Wade... What's the Deal
- Thread starter blessednxs65
- Start date
It's the same path Calif took and many other states are emulating. Tax the daylights out of tobacco ... then progressively ban smoking in more and more places. Now the politicians :scratchhe their head and wonder why they suddenly have so much less revenue to pay for all these wonderful services.
Maybe the anti-smoking groups will belly up and help fill the state's empty coffers .... :rofl:
Maybe the anti-smoking groups will belly up and help fill the state's empty coffers .... :rofl:
Volusianator
BoM Nov '07 & Jan '09
It's a f'ed up government we have man, what else can I say?
Coolhand
Resident River Rat
Colorado banned smoking in bars (there are exemptions but they are rare) ... within six months four of the five bars I know of within two miles of my house have gone tits-up.
A friend of mine owns a BIG casino in Cripple Creek - says his revenue is down 35% since the ban went into effect.
A friend of mine owns a BIG casino in Cripple Creek - says his revenue is down 35% since the ban went into effect.
Here in Madison, there is one cigar bar left with a (very narrow) exemption to allow smoking (pipes and cigars only, cigarette smokers have to go outside). What I don't understand is why the state doesn't just issue separate smoking and non-smoking liquor licenses. (Actually, if there were *really* an overwhelming demand for smoke-free bars, then the market would have met the demand . . . )
If the state let some percentage of bars purchase a (presumably more expensive) smoking liquor license and banned smoking in the rest of the bars, then all of these non-smokers who claim they would go to smoke-free bars could do so without forcing their will on us. Furthermore, since the majority of voters apparently want smoke-free bars, the bars with smoke-free licenses would surely be filled with grateful non-smoking patrons, right? :sarcastic