- Status
Are you serious?
No it doesn't. The employees comprise the state, in the intended sense. If I'd said Priests of the state, would you assume it was a religion as well?
You know almost literally nothing about what I believe.
You can dream about having rights you don't in practise have, or you can work within the political world which actually exists around you. You live in a democracy, and in it, people voted for governments which provide employees a basic level of protection against employers. And for good reason too - before such protections, they were treated as disposable commodities.
Like it or not, the smoking ban is sticking around - there's good evidence that it works, and it's supported by most people. Hitching vaping onto that horse is a losing strategy.
Although many people are not employees within the state, many are, and I agree with you about protection from employers, but you misspoke: I am an employee who lives and works in the state, I am NOT an employee OF the state.
I agree that legislators are coming in on the wrong side of history here, but you can say that about gay marriage or another leaf and still not change their votes THIS year: they do NOT want to LEAD, they want to march in front of the parade AFTER the route is known.
Right now I think the media need to be awakened to turn the tide for us. The closest thing to "sensational" that I can think of is that RJ Reynolds WANTS the two to be conflated.
I don't know if the legi-gators can understand the other good argument, that conflating the two makes a mockery of health and fire safety laws.
Last edited:
Dear Generic Statist,
You told me the following in closing your interesting post.
"Like it or not, the smoking ban is sticking around - there's good evidence that it works, and it's supported by most people. Hitching vaping onto that horse is a losing strategy. "
Thanks for your input. I will give your advice all of its due consideration.
I know "almost literally nothing about what (you) believe" according to you. By my reckoning, I know all I need to. You followed me into this thread and called me out telling me what I knew. You told me something was an "indisputable fact", which I promptly disputed, thus giving strong evidence that your premise was flawed. I obviously hit a nerve with my last post and you are upset with my words. Such a pity. Sounds like my arrows were close to the mark. It was not my intent to upset you, only to point out the truth of intentions and assumptions in the words you choose.
Again, here is the statement you made.
"all democratic states have legal systems in place to protect the rights of their employees"
These words imply the states are protecting their employees, thereby creating a subordination of the citizenry. You say I misunderstood you (good luck with that angle). You could admit you made a poor word choice (probably the best option you had). You could deny that is what you meant. I am sure there are other options, admitting you were wrong, or admitting that you do believe people are subordinates to the state come to mind. I bet that making such an admission never crossed your mind. I wonder why?
Your other comment:
"You can dream about having rights you don't in practise have, or you can work within the political world which actually exists around you."
I don't think I will permit you to tell me what I can and cannot do. I absolutely reject the boundaries you would place around my possible courses of action. Nice try.
And just to clear one more thing up. You said, "You live in a democracy". No sir, I live in a representative republic. Perhaps there is a reason I am not worried about what you want me to think you believe.
Have a great day, Generic Statist.
You told me the following in closing your interesting post.
"Like it or not, the smoking ban is sticking around - there's good evidence that it works, and it's supported by most people. Hitching vaping onto that horse is a losing strategy. "
Thanks for your input. I will give your advice all of its due consideration.
I know "almost literally nothing about what (you) believe" according to you. By my reckoning, I know all I need to. You followed me into this thread and called me out telling me what I knew. You told me something was an "indisputable fact", which I promptly disputed, thus giving strong evidence that your premise was flawed. I obviously hit a nerve with my last post and you are upset with my words. Such a pity. Sounds like my arrows were close to the mark. It was not my intent to upset you, only to point out the truth of intentions and assumptions in the words you choose.
Again, here is the statement you made.
"all democratic states have legal systems in place to protect the rights of their employees"
These words imply the states are protecting their employees, thereby creating a subordination of the citizenry. You say I misunderstood you (good luck with that angle). You could admit you made a poor word choice (probably the best option you had). You could deny that is what you meant. I am sure there are other options, admitting you were wrong, or admitting that you do believe people are subordinates to the state come to mind. I bet that making such an admission never crossed your mind. I wonder why?
Your other comment:
"You can dream about having rights you don't in practise have, or you can work within the political world which actually exists around you."
I don't think I will permit you to tell me what I can and cannot do. I absolutely reject the boundaries you would place around my possible courses of action. Nice try.
And just to clear one more thing up. You said, "You live in a democracy". No sir, I live in a representative republic. Perhaps there is a reason I am not worried about what you want me to think you believe.
Have a great day, Generic Statist.
BMX Rider/Amputee Kurt Yaeger's Inspiring Story - Photo | Red Bull Bike
Nothing to do with vaping or this thread but puts things into perspective.
Nothing to do with vaping or this thread but puts things into perspective.
On the point of grammar, there are two senses in which you can use the possessive. Either something 'owns' something, or it is 'composed' of something (I put scare quotes around these because I don't study grammar, I'm sure that's not what they're called, and I don't mean them absolutely literally).
"The company's headquarters" and "the club's members" have quite different meanings in this regard. If I'd said "the state's women" you would presumably not be assuming I meant that women are subservient to the state. Yes, what I wrote was ambiguous, but it should be totally obvious from the context what I intended.
