We Are Missing the Big Picture

[silverfox]

It seems to me that we are trying to fight a symptom instead of the illness...

The symptom we are fighting (IE: E-Cig Ban) is part of a much larger problem (IE: Gov't Domination )...And it seems to me that we will have no success fighting for this specific cause if we wont fight for ALL causes that are actually involved......to simplify...we cant fight one finger of a massive hand...until we attack the arm, or shoulder, or head....

IMHO, we are all fighting for the same thing...the right of FREE CHOICE....LIBERTY....guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution!....OUR constitution!....

I ask this question, what effect does regulation (gov't controll) have?....other than imposing on our liberties?..

I see proposed taxes on sugar (in any form, IE:soda,fruit,most foods...lol..)....energy (regardless of the source)...employment ( unions)........right down to the air we breathe..( CO2 ).....

So far...NOONE has explained how paying more taxes on these items does anything other than make the gov't more wealthy and powerful....how do these taxes help the individuals who are paying them?....UN-CONSTITUTIONAL!!!!...

unfortunately we are fighting a much larger battle...I can only hope that our particular facet on this diamond of action doesnt get lost in the mess that is sure to come....

OK!!,... Commentary over!...

We have the tools...we just need to use em the right way..

 

[StudioKraft]

We (vapers) are fighting the beast that we (US citizens) created by insisting that "there oughta be a law" about everything that irritates us or causes us an inconvenience. We've looked to the government for solutions to problems that they have no business being involved in. Fedzilla must be tamed.

The statistic that 28% of Americans are smokers is thrown about in these forums, if that is correct, that would make one formidable voting bloc if organized.

 

[drichardson]

I'm not exactly sure what you're proposing, but I doubt that I could support it.

I pay taxes in exchange for services best provided by government. 1.06% of my income (local tax), for example, buys me fire and police service, snow removal, local road repair, civic events, and other things. What a deal!

I also pay the federal government taxes in exchange for some of their services. One VERY important service they provide is regulation. They keep trusts and price fixing out of the free market, lead out of my paint, and (most of the time) germs and dangerous chemicals out of my peanut butter.

Our current financial crisis can be blamed, in part, on deregulation. We've learned the hard way that big companies cannot be trusted to play fair on their own. They need rules to follow, just like the rest of us, to maintain order.

It's true that the regulatory power that we give to those we elect to govern can and has been abused in the past. It's also likely that it will be abused in the future. But, like alcohol, regulation isn't inherently evil -- it's only a problem when it's misused.

I'm not suggesting that we all hop on the BAN-wagon (that's just silly) but I for one wouldn't mind if the FDA or appropriate regulating body were involved in e-cigarettes to ensure certain standards of quality, safety, and purity for our devices and fluids.

I would expect manufacturers to regularly test their products for contamination on their own, but we know that's not going to be the case for all. Proper regulation would ensure that the product I purchase contains no hidden dangers.

Well, at least as well as regulation can ensure safety. It's not perfect, but it's far better than nothing. I buy USDA inspected meat for a reason

 

[playerags]

Silverfox, I agree with you completely. I don't need a nanny state telling me what to do and how to live. If the government really cared about our health and safety they would make cigarettes illegal altogether.


drichardson, if by deregulation you mean the government forcing banks to give out loans to unqualified borrowers, then I agree with you on that. And I agree with the roads and police and firemen. What you may think are services best provided by government, others may think is socialism. Is a new car a service best provided by uncle sam, a house, a job, healthcare. We are increasingly becoming a nation that believes we are entitled to goods and services. I for one do not want to give up half my pay because the government thinks they can spend my money better than me.

 

[kinabaloo]

It seems to me that we are trying to fight a symptom instead of the illness...

The symptom we are fighting (IE: E-Cig Ban) is part of a much larger problem (IE: Gov't Domination )...And it seems to me that we will have no success fighting for this specific cause if we wont fight for ALL causes that are actually involved......to simplify...we cant fight one finger of a massive hand...until we attack the arm, or shoulder, or head....

IMHO, we are all fighting for the same thing...the right of FREE CHOICE....LIBERTY....guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution!....OUR constitution!....

I ask this question, what effect does regulation (gov't controll) have?....other than imposing on our liberties?..

I see proposed taxes on sugar (in any form, IE:soda,fruit,most foods...lol..)....energy (regardless of the source)...employment ( unions)........right down to the air we breathe..( CO2 ).....

So far...NOONE has explained how paying more taxes on these items does anything other than make the gov't more wealthy and powerful....how do these taxes help the individuals who are paying them?....UN-CONSTITUTIONAL!!!!...

unfortunately we are fighting a much larger battle...I can only hope that our particular facet on this diamond of action doesnt get lost in the mess that is sure to come....

OK!!,... Commentary over!...

We have the tools...we just need to use em the right way..

