I asked you for evidence.
Thanks Facist Pigs!
- Thread starter pipelineaudio
- Start date
-
- Tags
- smoking smoking bans
I asked you for evidence.
Francesca R
Girl
I want to stay and enjoy an atmosphere without harmful ciggie smoke. If anyone smokes it's contrary to my will, and my freedom to enjoy public health standards. If they smoke without doing this then they can go ahead—but not if the only way for me to avoid their smoke is to leave.
Next time somebody steals your wallet don't you dare go whining to the law about it, because others are being tortured and raped and murdered and you would be showing them horrifying disrespect.
Allow all crime except the worst crime imaginable. Failure to allow it is really messing up your priority of having respect for that victim.
pipelineaudio
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2006
- Messages
- 5,092
You wouldnt recognize the evidence if you saw it
You are being willfully ignorant, but the link YOU found should be enough evidence in the first place
I asked you for evidence.
pipelineaudio
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2006
- Messages
- 5,092
you are just trolling now
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2006
- Messages
- 13,844
What this indicates is that people don't want to listen to bands. If their was a market for them the bar owners would bring them in. The bars are full regardless, so are you saying only smokers like music?
Maybe that should tell you that the genre of music you are flogging, sucks! People prefer a DJ to a live band and the bars and clubs give them what they want. Isn't that business?
I have been searching for the last while and all I find are claims before the ban that business will drop by up to 55% but studies after the ban show that business went up. I never hear bar owners crying for a return to pre-ban days, they know which side their bread is buttered on.
I think it comes down to the quality of the music. If I made real crappy beer and I was going bankrupt because no one was buying it, could I claim that it was all the fault of the smoking ban? Not likely. I suggest you look at the quality of the product you are involved with as the cause of your problem. In matters of fashion, you are not the ultimate judge, society is and society is giving you a pretty clear indication that they do not like the music you think is good.
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2006
- Messages
- 13,844
Another point here is that when the bands refused to do Canadian gigs, Canadians turned to alternative entertainment. Now that the bands want to make money off of us, we have found that the alternatives we discovered are much better than the gigs we lost.
You run down DJ's but I think many people will agree that it is better to listen to a top band do their own material on a sound system than to listen to a second rate band play crap live.
The music industry dropped the ball with their short sightedness.
pipelineaudio
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2006
- Messages
- 5,092
No, lets try and apply some critical thinking here. If the smokers dont go, those who they ride with may not go. It only takes a pretty small decline in tickets one nite to spell the difference between profit and total bust
What genre of music am I promoting? The evidence in play is ALL live bands.
Even the cover bands arent doing as well
You are pulling up some serious strawmen here
WHAT music do I think is good? The day I listen to music on my off time, boogers will fall out of the noses at mount rushmore. I listen to the Skeptics Guide to the universe podcast if Im listening to anything. Most of the time I perfer the sound of the car's motor to any music
I take all comers, you seem to think I am tied to some specific genre or something. I am not. I am saying ALL live bands are going thru this, not any genre specifically
pipelineaudio
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2006
- Messages
- 5,092
How did I run down DJ's?
UserGoogol
Master Poster
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2002
- Messages
- 2,074
For some reason, many libertarians think that it is worse to have your options limited by government (or specific people) than it is for your options to be limited by circumstance. I don't understand why. It does be an equal amount of harm if I starve to death because someone steals all my food or if I starve to death because I just can't find any food.
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2006
- Messages
- 13,844
That's critical thinking? Where do you suppose the smokers are going to go? The ban is state wide is it not? Who rides with smokers? Do you think they will allow their nightly enjoyment to be decided by the fact that one of them has to step outside for 5 minutes to have a smoke?
And you think this is because of the smoking ban? How long has this ban been in effect? You stated that the financial impact has already been severe, how can this be the fault of the new smoking ban?
Have you considered that the drop in revenue you have experienced prior to the smoking ban is because your audience was driven away by the disgusting smell of the place?
