Gyroscopic Investing

I have several friends who have switched over to these and several that have used them to completely quit smoking of any kind.

Wow who would have thought that the profit seeking free market could solve a problem better than the government just raising taxes?

I see there's a move today by 29 states to ban these in public places (details unclear to me), despite the fact the only product is water vapor. I'm sure the tobacco lobby is supporting this heavily, not that I blame them.

Anyone have any thoughts on these or experience with them?

To bad the free market didn't invent these before government funded studies showing the health risks of cigarettes, the increased taxes on cigarettes, and widespread banning of public cigarette use.  It's not exactly futuristic technology, and could easily have been manufactured 50 years ago.

dragoncar wrote: To bad the free market didn't invent these before government funded studies showing the health risks of cigarettes, the increased taxes on cigarettes, and widespread banning of public cigarette use.  It's not exactly futuristic technology, and could easily have been manufactured 50 years ago.

Yeah think of all the profits missed and people who died early that could have been saved by these.

Good thing someone finally figured it out. Hopefully the rulers don't succeed in preventing them from helping people.

Have you tried these draconcar?

Kshartle wrote: I see there's a move today by 29 states to ban these in public places (details unclear to me), despite the fact the only product is water vapor. I'm sure the tobacco lobby is supporting this heavily, not that I blame them.

The last Altria stock report I read said they were investing in it.

Also I think they'll be ok when they provide (legal) marijuana's infrastructure.

dualstow wrote:

Kshartle wrote: I see there's a move today by 29 states to ban these in public places (details unclear to me), despite the fact the only product is water vapor. I'm sure the tobacco lobby is supporting this heavily, not that I blame them.

The last Altria stock report I read said they were investing in it.

Are they looking to purchase patents and control the technology?

My initial reaction to that bit of news would be to suspect they want to invest in it and secure a government enforced monopoly so they can squash it. I can't imagine their long-term interest is in E-cigs since it hurts their tobacco business and is probably a significant loss to them over time.

Of course I might be dead wrong. Perhaps they see it as inevitable and profitable competition and are taking the "join em if you can't beat em approach".

Have you tried them or have any friends or family who has? What do you think of government bans on their public use?

Kshartle wrote: Are they looking to purchase patents and control the technology?

My initial reaction to that bit of news would be to suspect they want to invest in it and secure a government enforced monopoly so they can squash it. I can't imagine their long-term interest is in E-cigs since it hurts their tobacco business and is probably a significant loss to them over time.

Of course I might be dead wrong. Perhaps they see it as inevitable and profitable competition and are taking the "join em if you can't beat em approach".

Have you tried them or have any friends or family who has? What do you think of government bans on their public use?

I think they're catching up to Lorillard and Reynolds American who already have their versions.

I haven't tried it, and I quit smoking at least a decade ago, but I have an Italian buddy who used them. Ironically, he was never a cigarette smoker! 
Anybody else?

TennPaGa wrote: I would think more people would be smoking tobacco if it were cheaper.

Yes raising the price of something will decrease the demand (min wage anyone  )

T do you think the government should enforce a restriction on the use of E-cigs in public places and also force private businesses like a restaurant to enforce a ban? Have you ever smoked one or know anyone who has?

Ecigs the ones that look like a cigarette and need (filter shaped) cartridges are expensive and tend to be flimsy.
  I think the new/popular thing is "vaporizers" (tube about the size and shape of a Cigarillo) which sell for as little as $16.00 bucks and are refiled by hand from a wide selection of flavored liquid, with and without nicotine (about $7.00 bucks) and tend to be fairly durable..

 

Desert wrote:

Kshartle wrote: I have several friends who have switched over to these and several that have used them to completely quit smoking of any kind.

Wow who would have thought that the profit seeking free market could solve a problem better than the government just raising taxes?

I see there's a move today by 29 states to ban these in public places (details unclear to me), despite the fact the only product is water vapor. I'm sure the tobacco lobby is supporting this heavily, not that I blame them.