Good point

 

[Dilutetrips]

In MN as far as I know, cig taxes go for education funding of the schools. Our gov. will only raise taxes on cig, cigars, roll your own, or chew.
we have cities that you can not smoke within 400 feet of any door, window etc... they want to make it so you can get a ticket if a person under 18 is in your car and you are smoking. My friend was told that he may own his condo, but can not smoke in it. The building went smoke free.. i was told by someone at work that there is now 3rd hand smoke and it can kill. I wish the goverment would just leave me alone and worry about the things that matter. FDA should worry about food and not e-cigs. Wait they are they told Cherrios that they need to stop saying that eating it can make you have lower colestoral (sorry about the spelling). This was on MSNBC today. do not have the link.

 

[Wildsky]

FDA has WAY too much power, they should be in place to issue warnings and let the people decide. (on strong drugs, they should get a say if stuff gets pulled from the market) but for the most part, the stupid e-cig and cherrio issues shouldn't be THEIRS

 

[jigtg]

Oh yeah, the big picture. The big picture is that majority of cig smokers will be switching to e-cigs or similar devices in 10, 20 or whatever years. The Chinese gov. could order all e-cig factories to be shut down and it wouldn't cause more than few years delay. Lets also keep in mind that FDA originally had no intentions of regulating e-liquids. Clearly if they really would of wanted to kill e-cigs they acted couple years too late. On a side note, Ruyan made 380% more profit last year than year before, Jazz should be available in EU and Asia within a month or so, disposable mini is on its way and they are investing "agressively" on R&D.

 

[V-V]

Two words:

Civil War

The ONLY way you'll get the government out of your business. It's gone too far and the citizens of this country no longer even know what liberty is, since very few of them know history.

 

[cyberwolf]

I heard an interesting story on NPR today that goes right along with this thread...

A memo from the White House Office of Management and Budget dated late last month is critical of the Environmental Protection Agency's proposed finding that greenhouse gases endanger public health. The memo questions the science behind the finding and suggests it would lower the bar for what kind of pollution endangers the public.

OMB Criticizes EPA Finding on Greenhouse Gases : NPR

Even the White House is afraid of what agencies like the EPA (and FDA) could end up regulating...

That said, I do not wish to advocate wholesale deregulation of everything. I would, however, prefer that regulation is fair and unbiased and that big corporations and powerful lobbying groups have no say in it.

 

[drichardson]

Yes, the "slippery slope" to socialism you mean?

The whole "where do we draw the line" is a very silly thing to talk about. It presupposes an objective hierarchy of potential services and that we could mark some point as being "government best above, the private sector best below".

Each new service can be evaluated independently of all others to best determine if the private sector or the government is best suited to provide it. This isn't only possible, it's NECESSARY as there is no hierarchy, nor can there ever be.

Further, we formed our government to provide services. In a sense, we were a socialist nation from the beginning: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

What use is government if not to perform these functions?

While it may or may not be true that we're a nation that increasingly "believes we are entitled to goods and services", it's not as though I'm not paying for them! I pay my taxes and expect that money to be put to use for the PUBLIC good.

Maybe that's the trouble with the folks who cry 'socialism' every time THEIR government does something they don't like. They're too focused on the Individual and less focused on the Society. (They can't see the forest through the trees, you see?) They don't want universal health care because they (focus on the individual) don't want to pay for the mistakes of the smokers, alchoholics, and overeaters (list of individuals) -- completely missing the societial benefits that are GAINED.

I've no idea where you came up with the idea that your government knows how to spend your money better that you do. Is there some invisible wall I'm unaware of that separates you from them? Government exists only by the will of the people. Just as the police only have power by virtu of the the people whom they oversee. Governance, in the USA at least, is BY the People and, hopefully, FOR the people. If you don't like how the government is spending your tax dollars, YOU have the power to change how they're being spent!

I've no idea where you see our government asking you to "give up half your pay". Is this hyperbole to highlight the problems you see with an increase of government scope? I'm a believer is smaller government myself, but I'm not so motivated by that philosophy as to deny growth where growth is necessary.

**Rant End**

Back on topic: We're all frustrated by the potential problems that the increased scope of the FDA would bring to e-cigs. But advocating a product safty anarchy is a bit too far on the other side, don't you think?

 

[playerags]

I never said you don't pay your taxes. We all pay our taxes. And our government is BROKE! We owe China so much money they are worried if we will be able to pay it back. My question to you is, how much taxes do you want to pay for "public good"? Whatever it takes?

P.S. Long winded responses with little substance don't make your opinion right, nor mine wrong.

 

[drichardson]

Long winded, yes. But also plenty of substance.

Of course the length of a response doesn't decide who is 'right' and who is 'wrong'! I'm almost insulted that you felt the need to inform me Though I will say that it's very simple minded to assume that one of us is correct and the other is not, or that there is an objectively "correct" view.

Neither would I say that are our views diametrically opposite one another. I'm willing to bet that we actually agree more on these sorts of issues than we disagree.

