Jump to content

Unnecessary heating of the atmosphere (aka patio heaters)


malumbu

Recommended Posts

My mate's got a pension that he can take at 60 it is a defined pot so he will get a medical to determine his life expectancy before they pay out. Smokers of course have a reduced life expectancy so they get a higher pension. They hair test to prove that you are and the test can go back 6 months. So he is an occasional smoker always giving up but has booked in his 6 months smoking for 9 years hence. That is something the keep fit fanatics will probably have to expect if you live longer you will get a smaller pension.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hyperbole ?


[quote name='Huguenot Wrote:

I think Nette is in the gang that sees smokers

making them PHYSICALLY SICK.

Much higher on the list of people who attack outside smokers unnecessaily should be bad attitude.It's going to kill you. ]



So glad you didn't stoop to ridiculous hyperbole just to show you're determination not to be poisoned to death by armies of smokers pinning you to the ground and breathing up your nose.


Of course if you got your way and smoking was banned in areas outside pubs/restaurants the patio heater problem would still exist and probably more so because' date=' according to you, there would be legions of 'fresh air' freaks fighting to get into the 'garden/park/outside space' so more patio heaters would be required.


I didn't say anything about human rights but I suppose you're the kind who believes that throwing that into any/every argument makes you a post modern political heavyweight rather than a neurotic whinger who is permanently frustrated at the world not going the way they would wish it.


And my day was fine, thankyou.


*lights up stinking Chernobyl of a stogie and walks s-l-o-w-l-y past pavement cafes*

[/quote']


David Aaronovitch once wrote:

" Smokers are like incontinent people, they'll do it anywhere "


I genuinely don't care if people do smoke, it's up to them. And I'm not part of any gang but maybe you as a smoker are "in the gang". It doesn't cause me to be "poisoned to death". Nor does it make me PHYSICALLY SICK.


What does though, are stupid & ?ucking juvenile comments like that.


However, what I do care about is; the assumption that it's fine to do it next or near to people who don't. I personally find it really antisocial, like someone farting, belching or having a strong body odour standing close by. You wouldn't put up with that, so why make others put up with your other foul habit.


What they don't realise or care to acknowledge as a public smokers is the overwhelming acrid, sharp & stale smell it creates.

People who smoke don't smell the worst part of it. Ask anyone who stands near a smoker that's just had a fag and they will tell you the same. In short you smell like sh!t; like a smouldering bonfire burning plastic.


So, why should we accept that a pub garden should smell like that. Other people who don't smoke will say the same, i'm sure.


And why should we turn a blind eye to all that. That's what makes me sick, the knowing selfishness of it all.


Please, tell me if I'm wrong. But tubes,trains,buses,cinemas,pubs & planes are better places now; because smoking's banned. In fact everywhere is better after the ban.


It has to be done with legislation, as how can you ask those with a near involuntary habit to willing give up smoking in public places.


Lastly, the old "A pub/drink is not the same without a fag" nonsense; is that not a kind of neurosis in itself ?


So....


" Time please Ladies & Gentleman, the ban is coming "




NETTE.:)-D


* cracks knuckles , polishes taser *

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I personally find it really antisocial, like someone farting, belching or having a strong body odour standing close by. You wouldn't put up with that, so why make others put up with your other foul habit."


Actually mate, I bet you do. I certainly do.


There's a social contract thaat we all indulge in where we find a compromise between our own activity and the activities of other people in the interests of rubbing along together.


There's plenty of activities that other people indulge in that inflict upon my selfish desires, but I need to make compromises.


There is however, a militant group of individuals who think they can break this contract when it comes to smokers. They're offensive and controlling in a way that vastly exceeds the apparent transgression.


I accept that smoking inside may represent a health risk, but when you're telling people outside to stop smoking in pub gardens because you don't fancy the smell you are outrageously overstepping your rights as an individual to inflict your interests upon others.


I have a close friend who is pathological about coriander - don't ask me why, but she can detect it in food when nobody else can, and she flies into a furious rage about it.


This rage is nothing to do with the flavour, it's actually a manifestation of infant rage when they discover for the first time that they can't control anything and everything going on around them. It's rage generated by the painful transition from the solipsism of childhood to the concessions of adulthood.


