True, he did it briefly, and based his back up on the assumption that we would know what he was talking about.
"so some people will have little choice but to work in the smoking bars." Here he says that the demand for unskilled work stays constant.
"if people prefer to work in a non-smoking bar, then there will be fewer jobs available in the non-smoking compared to the smoking bars," Here he says that there will be a limited amount of work available, and therefore workers will not be able to base their taking a job on whether the environment is hazardous or not.
It is your assertation that "If smoking-bars don't have employees to hire because nobody wants to work there, there will be fewer smoking bars" that is incorrect and Tomo's statement that there will be more smoking than non-smoking bars without the ban is correct.
Tomo assumed that we knew that it is demand by the PATRONS not demand by the workers that dictates the availability of non/smoking bars.
As to your second comment, waitressing/barkeeping is unskilled labour, whereas oil rig repair and sewage treatment plants/chemical processing is skilled labour. Apples and oranges. |
