Is the idea of regulation inherently bad?

Status
Not open for further replies.

DC2

Tootie Puffer
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 21, 2009
24,161
40,974
San Diego
The opportunity is there for someone, perhaps someone reading this message, to form a private regulatory body. This body would specifically deal with the substances and and materials that are either in ejuice or in the coils, wicks, and batting that are used in the delivery of ejuice. Companies would participate on a voluntary basis, paying a membership fee and would receive in return monthly inspections where the hygiene, purity, nic level accuracy, and production standards were verified. If meeting all of the standards the supplier could then display some sort of seal of approval.

If you buy your juice from a friend down the street, then you're probably capable of evaluating that friend's quality control. If you're buying ejuice online, however, it sure would be nice to know at least one third party evaluated the supplier.
You just described AEMSA, SFATA, and TVECA.
You can use the ECF search to find out more information regarding each of them.
:)

As far as I'm concerned, AEMSA is someone most of us can support.
But SFATA, maybe not so much, however I'm not sure.

And TVECA is four-letter word around here.
 

budynbuick

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Dec 18, 2012
609
391
michigan
Regulation would be good if done for the right reason & by people without a spurious agenda. As for the vendors, I trust them more then the fda/gov. at least with a vendor, I can change vendors, but I can't change Government's. If the fda was what they say they are, they wouldn't sanction poisons in our food & medicine(among other things). If the head is corrupt, the whole body is corrupt. Plus, I don't want anyone regulating anything for,or against me(I can handle it myself). For me, that's the end of the story.
 

zapped

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Nov 30, 2009
6,056
10,545
55
Richmond, Va...Right in Altria's back yard.
You just described AEMSA, SFATA, and TVECA.
You can use the ECF search to find out more information regarding each of them.
:)

As far as I'm concerned, AEMSA is someone most of us can support.
But SFATA, maybe not so much, however I'm not sure.

And TVECA is four-letter word around here.

Funny, AEMSA doesnt seem to be getting much support from any of the top vendors......might have something to do with confusing personal agendas with professional ones.
 

Abe_Katz

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Feb 6, 2013
381
281
FL, USA
Just my two cents worth.

First I want it understood that I am by no means a libertarian or anything of that nature. That being said I do think that the only regulations that are really necessary for the manufacture for sale of e-liquid (I'll call it juice cause I prefer calling it that) are as follows.

1. State issued business license. If you need a license to sell gas or sell groceries you need a license to sell juice. A standard simple business license will do.

2. Pharmaceutical grade ingredients must be used. PG/VG/Flavors/Colors etc all have to be reasonably pure, non-toxic (except for the nicotine which is toxic in large quantities) and generally recognized as being safe.

3. Child proof caps and other types of lids should be used in packaging.

4. Ingredients list must be on the label.

Other than those common sense regulations I don't see a need for any more than that.


ETA: I also think that supplies for DIY juice should be available and that DIY juice should be unregulated and considered to be "at-your-own-risk". I know that I personally will probably get involved in doing DIY juice.
 

ClippinWings

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Dec 12, 2011
1,641
1,889
The OC
First I want it understood that I am by no means a libertarian or anything of that nature.

You say that like its a bad thing?

I'm thinking that word doesnt mean what you think it means.

I only say that because:

1. The views you describe here are clearly libertarian.

2. You say it defensively, but everyone I know who learns what a libertarian belives, agree that the libertarian platform makes a hell of a lot more sense than the Republican or Democrat ones.... But don't identify as a Libertarian because "they have no chance of winning" (sad)

If you truly understand what a Libertarian is and find it reprehensible to be one... I respect your opinion and defend your right to it... Whether or not I understand it. Because, I'm a Libertarian and believe that freedom is a good thing. ;)



Sent from the ether using the power of my mind... and the Tapatalk app.
 
Last edited:

Abe_Katz

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Feb 6, 2013
381
281
FL, USA
A libertarian as I understand the term is best expressed by the Libertarian Party's platforms. I played around with libertarianism when I was about 15 years old or so. I'm pretty sure that I understand the term.

My point with my statement about not being a libertarian is that my politics cannot easily be classified on the two false dichotomies that are usually presented for politics in the US. My politics, I think are more subtle than labels can really present. I have "conservative" positions and I have "libertarian" positions and I have "liberal" positions. I'm hard to pen down and label when it comes to politics. Mostly my statement was geared towards people not thinking that I am easily labeled just because I have very libertarian views on vaping, smoking, and recreational use of drugs.

