Fashionistas you have arrived 3-25-03 - 10-3-03 - Page 991

greatwhitenorthchick · 07-23-2003, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
As does one when one doesn't quite get the tongue-in-cheek nature inherent in the other one one's comment.

Nonetheless, my general crush on you persists. You got the legs, I got the scars.

Sorry. I see "Michael Moore" - I see red. I should lighten up.

Mmmmmm, scars. And two crushes in one day - from you and the heat miser? I'm overwhelmed. Crushed, as they say.

notcasesensitive · 07-23-2003, 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by greatwhitenorthchick
Sorry. I see "Michael Moore" - I see red. I should lighten up.

Mmmmmm, scars. And two crushes in one day - from you and the heat miser? I'm overwhelmed. Crushed, as they say.

Must be part of the Chick's Rule. I'd tell you that when it rains it pours, but that is more Cold Miser's territory.

dtb · 07-23-2003, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
But in NYC, isn't a cigarette more expensive than a beer? Who can afford to smoke?

No shit dude! I was standing behind a nicotine addict in a deli the other day buying his fix, and when the chick behind the counter said his total was something close to $8 (for one pack), I said, "No way! Cigarettes cost $8?!?" The guy said, "yeah, tell me about it." I almost had some sympathy for the guy. (I said almost.)

Mind you, this was almost a year ago -- it's probably even more expensive now. Soon, the only guy in this town who will be able to afford to smoke is Bloomberg!

Edited to fix my embarrassing overuse of the exclamation point.

ThurgreedMarshall · 07-23-2003, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dtb
[Smoking is] probably even more expensive now! Soon, the only guy in this town who will be able to afford to smoke is Bloomberg!

And rest assured that it will be legal again at that point.

TM

bilmore · 07-23-2003, 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bad_Rich_Chic
My local bartenders say the smokers who come in are drinking less, and going home sooner, because they have to keep schlepping their butts out the door, but also say smoking former regulars just don't come in as much at all 'cause going to a bar just to walk in and out doors all night is now more bother than they want, so they just stay home. And the other regulars come in less because the smoking regulars aren't around as much to hang out with, and it just keeps getting worse over time in a great cycle of staying away. In other words, they think the ban was a serious hit to bar culture, and the remainder of bar culture is sort of disintigrating in its wake, and nothing is taking its place.

They're simply trying to judge it too soon in the cycle. Eventually, all of the bars will have ferns and exotic liquours and neat vegetarian snacks and wi-fi and places to hang your preppie sweaters and an entirely different clientele, and business will again boom. But, much more quietly and politely and healthily.

Yuck.

notcasesensitive · 07-23-2003, 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dtb
No shit dude! I was standing behind a nicotine addict in a deli the other day buying his fix, and when the chick behind the counter said his total was something close to $8 (for one pack), I said, "No way! Cigarettes cost $8?!?" The guy said, "yeah, tell me about it." I almost had some sympathy for the guy. (I said almost.)

Mind you, this was almost a year ago -- it's probably even more expensive now. Soon, the only guy in this town who will be able to afford to smoke is Bloomberg!

Edited to fix my embarrassing overuse of the exclamation point.

smoker's breath is totally yuck.
don't light up and save 8 bucks!

I can't help it - once you start with the inane poetry, it gets quite hard to stop. I understand Katy's dilemma.

ThrashersFan · 07-23-2003, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Because they recognize the inherent justness of compensating the waitstaff for subjecting them to their clouds of carcinogens?

For the moment, I will leave on the table the fact that there are conflicting studies about the affects of second-hand smoke. I realize that it would be foolish to assume that there is zero harm, but the question is whether that harm is more dangerous than that brought about by vehicles, electricity plants, the stove in the bar's kitchen, people wearing perfume (YUCK), etc.

In any event, waitstaff that I have known lo these last 3 decades have generally told me that they volunteer to work the smoking side of the bar/restaurant. Thus, they are willingly exposing themselves to the "carcinogens." Why do they like that side? Some were smokers themselves and not bothered by the smoke. Others felt that smokers were bigger tippers, willing to forgive minor slips in service/timing, or were just generally nicer people and more fun to be around. Could be any or all of the above. My experience with smoking sections in bars/clubs/restaurants is that they tend to have good fans keeping the smoke at bay anyway (which is good because I may smoke but I hate being in a smoky room). Also, in my experience, when smokers are out they smoke less -- possibly because of eating, drinking, talking, dancing, etc. that interfere.

Regardless of all that, the reason I oppose bans is that I think the individual bar owner should make the choice. If patrons don't want to be near smoke they will not go to a "smoking bar" and waitstaff who do not want to work in smoke will find work elsewhere. I think that if you offered it as an option you would see some bars voluntarily go smokeless and be okay while others will stay the same and likewise survive. Next thing you know, they will legislate against restaurants serving fatty food in order to encourage everyone to eat healthier -- I just don't like the government telling me what to do all the time.

WHEW.

Pretty Little Flower · 07-23-2003, 06:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
Chicago Police Apologize to Ice Cube

"This is an unfortunate and hurtful situation for Ice Cube," Labov said. "That his good name ever came up in association with the events currently taking place in Chicago's Wicker Park area is damaging to Ice Cube as a father, husband and artist."

Yes, I can see why he is so upset. Imagine! Associating Ice Cube's name with . . . with . . . crime!

"Ice Cube will swarm
On any muthafucka in a blue uniform
Just cuz I'm from the CPT, punk police are afraid of me
A young nigga on a warpath
And when I'm finished, it's gonna be a bloodbath
Of cops, dyin in LA
Yo Dre, I got somethin to say"

notcasesensitive · 07-23-2003, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ThrashersFan
For the moment, I will leave on the table the fact that there are conflicting studies about the affects of second-hand smoke.

While the affects of second hand smoke may be nil,
I hear the effects are quite a pill.

bilmore · 07-23-2003, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ThrashersFan
Others felt that smokers were bigger tippers, willing to forgive minor slips in service/timing, or were just generally nicer people and more fun to be around.

I'll agree with everything you said in your post, but I just want to point out that our entire worker-protection system is sort of built around the concept that we don't let higher pay or nicer conditions or shorter hours or . . . whatever . . . substitute for worker safety. Thus, you can't pay your steelworkers extra if they're willing to forgo the costly tying-off process for high work, and you can't let them have shorter shifts if you can take those pesky and speed-killing guards off of their presses, and the like.

So, the "higher-compensation-from-smokers" argument is never gonna fly. It will probably come down to the eventual answer to the "what does second-hand smoke do to your health" question.