FDA Sen Johnson (R-Wis) demands answers from FDA RE deeming
- Thread starter DrMA
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Well today's Trump news is even better. He thought 4 billion dollars was way too much for air force one. He's right. He's probably paying $100 for a screw. Did you ever see how much stuff they take with them in that plane? Literally a garage full of various vehicles, etc. I can understand him wanting to fly "lighter". He must hate waste of any kind. Like stupid regulations.
Well, that's a recognizable figure but not quite what I had in mind. More like the mere existence of Zap #1 being an example of what makes America great and that 98% of Americans wouldn't know great if it bit them on the .....
Well, nothing wrong with flying less people in a smaller plane and renting vehicles when you get there. You should see what all these Presidents take with them. It's ridiculous. All a pres really needs is his protector people and rental limos to get them around. Sheesh. And in this country he can travel with less people . I think he wants to travel lighter.
The other solution is to update the AF 1 that's already been made that Obama is using. Let's see what his solution is.
I see e-cigs is becoming a bigger and bigger subject in the house of government. I hope those see it is really not worth their time or a waste of time because they aren't much of anything. I think a lot of the public sees them is tobacco smoking a different way but still "smoking tobacco" Now that the FDA has deemed us "tobacco", it's even easier to believe. So that would make ex-smokers/current vapers people that are trying to pull the wool over public people's eyes when it comes to tobacco use. So we are still people who are as lowly as smokers, to be put outside in the rain, snow, blizzards and 50 feet from a building, inhaling toxins that can hurt the second hand people. I don't think society in general wants to complicate their imaginary "caste" system. It's too stressful, LOL. If a smoker invented an e-cigarette (horrible name and stigma) it must be for tricking the public.
I totally agree that the spending is out of control. But AF1 (and therefore AF2, because we all know we need spares) is a pretty special plane, for a variety of good reasons. The avionics, secure communications, and defensive capabilities are all real requirements. Do we really want some Jihadi with a shoulder stinger standing in a backyard in Jersey to be able to take out our President? No...
But yes, I'm a conservative Republican but I am fair. President Obama refused a new AF1 chopper when he came to office, electing to save the money and just use the one they had. I think Trump doing the same thing with the AF1 airplanes, if they are sound and capable, is great for us. I am all for supporting the Military suppliers, we may need them some day. But they SHOULD have to EARN the support, and provide good value for our money.
Once I got over the shock of not really having a choice, this is what finally settled in for me. The RNC turned their backs on him, and he was going to do it anyway. So he is NEITHER, AFAIAC. And has NO debt to either, either.
OR their agenda's, their "you scractch my back, I'll scratch yours" nonsense.It really WAS a revolution by election. NOW, he is either going to be a jerk and COMPLETELY screw us on the idea of a TRUE outsider being capable of doing this job, or he is going to do a good job, and cement the idea that we, the People, are DONE with the steady diet of Wags, Hags and Cronies they've been force feeding us as "choice". I can't REMEMBER the last election that I was actually excited about a candidate, and I'll be 60 before this term is over.
Darnit, I came here looking for something, and still can't find it.
Let's get back on topic please. Political discussions not having anything to do with vaping belong in Outside.
As a reminder: Strictly on-topic please
As a reminder: Strictly on-topic please
In my mind vaping is political. That's what got us into this mess. Trump is a job proponent and vapng is a billion dollar business. I think he will have some influence when he sees the numbers and job opportunities.
For an interesting read on Trumps strategy regarding Boeing see the AmericanThinker article regarding his "cancel the order"statement. Follow the money. Vaping makes money.
For an interesting read on Trumps strategy regarding Boeing see the AmericanThinker article regarding his "cancel the order"statement. Follow the money. Vaping makes money.
If Vaping wasn't Easily Taxable, or Didn't effect something that was Heavily Taxed, None of All This would be Happening.
And people would be Overjoyed that something "Safer" had come along to Supplant something that Kills Hundreds of Thousand of People per year.
And people would be Overjoyed that something "Safer" had come along to Supplant something that Kills Hundreds of Thousand of People per year.
I believe you underestimate the following...
--Big Pharma interests
--Anti-Smoking coalition interests
--Non-profit health organization interests
--And even Big Tobacco interests
But other than that, yeah....
