Vulpster03

no. everyone should feel welcomed in civil society and be allowed to live a public life; not told to go outside, sit in their cars or their homes alone by themselves

there is indeed a slippery slope, and in fact a more sinister undertone to the whole anti-smoking thing. I've said it before, but "health is duty" was a Nazi slogan. The smoking ban contingent, like the Nazi's, really have nothing to do with promoting health. If it was about health, the same zeal by this contigent would be directed towards the automobile industry and the food industry. The reality is, this is about demonization and removing people from civil society. It is just so convenient that smokers tend to be minorities when it comes to race, class and sexual orientation. Also a greater number of artists and foreigners smoke as well. The last thing we should do is further force socially marginalized people into recluse.

New Years Eve is going to be crazy

You know, on one hand it is kind of nice that voters are presented with two options for a smoking ban, but on the other hand it really is confusing for everyone. After voting today, I could see how maybe even smokers (or anti-ban supporters) may vote no on both of them, just as nonsmokers (or pro-ban supporters) might vote yes on both of them. Whatever the outcome of these issues, I don't think the results are going to be very telling of what people really wanted. I planned on voting Yes for 4 and No for 5, and I did indeed vote that way, but at the polls I almost got them confused.

I'm glad about the new building and positive recognition for the business school, but I'm starting to get a little worried that it is overtaking the university with receiving so much gifts, higher standards, and now a seperate (higher) tuition. It used to be that the people who couldn't make it in CAS went to the business school, but now it seems it is going the other way around.

Why is the "Petition for a statewide smoking ban" topic locked? I would like an explanation.

Great angle on the Peter B. Lewis Building. In my opinion most photos of it don't capture it too well.

Is anyone familar with communitarianism? I've been considering myself a communitarian lately. It is between liberal and conservative, but opposite libertarianism. I think it applies well to justifying strong urban planning and regionalism.

98% of cigarette smoke is comprised of H2O; the sustanance of life. And I don't think cigarettes were designed to harm people. That makes no sense. Though smoking can be harmful, I think the native Americans and subesquent users took up smoking as a mode of relaxation and socialization. What about the auto industry or the food industry? Were cars designed so people could get into accidents? Were French fries designed to clog arteries? There is no such thing as a safe cigarette, and there is no such thing as a safe car or a safe french frie. What is emmitting from the tailpipe of your car is lot more potent than a single cigarette, and I hope you don't dare have the audacity to drive in public. Bars should not be bound to a smoke-free environment. No one has to go to a bar!!! As long as tobacco is legal, the right to use it limited places should be protected. And you say you would like to have the opportunity to a buy a drink. A drink that is directly responsible for thousands of deaths of users and nonusers of alcohol a like. If you decide to become a health advocate, don't think you can take on your health advocacy without the same zeal towards other forms of public health infractions.

Bars in their very essence exist for leisure; certainly not health or public safety. It is no one's "right" to go to a bar and demand the owners and patrons restrict smoking. In fact of all the measures we would try to improve health and public safety in bars, eliminating smoking is the most superfolous, repugnant, and nonesensical. It is someone's choice to go into a bar and inhale second smoke. It is not someone's choice to get struck by a drunk driver nor is it someone's choice to become the victim of someone coming from the bars and heading home. We know that there are increasing amount of smoke free bars, and choice will also increase without passing the ban. And honestly, how much time do you or should you spend n a bar anyway to the point where a couple hours of second hand smoke would really pose as a health issue? Bars are really the only places that allow smoking. Not in offices, medical buildings, transit stations (or vehicles), educational buildings, shopping centers, or government buildings. How different the situation is today from that of my parents, where second-hand smoke was an inescapable aspect of daily life. Today, if smoking is restricted to bars, you can't say that second hand smoke still posses a threat to the public. If people cannot deal with adults smoking in bars, I suggest they seek evening leisure in ice cream shops or nurseries, where I am sure they will all feel more comfortable. "Health is Duty" was a slogan used by the Nazi party. I for one do not endorss Nazi policies.