How is it a strawman to say that the decline of the music scene is more to do with the quality of the music or the fact that the audience just isn't interested, instead of blaming it on the smoking ban?
Go look at other places where smoking bans have been implemented, none of them have suffered the dire results you claim. Perhaps it is time to get out of the music scene or maybe move to where it is more relevent to the people of the area. Speaking from experience, it is a hell of a lot more enjoyable to walk ingot a bar or restaraunt where there is a smoking ban than one where there isn't.
And in the end, it is the promotors job to provide the audience with what they want. If they are not showing up, it is probably because they are not getting it. Plus, you have to deal with a changing world where many types of entertainment are competing for my dollar.
pipelineaudio
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2006
- Messages
- 5,092
I think this sums up your knowledge of the *current* situation pretty well
The promoters job is not to bring in crowds, it is to charge bands money for tickets the band was supposed to sell
THAT is the new reality...If you havent had that one batted on you so many times as to have it sink in, I doubt your other observations as well.
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2006
- Messages
- 13,844
I don't see how this changes anything. In fact, this makes my point even stronger. It isn't the smoking ban, is it? That's just something you grasp onto as your ship sinks into the dark waters of irrelevence.
I'm late to the party, but wanted to add my opinion to pipeline's comment.
I live in Ontario Canada, where the rights of the smokers have pretty much been snuffed out.
I have friends who have lost businesses (bar/restaurants) since the no smoking ban has been in place.
I will state that I'm a smoker, though that really shouldn't matter as far as the point I will try to make.
In Canada, there is a will to allow individual rights to trump majority intentions as set out in the charter of rights and freedoms. The intent is such, similar to most democratic nations, that individual freedoms are protected within a majority.
More so, that we as an economic power should allow small business to guide itself within the laws of the land.
When the government acts to prohibit that which should be in the realm of the economic landholder, I bridle.
Smoking is legal. Drinking is legal.
Pubs and restaurants are privately held institutions. The Government has no place there. My rights are impinged upon when an owner of a pub has decided to allow smoking, and the govt. negates that right because of PC lobby groups. No one has been forced to attend. Much like a Catholic Mass.
If you would like to debate the public health issue, then I would have you ask yourself if it would be correct for the waiter to deny you your second glass of wine.
Or, perhaps, when you have ordered that Chateaubriand that a misdemeanor is issued.
There is too much government.
I live in Ontario Canada, where the rights of the smokers have pretty much been snuffed out.
I have friends who have lost businesses (bar/restaurants) since the no smoking ban has been in place.
I will state that I'm a smoker, though that really shouldn't matter as far as the point I will try to make.
In Canada, there is a will to allow individual rights to trump majority intentions as set out in the charter of rights and freedoms. The intent is such, similar to most democratic nations, that individual freedoms are protected within a majority.
More so, that we as an economic power should allow small business to guide itself within the laws of the land.
When the government acts to prohibit that which should be in the realm of the economic landholder, I bridle.
Smoking is legal. Drinking is legal.
Pubs and restaurants are privately held institutions. The Government has no place there. My rights are impinged upon when an owner of a pub has decided to allow smoking, and the govt. negates that right because of PC lobby groups. No one has been forced to attend. Much like a Catholic Mass.
If you would like to debate the public health issue, then I would have you ask yourself if it would be correct for the waiter to deny you your second glass of wine.
Or, perhaps, when you have ordered that Chateaubriand that a misdemeanor is issued.
There is too much government.
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader, TLA Dictator
Nitpick: A chateaubriand is a steak. Are we now banning red meat?
Too many cross-themes here.
For every study that (or anecdotal evidence as above) shows that businesses were hurt by smoking bans, there is an offsetting study to show that business rebounded after an initial dip.
I smoke for years. I can recall working in the 70's and going through a pack of Pall Malls and no one in the next desk could say a thing. We wouldn't dream of lighting up in an office full of people, nowadays.
