Ban Smoking in Public Housing?

[TNHarley]

But they must keep on trying to achieve the totalitarian state.

Next up: banning junk food in public housing.

They probably should. Probably receive food stamps. Why should I pay for their junk food?

Lets look at your Idea ... when I go to the super market I look at making some sort of salad to make as a side dish by the time I'm done it will cost me up to twenty dollars ... if you look at all the bad junk food you can buy for 20 dollars, in my state you can buy just about a weeks of junk food side dishes ... the problem we have here is the healthy food cost too much ... ask anyone who's on social security ... I realize you might not know this but junk food is more cost effective in a family then buying healthy...

I completely agree.
I think food stamps should go back to the way they were. The basics. Dried beans and shit. Coke, steak and cinnamon rolls is bullshit. If they want that stuff, they can get a second part time job.

not all people can work a second job ... not all people can even work a first job... its not a case of they need to work to get what they buy, its a case that good healthy food cost too much

That's why we should go back to the old way. They get certain items. Nofunds on a card.
If they are not working at all, they are probably getting a check or everything else is paid for anyways.

 

[Michelle420]

I don't smoke.

If someone owns their own house they should be able to smoke in it. Public Housing can be smoke free if they want.

Most people I know who smoke nowadays use the e-cigs. I really don't see the big deal in allowing e-cigs in public housing.

 

[billyerock1991]

I'm fuzzy on the whole dope thing, is dope good or bad now?

any kind of smoke into the body in large quantities a day can't be good for you

 

[martybegan]

I don't smoke.

If someone owns their own house they should be able to smoke in it. Public Housing can be smoke free if they want.

Most people I know who smoke nowadays use the e-cigs. I really don't see the big deal in allowing e-cigs in public housing.

They would probably be included in any ban, because the no-fun brigade can't have people figuring out a safer way to have fun.

 

[billyerock1991]

Next up: banning junk food in public housing.

They probably should. Probably receive food stamps. Why should I pay for their junk food?

Lets look at your Idea ... when I go to the super market I look at making some sort of salad to make as a side dish by the time I'm done it will cost me up to twenty dollars ... if you look at all the bad junk food you can buy for 20 dollars, in my state you can buy just about a weeks of junk food side dishes ... the problem we have here is the healthy food cost too much ... ask anyone who's on social security ... I realize you might not know this but junk food is more cost effective in a family then buying healthy...

I completely agree.
I think food stamps should go back to the way they were. The basics. Dried beans and shit. Coke, steak and cinnamon rolls is bullshit. If they want that stuff, they can get a second part time job.

not all people can work a second job ... not all people can even work a first job... its not a case of they need to work to get what they buy, its a case that good healthy food cost too much

That's why we should go back to the old way. They get certain items. Nofunds on a card.
If they are not working at all, they are probably getting a check or everything else is paid for anyways.

actually thats not totally true .... most public housing cost you something, at least in my state it does its not all free... the state pays for some of it and you pay the rest of it ... they problem is we have more people who need public housing then they have housing for the people who need it ... at least that's the way its in my state... my buddy had to move to different state to get a place to live in ... the other state had a 2 months waiting list ... in our state it has a 2 year waiting list .... I've been working my ass off to try and find him a place for him to live in this state ... they problem we have is the average rent for a 1 bedroom apt. is 1400 dollars a month ... until that changes he will live out of state... or when he gets a letter from the state saying they have a place for him ... its not as easy as you might think to get public housing here in my state ... nor is it a total free ride like you think ...

 

[Timmy]

They are renters . Lots of places ban smoking because it damages apartments .

 

[TNHarley]

They probably should. Probably receive food stamps. Why should I pay for their junk food?

Lets look at your Idea ... when I go to the super market I look at making some sort of salad to make as a side dish by the time I'm done it will cost me up to twenty dollars ... if you look at all the bad junk food you can buy for 20 dollars, in my state you can buy just about a weeks of junk food side dishes ... the problem we have here is the healthy food cost too much ... ask anyone who's on social security ... I realize you might not know this but junk food is more cost effective in a family then buying healthy...

I completely agree.
I think food stamps should go back to the way they were. The basics. Dried beans and shit. Coke, steak and cinnamon rolls is bullshit. If they want that stuff, they can get a second part time job.

not all people can work a second job ... not all people can even work a first job... its not a case of they need to work to get what they buy, its a case that good healthy food cost too much

That's why we should go back to the old way. They get certain items. Nofunds on a card.
If they are not working at all, they are probably getting a check or everything else is paid for anyways.

actually thats not totally true .... most public housing cost you something, at least in my state it does its not all free... the state pays for some of it and you pay the rest of it ... they problem is we have more people who need public housing then they have housing for the people who need it ... at least that's the way its in my state... my buddy had to move to different state to get a place to live in ... the other state had a 2 months waiting list ... in our state it has a 2 year waiting list .... I've been working my ass off to try and find him a place for him to live in this state ... they problem we have is the average rent for a 1 bedroom apt. is 1400 dollars a month ... until that changes he will live out of state... or when he gets a letter from the state saying they have a place for him ... its not as easy as you might think to get public housing here in my state ... nor is it a total free ride like you think ...

