A non-smoker rant about analog flavor ban

[jexmex]

...
Same thing happened to (whether you love or hate 'em) Micosoft. They had no need nor use for any 'govt' liason' in their company until Netscape and Sun Micro decided to push an anti-trust suit and the gov't grabbed the opportunity as a 'foot in the door' into the computer/software industry. So Microsoft had to lawyer up and start playing footsie with the gov't. Nothing good has come of it. And just as a side note - who had the 'monopoly' on web browsers before all of this - Netscape ;-)
...

While Netscape may have had a monopoly of some sorts on browsers, they did not have a means to push it like Microsoft did. The anti-trust suite was not about a browser monopoly, but about Microsoft shoving there browser down Windows users throats, with no way to opt out of it (because it was so embedded into the OS (Win 95 and above). But that's neither here nor there.

Good video btw.

 

[Kent C]

The anti-trust suite was not about a browser monopoly, but about Microsoft shoving there browser down Windows users throats, with no way to opt out of it (because it was so embedded into the OS (Win 95 and above).

Simply not true. Many continued to use Netscape, me included long after Microsoft packaged it with Windows. It wasn't like it disabled Windows if you didn't use it. It was a 'freebie' that was included in the Windows package - and so that would be like Drew forces his 'freebies' down the throats of his customers.

 

[fastfwd]

Ah the good ol government the only thing we can trust them to do is anything that makes them more money. This is no longer a country by the people and for the people. It is a country by the mighty dollar and for the corporation.

the flavored juice. that would be easy if they ban flavored juice. just buy unflavored and get lorranns and make flavor yourself. Im not worried about that.

now back to politics.

the people are starting to open their eyes. as the younger "more politically active" and i dont mean the older people are not politically active. but the younger people are starting to gain numbers and with new bands out that are very political the light has been shinned and aimed right into the dark closets of the corrupt government. Now I have not participated in voting any government official into office just on bills. before you start tearing me down I cannot vote to put someone in office that I know will not do a good job. The only way I will ever vote to put someone in office is if I know they will actually do what they are supposed to do. Like I said I do vote on bills, but I also make sure to read as much about it so I can make an educated desision.

The corrupt Government can Kiss my rebel ... !! They have no clue what they are messing with ! There are millions of us that will DIE to keep this country a free republic !

 

[68stang]

LOL Leonardo your safe in England so no worries about a gun march and besides I was joking on that, I don't think people would go that far!

Its just I really hate how submissive us Americans are now a days.

As Benjamin Franklin would say: "Someone who gives up their freedom for temporary security deserves neither freedom or security"... or along those lines

the problem is that for generations our government and a small group of people outside the government have been teaching or trying to teach us we must rely on the government to take care of us. When in reality no government can EVER take care of its people without oppressing them. our government was founded to protect us and keep us safe and keep states playing fair with each other and that is it. It taught us to take car of ourselves and our neighbors. now we have millions of Americans that don't understand history and actually think its The feds job to take care of us from hand outs to health care. it sucks bad, our lives are being made harder by the progressive taxation....so much harder to climb out of middle or poverty now days. And yet some people want more ofthat.....gah!

 

[jexmex]

Simply not true. Many continued to use Netscape, me included long after Microsoft packaged it with Windows. It wasn't like it disabled Windows if you didn't use it. It was a 'freebie' that was included in the Windows package - and so that would be like Drew forces his 'freebies' down the throats of his customers.

I am not saying that it was not possible, but that was what the lawsuit was about. If that was a worthy point of them to make is not mine to decide (EU thought so, but US did not, well not completely anyways).

But again, did not mean to take thread off topic.

 

[Kent C]

68stang:the problem is that for generations our government and a small group of people outside the government have been teaching or trying to teach us we must rely on the government to take care of us.

Largest group teaching that is the NEA. And the professors at universities, the media and Hollywood.

When in reality no government can EVER take care of its people without oppressing them. our government was founded to protect us and keep us safe

... well, to protect against attacks on individual rights both foreign and domestic. 'Protect us and keep us safe' sounds more like a nanny state, but I get the gist.

and keep states playing fair with each other and that is it. It taught us to take car of ourselves and our neighbors. now we have millions of Americans that don't understand history and actually think its The feds job to take care of us from hand outs to health care. it sucks bad, our lives are being made harder by the progressive taxation....so much harder to climb out of middle or poverty now days. And yet some people want more ofthat.....gah!

And the difference is, is those people actually know and understand our history and want and intend to change it dramatically - "fundamentally transforming the United States of America"

 

[The_janty_Misfit]

That seems pretty useless to me. Doesn't apply to cigars, right? Doesn't apply to menthol. So what analogs does it apply to other than clove?

It's a foot in the door to ban e-cigs.

They had flavored analogs like Camel's Sweet Dreams, cloves, that's the only ones I can think of on the top of my head. I was a just regular analog taste kinda girl.

LadyPamela:
I think if you watch the video closely, you will notice that the item he is talking about is a cigar, specifically, the one he is smoking in the video.

The issue of whether or not it pertains to e-cigs now, or will in future is debatable, it could go either way depending on how the powers that be choose to view them.

ladysolitary:
I, too, noticed the 'flavors-ban' but I drew different conclusions. For me the point wasn't how it affected e-cigs but what you could say about it if you were paranoid enough.