Getting enraged about smoking in pub gardens is exectly this.


You've had your compromise, but it's just not enough eh? ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have a car , go everywhere by public transport and see the pollution by smokers as inconsequential compared to the pollution caused by cars. London air as bad as 15 a day If it was banned everywhere except one's own home then another round of pub closures would inevitably follow , jobs would be lost and no-one's health would improve. Incidentally I no longer smoke but don't see it as a particuarly burning issue.


Also Annette Curtain hate is a strong word I would prefer it to be reserved for the f**ing bankers and their greedy ilk who at the latest reckoning will reduce our wealth by 25% over the next 5 years and our children to penury.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huguenot Wrote:


> There is however, a militant group of individuals

> who think they can break this contract when it

> comes to smokers. They're offensive and

> controlling in a way that vastly exceeds the

> apparent transgression.



No, you've missed the point.


I'm not militant or enraged but I do have a strong view; it's the smokers who break the so called contract. Times have changed and you need to move with it. Much like playing loud music in a park or on a train/tube, like leaving dog sh!t on the grass, all these things are deemed, like smoking, anti-social.


So i'll ask again " why should we turn a blind eye to it "


And it's not just that I don't fancy your smell, it's the fact that we're meant to understand the pathetic habit, like having a dummy in your mouth every 20 minutes, so as you don't get all tetchy with infant rage.


"I want to smoke, I will smoke" or feel the wrath of my indignant rage at not being able to do it all over you when I please. And i'm the one outrageously overstepping my rights as an individual to inflict my interests upon others, am I ?


I'll be honest. I'm indifferent rather than angry toward the needs of smokers; it's a dated habit, get patches & you'll get over it. When the ban comes in you could stay in your own home smoking until your hearts content as a compromise, but it's just not enough eh? ;-)


As you said yourself "I smoke out of spite" which is fine too; just know it's yourself that you spite.


Thankfully, the legislation will come in & as time goes by we'll look back and laugh.


Remember smoking in public places ?


"Yes, how silly; got a light "



NETTE:-S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"my indignant rage at not being able to do it all over you when I please"


This is the problem isn't it, Nette?


Nobody is doing this, nobody is claiming this at all. If they were, your complaint would make sense.


Your pathology against smoking is so uncontrolled that in your own mind it has swollen to ridiculous proportions. You know it, so to justify it you've actually reached the point in your fantasy that you are actually inventing scenarios to justify your disproportionate wrath.


There are workplace bans, there are restaurant and pub bans, but you're just not satisfied? Like some demented harpy you're pursuing smokers wherever you can find them supported by some sort of hysterical delusion.


When all is said and done, your views on the fashionability of smoking are neither here nor there.


So you want it banned simply because you don't like the smell.


And I'm guessing you also conveniently overlooked the wreckage your private car is doing to the environment. I don't like the smell of that, nor the noise, nor the threat to my health, nor the restrictions it places on my freedom of movement.


It's simply a good job that I'm more tolerant than you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ibilly, congrats at taking a swipe at the greedy bankers... Anyone else you want to throw in the mix...?


I don't hear anyone complaining about footballer salaries which are similar to the very small number of banking professionals who earn the seven figure sums.. Get real and stick to the debate which, may I add, makes for interesting reading.. Forum royalty at it's best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is now hard to believe that people used to smoke upstairs on a bus....

The only reason this ever became 'acceptable' was that buses used to be open topped.


Trains had smoking and no smoking compartments..


That was all stopped way back ... Well I'm not too sure..


Smoking continued in Pubs and worst still in Restaurants.

I am not saying that I have never smoked in a pub because I have although

I have never thought it correct to smoke in restaurants when others are eating..


Once in a restaurant whilst I was just starting my meal, the table of Hoorays next to me asked

"eehhr, darling, do you mind arfully if we smoke "?


"Not at all", I said, " Do you Mind if I fart"...


A silence fell around the place with a few titters from other tables....


Shame. Due to the smoking ban, cannot use that line any more..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frankito Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Ibilly, congrats at taking a swipe at the greedy

> bankers... Anyone else you want to throw in the

> mix...?


How about people on internet forums? :))


> I don't hear anyone complaining about footballer

> salaries which are similar to the very small

> number of banking professionals who earn the seven

> figure sums.. Get real and stick to the debate

> which, may I add, makes for interesting reading..

> Forum royalty at it's best.


Hahaha stick to the debate! Love it. Forum royalty? Hmmm. At its best? Double hmmm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Investment bankers provide a service.. They are paid commission for what they do. If anything, investors are greedy. Shoot medown in flames but Before you do I urge anyone with strong opinions on the matter to do a bit of unbiased research on the subject to uncover some of the other influencing factors.. Black and white it isn't..
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nette Curtain:



Well (speaking on my own behalf and not Huggy's) perhaps if you stopped taking commets out of $ucking context they wouldn't cause such sickness. For someone who uses words like 'hate' and 'disgust' as freely as you do it is surprising that my obviously deliberate hyperbole should be so wilfully misinterpreted as to upset you so much. No it isn't. You have your corsets done up too tight.


Frankie:

I have not the words to describe the joys of tobacco to a non smoker anymore than I could describe the pleasure of a rare stake to little Tommy M without causing him to think me mad or making him feel a trifle unwell. I will offer this only:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The banking sector in general takes about 7% of GDP for its services which is providing access to capital - it is a tax on all of us - they are the highest paid workers in the world and have brought systemic damage to the whole global economy which will now play out for the best part of a generation. It has corrupted some of the best and most agile minds of the planet and infected them with greed and created the monstrous money destroying machines of leverage which are still wreaking havoc on all our lives. When I'm ill I'm glad there's a humble nurse or doctor who went and had years of training for a modest return. They need to be humble , they need to be apologetic for the evil they have done along with the compliant bought politicians who were too eager to take their money and fictions.


Oh and patio heaters are not too good for the planet either but I find it hard to get too worked up about them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frank-

It smells no nicer than champagne on another's breath (have you ever smelled that when not drinking yourself? It is pretty vile) or indeed any other alcoholic beverage or coffee or milk (ever kissed a girl who'd just had a glass of milk? Eeeew!) and not just drink; pate, garlic, cheese - well the ways we pollute each others' spaces with our exhalations are numerous - as D-Fox has suggested.


For the smell on clothing - well the smoking ban means most people only ever smoke out of doors so it is often hard to say whether the smell is tobacco or petrol fumes.


Does it taste nice? To me, yes. I only smoke an average of 4-5 a day these days and so am more discerning about my weed of choice but can definitely say that a good Havana dipped in a fine Armagnac is as exquisite as OW suggets. Having said this I would no more advocate your taking up the hobby than I would TM eating FG on toast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • This is the chart that the DFT published last week that triggered the Cycling Weekly article. Clearly, nationally, something isn't working and I wonder if the approach taken needs a complete rethink and overhaul as if this is the result of a £2bn investment then clearly it is not delivering any ROI - but isn't a 2% or so increase what has been seen in the City of London (per Carlton Reid's "More bikes than cars in the city now" article) so maybe this is consistent in cities too and 2% increase is all that anywhere has seen? 
    • I meant that particular Sainsbury's, but perhaps I am being too hard on it. But then I remember Sainsbury's in the days before there were supermarkets .....
    • Pudding rice used to be in the same aisle as tinned fruit if that helps?? My preference is the Sainsburys fruit and veg aisle over Morrison any day of the week and Lidl, although I adore Lidl for other things they sell and their speciality weeks.  However Sainsburys size of peppers varies (small to moderate) week to week but the price remains constant, fresh mushrooms are hit and miss, some weeks they have them other weeks what's there I wouldn't touch with a barge pole. Gave up on the oranges as they also became much smaller but at the same price.  Nectar is a money saver compared o the price without the Nectar reduction. That's the same for all four of the big brand supermarkets. It may have flaws but saving money is what its about. Just some thoughts.  
    • I also had an awful experience there last month. The hairdresser started cutting my child’s hair before even knowing what kind of cut we wanted, and when I started to say what I would like, she said that she knows what she’s doing and just continued. They were also incredibly rude about the fact that I’d brought a buggy with me, and had no patience when my child started to get even a little distracted. Just very unfriendly. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...