You pay based on your income. I know a person that stayed in one for 8 bucks a month.
I am quit aware of the situation.

 

[Timmy]

Next up: banning junk food in public housing.

They probably should. Probably receive food stamps. Why should I pay for their junk food?

Lets look at your Idea ... when I go to the super market I look at making some sort of salad to make as a side dish by the time I'm done it will cost me up to twenty dollars ... if you look at all the bad junk food you can buy for 20 dollars, in my state you can buy just about a weeks of junk food side dishes ... the problem we have here is the healthy food cost too much ... ask anyone who's on social security ... I realize you might not know this but junk food is more cost effective in a family then buying healthy...

I completely agree.
I think food stamps should go back to the way they were. The basics. Dried beans and shit. Coke, steak and cinnamon rolls is bullshit. If they want that stuff, they can get a second part time job.

not all people can work a second job ... not all people can even work a first job... its not a case of they need to work to get what they buy, its a case that good healthy food cost too much

That's why we should go back to the old way. They get certain items. Nofunds on a card.
If they are not working at all, they are probably getting a check or everything else is paid for anyways.

Mailing paper checks is too expensive .

 

[SwimExpert]

I don't smoke.

If someone owns their own house they should be able to smoke in it. Public Housing can be smoke free if they want.

Most people I know who smoke nowadays use the e-cigs. I really don't see the big deal in allowing e-cigs in public housing.

They would probably be included in any ban, because the no-fun brigade can't have people figuring out a safer way to have fun.

From a hotelier point of view, many hotels have included "vaping" in their no-smoking policies, as a practical matter. The flavored liquids come with their own smells, and those smells do tend to linger. But most of all, e-cigs have become the immediate common excuse when someone is discovered violating the no-smoking policy. You see them on their balcony, they claim you saw an e-cig. You tell them that a strong smell was left behind, they claim it was from an e-cig. The solution is to include e-cigs in the non-smoking policy.

I would expect that a similar thing would happen in public housing.

 

[Timmy]

Lets look at your Idea ... when I go to the super market I look at making some sort of salad to make as a side dish by the time I'm done it will cost me up to twenty dollars ... if you look at all the bad junk food you can buy for 20 dollars, in my state you can buy just about a weeks of junk food side dishes ... the problem we have here is the healthy food cost too much ... ask anyone who's on social security ... I realize you might not know this but junk food is more cost effective in a family then buying healthy...

I completely agree.
I think food stamps should go back to the way they were. The basics. Dried beans and shit. Coke, steak and cinnamon rolls is bullshit. If they want that stuff, they can get a second part time job.

not all people can work a second job ... not all people can even work a first job... its not a case of they need to work to get what they buy, its a case that good healthy food cost too much

That's why we should go back to the old way. They get certain items. Nofunds on a card.
If they are not working at all, they are probably getting a check or everything else is paid for anyways.

actually thats not totally true .... most public housing cost you something, at least in my state it does its not all free... the state pays for some of it and you pay the rest of it ... they problem is we have more people who need public housing then they have housing for the people who need it ... at least that's the way its in my state... my buddy had to move to different state to get a place to live in ... the other state had a 2 months waiting list ... in our state it has a 2 year waiting list .... I've been working my ass off to try and find him a place for him to live in this state ... they problem we have is the average rent for a 1 bedroom apt. is 1400 dollars a month ... until that changes he will live out of state... or when he gets a letter from the state saying they have a place for him ... its not as easy as you might think to get public housing here in my state ... nor is it a total free ride like you think ...

You pay based on your income. I know a person that stayed in one for 8 bucks a month.
I am quit aware of the situation.

Public housing is 30% of your income . As u gain more income , you decide to leave and get a regular place since you'll be paying the same rate .

 

[martybegan]

I don't smoke.

If someone owns their own house they should be able to smoke in it. Public Housing can be smoke free if they want.

Most people I know who smoke nowadays use the e-cigs. I really don't see the big deal in allowing e-cigs in public housing.

They would probably be included in any ban, because the no-fun brigade can't have people figuring out a safer way to have fun.

From a hotelier point of view, many hotels have included "vaping" in their no-smoking policies, as a practical matter. The flavored liquids come with their own smells, and those smells do tend to linger. But most of all, e-cigs have become the immediate common excuse when someone is discovered violating the no-smoking policy. You see them on their balcony, they claim you saw an e-cig. You tell them that a strong smell was left behind, they claim it was from an e-cig. The solution is to include e-cigs in the non-smoking policy.

