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 : The new NFL -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: country bob who wrote (12297)	1/11/2006 5:57:38 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89635

OT It depends on how close the smoke is. If I am sitting next to someone who is smoking it bothers me much more than breathing the air of DC or New York City on a typical day. OTOH 2nd hand smoke is a point emission. The effect drops rapidly with distance. The effect on a large area from 2nd hand smoke is almost nil IMO. I can't move 30 feet away and get clean air when I am in a city on a bad air-quality day but I can move away from the smoker and everything is ok. So I can't support the more severe restrictions on smoking that some juristictions have. Smokers might lower the air quality of a room, but the owner of the room should be allowed to decide whether to accept that or not it shouldn't be up to a city council or state legislature. Tim

To: country bob who wrote (12297)	1/11/2006 9:08:14 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89635

The problem is, with no place else to make up the lost tax revenue, the country would have gone broke. Nah. Gov'ts are GOOD at stealing your money. :-)