| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#182
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Update on ecigs...
On 2/29/12 11:49 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 2/29/2012 11:35 AM, X ` Man wrote: On 2/29/12 11:22 AM, JustWait wrote: On 2/29/2012 11:17 AM, Oscar wrote: On 2/29/2012 10:53 AM, JustWait wrote: On 2/29/2012 10:34 AM, Oscar wrote: On 2/29/2012 10:26 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On 2/29/2012 9:41 AM, Oscar wrote: On 2/29/2012 6:55 AM, JustWait wrote: On 2/29/2012 6:33 AM, X ` Man wrote: On 2/28/12 9:55 PM, JustWait wrote: On 2/28/2012 8:46 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 2/28/12 8:11 PM, JustWait wrote: On 2/28/2012 8:02 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 2/28/12 7:56 PM, JustWait wrote: On 2/26/2012 3:20 PM, BAR wrote: In articlep_Kdnelbdrumw9fSnZ2dnUVZ_qKdnZ2d@earthlink .com, dump-on- says... On 2/26/12 11:20 AM, BAR wrote: In articlebeCdnXwnuLSUytfSnZ2dnUVZ_jCdnZ2d@earthlink .com, dump-on- says... On 2/26/12 10:56 AM, BAR wrote: Where are the independently duplicated and peer reviewed research that shows that second hand smoke causes health problems? The medical and scientific fields are rife with incorrect conclusions, sub-standard methods and politically driven persons. What are your qualifications to find, understand, and judge legitimate medical research? You are too funny. What are you qualifications to question anyone else's qualifications? I think if you are going to try to challenge peer-reviewed medical research in scientific publications, you ought to have some recognizable qualifications. What are your qualifications to question anyone else's qualifications? It is having a huge effect on the market.. Changing the whole dynamic. Taking the manufacture and distribution to a totally different level. Away from organized criminal organizations, and directly to Suzie Homemaker... You must have excised the content here. I think so. My comment was directed at the notion that 350 dollar an ounce pot was not having an effect on the market... And it certainly is... Ahh. I missed that. Is that up or down? And what effect is it having? I do not endorse the use of any illegal substance, all of my information is based on hearsay, my own research over the internet, and other sources over the years who wish to remain anonymous. OK,...here we go... Well, back in 1976 an ounce was less than ten dollars. It would come over from Jamaica or Vietnam with traveling service men, and other world travelers, average Joes, it was still somewhat casual but beginning to go more main stream (move to the suburbs) from about 69 on. At that time there were two distinctive levels of quality available. Regular like I said, less than ten buck an ounce, and then the specialty stuff like Colombian Gold, and Panama Red which cold reach the amazing price of 40 dollars an ounce... Things really changed quickly in the 80's when criminal elements realized how much money was to be made on pot, and really decided to take over the business. One of the things they did right away was begin to develop domestic production by sending growers from California all over the country, north western Mass, and particularly to Canada where a lot of the production moved indoors. This all made for a much fresher and significantly more potent, hand tended product rather than the imported stuff which was often beat to **** and smelling of something foul by the time it gotpot to the US. Although the imported stuff was still available, by the mid 80's it was almost completely replaced by the domestic crop and the prices skyrocketed to an average 200 an ounce by the mid 80's ten times more than it had been just a decade earlier. The whole market swung back in the last couple decades for suburban consumers anyway. With the availability of technology, information on the net, genetically superior seeds in the mail with practically no possibility of discovery has turned the whole market right back where it started with random, unconnected (mostly non criminal except for the pot) producers all over the country. Distribution has gone back to the days of the local farmer, mostly serving local friends and family. Stronger and better (taste, smoothness, etc.) is being genetically developed all the time and some of the higher priced strains now can go for nearly 500 an ounce for top bud (top plant material)... There is still a good amount of poor quality imported stuff coming over the border, but no longer the great strains of the past like the golds and reds, just commercial bunk, mostly sold in the inner city in dime bags on the street corner. That can still go for close to 200 an ounce if you were to find a distributor willing to sell that much. Most of them want to cut it to dime bags and make a fortune... So, that's how the price of pot has effected the industry... in a nutshell  Ahh, thanks. I don't follow the pot price curve... :) Hummm, yeah I know a couple here will get stupid but it's all on the up and up. I get my info mostly from legal sites representing legal retail stores across the country and world... I tend to stir them up a bit as although I know there are some very legitimate medical reasons for some folks to smoke, I don't subscribe to the whole "medical marijuana" hoax, I just believe in straight legalization... 