Paternalism run amok!

#101
#101
burntorangeVOLffle said:
There's a place in Johnson City that has a work around this. Half the building is beer and cigars the other is wine and liquor. Technically they are two seperate businesses but owned by the same people.
Click to expand...

I've often wondered why more places don't do this. I bet it's a hassle trying to run "two businesses."
 
#102
#102
therealUT said:
According to the Rutgers study, there were over 40 million "registered" two-wheel motor-vehicles in India in 2002 and it was growing at an almost exponential rate. Further, according to the Rutgers study:



Personally, I put more weight on (1), (3), and (5)-(7), plus the fact that many who are being hit are not in the least protected (i.e., they are on motorcycles, bikes, and/or walking and are not wearing any protective equipment) and that first responder services in India are not very responsive. That said, this study does support my contention that there are a ****-ton of motorcycles in India (40 million registered in 2002 (only accounts for those motorcycles that are registered which is not a requirement outside of the major cities), plus another 60 million since 2005 which only accounts for those produced domestically) and that traffic laws are not enforced.
Click to expand...

Another factor that needs to be considered is the difference in their perspective on human life, especially regarding the Dalits and other lower castes. Last time I was in Delhi, I saw a child no more than 5 years old lead a group of 4 younger kids across the highway through rush hour traffic. No one yielded and they didn't really look concerned. Pedestrians get hit because they don't care to look before they cross and not many people care if they hit someone (of certain value).

(Note: We were also surprised when a couple of guys "drove" up next to us in the same traffic jam on their elephant. I could imagine the conversation before they left for work, "Honey, I can't find my keys and I need to get to work!" "Your brother took the car, take the elephant." "But it's my day to drive the carpool." "Then take the big elephant!")
 
#103
#103
Thrasher865 said:
I've often wondered why more places don't do this. I bet it's a hassle trying to run "two businesses."
Click to expand...

Come to Pennsylvania if you want to see it done totally wrong.

Wine and Spirits are sold only at the State Owned Wine and Spirits stores. These are open from 10-9pm Mon-Sat but closed on any state and federal holiday.

It is illegal to buy wine or spirits out of the state and transport them across the state line. So when I worked at Aberdeen MD and commuted from York Pa, I was breaking the law if I stopped at the Class VI store (on base liquor store) on the way home.

Beer is sold a couple of ways. The beer stores sell only by the case and you can't break up a case to get different brands of 6 packs. Just cases only (and kegs I guess).

Delicatessens sell what they call Quick Picks, where you can get anything from 1 to 12 beers in singles or six packs to go along with your subs.

Grocery stores are now starting to sell beer in their deli sections.

Some grocery stores have also put up Wine Kiosks, which are a sort of vending machine that you can buy bottles of wine. You have to use a credit card, swipe your driver license and blow into the machine for a breathalyzer before it will authorize the transaction. These aren't very popular.

It is a fact that in Pennsylvania it is easier to buy crack, meth or pot than alcohol.
 
#105
#105
YorkVol said:
Another factor that needs to be considered is the difference in their perspective on human life, especially regarding the Dalits and other lower castes. Last time I was in Delhi, I saw a child no more than 5 years old lead a group of 4 younger kids across the highway through rush hour traffic. No one yielded and they didn't really look concerned. Pedestrians get hit because they don't care to look before they cross and not many people care if they hit someone (of certain value).

(Note: We were also surprised when a couple of guys "drove" up next to us in the same traffic jam on their elephant. I could imagine the conversation before they left for work, "Honey, I can't find my keys and I need to get to work!" "Your brother took the car, take the elephant." "But it's my day to drive the carpool." "Then take the big elephant!")
Click to expand...

I found that looking before stepping into streets, in India, was a sure way to never get across; basically, looking before crossing is for noobs.
 
#106
#106
therealUT said:
Of course it is acceptable. There are ways in which I could solve that problem (install thicker windows, turn on the a/c, etc.) I can secure and defend my property from noise and light pollution, that does not give me the right to dictate what another individual does on their own property.

Not particularly enamored by the idea that the 2nd party carries the onus of accomodating the desires of the first. The first party's actions infringe on others so the 2nd has to "deal with it"? You seem to take an "If you don't like it, move." angle. Nobody's saying they can't play their music at a volume that makes their ears bleed but why make anybody else move when they can move. What makes their desires to blaring Crazy Train at 3:00 AM more worthy than a neighbors desire to get good night's sleep?



It is perfectly understandable to say that one can kill another even though the other is not acting contrary to law (this is happens all the time in war). What it boils down to is a supersession of rights; i.e., for A, A's right to A's life supersedes B's right to B's life and vice versa. Killing someone, as the only way to preserve my life, when I feel reasonably and imminently threatened is morally justified.
Click to expand...

So now what if the scenario is a 3rd party being targeted? Does anyone have any right to intercede on another's behalf? What I'm really getting at is the concept of stopping something negative BEFORE it happens. By definition this is pretty much impossible unless a preventative act is justified before this bad thing, whatever it is, actually occurs. Many traffic laws (especially those involving alcohol) are for this purpose. I'm pretty laissez faire about what someone wants to do on their own time and risk but when an action expressly puts others at risk you're, IMO, now operating outside any individual right.

For the thread itself I don't hold the smoking ban comparison in particularly high regard. Put the argument in a vacuum and smoking is act which, and wholly unambiguously at that, can adversely affect those nearby. This can even include some fairly severe medical reactions. There's an absolutely demonstrable difference in have a person sit down next to you with a Big Gulp vs lighting up a stogie.