If I had to label myself I'm unsure as to what I'd use as a label, "common senseist" comes closest though. I believe in appling common sense, logic, and reason to the world's problems.

The problem I have with the general libertarian platform is that the market left to itself will concentrate wealth for the few while the many have nothing. This would be socially destructive in the long term. I'm of the view that common sense, working regulations are necessary to have a fair market. Totally free markets are ultimately impossible, and capitalism itself is impossible without government.

As to the matters related to personal behavior I could be said to be very libertarian. I personally believe that if one's behavior is not harming someone else that they should be free to do as they please.
 

ClippinWings

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Dec 12, 2011
1,641
1,889
The OC
A libertarian as I understand the term is best expressed by the Libertarian Party's platforms. I played around with libertarianism when I was about 15 years old or so. I'm pretty sure that I understand the term.

My point with my statement about not being a libertarian is that my politics cannot easily be classified on the two false dichotomies that are usually presented for politics in the US. My politics, I think are more subtle than labels can really present. I have "conservative" positions and I have "libertarian" positions and I have "liberal" positions. I'm hard to pen down and label when it comes to politics. Mostly my statement was geared towards people not thinking that I am easily labeled just because I have very libertarian views on vaping, smoking, and recreational use of drugs.

If I had to label myself I'm unsure as to what I'd use as a label, "common senseist" comes closest though. I believe in appling common sense, logic, and reason to the world's problems.

The problem I have with the general libertarian platform is that the market left to itself will concentrate wealth for the few while the many have nothing. This would be socially destructive in the long term. I'm of the view that common sense, working regulations are necessary to have a fair market. Totally free markets are ultimately impossible, and capitalism itself is impossible without government.

As to the matters related to personal behavior I could be said to be very libertarian. I personally believe that if one's behavior is not harming someone else that they should be free to do as they please.


OK, thanks for that... makes sense.

Sorry, that I came off a bit gruff, I didn't really mean to and appreciate you actually taking the time to respond.

Honestly I'm much the same way (My views are all over the place in terms of aligning with parties).

But I'm far more Libertarian than anything else... I do, certainly agree with your idea of basing my opinions on Common Sense(Wish common sense was more common).

I just had never seen the term "Libertarian", used in the way that people use the term "Liberal".... threw me for a loop. I figured it must be because you associate all Libertarians with some Whacky Libertarian you knew of... That's what I get for assuming, my bad.
 
Last edited:

Thomasis

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Nov 14, 2012
914
1,244
Somewhere on top of the world
A libertarian as I understand the term is best expressed by the Libertarian Party's platforms. I played around with libertarianism when I was about 15 years old or so. I'm pretty sure that I understand the term.

My point with my statement about not being a libertarian is that my politics cannot easily be classified on the two false dichotomies that are usually presented for politics in the US. My politics, I think are more subtle than labels can really present. I have "conservative" positions and I have "libertarian" positions and I have "liberal" positions. I'm hard to pen down and label when it comes to politics. Mostly my statement was geared towards people not thinking that I am easily labeled just because I have very libertarian views on vaping, smoking, and recreational use of drugs.

If I had to label myself I'm unsure as to what I'd use as a label, "common senseist" comes closest though. I believe in appling common sense, logic, and reason to the world's problems.

The problem I have with the general libertarian platform is that the market left to itself will concentrate wealth for the few while the many have nothing. This would be socially destructive in the long term. I'm of the view that common sense, working regulations are necessary to have a fair market. Totally free markets are ultimately impossible, and capitalism itself is impossible without government.

As to the matters related to personal behavior I could be said to be very libertarian. I personally believe that if one's behavior is not harming someone else that they should be free to do as they please.

I think we All think we use common sense thinking, the problem is we all have different views of what common sense is....
Therin lies the problem!! If everybody just thought like I did!!!Just kidding......
 