Anyone have any thoughts on these or experience with them?

That water vapor is a greenhouse gas... 

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Yes much like regular breathing.

Maybe it's the increase in the human population alone that is causing global cooling, I mean warming.

My gf is a social smoker. She's purchased one though for herself and her brother and it's cut her down from a pack a week to maybe a pack every two weeks. I think he may have totally swiched but I'm not sure.

I tried them a couple of years ago. They shot my anxiety so let them. Probably because I did not was right with the dose of nicotine. Now I'm thinking retake them.

TennPaGa wrote:

Kshartle wrote: do you think the government should enforce a restriction on the use of E-cigs in public places and also force private businesses like a restaurant to enforce a ban?

I don't have any opinion on it. Have you uncovered any information that might help me form one?

I've read about a dozen articles on the banning and attempted bans so far but I can't find a rationale. The only argument I've seen is the chance that there are trace elements in the water vapor that are potentially harmful. Evidently an attempted 2010 obstruction of these devices by the FDA for this "reason" was defeated on the grounds there was no evidence.

On the other hand I did come across a few articles that contend, ironically, that companies (GlaxoSmithKline, Abbott Laboratories, Merck & Co. and Bristol-Myers Squibb) with smoking cessastion products (pills, gum etc.) have helped "encourage" lawmakers to ban the e-cigs.

Obviously having people actually successfully quit smoking would hurt them and this is direct competition.

Somewhat paradoxically, the government now also can't afford for people to stop smoking.  It's certainly true that more people would be smoking if not for taxes, but *because* of taxes, governments are now in a position of maximizing their tax revenue from tobacco.  Obviously zero smokers wouldn't do that.

State and local governments now depend on various vice taxes, like smoking, lottery, etc.  So they now depend on those things happening.

Xan wrote: Somewhat paradoxically, the government now also can't afford for people to stop smoking.  It's certainly true that more people would be smoking if not for taxes, but *because* of taxes, governments are now in a position of maximizing their tax revenue from tobacco.  Obviously zero smokers wouldn't do that.

State and local governments now depend on various vice taxes, like smoking, lottery, etc.  So they now depend on those things happening.

Yes that's a good point. In the long run a healthier and longer lived population will be more productive and produce more wealth to be expropriated by the government. Ahhhh but long-term is not a concept democrat governments are typically good with.

Xan wrote: Somewhat paradoxically, the government now also can't afford for people to stop smoking.  It's certainly true that more people would be smoking if not for taxes, but *because* of taxes, governments are now in a position of maximizing their tax revenue from tobacco.  Obviously zero smokers wouldn't do that.

State and local governments now depend on various vice taxes, like smoking, lottery, etc.  So they now depend on those things happening.

Xan,

I never thought about this before, but maybe that is why the government (oops, excuse me kshartle - I mean the individuals that makeand get regulations passed and create more regulations to collect even more taxes  ) is so hell bent on removing religion from all aspects of life .... fewer morals, more vice, more money, more job security.  Hmmmmmm........

... Mountaineer

Mountaineer wrote:

Xan wrote: Somewhat paradoxically, the government now also can't afford for people to stop smoking.  It's certainly true that more people would be smoking if not for taxes, but *because* of taxes, governments are now in a position of maximizing their tax revenue from tobacco.  Obviously zero smokers wouldn't do that.

State and local governments now depend on various vice taxes, like smoking, lottery, etc.  So they now depend on those things happening.

Xan,

I never thought about this before, but maybe that is why the government (oops, excuse me kshartle - I mean the individuals that makeand get regulations passed and create more regulations to collect even more taxes  ) is so hell bent on removing religion from all aspects of life .... fewer morals, more vice, more money, more job security.  Hmmmmmm........

