SI
SI
discoversearch

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: epicure who wrote (15634)1/18/1998 7:04:00 PM
From: James R. Barrett  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 108807
 
Why is the general public so willing to bear the costs of alcoholics and drug addicts? I personally knew six men who died before the age of 45 from drinking. Why are'nt the states suing the liquor companies like they are the cigarette companies? Incidently, heavy drinking is a major problem among the elderly, especially widowers.
I'd be willing to bet that the states spend more money taking care of drinkers than they do smokers.

Jim



To: epicure who wrote (15634)1/18/1998 7:32:00 PM
From: Lady Lurksalot  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 108807
 
Alexa,

That was one of my points in our debate of last week. Most of the bartenders of my acquaintance DO smoke, and a blanket banning of smoking in all bars visits an extreme and unnecessary hardship on them.

Again, there was no reason for you to have had to stay home and not go to bars and dining establishments because you wanted to avoid smoke. There were quite a few nonsmoking places before this new law went into effect. We smokers knew the ones. Ask around, they're out there. I again offer this suggestion to you this because I'm pretty sure this law will be rescinded or at least greatly modified in the near future.

In any event, come on up my way. I'll take you to Choices, the great wine and beer bar with live jazz that I mentioned last week. My treat! And I won't light up around you. I promise. <vbg>

Holly