Why "loss of productivity" is NOT an issue

Jeff Bone jbone@jump.net
Tue, 31 Jul 2001 15:00:00 -0500

Tom wrote:

> If you are allowed to blow toxins into my air stream then I should be
> allowed to return the favor. Heres teh deal, you can smoke, but if any of
> it gets into my system or the system of my family I can going to open a
> can of Zyclon B in your shower.

So how do you feel about all the EM radiation we're awash in from all these
nasty, smelly cell-phone users?  How about all the emissions from cars,
manufacturing, etc. etc. etc.  How about those nasty, short-sighted Brazillians
who are destroying our planet's lungs?  How about those hormones in the beef?
How about... (etc., etc., etc.)  It's a slippery slope:  to what extent to we
enforce the preferences of one segment of society to the detriment of another.

Here's the deal:  I won't smoke in your house, or your office, and you won't
put Zyclon B in my shower.  I'll respect your *reasonable* expectation of clean
air, generally, and you respect my *reasonable* expectation of being able to
pollute my own, and designated public, airspaces.  How's that?  Seems equitable
to me.  On the other hand, if you come into my bar where I allow smoking and,
30 years later, you get lung cancer...  tough titty, kitty.

Caveat vivo.

> Deal?
> Yea thats what I though.

No, it's not what you thought;  I'm all for equity.  Just make sense.

Frankly, I'm surprised at you, Tom --- being the advocate of personal liberty
and personal responsibility you've claimed to be in the past.  Wouldn't you say
that outlawing cigarettes is surrendering some personal liberty in favor of a
little temporary safety?  Isn't that a bugaboo in your cannon?