not like smoke. But I do not recognize anybody's right to tell me not to smoke. The only reason I obey by the rules of "smoking" and "non-smoking" sections in restaurants is because I've been forced to obey these rules by majority. I do not feel it is fair. Anybody who doesn't want to be around me while I am doing stuff that I choose to be doing is free to get the hell away from me.
If the act of not smoking did something to the air that other people breath, then the rights issue would be the same. However, they aren't the same because smoking does something, while not smoking does nothing to the same air. The issue is more along the lines of "disturbing the peace" where someone is makeing a racket and bothering everyone around them, while all of those other people are doing nothing to bother the person making the racket. Just my non-judgmental 2 cents. John
-
I just feel that since smoking has been proved as a health hazard, that smokers should comply to others since they somewhat represent a threath to health. It's not because I'm in the majority, it's because smoking is bad. Isn't that enough of a reason??? I don't want to direct any personal attacks, but your way of thinking is typical of a smoker! There' This could go on for hours, if not days and we seem to be both stubborn so nobody's gonna win this match... --------------- www.edovia.com
I just feel that people should respect each other rights and choices. Just because something considered to be proven by many doesn't mean it is the way I believe. I suspect that you know that your thinking is typical of the other opposite group, right? :) And if we ever meet in the restaurant I promise not to drag you into a smoking section. There. :)
-
I just feel that since smoking has been proved as a health hazard, that smokers should comply to others since they somewhat represent a threath to health. It's not because I'm in the majority, it's because smoking is bad. Isn't that enough of a reason??? I don't want to direct any personal attacks, but your way of thinking is typical of a smoker! There' This could go on for hours, if not days and we seem to be both stubborn so nobody's gonna win this match... --------------- www.edovia.com
Now I personally don't smoke, but I just can't let a good argument opportunity like this pass by unhindered! LukeV wrote: I just feel that since smoking has been proved as a health hazard, that smokers should comply to others since they somewhat represent a threath to health. Does this mean that the anti drink campaigners should succeed in stopping anybody from drinking alchohol? That is a far bigger heath hazard than smoking. In order to understand why people don't want to give up smoking - or thier right to smoke - you have to understand how you would feel if you were told to give up drinking, or if you don't drink, sex. Think how many poor old men have had heart attacks during sex - that must make it a health hazard too. The short straw is that no matter where you go or what you do, you are putting your life at risk. If you ban smoking you will need to be recreation, commerce, and well - life. Nothing comes without risk. LukeV wrote: It's not because I'm in the majority, it's because smoking is bad. Isn't that enough of a reason??? No. Stealing is bad, but will theives stop? Driving is bad, but will you stop? You (or I) are in no position to quote that kind of reasoning. LukeV wrote: I don't want to direct any personal attacks, but your way of thinking is typical of a smoker! There' And yours is of a typical non smoker! There' LukeV wrote: This could go on for hours, if not days and we seem to be both stubborn so nobody's gonna win this match... I don't think stubborness comes into it; the fact is that neither of you has the right to dictate to the other (only I have that divine right, what with being god and all), unless it directly affects you, in which case you can lobby your viewpoint but no more. ________________ David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk "I loathe people who keep dogs. They are cowards who haven't got the guts to bite people themselves" - August Strindberg
-
If the act of not smoking did something to the air that other people breath, then the rights issue would be the same. However, they aren't the same because smoking does something, while not smoking does nothing to the same air. The issue is more along the lines of "disturbing the peace" where someone is makeing a racket and bothering everyone around them, while all of those other people are doing nothing to bother the person making the racket. Just my non-judgmental 2 cents. John
-
Why do you consider your right not to smoke a priority over my right to smoke. Why should I give up my right to satisfy your right and not the other way around? Just because you happened to be in majority? You choose to go in smoking section because obviously you prefer smoking person's company over the "supposed" dangers of smoke inhalation and over the inconvenience of smelling like smoke. Smoking person does not drag you in there by force, does he? I choose not to smoke around people who I care about and who do not like smoke. But I do not recognize anybody's right to tell me not to smoke. The only reason I obey by the rules of "smoking" and "non-smoking" sections in restaurants is because I've been forced to obey these rules by majority. I do not feel it is fair. Anybody who doesn't want to be around me while I am doing stuff that I choose to be doing is free to get the hell away from me.
When I started university, I had professors who would smoke in 10-seat tutorial rooms with no windows. We poor non-smokers had two lousy tables (out of about 100) in the cafeteria dedicated to non-smokers... but still the smokers would smoke there. Back in the old days, when smokers ruled the roost, they were the most inconsiderate jerks you can possibly imagine. They couldn't have cared less if they were asphixiating someone. So now... thank God... when the tables have finally turned... I say... looks good on all of you. May you freeze your butts off (excuse the pun) shivering out there by the front door. I'm all for banning smoking outdoors to... never mind indoors (which should be absolutely totally smoke free). Why? Because now that we have the political power... it's time for a some payback... hehehehehe. JM
-
If the act of not smoking did something to the air that other people breath, then the rights issue would be the same. However, they aren't the same because smoking does something, while not smoking does nothing to the same air. The issue is more along the lines of "disturbing the peace" where someone is makeing a racket and bothering everyone around them, while all of those other people are doing nothing to bother the person making the racket. Just my non-judgmental 2 cents. John
There are plenty of things you non-smokers do that "disturb my peace" or even my health. I am not walking around preaching that you all should stop doing what you are doing. I will voice my opinion if I am asked or if I feel like it, but am not going to run to the government and ask to create farting and non-farting sections all over the place even if I believe that someone's farting is bad for health. If I do not like the smell - I simply walk away.