Commentators in the media have pointed out that the current tobacco control legislation was written with the 'help' of the tobacco companies and this was viewed in some quarters as the tobacco industry's deciding to toe the line and become good corporate citizens. After all, on the surface, it looked as if by suggesting the flavor-ban, or at least, not opposing it too much, they were limiting their own options to create new product lines and expand their markets. It only looks that way briefly.

As you yourself point out, the great majority of cigarettes sold are ‘regular’ cigarettes in the sense that most smokers are hooked on cigarettes that vary only in strength, length strength and whether or not they contain menthol. It is thus imaginable that flavorings are largely irrelevant to 
“Big Tobacco” because they themselves have demonstrated by their recent, unsuccessful attempts to expand their markets with flavored or gimmicked cigarettes (e.g. menthol capsules in the filters).

This makes the flavor-ban interesting in some of the things it can be seen to do by working to limit a smoker’s choice of nicotine sources to good-old-fashioned cigarettes which display the regular use-pattern of addiction. No one smokes twenty grape cigars a day even if they’re available, cigarettes are of course, a different story.

In addition to that, the flavor-ban throws certain foreign sources out of the U.S. market. Proper kretek, or clove cigarettes, are made according to secret recipes involving cloves and other flavors/spices. Their taste cannot be easily replicated and no one but an Indonesian has ever made a convincing one. Add to this the fact that Kretek are mostly the province of occasional-/social smokers and you see that their elimination is no problem for BT. Far from it, the flavor-ban can be said to have eliminated one of their competitors in a form of protectionism; bringing the U.S. closer to a situation you could call “Marlboro or nothing.”

The ostensible reason behind the flavor-ban may be to keeping children safe from cigarettes by eliminating flavors that could attract them to try nicotine-use, but when you step back from that flaccid piece of reasoning, it is possible to construct a scenario where the guys in the more expensive suits have run rings around the government, in the guise of cooperation.

 

[ladysolitary85]

LadyPamela:
I think if you watch the video closely, you will notice that the item he is talking about is a cigar, specifically, the one he is smoking in the video.

The issue of whether or not it pertains to e-cigs now, or will in future is debatable, it could go either way depending on how the powers that be choose to view them.

ladysolitary:
I, too, noticed the 'flavors-ban' but I drew different conclusions. For me the point wasn't how it affected e-cigs but what you could say about it if you were paranoid enough.

Commentators in the media have pointed out that the current tobacco control legislation was written with the 'help' of the tobacco companies and this was viewed in some quarters as the tobacco industry's deciding to toe the line and become good corporate citizens. After all, on the surface, it looked as if by suggesting the flavor-ban, or at least, not opposing it too much, they were limiting their own options to create new product lines and expand their markets. It only looks that way briefly.

As you yourself point out, the great majority of cigarettes sold are ‘regular’ cigarettes in the sense that most smokers are hooked on cigarettes that vary only in strength, length strength and whether or not they contain menthol. It is thus imaginable that flavorings are largely irrelevant to 
“Big Tobacco” because they themselves have demonstrated by their recent, unsuccessful attempts to expand their markets with flavored or gimmicked cigarettes (e.g. menthol capsules in the filters).

This makes the flavor-ban interesting in some of the things it can be seen to do by working to limit a smoker’s choice of nicotine sources to good-old-fashioned cigarettes which display the regular use-pattern of addiction. No one smokes twenty grape cigars a day even if they’re available, cigarettes are of course, a different story.

In addition to that, the flavor-ban throws certain foreign sources out of the U.S. market. Proper kretek, or clove cigarettes, are made according to secret recipes involving cloves and other flavors/spices. Their taste cannot be easily replicated and no one but an Indonesian has ever made a convincing one. Add to this the fact that Kretek are mostly the province of occasional-/social smokers and you see that their elimination is no problem for BT. Far from it, the flavor-ban can be said to have eliminated one of their competitors in a form of protectionism; bringing the U.S. closer to a situation you could call “Marlboro or nothing.”

The ostensible reason behind the flavor-ban may be to keeping children safe from cigarettes by eliminating flavors that could attract them to try nicotine-use, but when you step back from that flaccid piece of reasoning, it is possible to construct a scenario where the guys in the more expensive suits have run rings around the government, in the guise of cooperation.

See I understand with the whole thing of... people aren't going to smoke 20 grape cigars. I was never really into flavors until I was introduced to hookah and then the e-cig.

 

[susan28]

The real payload of that legislation was a ban on all advertising, including point-of-sale, and more importantly, *no new tobacco companies*. That benefitted the current field leaders since they're least in need of advertising, and eliminates any future competition from home or abroad (new companies could form aborad, of course, - 'least til we *totally* take over the joint - just can't sell here if they aren't already). It's the same reason mega-corporations often support "onerous" regulation of their market or profession, because, although it costs them money, they can better absorb those costs, resulting in less competition and more profit overall. It's all very Machiavellian.

That is what PM "helped with". Whether or not that was the impetus behind it and the "for the children" thingie was the same hand-wringing, conscience-tugging justification for tyranny and profit it always is, or whether the flavour ban was the main thrust of it and PM and friends saw an opputunity for a "coup of cooperation" (not sure what the French for that is, hehe) is anyone's guess. I'm guessing the latter, as the anti-smoking crowd is every bit as rabid as the anti-drug and anti-gun crowd, and like them wage battles of attrition, chipping away at the right in question any way they can.