95 to probably 98% of the folks using "medical marijuana" are full of crap... Dope is dope Scotty. Do you suggest that all regulations on dope be rescinded? No, I think Marijuana should be treated like Tobacco or Alcohol... I agree. We spend WAY too much time and money on the fight to stamp out pot. Those resources could be used for much better things. Why don't you guys come up with a list of dope that you deem acceptable for general consumption. I'll start the list for you. 1. The hallucinogen, marijuana Well, that's my list.. Let's turn the tables.. Would you rather get in the car with somebody smoking pot, or somebody on Oxycontin or Vicodin? I assume those drugs are powerful hallucinogens, just like marijuana. You aren't really offering a safe alternative. To answer your question, I would not knowingly be around any machinery being operated by a person under the influence of any of those dangerous controlled substances, including pot. Listen, I get it.. You want me to get all upset and defend pot from your hysterical, uninformed suggestions about the drug... But I am not going to. I have known literally thousands of pot smokers in my lifetime, never once have I ever heard of one having hallucinations... so as far as I am concerned, as soon as you go there, you are talking about some fictional drug.. And I am not here to make up fairy tales... The pot smokers I have known in my lifetime have never mentioned hallucinations in connection with use of the stuff. This is a propaganda talking point used by the textile and alcohol companies who got it banned in the first place. Think Kennedy, yeah, wrap your head around that one... and more recently, big pharma... I could be wrong, but I recall reading that marijuana was added to the list of restricted drugs in the 1930's. |
|
#183
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Update on ecigs...
On 2/29/2012 12:03 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 2/29/12 11:48 AM, wrote: On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 06:35:15 -0500, X ` Man wrote: On 2/28/12 11:02 PM, wrote: On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:35:06 -0500, X ` Man wrote: Cigarette smoke is not one of those trade-off thingies you like so much. It's like Hitler...there's no reason to compromise about it...it's all bad and *anything* that can be done to eliminate cigarettes is a good thing. We just have to hope the environmental weenies do not use second hand smoke as a precedent (infinitesimally small trace amounts of a chemical) to come after our BOATS (just to stay on topic). No matter how clean burning your engine is, there are still trace amounts of all sorts of chemicals in the exhaust. They could even cite the fiberglass that out gases for years or the paints and preservatives used on wood. Bottom paint is a super fund site compared to SHS. Somehow I bet you think these are all harmless because they meet some threshold limit value.. I can't do much more than giggle at your attempts to build your case here. Sorry. It is simply because you refuse to accept your prejudice. Nah. The general disdain for cigarettes isn't going to portmanteau into general disdain for boats. You must not have manatees up there in "Cawlvert county". There is a very vocal group around here who would ban all power boats in vast stretches of water. They will use any kind of junk science that becomes available. If they ever figure out you can set the threshold limit value of emissions to zero like we have done with tobacco smoke, power boats could go the way of asbestos pot holders. Your problems with manatees and manatee lovers is not "general disdain" for boats or boaters. We have lots of active boaters up here, and I've not seen much aimed at curtailing the activities of those who behave responsibly on the water. Who gets to decide whats responsible activity on the water? Someone who loves powerboats, someone who loves sailboats, or the guy who has a home on the water and only wants kayaks out there? |
|
#184
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Update on ecigs...