PrairieWoman

Full Member
Jan 31, 2013
9
4
Kansas
I agree with Trick. The FDA worried about what vaping does is like the FDA worrying about what GMO products on the market do. The big TOBACCO companies aren't liking the fact that vapers are not buying their products, which are known to cause all kinds of havoc on anyone who uses them. Big TOBACCO has lots of money for lobbying to get its way and everyone who vapes needs to be calling and sending emails to their elected officials. The FDA is almost a joke when it comes to caring about your health.....Just my 2 cents.
 

juggernautxtr

Full Member
Feb 4, 2013
32
5
AZ
I agree with Trick. The FDA worried about what vaping does is like the FDA worrying about what GMO products on the market do. The big TOBACCO companies aren't liking the fact that vapers are not buying their products, which are known to cause all kinds of havoc on anyone who uses them. Big TOBACCO has lots of money for lobbying to get its way and everyone who vapes needs to be calling and sending emails to their elected officials. The FDA is almost a joke when it comes to caring about your health.....Just my 2 cents.

If government actually followed the rules the FDA would not exist, nobody has a right to tell me what I can and cannot do to my personal self..
my thoughts of the FDA, they cause more problems than they solve.:2c:
 

jerazeit

Full Member
Feb 5, 2013
33
26
United States
After doing some reading, it seems the big problem is that the major players in the juice and equipment manufacturers and distributors are not entering into some sort of voluntary private regulatory board. The truth is if the FDA can push off inspecting and regulation to a private contractor/vendor/association they will. This is done extensively in the food industry - the factories actually hire their own inspectors. Granted, this might not be the best idea for the consumer, as is also evident in the various food illness issues we've had over the past few years.
 

Abe_Katz

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Feb 6, 2013
381
281
FL, USA
OK, thanks for that... makes sense.

Sorry, that I came off a bit gruff, I didn't really mean to and appreciate you actually taking the time to respond.

I wouldn't worry about that. I'm used to gruff actually, and can be pretty gruff myself. About the only thing that really offends me is bigotry. Your previous post may have been gruff but it did not strike me as bigoted.

Honestly I'm much the same way (My views are all over the place in terms of aligning with parties).

I actually don't bother with aligning with parties anymore. None of them represent even a quarter of my views.

But I'm far more Libertarian than anything else... I do, certainly agree with your idea of basing my opinions on Common Sense(Wish common sense was more common).

I just had never seen the term "Libertarian", used in the way that people use the term "Liberal".... threw me for a loop. I figured it must be because you associate all Libertarians with some Whacky Libertarian you knew of... That's what I get for assuming, my bad.

Ah, I tend to be called "liberal" more often than being called something else. I tend to be liberal on economic issues, and libertarian on personal behavior issues, and conservative on interpersonal issues (like crime for example).

I do know some wacky libertarians, but those are the wacky ones and do not necessarily reflect on the majority of libertarians who I agree with on a number of issues.

Also yes it is unfortunate that "common sense" seems to be in a general short supply these days.
 

meli.

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Jul 10, 2012
1,030
938
Private Suite GroenDakkies
I agree with Trick. The FDA worried about what vaping does is like the FDA worrying about what GMO products on the market do. The big TOBACCO companies aren't liking the fact that vapers are not buying their products, which are known to cause all kinds of havoc on anyone who uses them. Big TOBACCO has lots of money for lobbying to get its way and everyone who vapes needs to be calling and sending emails to their elected officials. The FDA is almost a joke when it comes to caring about your health.....Just my 2 cents.

I have read so many posts with this point of view and I sometimes wish I could wave a magic wand and dispel this myth, because I fervently believe it is a Myth.
For me, the best way to explain and dispel myths is to use the words of those who have far more experience and eloquence than I.
I present one of Kirstin's many posts on this topic in the hope this may help alter some prejudice:
Don't forget to say "Sorry Big Pharma" too, because the biggest loser from the growth of e-cigarette market (and you switching to vaping) is Big Pharma, not the tobacco companies. (Remember, the nicotine you use comes from tobacco, too.)

The tobacco companies will benefit from having a far safer alternative to smoking to sell to their customers, so they will get into the market as has already begun. My prediction is that they will profit MOST by selling a high-quality product that keeps people coming back, rather than trying to quit or going back to cigarettes, because e-cigs will eventually have a much higher profit margin. They will work for a better product and work for transparency in product quality and safety in order to regain consumer trust. The tobacco industry will fight high taxation on e-cigarettes, along side groups like CASAA, because low cost keeps the product appealing to their consumers. They won't want a repeat of what is happening with e-cigarettes. They are already fighting to get smoke-free tobacco to be allowed to remove misleading warning requirements that falsely suggest that smoke-free is as hazardous as smoking. This is the first step in getting recognition for low-risk tobacco products, which can be truthfully argued should not be subject to punitive "sin taxes" meant for hazardous products. Many tobacco companies have also been reducing marketing budgets for cigarettes and moving the funds to promoting smoke-free alternatives to counter the ever expanding smoking bans. So they will want their e-cigarette products to be a satisfying alternative to traditional cigarettes so they don't lose customers.