I believe you underestimate the following...
--Big Pharma interests
--Anti-Smoking coalition interests
--Non-profit health organization interests
--And even Big Tobacco interests
But other than that, yeah....
The 2nd Identity is Window Dressing for the Masses.
The 3rd Identity doesn't Trump Tax Revenues. Never have - Never will.
The 4th Identity can make Profits they want With Taxes on their protects. It's Market Protection thru Regulations that they want/need.
I'll give you the 1st One though. Free Market e-Cigarettes do Threaten their current interests.
I don't disagree necessarily...
Although I will say that this would still be happening without the tax angle.
And in fact it was happening long before the tax angle become the primary factor.
At least that's the way it looks from my couch.
I don't disagree necessarily...
Although I will say that this would still be happening without the tax angle.
And in fact it was happening long before the tax angle become the primary factor.
At least that's the way it looks from my couch.
When Taxes are Not in the Equation, people will Listen to Science and Common Sense. And Good, Accurate Science will prevail given enough time. And something like a Public Health Policy has... Wait for it.... Wait for it... Public Health as the Priority.
Declining Smoking Rates should be a Reason to Celebrate. Isn't that what they Said they Always Wanted?
It Is. As Long as it Doesn't ever really Happen. Because States and the Fed are Dependent on the Blood Money they receive from the Sale of Cigarettes.
It's one thing to Say that you want everyone to Quit Smoking. They have been Saying that All of My and Your Life. But Now we have. So why are they so ...... Off? If it Isn't about the Taxes we are No Longer Paying?
If the profit margin from taxes was close to cigarette sale for BT and FDA, how much of a problem would there be?
If profit and generation of tax on e-cigarettes was comparable to Cigarettes, how fast would the Gov approve them and support their marketing? What kind of information would be fed to the public anti groups and such?
The other thing is how does one tax cigarettes, vs e-cigarettes? They would have a hard time taxing anything but nicotine. How do you tax one on non-nicotine items such as equipment and 0 nicotine? This in itself destroys small business.
I wonder if there's a way for many small businesses merging into one company where each business owns shares of the company? Therefore dividing up the cost of lawyers? Think of what the scenario would be. The company would also divide up the profits based on the numbers of sales of each shop.
THEN, let Trump know that the regulations and paying taxes at an inflated rate is why we're moving to Mexico. But it wouldn't come to that since he talks about giving tax breaks to businesses that have a 15% limit. And how would that affect BT? More profit for them and less for the government?
If profit and generation of tax on e-cigarettes was comparable to Cigarettes, how fast would the Gov approve them and support their marketing? What kind of information would be fed to the public anti groups and such?
The other thing is how does one tax cigarettes, vs e-cigarettes? They would have a hard time taxing anything but nicotine. How do you tax one on non-nicotine items such as equipment and 0 nicotine? This in itself destroys small business.
I wonder if there's a way for many small businesses merging into one company where each business owns shares of the company? Therefore dividing up the cost of lawyers? Think of what the scenario would be. The company would also divide up the profits based on the numbers of sales of each shop.
THEN, let Trump know that the regulations and paying taxes at an inflated rate is why we're moving to Mexico. But it wouldn't come to that since he talks about giving tax breaks to businesses that have a 15% limit. And how would that affect BT? More profit for them and less for the government?
The regulations are written in such a way as to make everything a tobacco product
made for users of tobacco products.(Users would be us. We are not vapers,we are users
of tobacco products.)
If I discovered doing breathing exercises through a straw from McDonald's helped
one to quit smoking that straw and the air breathed through it would become a
tobacco product. That is the way the law is written. So let it be written.So let it
be done.
Mike
Any tax on vaping that's more than trivial is problematic. To be tax revenue neutral, if I'm a typical former smoker, the bottle of nic I buy for $50 would have to cost $6,000 because that bottle lasts me 4 years and $6,000 is what I would have paid in cigarette taxes if I kept smoking. If that bottle would last you 10 years and you smoked like I did it would have to cost $15,000 to preserve tax revenue. That is impractical and governments know it. If governments endorse and encourage vaping they are killing their tobacco tax revenues and that's going to change a lot of things where ever it happens.
- Status