On 2/29/2012 12:01 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 2/29/2012 11:56 AM, Oscar wrote: On 2/29/2012 11:49 AM, JustWait wrote: On 2/29/2012 11:35 AM, X ` Man wrote: On 2/29/12 11:22 AM, JustWait wrote: On 2/29/2012 11:17 AM, Oscar wrote: On 2/29/2012 10:53 AM, JustWait wrote: On 2/29/2012 10:34 AM, Oscar wrote: On 2/29/2012 10:26 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On 2/29/2012 9:41 AM, Oscar wrote: On 2/29/2012 6:55 AM, JustWait wrote: On 2/29/2012 6:33 AM, X ` Man wrote: On 2/28/12 9:55 PM, JustWait wrote: On 2/28/2012 8:46 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 2/28/12 8:11 PM, JustWait wrote: On 2/28/2012 8:02 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 2/28/12 7:56 PM, JustWait wrote: On 2/26/2012 3:20 PM, BAR wrote: In articlep_Kdnelbdrumw9fSnZ2dnUVZ_qKdnZ2d@earthlink .com, dump-on- says... On 2/26/12 11:20 AM, BAR wrote: In articlebeCdnXwnuLSUytfSnZ2dnUVZ_jCdnZ2d@earthlink .com, dump-on- says... On 2/26/12 10:56 AM, BAR wrote: Where are the independently duplicated and peer reviewed research that shows that second hand smoke causes health problems? The medical and scientific fields are rife with incorrect conclusions, sub-standard methods and politically driven persons. What are your qualifications to find, understand, and judge legitimate medical research? You are too funny. What are you qualifications to question anyone else's qualifications? I think if you are going to try to challenge peer-reviewed medical research in scientific publications, you ought to have some recognizable qualifications. What are your qualifications to question anyone else's qualifications? It is having a huge effect on the market.. Changing the whole dynamic. Taking the manufacture and distribution to a totally different level. Away from organized criminal organizations, and directly to Suzie Homemaker... You must have excised the content here. I think so. My comment was directed at the notion that 350 dollar an ounce pot was not having an effect on the market... And it certainly is... Ahh. I missed that. Is that up or down? And what effect is it having? I do not endorse the use of any illegal substance, all of my information is based on hearsay, my own research over the internet, and other sources over the years who wish to remain anonymous. OK,...here we go... Well, back in 1976 an ounce was less than ten dollars. It would come over from Jamaica or Vietnam with traveling service men, and other world travelers, average Joes, it was still somewhat casual but beginning to go more main stream (move to the suburbs) from about 69 on. At that time there were two distinctive levels of quality available. Regular like I said, less than ten buck an ounce, and then the specialty stuff like Colombian Gold, and Panama Red which cold reach the amazing price of 40 dollars an ounce... Things really changed quickly in the 80's when criminal elements realized how much money was to be made on pot, and really decided to take over the business. One of the things they did right away was begin to develop domestic production by sending growers from California all over the country, north western Mass, and particularly to Canada where a lot of the production moved indoors. This all made for a much fresher and significantly more potent, hand tended product rather than the imported stuff which was often beat to **** and smelling of something foul by the time it gotpot to the US. Although the imported stuff was still available, by the mid 80's it was almost completely replaced by the domestic crop and the prices skyrocketed to an average 200 an ounce by the mid 80's ten times more than it had been just a decade earlier. The whole market swung back in the last couple decades for suburban consumers anyway. With the availability of technology, information on the net, genetically superior seeds in the mail with practically no possibility of discovery has turned the whole market right back where it started with random, unconnected (mostly non criminal except for the pot) producers all over the country. Distribution has gone back to the days of the local farmer, mostly serving local friends and family. Stronger and better (taste, smoothness, etc.) is being genetically developed all the time and some of the higher priced strains now can go for nearly 500 an ounce for top bud (top plant material)... There is still a good amount of poor quality imported stuff coming over the border, but no longer the great strains of the past like the golds and reds, just commercial bunk, mostly sold in the inner city in dime bags on the street corner. That can still go for close to 200 an ounce if you were to find a distributor willing to sell that much. Most of them want to cut it to dime bags and make a fortune... So, that's how the price of pot has effected the industry... in a nutshell Ahh, thanks. I don't follow the pot price curve... :) Hummm, yeah I know a couple here will get stupid but it's all on the up and up. I get my info mostly from legal sites representing legal retail stores across the country and world... I tend to stir them up a bit as although I know there are some very legitimate medical reasons for some folks to smoke, I don't subscribe to the whole "medical marijuana" hoax, I just believe in straight legalization... 95 to probably 98% of the folks using "medical marijuana" are full of crap... Dope is dope Scotty. Do you suggest that all regulations on dope be rescinded? No, I think Marijuana should be treated like Tobacco or Alcohol... I agree. We spend WAY too much time and money on the fight to stamp out pot. Those resources could be used for much better things. Why don't you guys come up with a list of dope that you deem acceptable for general consumption. I'll start the list for you. 1. The hallucinogen, marijuana Well, that's my list.. Let's turn the tables.. Would you rather get in the car with somebody smoking pot, or somebody on Oxycontin or Vicodin? I assume those drugs are powerful hallucinogens, just like marijuana. You aren't really offering a safe alternative. To answer your question, I would not knowingly be around any machinery being operated by a person under the influence of any of those dangerous controlled substances, including pot. Listen, I get it.. You want me to get all upset and defend pot from your hysterical, uninformed suggestions about the drug... But I am not going to. I have known literally thousands of pot smokers in my lifetime, never once have I ever heard of one having hallucinations... so as far as I am concerned, as soon as you go there, you are talking about some fictional drug.. And I am not here to make up fairy tales... The pot smokers I have known in my lifetime have never mentioned hallucinations in connection with use of the stuff. This is a propaganda talking point used by the textile and alcohol companies who got it banned in the first place. Think Kennedy, yeah, wrap your head around that one... and more recently, big pharma... How would you describe the sensations derived from the act of smoking dope? For that, you would have to ask a smoker... You are implying that you are not a drug user. I'm happy to hear that. Lolling about with drug users is a dangerous pass time. You should distance yourself from them lest they influence you to become one of them. -- O M G |
|
#185
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Update on ecigs...
