Scoop! Cancer No Danger to Millionaires - Official.
Fancy the right to smoke? Then you'd better have a few quid to spare.
On July 1st, it officially became illegal in Victoria to smoke in any enclosed licensed premises in the state.
Almost.
There is one exception to the new rule; the Mahogany Room at the Crown Casino here in Melbourne. This is the "High Rollers" room, where millions are dropped with the same ease with which most of us nick down to the corner shop for a carton of milk. And here, it seems, the serious money talks.
The Victorian Government gets enormous revenue from the Casino. Ergo, you don't upset the premuim punters, for fear if they aren't allowed the odd fag at the roulette tables, they'll take their millions elsewhere.
Meanwhile, Wal Baranow, the owner of a Cuban-style cigar lounge in suburban Hawthorn, looks likely to lose his business and his house as a result of the new laws.
He was recently quoted in The Age:
"I run a cigar bar. Drinking is a secondary component. People who come here come to smoke cigars, and my staff work here because they like talking and selling cigars. I agree that people who don't smoke shouldn't be affected by second-hand smoke, but if you choose to come to a cigar bar you come to smoke a cigar."
"It seems that as long as people are gambling enough, it's OK for staff to work in a smoky environment".
I'm no fan of smoky bars, but the hypocrisy of this makes me feel sicker than any secondary smoke is ever likely to.
On July 1st, it officially became illegal in Victoria to smoke in any enclosed licensed premises in the state.
Almost.
There is one exception to the new rule; the Mahogany Room at the Crown Casino here in Melbourne. This is the "High Rollers" room, where millions are dropped with the same ease with which most of us nick down to the corner shop for a carton of milk. And here, it seems, the serious money talks.
The Victorian Government gets enormous revenue from the Casino. Ergo, you don't upset the premuim punters, for fear if they aren't allowed the odd fag at the roulette tables, they'll take their millions elsewhere.
Meanwhile, Wal Baranow, the owner of a Cuban-style cigar lounge in suburban Hawthorn, looks likely to lose his business and his house as a result of the new laws.
He was recently quoted in The Age:
"I run a cigar bar. Drinking is a secondary component. People who come here come to smoke cigars, and my staff work here because they like talking and selling cigars. I agree that people who don't smoke shouldn't be affected by second-hand smoke, but if you choose to come to a cigar bar you come to smoke a cigar."
"It seems that as long as people are gambling enough, it's OK for staff to work in a smoky environment".
I'm no fan of smoky bars, but the hypocrisy of this makes me feel sicker than any secondary smoke is ever likely to.
Pic: www.edie.net
posted by MargieCM at 5:28 pm
9 Comments:
Twatfull!!!..
It's the same here, because Westminster (The houses of Parliament) is attatched to the palace,(The queens gaff) they are exempt from the law...ER EXCUSE ME!! The very people who make these laws make sure there are loopholes to appease their own bloody selves!!..
Interesting and good post. In my province of Ontario and native province of Quebec you can't smoke in public places, except for some casinos too. Why? because many of them are run by Native Canadians (Indians) and so, via several twists in our constitution, the rule doesn't apply to them.
Hope all is going well.
Pity how money talks...
We have had a no-smoking-in-public-places law in effect for several years here in BC.
It matters not a whit to me.
But I have to say, it is nice not to have to breathe the smoke from my buddy's cigarette (and exhale) at the table.
I know many restaurant and bar owners who were worried about their business, but it's as strong as ever.
However, we don't have cigar bars here and I can understand Mr Baranow's concern - and argument.
Where there's enough money, there will always be hypocrisy...
Thanks for stopping by TOWHM Margie. I saw you're comment "I'm in". Were you wishing to become an admin team member? If so please send me an email at theoneswhoheardmusic@yahoo.com.
Exactly the same sort of law came to be exactly the same time in Finland, I believe. Whether or not any casinos or such are exempt I don't know, but this example very well shows the hypocricy of money that is always involved when it comes to tobacco industry. They don't want to lose the big money it brings in. Same with alcohol politics really.
It just goes to show you that if you have money, you can do what you want. It is not right!!
Glad you liked the pics of your beautiful country.
xx
A commentary on smoking...
I believe in limiting smoking to protect folks...like me and my kids, but if you wanna smoke in a smokehouse...though that may not really be smart or very bright...who can tell you "no"?
This is not a big issue for me. I am around smokers all the time. I deal with what I can, or tell them to back off. I have asthma, so do many in my own family. It is hard, it is uneasy. If I need to, I'll tell 'em to hit the road. It works out. My Dad was a big smoker. He quit many many years ago. He was smart. Others need that smartness too, but it takes time.
Really, though...if you are told something is absolutely bad for you, as is smoking, and you choose to do it anyway, is that not selfishness? Then when you die, others suffer, as well as you who blew it, on your way to death. The map is clear, you will suffer.
Anyway,
--Dan L.
Gypsy - you're joking! I mean, if HM the Q wants a quick fag in the lav in privacy of her own digs, that's fine by me, but this is summin' else! One rule for the masses ...
So Lesley, you have exceptions too? At least yours are based on something other than just money, even if it is a bit spurious. It's that "stuff you we're just doing this" attitude I hate.
Dale, I have to admit the smoke-free thing suits me personally too, but I still object to the abuses of the law. You said it though:
"Where there's enough money, there will always be hypocrisy... ".
Hi there Ones! I have been over and clarified. Thanks.
Maria, it's funny, but I think there were a few countries where the no-smoke thing either came in or was broadened on July 1st. Perhaps they all got together! You're absolutely right though - tobacco and alcohol produce huge tax revenues, so their controlled consumption is always done very gingerly, which ties in with your comment too Grace - money has a loud voice.
Hi Dan. The issue of protection is a good one. I think it's about to become illegal here to light up in a car when children are passengers - or perhaps it may already be. I'm not sure why anyone would think it's OK to do that anyway, but then I'm a non-smoker.
Yes, I think there can be an element of selfishness, but I think these days smokers are more aware of others who might have difficulties with their smoke. There's also the question of addiction. It's hard to stop anything if you're really hooked.
On community selfishness - there was a comedian who said as a smoker he recognised he may end up in an expensive hospital bed for the last few months of his life being a drain on the taxpayer, but think what a favour he was doing us by shuffling off thirty years earlier than all those healthy people who are going to be a drain on the environment for an extra thirty years, then wind up in the same bed anyway? He saw his smoking as less of a recreational pastime and more of a community service.
The human cost though, as you say, is not so easily laughed off.
I so agree with you Margie! What flagrant hypocrisy! My sympathy and support for Wal Baranow
Post a Comment
<< Home