I read the transcript and did not see the film. I feel the film is pretty accurate in depicting the sprawl situation and decline of the city, but it didn't really talk a lot about a lot of the renewal going on; like downtown, University Circle, Ohio City and Tremont. It certainly was a little gloom and doom.

Don't make assumptions.

I think the campus has seen better days, but it still isn't to be had for the price of a cheap cocktail, like a salted peanut.

I don't think the wording is so confusing.

Chautauqua should burn in hell.

Your cancer risk will always be higher, but I'm sure they figure if we were stupid enough put things in our mouths and light them on fire, we're liable to do all kinds of other stupid things in the future, as well. Actually, if you quit within a reasonable timeframe, your risk of cancer is completely eliminated. Now in regars to smotking "other things," I'm actually alergic to them, so after numerous attempts I've stopped trying. Smoking "other things" by the way, is the equivilent on the lungs of smoking nearly a pack of cigarettes.

that's a good question, and I don't know. From all the press it sounds just like cigarettes.

Filene's Basement draws a crowd -- and we name names Plain Dealer 4:50 p.m. “Oh, please don’t say I was here. ... I told my boss I was sick today!” That was the most common comment today during a Shop for Charity benefit at the new Filene’s Basement in Warrensville Heights. The discount fashion retailer opens officially tomorrow. More at cleveland.com http://www.cleveland.com

I agree with this statement, and I think arts and culture should have some public assistance. However, there are some problems with the revenue sought from cigarettes. First of all, it is a fairly narrow segment of the population. Secondly, I don't consider this a dependable revenue stream since less and less people smoke; it will only mean further guaging addicted smokers (mostly lower income people). Thirdly, there is some kind of hypocrisy revealed in the majority advocating for a smoking ban and trying to get revenue from cigarettes at the same time.

Where there's art, culture, there's smoke Wednesday, October 25, 2006 Carolyn Jack Plain Dealer Arts Reporter Like any other ballot question, Issue 18 is drawing a range of reactions from the public. Article Removed