On 2/29/2012 12:08 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 2/29/2012 12:03 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 2/29/12 11:48 AM, wrote: On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 06:35:15 -0500, X ` Man wrote: On 2/28/12 11:02 PM, wrote: On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:35:06 -0500, X ` Man wrote: Cigarette smoke is not one of those trade-off thingies you like so much. It's like Hitler...there's no reason to compromise about it...it's all bad and *anything* that can be done to eliminate cigarettes is a good thing. We just have to hope the environmental weenies do not use second hand smoke as a precedent (infinitesimally small trace amounts of a chemical) to come after our BOATS (just to stay on topic). No matter how clean burning your engine is, there are still trace amounts of all sorts of chemicals in the exhaust. They could even cite the fiberglass that out gases for years or the paints and preservatives used on wood. Bottom paint is a super fund site compared to SHS. Somehow I bet you think these are all harmless because they meet some threshold limit value.. I can't do much more than giggle at your attempts to build your case here. Sorry. It is simply because you refuse to accept your prejudice. Nah. The general disdain for cigarettes isn't going to portmanteau into general disdain for boats. You must not have manatees up there in "Cawlvert county". There is a very vocal group around here who would ban all power boats in vast stretches of water. They will use any kind of junk science that becomes available. If they ever figure out you can set the threshold limit value of emissions to zero like we have done with tobacco smoke, power boats could go the way of asbestos pot holders. Your problems with manatees and manatee lovers is not "general disdain" for boats or boaters. We have lots of active boaters up here, and I've not seen much aimed at curtailing the activities of those who behave responsibly on the water. Who gets to decide whats responsible activity on the water? Someone who loves powerboats, someone who loves sailboats, or the guy who has a home on the water and only wants kayaks out there? That would be Harry. Surprised? -- O M G |
|
#186
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Update on ecigs...
On 2/29/12 12:08 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 2/29/2012 12:03 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 2/29/12 11:48 AM, wrote: On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 06:35:15 -0500, X ` Man wrote: On 2/28/12 11:02 PM, wrote: On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:35:06 -0500, X ` Man wrote: Cigarette smoke is not one of those trade-off thingies you like so much. It's like Hitler...there's no reason to compromise about it...it's all bad and *anything* that can be done to eliminate cigarettes is a good thing. We just have to hope the environmental weenies do not use second hand smoke as a precedent (infinitesimally small trace amounts of a chemical) to come after our BOATS (just to stay on topic). No matter how clean burning your engine is, there are still trace amounts of all sorts of chemicals in the exhaust. They could even cite the fiberglass that out gases for years or the paints and preservatives used on wood. Bottom paint is a super fund site compared to SHS. Somehow I bet you think these are all harmless because they meet some threshold limit value.. I can't do much more than giggle at your attempts to build your case here. Sorry. It is simply because you refuse to accept your prejudice. Nah. The general disdain for cigarettes isn't going to portmanteau into general disdain for boats. You must not have manatees up there in "Cawlvert county". There is a very vocal group around here who would ban all power boats in vast stretches of water. They will use any kind of junk science that becomes available. If they ever figure out you can set the threshold limit value of emissions to zero like we have done with tobacco smoke, power boats could go the way of asbestos pot holders. Your problems with manatees and manatee lovers is not "general disdain" for boats or boaters. We have lots of active boaters up here, and I've not seen much aimed at curtailing the activities of those who behave responsibly on the water. Who gets to decide whats responsible activity on the water? Someone who loves powerboats, someone who loves sailboats, or the guy who has a home on the water and only wants kayaks out there? To a degree, all the stakeholders should have some say. As an example, if you live on a moderately sized lake and suddenly there is an infestation of unmuffled "penis" boats zooming close by your house every Sunday morning at 8 am, you should have input into whether that sort of behavior is "responsible." When we lived in the St. Augustine area near the ICW, I was part of an effort to "ban" airboats from the shallow estuaries and marshlands in the immediate area because of their noise and the physical damage they were doing. The owners of these boats were not acting responsibly. Note I didn't say banned from the waterways. |
|
#187
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Update on ecigs...
