i know you didnt make the move because of this.i put 1+1 together because i can and its fitting. stop ...... on my perfect reasoning.
Damn, I needed that...
Last edited:
E-cig Ban in NYS???
- Thread starter Briar
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Damn, I needed that...
Yes. And, since it's not likely to pass, and Hannon is just introducing it to encourage "discussion", we need to get in on that discussion and make a *strong* showing - and get all our friends, relatives and, if possible, health providers, involved.
I just joined CASAA, and I'm going to find out exactly what they plan to do and how...
I'm a little less concerned about immediate action now, but I'm still concerned about the near future, and about this whole attitude. I don't mind some regulation, to be honest, but I also don't want to end up with e-liquid in unfiddle-lble cartridges only, or at total ban, God forbid. The politicians need a reality check, and we need to lobby as hard as we can.
Food for thought for those who look to ban e-cigs and alike...."There is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance-----that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer....Just my 2 cnts. werth.
Amen, Briar. If they want conversation, ler's give them conversation. As far as regulation goes...I think most of us will agree, it is both a neccessity and an inevitabilty. Quality and consistency are major issues, and regulation puts the legislature at ease.
-begin rant-
The biggest lie in all the anti-tobacco (let's tax 'em some more) and anti-ecig propaganda is that this is done to try to get people to stop smoking. The government does not want people to stop smoking. Every pack of cigarettes sold brings in several dollars in federal and state taxes. Something I learned in Econ 101 waaaay back in the 80's - you don't tax something that you are really trying to stop, because then you are drying up your income stream. Additionally, smokers do *not* cost "society" (a/k/a the government) more than non-smokers. It's been over ten years since I read the study, so I'm unlikely to be able to find a link, but the number they presented was that every pack of cigarettes sold saved the government $.30 in old-age benefits. The rot about how smokers should be taxed to death because they get sick and die is a load of bullpucky. *Everyone* gets sick and dies. And that costs the same for smokers and non-smokers. But smokers do it about ten years earlier, saving the government not only the Social Security payout for those ten fewer years of life, but also all the Medicare costs, senior housing assistance, etc. And they knew that most of us could not quit and would continue to be a cash cow for them until we kicked the bucket.
E-cigs have thrown a wrench into their works. E-cigarettes are a threat to them precisely because they do work to get people off analogs. We will live longer than they planned for. We will take back a lot of the money they expected us to bequeath to them. The potential for millions of people to not die when they expected them to die is an absolute disaster from the taxman's point of view.
I'm tempted to send these folks emails saying, "No, I'm not a constituent. You go right ahead and pass this law and kill your own people. More money in the SS pot for the rest of us." But, like most politicians, they're probably sarcasm-impaired.
-end rant-
The biggest lie in all the anti-tobacco (let's tax 'em some more) and anti-ecig propaganda is that this is done to try to get people to stop smoking. The government does not want people to stop smoking. Every pack of cigarettes sold brings in several dollars in federal and state taxes. Something I learned in Econ 101 waaaay back in the 80's - you don't tax something that you are really trying to stop, because then you are drying up your income stream. Additionally, smokers do *not* cost "society" (a/k/a the government) more than non-smokers. It's been over ten years since I read the study, so I'm unlikely to be able to find a link, but the number they presented was that every pack of cigarettes sold saved the government $.30 in old-age benefits. The rot about how smokers should be taxed to death because they get sick and die is a load of bullpucky. *Everyone* gets sick and dies. And that costs the same for smokers and non-smokers. But smokers do it about ten years earlier, saving the government not only the Social Security payout for those ten fewer years of life, but also all the Medicare costs, senior housing assistance, etc. And they knew that most of us could not quit and would continue to be a cash cow for them until we kicked the bucket.
E-cigs have thrown a wrench into their works. E-cigarettes are a threat to them precisely because they do work to get people off analogs. We will live longer than they planned for. We will take back a lot of the money they expected us to bequeath to them. The potential for millions of people to not die when they expected them to die is an absolute disaster from the taxman's point of view.
I'm tempted to send these folks emails saying, "No, I'm not a constituent. You go right ahead and pass this law and kill your own people. More money in the SS pot for the rest of us." But, like most politicians, they're probably sarcasm-impaired.
-end rant-
I also just joined CASSA. Let's get these guys in Albany's attention
Me too, about an hour after Briar started this thread.
maybe not the ones you read, but here is some support for this statement.
Smokers save Govt cash, says report - Economy - NZ Herald News
CNN.com - Study for Philip Morris found smokers' early deaths helped Czech finances - Jul. 16, 2001
I will be attending the CASAA Member Meeting "Webinar" this evening at 6:30pm Central. I hope to see everyone there.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
