Tim Worstall

The 10,000th Post

I am returned from the fleeting visit to the clan gathering and don’t really have all that much to say except that I note this is the ten thousandth post on this blog since it was started.

An average of 8 or so posts a day. An awful lot of words and opinions given away for free (and they are of course worth exactly what people are paying for them) and fortuitously they’ve acted as advertising to editors and the like who employ me to write as Dr. Johnson would approve of.

Whether or not this will continue to be an option I have no idea but certainly the apocryphal advice to scribblers manque has worked for me: You wanna be a writer? So, write!

Other than that, after my experience in pubs over the weekend, can I just note how wonderful it is to be back in a civilized nation, one where I may partake of both alcohol and tobacco in company upon private premises without fear of the law?

(Anecdotal evidence from publicans I both know and trust is that takings are 50% down as a result of the change in the law.)

In

8 responses

  1. sortapundit Avatar
    sortapundit

    All I know is that there are tumbleweeds rolling through my favourite pubs here in York, and I’m about ready to punch through walls about the lunacy of stepping outside an empty bar for a fag, only to find that all the customers are already out there while they’re drinks grow tepid inside.

    Reply
  2. Kay Tie Avatar
    Kay Tie

    I expect that there were those in the old days that complained about the ban on shitting in the street or emptying piss pots on the heads of passers-by. Being smoked on isn’t a lot different to being pissed on (except that urine is mostly sterile and can’t give you lung cancer). I think it’s great that the anti-social ignorant bastards have been tossed out of these social gathering places. Oh frabjous day!
    It’ll take time for people to change their habits and put pubs back on the list of places to spend time in. I long ago gave up with pubs, coming home late stinking of smoke, putting my stinky hair on to my pillow and waking up in a stinky bedroom and waking up with a raw throat. I think I might start going to pubs again.

    Reply
  3. sortapundit Avatar
    sortapundit

    “I think I might start going to pubs again.”
    I hope you do, Kay Tie. It’d be a small but welcome consolation if the ban really does lead to this apparently huge number of non pub goers flocking in to pubs now they can enjoy clean air, but I haven’t seen any evidence of it yet. All I’ve seen is my favourite local closing an hour earlier each night because it’s empty by 10:30 and the landlord can’t afford to pay the staff to stick around to tend a silent bar.
    I’ve been saying for ages that there are three better solutions to the problem of smoky pubs than a blanket ban:
    1. Segregated smoking and non-smoking areas with high quality ventilation.
    2. Exemption licences for pubs that wish to allow smoking (limited to a small percentage of pubs and on the basis that each staff member sign a waiver).
    3. VAT breaks on alcoholic purchases to incentivise landlords to operate a non-smoking policy. A 5% cut on VAT would, I’m sure, sway many a landlord – especially since they could pass on the savings to their customers and draw in more punters.
    A blanket ban just seems so… stupid.

    Reply
  4. Kay Tie Avatar
    Kay Tie

    “A blanket ban just seems so… stupid.”
    Oh quite right. I’ve seen places where there are ventilation gizmos above tables that suck away the smoke. A ban on smoke particles in the air would have been more sensible than a ban on smoking per se (after all, it’s the smoke that counts).
    But this ban was never about my avoiding smelly clothes or the staff in a pub avoiding throat problems. No, it’s always been about a Toynbee “we must” and “our duty” jihad against smoking itself. The ban is a powerful incentive to give up smoking that’s why it has been imposed.

    Reply
  5. sortapundit Avatar
    sortapundit

    “But this ban was never about my avoiding smelly clothes or the staff in a pub avoiding throat problems. No, it’s always been about a Toynbee “we must” and “our duty” jihad against smoking itself. The ban is a powerful incentive to give up smoking that’s why it has been imposed.”
    True. Something that gets me about the ban is the illogic of forcing punters out onto the streets. While one of the main ‘benefits’ was to reduce smoking overall, it’s doubtful that any more than a few percent of people will quit permanently as a result.
    What we really need to do is discourage kids from taking up the habit. ASH says that 60% of smokers have already started by the age of 13, so it makes sense that do our best to reduce the exposure of smoking to kids so that they don’t get the idea that it’s a normal and cool activity. Perhaps – and I know this is an outlandish idea – we could try to restrict our smoking to areas from which young people can be prevented from entering until they reach, say, the age of 18.
    Instead we push smokers out onto the street, packing the pavements with laughing cmokers having a great time. It’s all one big advert for Marlboro, and very poorly thought out.

    Reply
  6. Mark Wadsworth Avatar
    Mark Wadsworth

    The penny has dropped!
    Obviously, smokers will take their drinks outside and smoke/drink/chat on the pavement.
    So the next step will obviously be banning drinking on the pavement, that way we are completely f***ed.
    See also “Banticipation”.

    Reply
  7. sortapundit Avatar
    sortapundit

    “So the next step will obviously be banning drinking on the pavement, that way we are completely f***ed.”
    None of my favourite pubs have off premises licences anyway, so it’s already illegal for me to take my drinks outside. Bah.

    Reply
  8. Kay Tie Avatar
    Kay Tie

    “so it’s already illegal for me to take my drinks outside. Bah.”
    law = ass.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Tim Worstall

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading