Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Michael Bloomberg launches $160M initiative to ban flavored e-cigarettes

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 164 posts

Re: Michael Bloomberg launches $160M initiative to ban flavored e-cigarettes

#21

Post by mieseratte »

throw554 wrote: post #12
mpfundstein wrote: post #6

When can people finally stop to interfere in other peoples lives? If Bloomberg doesn’t want to vape flavors: fine, but give me the liberty to do so... Seriously, if I look back at my youth, I wonder how we all survived -.-

People who smoke cigarettes and otherwise have an unhealthy lifestyle overburden the health system and take away government spending that can be spent elsewhere. Why should I pay more because you drinks coke, diabetic and smoke yourself towards lung cancer?

> Why should I pay more because you drinks coke, diabetic and smoke yourself towards lung cancer?

Why should I pay taxes for schools and roads and services I don't use?

Re: Michael Bloomberg launches $160M initiative to ban flavored e-cigarettes

#22

Post by kaibee »

throw554 wrote: post #12
mpfundstein wrote: post #6

When can people finally stop to interfere in other peoples lives? If Bloomberg doesn’t want to vape flavors: fine, but give me the liberty to do so... Seriously, if I look back at my youth, I wonder how we all survived -.-

People who smoke cigarettes and otherwise have an unhealthy lifestyle overburden the health system and take away government spending that can be spent elsewhere. Why should I pay more because you drinks coke, diabetic and smoke yourself towards lung cancer?

> People who smoke cigarettes and otherwise have an unhealthy lifestyle overburden the health system and take away government spending that can be spent elsewhere. Why should I pay more because you drinks coke, diabetic and smoke yourself towards lung cancer?

Do you have a source? I know it sounds intuitively correct, but I remember reading the opposite. Basically it goes like this: end of life/senior care is a very large percentage of medical spending. Unhealthy people don't live as long and die faster once their health deteriorates. So they actually cost less to the healthcare system than healthy people.

Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5316444/

Re: Michael Bloomberg launches $160M initiative to ban flavored e-cigarettes

#24

Post by celdon25 »

scriptkiddy wrote: post #10

I understand that we don't want our kids vaping or smoking, but banning flavored juices is the wrong way to go about it. All it's going to accomplish is deregulation of the flavored juice market. People will buy unflavored juices and add their own (possibly dangerous)flavoring agents at home. Also, it is in Big Tobacco's best interest to make vaping as difficult as possible. Think about it, all these cities with vape…

From my understanding, many of the flavored juices contain Vitamin E, which we're just now finding out is potentially deadly when inhaled (hence the recent deaths). It's a largely unregulated industry already when it comes to safety of peripheral ingredients. Wouldn't it be very costly to start scrutinizing each manufacturer's ingredients? Do you know what you're really getting if you decide to buy some vaping products?

Re: Michael Bloomberg launches $160M initiative to ban flavored e-cigarettes

#25

Post by collyw »

kaibee wrote: post #22
throw554 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who smoke cigarettes and otherwise have an unhealthy lifestyle overburden the health system and take away government spending that can be spent elsewhere. Why should I pay more because you drinks coke, diabetic and smoke yourself towards lung cancer?

> People who smoke cigarettes and otherwise have an unhealthy lifestyle overburden the health system and take away government spending that can be spent elsewhere. Why should I pay more because you drinks coke, diabetic and smoke yourself towards lung cancer? Do you have a source? I know it sounds intuitively correct, but I remember reading the opposite. Basically it goes like this: end of life/senior care is a very…

Smokers pay a fair bit in tax as well.

Re: Michael Bloomberg launches $160M initiative to ban flavored e-cigarettes

#26

Post by SomeOldThrow »

shpongled wrote: post #11
mpfundstein wrote: post #6

When can people finally stop to interfere in other peoples lives? If Bloomberg doesn’t want to vape flavors: fine, but give me the liberty to do so... Seriously, if I look back at my youth, I wonder how we all survived -.-

Bloomberg just loves to use his money to try to enforce his beliefs on other people.

There isn't even a coherent belief here. This is a $160M emotional reaction.

Re: Michael Bloomberg launches $160M initiative to ban flavored e-cigarettes

#27

Post by gnu8 »

shpongled wrote: post #11
mpfundstein wrote: post #6

When can people finally stop to interfere in other peoples lives? If Bloomberg doesn’t want to vape flavors: fine, but give me the liberty to do so... Seriously, if I look back at my youth, I wonder how we all survived -.-

Bloomberg just loves to use his money to try to enforce his beliefs on other people.

The mere fact that Bloomberg is wealthy proves that he knows best and we should bend to his will. After all, someday when you sell your startup to SoftBank, don’t you want to use your money to improve society and get your way?

Re: Michael Bloomberg launches $160M initiative to ban flavored e-cigarettes

#28

Post by EpicEng »

yifanl wrote: post #9

I can sort of get it, we could've been the first generation of majority non-smokers, but instead companies got kids to start vaping clouds of bubblegum, and of course kids didnt have a chance of avoiding that crap and now we have an entire subculture of vaping. There'll be a lot of pushback, but I really do think this is the right direction.

You know, kids seem to like alcoholic drinks with sweet flavors as well. Should we get rid of those? How about food that tastes great but is bad for you? Obesity is a massive problem in this country.

Re: Michael Bloomberg launches $160M initiative to ban flavored e-cigarettes

#29

Post by landcoctos »

scriptkiddy wrote: post #10

I understand that we don't want our kids vaping or smoking, but banning flavored juices is the wrong way to go about it. All it's going to accomplish is deregulation of the flavored juice market. People will buy unflavored juices and add their own (possibly dangerous)flavoring agents at home. Also, it is in Big Tobacco's best interest to make vaping as difficult as possible. Think about it, all these cities with vape…

>Also, it is in Big Tobacco's best interest to make vaping as difficult as possible. Think about it, all these cities with vape bans haven't banned cigarettes yet, right? Make it extremely difficult to vape and people will resort to smoking.

Maybe, but vaping has (had?) the reputation of being "safer" than cigarettes. I doubt there would be a 1:1 of potential vappers to smokers.

Re: Michael Bloomberg launches $160M initiative to ban flavored e-cigarettes

#30

Post by IshKebab »

mpfundstein wrote: post #6

When can people finally stop to interfere in other peoples lives? If Bloomberg doesn’t want to vape flavors: fine, but give me the liberty to do so... Seriously, if I look back at my youth, I wonder how we all survived -.-

Yeah exactly - stop blowing flavoured vapour in my face!
Post reply on HN