Edd - I give you my irrevocable permission to keep fighting for what you believe in ;-) Signed: Generic Statist
But you've got to know when to pick your battles. I was a vegetarian for a long time, although I'm not any more. Sometimes there were demonstrations here about cosmetics testing on animals. Generally speaking the spokespersons for the demos wouldn't mention vegetarianism / veganism even if that was their ideological position, simply because it didn't help - they kept the focus narrow, because there are a heck of a lot more people who are prepared to back "we shouldn't painfully kill animals to test makeup" than "we shouldn't use animals for anything, ever".
If you help your opponents paint you as an irreconcilable extremist (and don't doubt for a second, they will try), you assist them in defeating you.
"The company's headquarters" and "the club's members" have quite different meanings in this regard. If I'd said "the state's women" you would presumably not be assuming I meant that women are subservient to the state. Yes, what I wrote was ambiguous, but it should be totally obvious from the context what I intended.
Edd - I give you my irrevocable permission to keep fighting for what you believe in ;-) Signed: Generic Statist
But you've got to know when to pick your battles. I was a vegetarian for a long time, although I'm not any more. Sometimes there were demonstrations here about cosmetics testing on animals. Generally speaking the spokespersons for the demos wouldn't mention vegetarianism / veganism even if that was their ideological position, simply because it didn't help - they kept the focus narrow, because there are a heck of a lot more people who are prepared to back "we shouldn't painfully kill animals to test makeup" than "we shouldn't use animals for anything, ever".
If you help your opponents paint you as an irreconcilable extremist (and don't doubt for a second, they will try), you assist them in defeating you.
You must not live in a "right to work" state like Texas where there are almost no state laws to protect workers and numerous laws with the intent to remove workers "rights" and only protect business and the almighty dollar.
Just sayin'.
Just sayin'.
Last edited:
Hey man just trying to think of ideas!
Don't forget - big things come from big ideas. Something needs to be done regardless of what it is.
And making a commercial is not as expensive as you think.. especially when you can market it with YouTube for free instead of paying for the time slots on tv.
As I pointed out, your idea about a commercial is a good one.
It was your comment about CASAA that got me going. So few people take the time to give CASAA a second thought. At least you know who they are. And I assume you are a member, right??? Adding the CASAA banner to your posts would help the cause.If more vapers don't start supporting CASAA, then all of this "talk" is nothing more than hot air.
As I pointed out, your idea about a commercial is a good one.
If more vapers don't start supporting CASAA, then all of this "talk" is nothing more than hot air.
Ah but this talk helps people find out what is going on, right under our collective noses. The more people that read all of these posts, the more aware they are of CASAA, the ANTZ and what can be done, with their help, to stop the ANTZ.
There are so many threads that inevitably start going into the FDA/regulation of ecigs, it does seem overwhelming. But think of the new people that find these and learn, each day, about what is going on around them and for the first time they hear about CASAA. This Talk is very helpful in educating and brings CASAA into the picture.
Double post time again?!?!? Sheesh I thought that was all behind us.
Last edited:
As someone who for years now has been doing everything I can to make people aware of CASAA...
I can't tell you how happy I am to see more and more people starting to work at helping to raise awareness!
There were times when I almost felt like giving up.
But I am starting to get the feeling that we are making some real progress now.
As someone who for years now has been doing everything I can to make people aware of CASAA...
I can't tell you how happy I am to see more and more people starting to work at helping to raise awareness!
There were times when I almost felt like giving up.
But I am starting to get the feeling that we are making some real progress now.
Were you sitting in on the meeting last night? I've been trying to figure out who is who.
Mine's easy. I think I'm the only Robin on the list of attendees.
Unfortunately I have only been able to attend one or two meetings over the years.Were you sitting in on the meeting last night? I've been trying to figure out who is who.
Mine's easy. I think I'm the only Robin on the list of attendees.
I have family obligations every Sunday evening which makes it mostly impossible for me to attend.
Unfortunately I have only been able to attend one or two meetings over the years.
I have family obligations every Sunday evening which makes it mostly impossible for me to attend.
Good news then for you! They are toying with switching one of the Sundays to a weeknight.
Keep an eye on the CASAA website. They may be putting a poll up to see what works for the most people.
just pure 
Ah but this talk helps people find out what is going on, right under our collective noses. The more people that read all of these posts, the more aware they are of CASAA, the ANTZ and what can be done, with their help, to stop the ANTZ.
There are so many threads that inevitably start going into the FDA/regulation of ecigs, it does seem overwhelming. But think of the new people that find these and learn, each day, about what is going on around them and for the first time they hear about CASAA. This Talk is very helpful in educating and brings CASAA into the picture.
I agree with you Robin that writing about it here is important. But it's depressing that more ECF members are not willing to join CASAA for some unknown, odd reason and why those who do join don't let everyone know they are a member which helps get others interested. There has been an "up-tick" in membership recently due to these type of threads, which is good.
When I start to see 80% of ECF members have the CASAA banner on their posts instead of the 10% now, I will feel like we are making real progress.
Last edited:
Some of the newer people don't even know how to create a signature
New ... old ... computer illiterate ... That would be me of course!
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