I would expect that a similar thing would happen in public housing.

Perfume and cologne tend to linger, are hotels banning them?

Smoking produces combustion, and combustion products are easy to tell apart from vaping products. They also are the only things that leave a real residue behind that requires cleaning.

The whole point of banning it in the housing is based on "safety and maintenance". Vaping has less of an impact on both, yet it is lumped in to make enforcement easy, which isn't a good reason.

If some entity wants to enforce the rules, they should have to make the effort.

As clarification, hotels can do what they want, although the business wisdom of charging someone $400 to "clean" a room after vaping may result in a significant lost of business.

 

[billyerock1991]

Lets look at your Idea ... when I go to the super market I look at making some sort of salad to make as a side dish by the time I'm done it will cost me up to twenty dollars ... if you look at all the bad junk food you can buy for 20 dollars, in my state you can buy just about a weeks of junk food side dishes ... the problem we have here is the healthy food cost too much ... ask anyone who's on social security ... I realize you might not know this but junk food is more cost effective in a family then buying healthy...

I completely agree.
I think food stamps should go back to the way they were. The basics. Dried beans and shit. Coke, steak and cinnamon rolls is bullshit. If they want that stuff, they can get a second part time job.

not all people can work a second job ... not all people can even work a first job... its not a case of they need to work to get what they buy, its a case that good healthy food cost too much

That's why we should go back to the old way. They get certain items. Nofunds on a card.
If they are not working at all, they are probably getting a check or everything else is paid for anyways.

actually thats not totally true .... most public housing cost you something, at least in my state it does its not all free... the state pays for some of it and you pay the rest of it ... they problem is we have more people who need public housing then they have housing for the people who need it ... at least that's the way its in my state... my buddy had to move to different state to get a place to live in ... the other state had a 2 months waiting list ... in our state it has a 2 year waiting list .... I've been working my ass off to try and find him a place for him to live in this state ... they problem we have is the average rent for a 1 bedroom apt. is 1400 dollars a month ... until that changes he will live out of state... or when he gets a letter from the state saying they have a place for him ... its not as easy as you might think to get public housing here in my state ... nor is it a total free ride like you think ...

You pay based on your income. I know a person that stayed in one for 8 bucks a month.
I am quit aware of the situation.

I guess that all depends on the state you live in... I've become aware what thing cost to people who are consider disabled ... my friend is disabled and I do all the fact finding for him... in wyoming its also the same way in colorado ... you pay a for some of the rent ... he pays 325 a month in wyoming and if he gets a place in colorado he will pay 450 a month and the state pays the difference... nobody in our state that I'm aware of can pay 8 dollars a month and the state pays the rest... personally I don't know of any state that does ... even people who are on welfare in our state pays the same as a disabled person ... you can't assume all states are the same

 

[TNHarley]

They probably should. Probably receive food stamps. Why should I pay for their junk food?

Lets look at your Idea ... when I go to the super market I look at making some sort of salad to make as a side dish by the time I'm done it will cost me up to twenty dollars ... if you look at all the bad junk food you can buy for 20 dollars, in my state you can buy just about a weeks of junk food side dishes ... the problem we have here is the healthy food cost too much ... ask anyone who's on social security ... I realize you might not know this but junk food is more cost effective in a family then buying healthy...

I completely agree.
I think food stamps should go back to the way they were. The basics. Dried beans and shit. Coke, steak and cinnamon rolls is bullshit. If they want that stuff, they can get a second part time job.

not all people can work a second job ... not all people can even work a first job... its not a case of they need to work to get what they buy, its a case that good healthy food cost too much

That's why we should go back to the old way. They get certain items. Nofunds on a card.
If they are not working at all, they are probably getting a check or everything else is paid for anyways.

Mailing paper checks is too expensive .

 

[ogibillm]

Where will the nutters come down on this one. On one hand....they want to make anyone who accepts any public assistance miserable......but they supposedly can't stand it when people are told what to do in their own homes.

PC doesn't believe second-hand smoke is harmful and that's as nutty as it gets.

But i don't blame you for leaving crackpot conspiracy theory objection off your list

 

[TNHarley]

I completely agree.
I think food stamps should go back to the way they were. The basics. Dried beans and shit. Coke, steak and cinnamon rolls is bullshit. If they want that stuff, they can get a second part time job.

not all people can work a second job ... not all people can even work a first job... its not a case of they need to work to get what they buy, its a case that good healthy food cost too much

That's why we should go back to the old way. They get certain items. Nofunds on a card.
If they are not working at all, they are probably getting a check or everything else is paid for anyways.

actually thats not totally true .... most public housing cost you something, at least in my state it does its not all free... the state pays for some of it and you pay the rest of it ... they problem is we have more people who need public housing then they have housing for the people who need it ... at least that's the way its in my state... my buddy had to move to different state to get a place to live in ... the other state had a 2 months waiting list ... in our state it has a 2 year waiting list .... I've been working my ass off to try and find him a place for him to live in this state ... they problem we have is the average rent for a 1 bedroom apt. is 1400 dollars a month ... until that changes he will live out of state... or when he gets a letter from the state saying they have a place for him ... its not as easy as you might think to get public housing here in my state ... nor is it a total free ride like you think ...

