Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Surprise opposition derails Emanuel’s e-cigarette ban [View all]Treant
(1,968 posts)2. I don't have an issue
with banning sales to minors. In fact, I think it's a good idea to do so. Nor do I particularly have an issue with the designated smoking area being the designated vaping area as well (but please separate the two as vapers usually can't stand cigarette smoke any longer!) I have no problem going outside.
Taxes? Cigarette "sin" tax was put forth as a way of balancing the health cost by collecting revenue to pay for it. Said revenue always got diverted somewhere else, but that's besides the point.
Show me the health detriments of e-cigs and I'll allow you to tax it as a percentage detriment compared to cigarettes. I strongly doubt it'll end up being even 1% of cigarette taxes.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
48 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Vapor has a distinct smell from smoke, but yes, it still smells "weedy" so to speak.
nomorenomore08
Dec 2013
#37
'a recent federal analysis that found vapors from e-cigarettes contain carcinogens...'
onehandle
Dec 2013
#25