- Status
I think this is the third thread I saw about prying eyes when vaping. There may be more before I joined here, but my reply is always the same. Just ignore them. Call me guilty. Call me stupid. Well I guess I was when I was smoking and looking at a few folks puffing away those reactor grade white vapor. Believe me, I have prying eyes looking at them. And all I am wondering while staring in awe is where I can buy those?! 'coz I am jealous. 
The way this thread has turned this I have to say here - I was never a Leg Man ... wonder if that' s why I took to my Nautilus Minis so quickly and stuck with them so long!
Last edited:
Some entertaining reply's for sure.
Oh, barf. Live and let live.
You seem to care a lot about what other people think—see the title of this thread—and you are judgemental too.
Get used to it. Most lawmakers consider vaping and smoking to be exactly the same thing. Nobody is going to celebrate your vaping except other vapers. If you are disdainful of smokers they'll rightly conclude that you're a dick.
Hehe! Just wanna put it here, if any of you ever pulled off that "hehe", of course with sound, while being alone in the office and just staring at a computer screen. Just read a lot of comments here and there's some "hehe" moments. I think I need to go home now. Cheers guys!
Aw man
I was in while the talk of cylindrical objects in dudes mouths was the focus...
out before the boobs
That is epically bad timing
Yes it is a bit of a misnomer, and yes it is supposedly some sort of drainage/sewer tax, but based on actual use? Not really. How do you determine someones actual use of rain runoff that they can't control and can't be metered? Equal measure? This tax takes into consideration, roof size. This means that a lower income home owner that bought an very old run down 1 story home with a larger footprint could get taxed more than a richer person that bought a brand new 2 story home with a smaller footprint but more total sq footage. Sound fair? Add to that there is no fixed rate and no cap on how high it can go. This is a foot in the door to grab more money at anytime just because they want more without passing a new law or constituents even getting any sort of say or appeal.
How do you measure it? That’s really easy. You measure the area square footage from an aerial map. Rain is really consistent. The same amount of rain will hit a given area. You multiply square footage by inches of rain and you get total volume. Pretty accurate really.
As for roof footage it’s not even really that, it’s lot Sq. Footage. As taxable metrics go it’s pretty good. There have been some kinda messed up ones historically. The Dutch were famous for em. One was to tax the deck area of a ship to determine volume. People made barrel shaped ships whose deck was smaller than the actual width of the ship. Another was to count the number of windows below the roofline so people started building houses with dormers where the roofline was below the top story of the house.
This one is kind of hard to beat though unless they’re just measuring roof area. That would be dumb. They need to measure lot area. Roof Sq footage can change according to roof pitch, and if they find a way to reduce perceived roof are any doing something ridiculous like building pyramids it will all go to hell.
As for the money grab thing well duh. Government takes money to run and rain runoff is a variable city cost based on volume. They’re just passing it on directly, just like a business would. It will be low in dry years and high in wet years. More efficiently built taller buildings like apartment blocs will have less rain per sq foot of living space, thus lower taxes. People with single family homes that sit on large spacious lots full of lawn and gardens will pay just as much as if they were a 50 story building occupying the same lot. Will push for greater compression of housing probably.
Last edited:
That tax was in place in Denver thirty years ago. Size of the building + paved areas like driveways, patios, and sidewalks on property. Obviously, the costs of providing storm sewers is going to be recovered one way or another.
Currently, Farmington, NM requires a sort of catchment basin on new commercial structures. For what it's worth, neither Denver nor Farmington is known for heavy rainfall.
Currently, Farmington, NM requires a sort of catchment basin on new commercial structures. For what it's worth, neither Denver nor Farmington is known for heavy rainfall.
You obviously didn't read the law or watch the video did you? This is based on the properties contribution to runoff, and the yard portion will ABSORB the water. It is the impervious ground cover (AKA the house, driveway, patios, and sidewalks) that create the runoff. So this is NOT based on lot size but on roof size and driveway size.
The odd thing is there doesn't seem to be a measure that gives discounts to those that collect rain water runoff from a roof into a barrels. So there is no way for a person to reduce their tax liability.
Ah. So they’re giving a break to the Uber rich with lawns and gardens. Dumb move. Those “permeable” areas don’t actually absorb much water unless rainfall comes in tiny bits.
As for the video I couldn’t make it work.
I understand entirely, and I bet most people here do. The fact is... organizations are paid money to make and advertise anti tobacco. Because the FDA now considers vaping a tobacco product, that includes vaping. The vaping industry has to pay out of their own pockets, and are limited in what they say and how they portray vaping. So, the vaping industry is already at a huge disadvantage when it comes to telling our side of the story.
So, at work, we have quite a few vapers, and quite a few smokers as well. When I was talking to one of the smokers, he is a die hard fanatic on anti-vaping. He believes word of mouth, and he's heard all the rumors about anti-freeze, explosions, and popcorn lung. He said he'd rather stick with something that he knows and has been tested..... It makes me so frustrated. Stick with a known and proven killer, or go with something that someone's second cousin twice removed heard from a friend that he saw a commercial that mentions the possibility of something bad.... and he believes the rumors as fact.
Vaping started off ok... it was called Electronic Cigarette to entice smokers to switch. It's a decision that has ended up biting the industry in the behind. People hear cigarette and they think cancer. They see what looks like smoke, and they think cancer, so they label and control it as something that creates cancer.. no matter what the research has said. After all, we (the United States) are the nation that sticks with standard measurement and not metric because... well, we just don't want to change.
So, he wanted to stick with something that for sure causes health issues. Fair enough.
I'm a pilot and being in and out of airports is proving that swapping to vaping is more difficult then I thought. I'm not going to walk for 45 min going out and back into the terminal for a vape. I hoped to kill off my snus usage but now I don't see it possible.
I don't agree with saying vaping and smoking are the same, I kinda understand why there is no vaping in buildings like an airport. Someone chugging huge clouds could be annoying for some and the vapor hangs forever. Oh well it is what it is.
I have to admit that I was a bit self conscious about vaping in public when I first started. I live in a town with a population of under 20,000 in the middle of farmland so it's way behind the times.
A guy at work saw me vaping in my car and he told someone that he thought I was smoking "other stuff". I had to show him my vape and explain it to him.
We did get a vape shop a few years ago so that should help. I think we have 2 now.
I ran into another guy that I used to work with at Walmart one day. He's another one who heard all the FUD about vaping and is convinced smoking is safer.
A guy at work saw me vaping in my car and he told someone that he thought I was smoking "other stuff". I had to show him my vape and explain it to him.
We did get a vape shop a few years ago so that should help. I think we have 2 now.
I ran into another guy that I used to work with at Walmart one day. He's another one who heard all the FUD about vaping and is convinced smoking is safer.
- Status
Similar threads
