You’ll have to excuse me, I’ve been running a fever the last two days, can you be less vague on this?
Deeming Regulations have been released!!!!
- Thread starter Oliver
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
I agree. The vape world will change to be sure. When Deeming came out it was headed for extinction. I think Gottlieb will end up in the middle somewhere. I look at it as that middle will be too much restriction but will be better than what pre-Gottlieb would have been.I may be seriously over-optimistic, but I believe Scott Gottlieb wants to save vaping and the vaping industry(though maybe not in exactly the form we're used to). Since he took over at the FDA, they've delayed the PMTA deadline for 4 years and there's been little to no enforcement of the PMTA requirement for new products introduced after 8/1/2016.
I try to keep in mind that he's only one person, and he has to work within the environment that he inherited.
Just my.
I've said it many, Many Times...
That when e-Cigarette Use reaches the same average PAD Tax Rate as smoking, that the States and FDA and the CDC and the NIC and the (Insert your Favorite 3 Letter Acronym here =>) ____ will embrace e-Cigarettes. And start the narrative of how much Safer it is than Smoking.
Because then it will be their Golden Goose.
BTW - Before people start Lighting the Torches and Sharpening up their Pitch Forks, I'm not advocating that e-Liquids be Taxed.
Just say'n what is going to Happen.
Just say'n what is going to Happen.
That's my angle for the most part. What I want and what I think will happen are two different things. In the end, no one gives a rat'sass what Bronze wants so my time is better spent discussing what I think will happen.
Oh there is Definitely a Place for Bronze's views on what he would Like to see happen.
BTW - Congratulations of Posting the 19,000th Post in this thread.
We'd see an entirely different country if we did what I want.Oh there is Definitely a Place for Bronze's views on what he would Like to see happen.
BTW - Congratulations of Posting the 19,000th Post in this thread.
19K...I'm honored.
I would give one, maybe two, rat'sasses to know exactly what it is that you want from your government.
(one for each rat'sasses)In a nutshell...as little as possible.I would give one, maybe two, rat'sasses to know exactly what it is that you want from your government.
I have to be honest, there is something about Gottleib that is likeable. I do agree that he "appears" more measured than the prior "deeming effort" but Obama was a smoker. I'm sure he failed to transition to vaping during his time as president LOL. He had little skin in the game, as far as I was concerned.
With that said, the absolute unpredictability involved with our current president and his appointees makes me nervous. If they're not being fired, they are being given rapid, contradictory instructions that are a moving target.
Do I think vaping will remain? I do in some fashion, and I think that Gottleib is likely going to be as "fair" to vaping as any other possible appointee. What and how directives are being provided to him, I don't really know. I'd like to think Trump sort of said, "Deal with this" and left. That is one part of being a successful businessman, appointing the right people and then letting them work.
I tend to view Trump as kind of a micro manager. That may be based on a (very few) screenings of the Apprentice, so I'm not sure it's a fair assessment.
I am also not sure how "fair" Trump can actually BE as far as harm reduction itself. His family narrative leads me to the conclusion that he feels all harmful substances should be wiped off the face of the earth, because his brother was an alcoholic.
I'm quite sure he didn't attend al-anon either, to achieve an understanding of addiction and even his OWN role in causing it. Based on an assessment of my own mother's action in response to my addiction and her failure to attend al-anon, as advised, my guess is that he may be spilling control-freak behavior all over any harm reduction efforts and making them as unpleasant as possible.
These are all postulates, I don't know any of them to be true. What I do know is that the prior deeming effort was clearly to cut vaping off at the knees. If we wind up with anything better than that, I will be pleased. If we wind up with what we WANT, I will be ASTONISHED.
Anna
With that said, the absolute unpredictability involved with our current president and his appointees makes me nervous. If they're not being fired, they are being given rapid, contradictory instructions that are a moving target.
Do I think vaping will remain? I do in some fashion, and I think that Gottleib is likely going to be as "fair" to vaping as any other possible appointee. What and how directives are being provided to him, I don't really know. I'd like to think Trump sort of said, "Deal with this" and left. That is one part of being a successful businessman, appointing the right people and then letting them work.
I tend to view Trump as kind of a micro manager. That may be based on a (very few) screenings of the Apprentice, so I'm not sure it's a fair assessment.
I am also not sure how "fair" Trump can actually BE as far as harm reduction itself. His family narrative leads me to the conclusion that he feels all harmful substances should be wiped off the face of the earth, because his brother was an alcoholic.
I'm quite sure he didn't attend al-anon either, to achieve an understanding of addiction and even his OWN role in causing it. Based on an assessment of my own mother's action in response to my addiction and her failure to attend al-anon, as advised, my guess is that he may be spilling control-freak behavior all over any harm reduction efforts and making them as unpleasant as possible.
These are all postulates, I don't know any of them to be true. What I do know is that the prior deeming effort was clearly to cut vaping off at the knees. If we wind up with anything better than that, I will be pleased. If we wind up with what we WANT, I will be ASTONISHED.
Anna
A strong national security/defense. a nice transportation system, and 10% of the budget for the truly needy that cannot help themselves. Beyond that, very little. I like the 10th amendment.
The attacks on nicotine and flavors don't give me that much hope. We all expected the packaging so that's understandable. I think a big part of the problem is Zeller is still there.
Before we heard nothing from Califf, it was all Zeller pretending to hear us. Now it's Gottlieb telling us not exactly what we want to hear but less than we expected.
I can't fight the feeling that they're still doing exactly what their corporate masters have ordered and they've only adjusted the rate they're boiling the water.
Got it now on the 'cop out'. - Agree
Again 'all support' vs. 'all Republicans'. I didn't say the latter. The original committee vote was 29 Republicans and 2 Democrats and 19 Democrats voting against it. So the 'all support was from Republicans plus 2 Dems' wasn't say 6 plus 2, but the whole Republican side.
Similar in the Committee hearings with Senators Burr, Alexander, Thume, et al (minus Rand Paul who wasn't there dammit) vs. most of the usual suspects from the letter signers on the Democrat side.
Although I DO understand how You might read/interpret some things, but again, what I said was true.
Again 'all support' vs. 'all Republicans'. I didn't say the latter. The original committee vote was 29 Republicans and 2 Democrats and 19 Democrats voting against it. So the 'all support was from Republicans plus 2 Dems' wasn't say 6 plus 2, but the whole Republican side.
Similar in the Committee hearings with Senators Burr, Alexander, Thume, et al (minus Rand Paul who wasn't there dammit) vs. most of the usual suspects from the letter signers on the Democrat side.
Although I DO understand how You might read/interpret some things, but again, what I said was true.
And here I thought the 10th Amendment had been repealed. You don't hear much about it anymore.
And the 9th for that matter
The 17th amendment was one of the worst ones. It changed elections of senators by the state legislatures to the popular vote. Basically, it turned senatorial elections from state elections to national elections for all intents and purposes.
And the 9th for that matter
A cross to a vampire, the 9th.
I have some mixed feelings on the direct election of senators. Here in Kentucky we have one of the finest legislatures that money can buy (and they go down real cheap), I am far more honest and infinitely wiser than ninety-nine percent of our legislature or candidates therefor.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