... Mountaineer

They are different forms of government competing. The religious leaders used to be the government. Societies were controlled by the shamans and witch doctors and the head of the tribe was either ordained by god(s) or the people were forced to worship him because he was a god.

The next phase in many parts of the world was cooperation between the secular government and religious one whereby the religious government was permitted to exist for a number of reasons:
1. It had a lot of support which is difficult to stamp out
2. It could still control the population by claiming that secular leaders were placed by God to rule over us
3. It conditioned the people to "turn the other cheek" and "render unto Ceasar", essentially conditioning them to servitude/slavery.
4. It's a good motivator for wars. "God is always on our side". God bless 'merica.
5. No doubt many secular heads of state actually believed that God or the Gods had placed them in power. (Bush, Charlamagne, Ahemadinjad etc.)

Democracy appears incompatible long-term with religious authorities because the politicians offer tangible stolen goods to the voters and promises in the here and now vs. the afterlife promises from the preists and religious authorities. That and fewer people believe as education about the natural world spreads and they aren't threated with violence and death if they stop acting the part.

Significant portions of the secular government do see the religious authorities as competition no doubt but many of them see them as their ticket to power as well.

Do you consider smoking to be a moral issue M?

Also, do you have an opinion on E-cigs and on banning them?

No, I haven't tried them.  Never got a nicotine addiction primarily due to government interference with free trade.  Don't really want to start a new addition at this point, already spend too much time on the internet ;-)

Mountaineer wrote: maybe that is why the government  is so hell bent on removing religion from all aspects of life .... fewer morals, more vice, more money, more job security.  Hmmmmmm........

... Mountaineer

That being said, I completely agree with you that people with vices are easier to control.

Ahhhh but the same goes for convincing them they are sinners destined for a lake of fire but you've (the religious authorities) got the cure. 

dragoncar wrote: No, I haven't tried them.  Never got a nicotine addiction primarily due to government interference with free trade.  Don't really want to start a new addition at this point, already spend too much time on the internet ;-)

I don't suppose there's an Electronic version of this site to wean myself off it.

Wait a minute................

Kshartle wrote:
Do you consider smoking to be a moral issue M?

Also, do you have an opinion on E-cigs and on banning them?

No and No and No.  I also do not think consumption of alcohol is a moral issue; I think drunkenness is.  In general I tend to think more in terms of sin (we are all guilty of that) and ethics (human codes of conduct somewhat dependent on culture and heavily dependent on what is inside you, something like a conscience, but I'm a bit wishy-washy on an exact non-religious definition) more so than morals because "moral" is a term that often means different things to different people UNLESS there is a commonly held definition of right and wrong external to ones self that is held to be absolute truth.

... Mountaineer

TennPaGa wrote:

Mountaineer wrote:

Xan wrote: Somewhat paradoxically, the government now also can't afford for people to stop smoking.  It's certainly true that more people would be smoking if not for taxes, but *because* of taxes, governments are now in a position of maximizing their tax revenue from tobacco.  Obviously zero smokers wouldn't do that.

State and local governments now depend on various vice taxes, like smoking, lottery, etc.  So they now depend on those things happening.

Xan,

I never thought about this before, but maybe that is why the government (oops, excuse me kshartle - I mean the individuals that makeand get regulations passed and create more regulations to collect even more taxes  ) is so hell bent on removing religion from all aspects of life .... fewer morals, more vice, more money, more job security.  Hmmmmmm........

... Mountaineer

You'd have to say that government action (taxes, research) has helped reduce smoking, wouldn't you?

My bigger point is that I don't think incrreasing revenue is why government wants to "remove religion from all aspects of life".

I would also say it is not government that wants to do this, but people.

Agree.  Government is only a bunch of people.  I have thoughts on "why" people are pushing religion out (advertised as in the name of tolerance but in reality is anything but) but that is perhaps a subtopic for the religion thread.  Basically, it is just the natural progression of things as we plunge headlong into accelerating toward the Last Day

... Mountaineer