Pipeline, I think you're right about the rotten state of the music "biz", but I don't think smoking or not smoking is going to do anything to get people into clubs to listen to lousy music. I live in the musical wastelands of Asia. We get retread tours. In the past three years I've seen Roberta Flack, The Stones, The Eagles, and a few others. You can't smoke in the big auditoria. Of the people I know who didn't go to see the Stones, all said, in one variation or another, "...because I don't really like them any more..". No one said, "Well, if I can't smoke, I'm not going to see my favorite band!"
Now, I admit that The Rolling Stones aren't doing 3-a-nite for meal money, but in many of the cities I've lived in, the local music scene produced some pretty good music. I can't imagine passing up on Dizzy Gillespie (New York 60's), Mahogany Rush or Robert Charlebois (Montreal in the 70's) or The Backwards Band (unheard of... Pittsburgh in the 90's, but I liked 'em) if the only drawback was that I couldn't smoke. If music is your interest, you'll go where the music is good.
Too many cross-themes here.
For every study that (or anecdotal evidence as above) shows that businesses were hurt by smoking bans, there is an offsetting study to show that business rebounded after an initial dip.
I smoke for years. I can recall working in the 70's and going through a pack of Pall Malls and no one in the next desk could say a thing. We wouldn't dream of lighting up in an office full of people, nowadays.
Pipeline, I think you're right about the rotten state of the music "biz", but I don't think smoking or not smoking is going to do anything to get people into clubs to listen to lousy music. I live in the musical wastelands of Asia. We get retread tours. In the past three years I've seen Roberta Flack, The Stones, The Eagles, and a few others. You can't smoke in the big auditoria. Of the people I know who didn't go to see the Stones, all said, in one variation or another, "...because I don't really like them any more..". No one said, "Well, if I can't smoke, I'm not going to see my favorite band!"
Now, I admit that The Rolling Stones aren't doing 3-a-nite for meal money, but in many of the cities I've lived in, the local music scene produced some pretty good music. I can't imagine passing up on Dizzy Gillespie (New York 60's), Mahogany Rush or Robert Charlebois (Montreal in the 70's) or The Backwards Band (unheard of... Pittsburgh in the 90's, but I liked 'em) if the only drawback was that I couldn't smoke. If music is your interest, you'll go where the music is good.
No, I am asking you for evidence of your claim that you are "somewhat popular" in my area.
How many Danish engineers are using your drum samples?
How many Danes are using REAPER?
How many read your articles?
pipelineaudio
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2006
- Messages
- 5,092
More than 1
How many of your fellow countrymen take YOUR advice in technical music matters? Music business matters? Got any great articles I can read?
I actually read your skeptics page from time to time, but Im not stupid enough to go blowing my horn against professionals in their industry
Francesca R
Girl
But your options are being limited by people if you can't go into a bar and have breathe smoke-free air. It's not "circumstance", but the deliberate choices of smokers to violate public air quality.
Libertarians are opposed to allowing actions which harm or otherwise infringe the liberty of others.
Almost all the anti-ban rhetoric on here is not libertarian
pipelineaudio
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2006
- Messages
- 5,092
What about that choice not to walk into the bar?
What about the noise then? You already see some there who plan to shut off the music, because the noise is offending them after the smokers are taken care of
Where do we draw the line?
What about the noise then? You already see some there who plan to shut off the music, because the noise is offending them after the smokers are taken care of
Where do we draw the line?
Gee, you sure set your standard of success low, don't you?
I am not the one claiming to be "somewhat popular" in the music industry.
Thank you!
That's what you misunderstand about skeptics. Anyone can "blow their horn" against any "professionals" - skeptics, in this case. But for skeptics, the issue is not who has the most fans. The only thing we care about is evidence.
As is exemplified in Randi's Swift, he sometimes makes mistakes that are corrected by the readers. It doesn't have to be the "professionals" who point it out, it can be anyone.
Skeptics don't measure their success in popularity, but in evidence.