Yep no problem vaping outside.I hear that
And, I almost feel I have an obligation to vape around smokers - whether or not they are strangers is irrelevant
Yep no problem vaping outside.
and yeah still tend to vape around smokers.
I am not really pro Juul.
I also do not support nude vaping,
Nude vaping is fun!What's wrong with nude vaping provided you arein't out in public?
I wouldn't shed a tear for Juul if they were forced out of business, especially if that meant that vaping as a whole received a reprieve from all the false fear mongering going on.
Indeed, I don't expect it would work that way at all. In fact, I believe it would have the opposite effect.I wouldn't shed a tear for Juul if they were forced out of business, especially if that meant that vaping as a whole received a reprieve from all the false fear mongering going on. Unfortunately, that's not how it usually works ... give an inch and they take a mile type thing.
I wouldn't shed a tear for Juul if they were forced out of business, especially if that meant that vaping as a whole received a reprieve from all the false fear mongering going on. Unfortunately, that's not how it usually works ... give an inch and they take a mile type thing.
What's wrong with nude vaping provided you aren't out in public?
Lol, just teasin', I did a quick glance at your comments and that's how it originally read to me.
I have very little doubt. And hopefully they will keep the FDA and the ANTZ distracted enough not to pay much attention to us, especially after May 12th, 2020...I have the sinking feeling Juul is going to use some of their billions to squirm out of this situation and carry on.
I have very little doubt. And hopefully they will keep the FDA and the ANTZ distracted enough not to pay much attention to us, especially after May 12th, 2020...
If the ANTZ somehow did manage to drive Juul out of business, you know what would happen, right? The under-age crowd would move on to whatever was still available, and most likely it would something closer to our open systems. Moreover, the ANTZ would feel empowered by their "victory" and come after whatever is left harder than ever.
I think so far in the USA vaping itself has not been banned just the sale in some areas.Just look at the proliferation of 'sin' taxes on vaping and more recently, outright bans.
I think so far in the USA vaping itself has not been banned just the sale in some areas.
And of course lumped into the no smoking zones as well.
and taxes, but that was inevitable even if FDA approved.
Why tax vapes?
because vapers are a minority and public opinion will endorse it or tolerate it.
should not be able to profit?
You might call taxes a founding principle of our country.
Sin taxes are a founding principle of our country? Okay, if you say so but I remain defiant. I will never see taxing certain items more than others as acceptable or ethical. They sell it as a means to discourage smoking but really it's just another way to steal others hard earned money, many of whom can scarcely afford it.
Taxing those who can least afford it is another time honored tradition in our country.
Those who can afford it can afford to rent congresspersons to get their taxes reduced.
The working poor and such cannot.
I fully support a pure flat rate personal income tax with no deductions.
10% for everyone? On ALL personal income unless it was previously taxed such as in a post tax savings/retirement, etc.
Think of the reduced costs of the IRS...
Smaller government.
Nope how would congress persons get money from the rich if they cannot benefit them?I'm reminded of a Metallica song ...
Sadly, I don't the tax code changing anytime soon, at least not to our benefit anyway.
Allowing government to profit when someone doesn't take heed of a warning instantly creates a moral dilemma, an incentive not to make the warnings too effective, lest the revenue decline too precipitously.As far as I'm concerned, the government's only responsibility in this respect is to try and protect consumers by warning them of possible dangers. They shouldn't be allowed to profit when someone doesn't take heed of their warning. Who knows what other conditioning practices they may wish to implement in the future.
Not that long ago, we had a presidential candidate who proposed 9%.Nope how would congress persons get money from the rich if they cannot benefit them?
I would like to see the flat rate tax be in the constitution. And be an adjustable rate by congress but not modified from a flat rate tax.
You make $1,000 you pay 10% you make $1,000,000 you pay 10%.
The ones making mega bucks benefit more from living here than the ones making working wages so why should they not pay a higher dollar amount?
I don't disagree but my point is still why tax vaping products any differently than say, grocery items? It's the perception that it's a vice and something we shouldn't' be doing along with public apathy that allows such taxes and bans in the first place. I say they don't have the right to tell me what I should or shouldn't be consuming. That's called free will and something that should be respected even if those choices aren't necessarily good for me.
As far as I'm concerned, the government's only responsibility in this respect is to try and protect consumers by warning them of possible dangers. They shouldn't be allowed to profit when someone doesn't take heed of their warning. Who knows what other conditioning practices they may wish to implement in the future.
I'm reminded of a Metallica song ...
Sadly, I don't the tax code changing anytime soon, at least not to our benefit anyway.