This will result in standard sales taxes on e-cigarettes, but it will also raise the standards for quality and production. Unfortunately, this will result in many smaller companies going out of business, because they will be unable to meet the standards - which will most likely be set in stone by the FDA. However, it could end up being as basic as food-handling standards. It's entirely possible OSHA will also get involved, as employees handling pure nicotine to make the solutions is extremely hazardous. So they will enact safety protocols to which many small companies may not be able to adhere.

Big Pharma, on the other hand, will lose the revolving door of customers who repeatedly use their NRT and other smoking cessation "treatments" that fail 93.6% of the time and result in keeping smokers smoking. Then they get sick and need Big Pharma's "smoking-related disease treatments," which are the real big moneymakers. If people feel that e-cigarettes relatively safe, they won't feel the need to quit and they also won't get smoking related diseases.

Just my:2c:
 

DC2

Tootie Puffer
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 21, 2009
24,161
40,974
San Diego
I have read so many posts with this point of view and I sometimes wish I could wave a magic wand and dispel this myth, because I fervently believe it is a Myth.
It is painful to see all the newer folks blaming Big Tobacco for everything.

We just have to remember than it takes time to learn the truth.
And we just have to make sure we keep on educating.

Someday soon, I think we will win.
I really do.
:)
 

budynbuick

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Dec 18, 2012
609
391
michigan
A libertarian as I understand the term is best expressed by the Libertarian Party's platforms. I played around with libertarianism when I was about 15 years old or so. I'm pretty sure that I understand the term.

My point with my statement about not being a libertarian is that my politics cannot easily be classified on the two false dichotomies that are usually presented for politics in the US. My politics, I think are more subtle than labels can really present. I have "conservative" positions and I have "libertarian" positions and I have "liberal" positions. I'm hard to pen down and label when it comes to politics. Mostly my statement was geared towards people not thinking that I am easily labeled just because I have very libertarian views on vaping, smoking, and recreational use of drugs.

If I had to label myself I'm unsure as to what I'd use as a label, "common senseist" comes closest though. I believe in appling common sense, logic, and reason to the world's problems.

The problem I have with the general libertarian platform is that the market left to itself will concentrate wealth for the few while the many have nothing. This would be socially destructive in the long term. I'm of the view that common sense, working regulations are necessary to have a fair market. Totally free markets are ultimately impossible, and capitalism itself is impossible without government.

As to the matters related to personal behavior I could be said to be very libertarian. I personally believe that if one's behavior is not harming someone else that they should be free to do as they please.


Stellar clarification. You just pretty much described me. Good job.
 

chartreuse

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Feb 7, 2013
80
90
The High Plains
Cigarettes were about $1.50 a pack when I started (could get generics for $1.00)

They were $5.50-$6.00 when I quit, 20 years later.

I assume the cost of manufacturing didn't go up 400% in those 20 years...

Consider Gasoline. The last years that I have data for were when the last president was in office. On a gallon of gas, the oil company made 8 cents profit, the state took 8 cents in tax and the Feds took 16 cents in tax.

If that was all that regulation was, it would be bad enough. But it's much, much worse than that.

Regulation might, once upon a time, have been a benign thing. People of good conscience and some degree of intellectual prowess might have applied themselves to a carefully nuanced analysis of how government might improve the public lot while refraining from infringing upon freedoms.

I say might, because I only caught the tail end of it. Nevertheless, it was better then than it is now, where:

Regulation is a mechanism whereby any corporation with enough money and influence uses the government to restrict competition and force the public to buy its products, with the threat of state violence underpinning the whole edifice.

In other words, it's like owning a small restaurant in New Jersey and having a Made Man come round and tell you what your garbage collection arrangements are going to be. Then you go to the police station to complain and the Chief walks out of his office and he's the made man who was just extorting you.

Yep, that's regulation.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread