Psychoserenity wrote:Coito ergo sum wrote:Psychoserenity wrote:Coito ergo sum wrote:I reject the proposition that the choice is "working in a smoky bar or not working at all." They can work somewhere else.
"Let them eat cake."
Err...no. The acknowledgment that there are more options than "work in smoke" on the one hand and "be unemployed" on the other is just an acknowledgment of reality.
Yeah and I'm saying you're out of touch with reality.
Some people are forced to take work wherever they can get it. If there are no rules against making employees work in a smoke filled bar, then some percentage of the population will be left no other choice.
No other choice except to work in, say, a supermarket, grocery store, pharmacy, gas station, clothing store, toy store, computer store, book store, music store, hardware store, large box store, hair salon, bank, auto repair shop, manufacturing plant, non-smoking bar, non-smoking restaurant, home based business, sales business, pizza restaurant, shipping company, farm, or a host of other places....
Psychoserenity wrote:
So what if there are some individuals that do have the opportunity to go elsewhere? That just means it's the ones with the least opportunity that get stuck in the worst conditions.
Or, those that like working in bars, work in bars, and those that would rather work in a Denny's restaurant go to work at Denny's.