You pay based on your income. I know a person that stayed in one for 8 bucks a month.
I am quit aware of the situation.

Public housing is 30% of your income . As u gain more income , you decide to leave and get a regular place since you'll be paying the same rate .

This chick worked with my ex. She lived in public housing. She worked probably 20-30 hours a week for my girlfriend. Probably made minimum to 9 bucks an hour and paid 8 bucks a month for the actual "rent". Maybe she lied idk.
Also, your premise is assuming those people want to try and better themselves.

 

[Katzndogz]

E-cigs have no smell, no residue and no one would know if one was being used or not. The ban on e-cigs is lip service. Unless hotels are going to put surveillance cameras in every room they would never know.

 

[Katzndogz]

The no smoking policy would not apply to pot after all people really need their medicine. Pot does have a strong acrid smell. The smell of Marijuana would mask the smell of any cigarette. They might ban smoking in public housing which will make it just another law that gets ignored.

 

[SwimExpert]

Perfume and cologne tend to linger, are hotels banning them?

Smoking produces combustion, and combustion products are easy to tell apart from vaping products. They also are the only things that leave a real residue behind that requires cleaning.

The whole point of banning it in the housing is based on "safety and maintenance". Vaping has less of an impact on both, yet it is lumped in to make enforcement easy, which isn't a good reason.

If some entity wants to enforce the rules, they should have to make the effort.

As clarification, hotels can do what they want, although the business wisdom of charging someone $400 to "clean" a room after vaping may result in a significant lost of business.

Vaping uses oily substances, which soak into fabrics and do indeed leave a distinctive smell. Nobody is using a tobacco scented perfume. I've had to put rooms out of order for two days in order to let them air out and get rid of the lingering smell from vaping.

When you inform people up front about the policy they carry the burden of their own informed decisions. Some people might initially object, but once you explain that complaints happen from the residual smells and that too many people have abused the latitude most people understand, most will choose to honor the policy. Typically, if someone is discovered vaping in their room the hotel staff will remind the person of the policy and ask them to please honor it so as to avoid an unnecessary fee being assessed. But ultimately, the hotel won't assess the fee unless there is some kind of odor or residue. Meanwhile, someone who is discovered smoking will have the fee assessed immediately.

At the end of the day, hotels aren't going to worry about losing business over these policies, because we're talking about people who have deliberately ignored policies after being informed, and in doing so are causing damage to your assets. The type of person who makes such a malicious decision is not the kind of client that is profitable, so there is nothing to fear losing.

 

[SwimExpert]

E-cigs have no smell, no residue and no one would know if one was being used or not. The ban on e-cigs is lip service. Unless hotels are going to put surveillance cameras in every room they would never know.

Wrong. Completely, utterly wrong.

 

[martybegan]

Perfume and cologne tend to linger, are hotels banning them?

Smoking produces combustion, and combustion products are easy to tell apart from vaping products. They also are the only things that leave a real residue behind that requires cleaning.

The whole point of banning it in the housing is based on "safety and maintenance". Vaping has less of an impact on both, yet it is lumped in to make enforcement easy, which isn't a good reason.

If some entity wants to enforce the rules, they should have to make the effort.

As clarification, hotels can do what they want, although the business wisdom of charging someone $400 to "clean" a room after vaping may result in a significant lost of business.

Vaping uses oily substances, which soak into fabrics and do indeed leave a distinctive smell. Nobody is using a tobacco scented perfume. I've had to put rooms out of order for two days in order to let them air out and get rid of the lingering smell from vaping.

When you inform people up front about the policy they carry the burden of their own informed decisions. Some people might initially object, but once you explain that complaints happen from the residual smells and that too many people have abused the latitude most people understand, most will choose to honor the policy. Typically, if someone is discovered vaping in their room the hotel staff will remind the person of the policy and ask them to please honor it so as to avoid an unnecessary fee being assessed. But ultimately, the hotel won't assess the fee unless there is some kind of odor or residue. Meanwhile, someone who is discovered smoking will have the fee assessed immediately.

At the end of the day, hotels aren't going to worry about losing business over these policies, because we're talking about people who have deliberately ignored policies after being informed, and in doing so are causing damage to your assets. The type of person who makes such a malicious decision is not the kind of client that is profitable, so there is nothing to fear losing.

I concede the point on hotels, however I don't concede the point on someones apartment, regardless of who owns it.