While it might seem a contradiction with the above I'm not in favor of smoking bans. I hold the above to be clear reasoning in a business telling smokers they can't smoke and no, they can't act as though they're being treated unfairly. Smoking DOES involve others, deal with it. OTOH I don't see the government having authority to dictate to a business they can't allow smoking.
 
Last edited:
#107
#107
Thrasher865 said:
I've often wondered why more places don't do this. I bet it's a hassle trying to run "two businesses."
Click to expand...

I know the owner of one of these split businesses. It is effing ridiculous. There can be no doors/windows/etc between the two businesses. If he or one of his workers wants to do something next door, he has to go out the front (or back) door of one and into the door of the other. No sharing storage areas, etc. It was so messed up he closed the beer side and opened a restaurant there.

Tennessee's liquor laws are absolutely stupid. But hey, our fellow citizens voted for Santorum, so what should we expect.
 
#108
#108
Danl said:
I know the owner of one of these split businesses. It is effing ridiculous. There can be no doors/windows/etc between the two businesses. If he or one of his workers wants to do something next door, he has to go out the front (or back) door of one and into the door of the other. No sharing storage areas, etc. It was so messed up he closed the beer side and opened a restaurant there.

Tennessee's liquor laws are absolutely stupid. But hey, our fellow citizens voted for Santorum, so what should we expect.
Click to expand...

Stupid? We have drive up beer windows. How many states can say that?
 
#109
#109
burntorangeVOLffle said:
Stupid? We have drive up beer windows. How many states can say that?
Click to expand...


Yes, stupid. As in monumentally stupid.

In many states you can buy beer, wine, and liquor in your neighborhood supermarket along with your usual groceries, just as God intended.

In many states you don't have to wait until the Baptists get out of church on Sunday before you can buy beer, wine, and liquor.

And Tennessee is not the only state with drive-thru beer windows, but I would gladly give them up if I didn't have to make two stops to get a case of beer and a bottle or two of wine.
 
#110
#110
Danl said:
Yes, stupid. As in monumentally stupid.

In many states you can buy beer, wine, and liquor in your neighborhood supermarket along with your usual groceries, just as God intended.

In many states you don't have to wait until the Baptists get out of church on Sunday before you can buy beer, wine, and liquor.

And Tennessee is not the only state with drive-thru beer windows, but I would gladly give them up if I didn't have to make two stops to get a case of beer and a bottle or two of wine.
Click to expand...

I was just kidding around. I agree the seperation of beer from liqour and wine is stupid. But to my knowledge there aren't very many states with drive through beer stores. Back in the summer of 01 I worked in Yellowstone and met people from all around the country who were amazed to hear TN had drive throughs.
 
#111
#111
burntorangeVOLffle said:
I was just kidding around. I agree the seperation of beer from liqour and wine is stupid.

Well DON"T kid around about serious sh!t like beer and wine!!!


But to my knowledge there aren't very many states with drive through beer stores. Back in the summer of 01 I worked in Yellowstone and met people from all around the country who were amazed to hear TN had drive throughs.
Click to expand...

Where did you work in Jellystone? Me and some buddies fly fish around there every summer. Stunningly beautiful place. The trouts ain't bad either.
 
#112
#112
MG1968 said:
the smoking ban is enforced on private businesses which should have a right to cater to a particular type of clientele.

I grew up during the '70's, every restaurant allowed smoking, news anchors smoked on live TV, and the Marlboro Man was a national hero. Somehow, I and millions of others survived all of this without an overbearing nanny-state government deciding that it knows best.
Click to expand...


I think people were actually allowed to smoke in the Dr's office back in the 70's.
 
#113
#113
Danl said:
In many states you don't have to wait until the Baptists get out of church on Sunday before you can buy beer, wine, and liquor.
Click to expand...

Is that a state law? I cannot remember not being served any alcohol on Sundays in Memphis, even in the mornings:), and I know Beale Street serves 24/7.
 
#114
#114
knucklehead_vol said:
Is that a state law? I cannot remember not being served any alcohol on Sundays in Memphis, even in the mornings:), and I know Beale Street serves 24/7.
Click to expand...

I think its a county by county thing. If your county has more than 62.5% Baptist, you have to pretend, like they do, that alcohol is a sin until noon on Sunday. Then its not a sin. That's in the Bible, you know.
 
#118
#118
Milk could be next.

At the meeting, some of the members of board said they should be considering other limits on high-calorie foods.

One member, Bruce Vladeck, thinks limiting the sizes for movie theater popcorn should be considered.

"The popcorn isn't a whole lot better than the soda," Vladeck said.

Another board member thinks milk drinks should fall under the size limits.

"There are certainly milkshakes and milk-coffee beverages that have monstrous amounts of calories," said board member Dr. Joel Forman.



Read more: Health panel talks about wider food ban - New York News | New York Breaking News | NYC Headlines
Click to expand...

Maybe after that, they will start limiting egg-purchases, red-meat consumption, alcohol consumption (two-drink maximum?)...
 
#121
#121
- smoking
- trans fats
- salt
- soft drinks
- milk
- popcorn

I feel safer already
 
#125
#125
It is spreading:
WHEREAS: High intake of soda and other sugar-sweetened beverages increases the risk of obesity and diabetes; and

WHEREAS: New York City has a plan to limit the serving size of soda and other sugar-sweetened beverages sold in restaurants; now therefore be it

ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to refer the matter of a ban on soda and sugar-sweetened beverages in restaurants to the Cambridge Public Health Department for a recommendation.

City Of Cambridge - CITY CLERK OFFICE, CAMBRIDGE MASSACHUSETTS
Click to expand...

I am curious as to how they will keep from labeling an Old Fashioned as "sugar-sweetened". There are a lot of craft cocktail places in Cambridge and a whole lot of drinks made with simple syrup.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top