I don't know how deeply you've considered any of these issues, but the way you've presented your views puts me in mind of a mindless WorldNetDaily devote. If my reaction seemed a bit strong, it's because I assume that those sorts ideas are born out of combination ignorance and blind zealous ardour. I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt here, push my obvious bias to the side, and give you an opportunity to more fully explain yourself.

As for taxes, yes, "whatever it takes". Any thing more is oppressive, anything less is irresponsible.

As for "We owe China so much money they are worried if we will be able to pay it back." This is just ridiculous. Our credit (that of the good ol' USA) is excellent. China isn't worried. Neither are any of our other creditors. I've no idea where you got such an idea.

 

[Smokin'Sandy]

>snip<
FDA should worry about food and not e-cigs. Wait they are they told Cherrios that they need to stop saying that eating it can make you have lower colestoral (sorry about the spelling). This was on MSNBC today. do not have the link.

Do you remember when Listerine used to advertise that it kills the germs that cause sore throats or the common cold? The FDA didn't like that either, so now it kills "bad breath germs".

Can't have people selling snake oil whether it actually works or not. I can see both sides of the issue, but it seems most of the time it's just semantics.

If it actually works, like Cherrios or Listerine, then I think people need to know and be able to get it without it being a pharmacutical item. Does there need to be an all Natural Food and Drug Administration to where scientifically proven items can be sold without being labeled a medical device or drug?

 

[silverfox]

I am a strong believer in this..

"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

the way i interpret it, we pay taxes to "provide for the common defense" and fund the mechanations of the gov't, which IMHO should be kept to a minimum, thereby not becoming a larger burden on taxpayers..police and fire and other services are provided by the individual state and local govt's..
Im not so sure that a federal office banning and taxing things falls under, " PROMOTE the general welfare "..and actually is contradictory to "secure the blessings of liberty" which in my opinion was intended to ensure the INDIVIDUAL right of free choice..Im also pretty sure that taxing a specific group of people in order to benefiet another, separate, group of people is unconstitutional regardless of the reason or intent..forced charity is not charity..

I believe that a free market system is self-regulating as far as what is a good or bad product, bad products wont sell..I would agree that the people are entitled to know exactly what they are getting and what may be involved in using a product, but that would be a function of the FTC requiring honest and full disclosure in advertising and labeling..a seller is also responsible for their products in civil court as well, if they are selling harmfull products..

I really didnt intend to start people arguing here, my point is that when we have a govt. office that practices "guilty until proven innocent", we are on a dangerous road...its simply not the american way..from that standpoint we have far more people on our side than just the smoking community, this actually should involve the entire country..

 

[silverfox]

OMG...LOL...they are going after Cheerios?...for claiming that it reduces cholesterol...now THEY will be considered a drug?....this is getting insane...

 

[harmony gardens]

I am not afraid of the tests,,, bring them on. I believe at the end of the day, Ecigs will prove to be a safer alternative to smoking, just as the promoters claim. I also think it's silly to have to dance around the fact that ecigs can help people quit smoking,,, we know it can,,, many of us are living proof of that...

Sing to the melody of brother can you spare a dime,,,,


Once i fought a product,,, I wasn't wrong,,,
called it a sin and a crime
once i banned a product,,, now it's gone,,,
Brother can you spare a dime



Anti smoking advocates are the real dieing group,,,

The headline

Public Health Officials Gasp As Smokers Turn To Ecigs


If anyone is familiar with Munchhausen Syndrome by Proxy,,, it's a condition where someone is so invested in the care of someone who is ill, that they actually do things to keep the person sick because they would lose thier position. Thier self esteem depends on the "goodness" they are doing,,, I really think the PH officials are flirting with Munchhausen with thier irrational arguments involving ecigs.

 

[Smokin'Sandy]

OMG...LOL...they are going after Cheerios?...for claiming that it reduces cholesterol...now THEY will be considered a drug?....this is getting insane...

Yes, and your spoon is a medical delivery device.

 

[sherid]

I am hoping that Obama stands behind his pledge to bring honesty back to science. There are many implications that would support our cause should he actually do what he says he will do.

 

[silverfox]

I too invite the testing..Ive seen some tests done by a lab in New Zealand for Ruyan, it seems a lil dishonest to claim that e-cigs have never been tested..not too sure what their criteria is as far as "independantly tested" but it is obvious by the results of those tests that e-cigs arent very dangerous...I would actually be very interested in seeing more test results as well if the FDA wants to run some for themselves...I dont really see how the FDA running tests itself can be considered "independant" though considering the fact that they will most likely initiate a tax on them regardless of the results, and benefiet themselves rather than the public..seems more of a power and money grab to me than Munchhausen Syndrome, but you do have a good point Harmony, they do indeed appear irrational, evasive, and mis-leading...they dont flat out lie, but they arent telling the whole truth either..
this Cheerios thing is the icing on the cake..if that doesnt stir up some interest in what they are doing and get someone to rein them in Ill be suprised..