Image alone sustains many other cities. Other cities aren't all cracked up to be what they are, but people have a postive image/perception of these places before they visit, and they see what they want to. Much like the situation in Ohio where people have a negative image/perception and see what they want to. For instance, how does the fact that bums and parking go without much notice or given much importance by visitors in other cities, but people rant about the situation in Ohio cities? I know what you are saying, but I don't personally buy it. I don't think for MANY people this is PRIORITY; even younger people. A preference perhaps, but not a priority. There are a lot of people in this age group attracted to Floridia, Carolinas, Texas, Arizona, Georgia, California, etc. that aren't very public transit oriented. True, retail has not rebounded in the city like the restaurants and bars have. But, I think we can all agree that the situation is likely to change very soon with some promising big developments on the horizon. Even with the lack of retail downtown, it takes virtually not a single Greater Clevelander more than fifteen minutes to reach what the arguably "need" by car. Steelyard Commons will help the situation I guess, but you were very depressed with this development on the forum. Also, it takes virtually not a single Greater Clevelander more than forty minutes to reach what they may arguably "want" at Saks, Nordstroms, Brooks Brothers, J.Crew, Banana Republic, Bose, Apple, Coach, H&M, Crate and Barrel, Urban Outfitters, Guess, etc. All of our flagship shopping centers and neighborhoods like downtown, Larchmere, Ohio City, Coventry, Shaker Square, Cedar Fairmount, Cedar Lee, Tremont, Little Italy, etc. contain some unique shops with higher quality goods. Next to Chicago, I think Cleveland could be the best in the midwest when it comes to more exclusive brands/goods. Cleveland might have the highest "downtown" population growth rate in the midwest and the fourth highest in the country. The Warehouse District, E.4th, and the Flats are thriving with new people and new restaurants/bars/neighborhood amenities are openning up all the time. In addition to downtown, University Circle, Ohio City, Tremont, Detroit-Shoreway, Fairfax, and St.Clair Superior are thriving and up-and-coming. Edgewater, Shaker Square, Coventry, Cedar-Fairmount, Little Italy, Cedar-Lee, Kamm's Corners, Madison Village, Detroit-Warren, and West End continue to remain good/stable neighborhoods. Several others like Glenville and others - most notably in Midtown - are excellent speculative neighborhoods at this point considering future tangible developments. This list is not insignificant. We aren't a "touristy" city, although tourism is growing in Cleveland, particularly international and medical. Take the tourists and visitors out of D.C., NYC, LA, Miami and Chicago and you won't be left with a whole lot of vibrancy. Honestly, considering the relatively small fraction of our own population that supports our numerous attractive urban neighborhoods/districts, I think Cleveland has done a fantastic job. Only promotion will bring a greater segment of the populaiton and out-of-town visitors to add to the vibrancy of our attractive urban neighborhoods/districts. But on the other hand tourism is kind of bad, which makes me have a problem with all of these vibrant urban places, because the chains still infilitrate. In Cleveland you still have authentic and unique places dominating the coolest urban neighborhoods. You have to KNOW where to look and it isn't hard!!! Sure there are suburban/rural families, but there are also plenty of places where families, young professionals, artists, gays, foreigners, students, musicians and writers live too! AND in URBAN Ohio! - That's what this site is about if you didn't catch that already. Politically Ohio is very diverse also. The whole red state thing is really a fabrication of the media. When comparing state by state, no state is really that far off from the other in terms of political tendancies and opinions on a wide range of topics - my flaming liberal professor in my Public Opinion and Behavior poli sci class says so and I saw good extensive data first hand. We already have so much to offer in Ohio, but people don't know it. I'm not just talking about magazine adds or billboards. "Believe in Cleveland" is/was kind of a superfulous campagin. When I say things like marketing, promotion, or getting the message across, I'm talking about developing a thorough and comprehensive strategy to target Ohio corporations and college graduates, and out-of-state corporations and graduates to seriously consider Ohio and show them they should and can make it work here. First of all, it is apparent that not everyone on this forum or even this thread thinks the same way. The problem with your perspective is indeed exactly and unashamedly what we need to change. Your perspective is one of Cleveland with little opportunity. That is certainly a dangerous perspective, and it is that perspective- your perspective - that is the most common and typical perception of Ohioans. This thread was started by article that says 32,000 people leave Ohio per year, and we can speculate how many more people would like to leave too. Your perspective can't possibly be more mainstream. Not just Ohio, but the country's. It is like you are waiting to hop on the bandwagon until you can follow other people who are moving to Cleveland, telling you its cool.

cle2032 - excellent post, and by the way, I was a younger regular at the Bier Markt this summer - Caroline usually bartended while I was there and I got to know her pretty well. Everything you said I agree with. You seem to know the city well and have traveled considerably. Honestly, I've never known someone who really knows the Cleveland well and has traveled considerably who does not appreciate Cleveland and want to live there. That's what I mean by marketing. People (who live in NEO) just don't know the region and its assets enough to appreciate it, so that's what I mean about getting the message out.

The federal government has to stop using Ohio tax revenue to subsidize growth in places that have earthquakes, hurricanes, and unnatural environments, i.e. the desert. That is a huge part of Ohio's problem too.

Listen DanielDC, you aren't living in Ohio right now. Neighborhoods are getting better all the time and there are many great neighborhoods to choose from. I don't appreciate your constant negativity towards people doing things to try and make Ohio better in some way. Why don't you tell your friends on Capitol Hill to stop subsidizing new infrastructure in other parts of the country and invest in existing infrastructure. Tell the federal government to spend money on public transit here in Ohio so we can build it.

To me this really says that Brain Drain isn't necessarily about jobs or potential opportunities. It is more about image and location. I think a lot of people simply decide to uproot from Ohio before they look for jobs in Ohio. If we entice these people to stay in Ohio, I think jobs will follow. It will start a trend and economic growth will happen naturally. You can't really say that jobs came first in the Southwest desert or the backward South, or the culturally deficient Carolinas. People started moving there, jobs were created in the process, and things have spiraled. It is all about creating a cultural momentum in Ohio.