Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jagfan who wrote (100206)	4/2/2005 3:01:36 PM
From: epicure	Respond to of 108807

Were the smoking and non-smoking sections required by law, though? They were here in California. Of course they didn't work very well. I'm glad they went to full non-smoking, because smoke is disgusting, and the more expensive the meal, the less I want it ruined by smoke drifting in from other tables. I think the police would be called if someone insisted on spraying my table with pesticides while I was eating, and yet many of the contaminants in cigarettes are just as toxic (actually, aren't some of them found in pesticides?). Anyway, I think government is getting too invasive in many ways- but the smoking debate involves two competing rights, the right to have clean air to breathe, and the right to foul the air for your own pleasure. I think it is in areas where two rights compete that government is most needed, because those are the areas that are like assault. Abortion is another area where there are competing individual rights- and government probably has a place figuring out whose rights should be preeminent. At the moment we allow the mother's right to choose to trump the zygotes right to mature, but the government could tomorrow change its mind and change the playing field. I think the public good thing is much iffier- at least where you have CLEAR rights (my right to breathe clean air unfouled by someone else, a smoker's right to smoke)- you can see how they interact. Those "public good" arguments are a lot more intangible, imo, and a lot more susceptible to local corruption and stupidity. JMO of course. Thanks for sharing your opinion. I appreciate it.