On 2/29/2012 12:24 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 2/29/12 12:08 PM, JustWait wrote: On 2/29/2012 12:03 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 2/29/12 11:48 AM, wrote: On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 06:35:15 -0500, X ` Man wrote: On 2/28/12 11:02 PM, wrote: On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:35:06 -0500, X ` Man wrote: Cigarette smoke is not one of those trade-off thingies you like so much. It's like Hitler...there's no reason to compromise about it...it's all bad and *anything* that can be done to eliminate cigarettes is a good thing. We just have to hope the environmental weenies do not use second hand smoke as a precedent (infinitesimally small trace amounts of a chemical) to come after our BOATS (just to stay on topic). No matter how clean burning your engine is, there are still trace amounts of all sorts of chemicals in the exhaust. They could even cite the fiberglass that out gases for years or the paints and preservatives used on wood. Bottom paint is a super fund site compared to SHS. Somehow I bet you think these are all harmless because they meet some threshold limit value.. I can't do much more than giggle at your attempts to build your case here. Sorry. It is simply because you refuse to accept your prejudice. Nah. The general disdain for cigarettes isn't going to portmanteau into general disdain for boats. You must not have manatees up there in "Cawlvert county". There is a very vocal group around here who would ban all power boats in vast stretches of water. They will use any kind of junk science that becomes available. If they ever figure out you can set the threshold limit value of emissions to zero like we have done with tobacco smoke, power boats could go the way of asbestos pot holders. Your problems with manatees and manatee lovers is not "general disdain" for boats or boaters. We have lots of active boaters up here, and I've not seen much aimed at curtailing the activities of those who behave responsibly on the water. Who gets to decide whats responsible activity on the water? Someone who loves powerboats, someone who loves sailboats, or the guy who has a home on the water and only wants kayaks out there? To a degree, all the stakeholders should have some say. As an example, if you live on a moderately sized lake and suddenly there is an infestation of unmuffled "penis" boats zooming close by your house every Sunday morning at 8 am, you should have input into whether that sort of behavior is "responsible." When we lived in the St. Augustine area near the ICW, I was part of an effort to "ban" airboats from the shallow estuaries and marshlands in the immediate area because of their noise and the physical damage they were doing. The owners of these boats were not acting responsibly. Note I didn't say banned from the waterways. So, penis boats are bad for you... What if all the homeowners on the lake have them but you? Then, what if you have a sailboat and the rest of the folks are fishermen who hate sailboats moving in and around them while they were fishing. The lake we went to on the shoreline was a home to a skulling team. The only accident we ever had on that lake was when they hit my wifes row boat because they didn't think she was moving fast enough across the lake.... I say skulls are the most annoying and dangerous, mostly because of the assholes in them... So, who gets to decide again? |
|
#188
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Update on ecigs...
On 2/29/2012 12:17 PM, Oscar wrote:
On 2/29/2012 12:01 PM, JustWait wrote: On 2/29/2012 11:56 AM, Oscar wrote: On 2/29/2012 11:49 AM, JustWait wrote: On 2/29/2012 11:35 AM, X ` Man wrote: On 2/29/12 11:22 AM, JustWait wrote: On 2/29/2012 11:17 AM, Oscar wrote: On 2/29/2012 10:53 AM, JustWait wrote: On 2/29/2012 10:34 AM, Oscar wrote: On 2/29/2012 10:26 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On 2/29/2012 9:41 AM, Oscar wrote: On 2/29/2012 6:55 AM, JustWait wrote: On 2/29/2012 6:33 AM, X ` Man wrote: On 2/28/12 9:55 PM, JustWait wrote: On 2/28/2012 8:46 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 2/28/12 8:11 PM, JustWait wrote: On 2/28/2012 8:02 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 2/28/12 7:56 PM, JustWait wrote: On 2/26/2012 3:20 PM, BAR wrote: In articlep_Kdnelbdrumw9fSnZ2dnUVZ_qKdnZ2d@earthlink .com, dump-on- says... On 2/26/12 11:20 AM, BAR wrote: In articlebeCdnXwnuLSUytfSnZ2dnUVZ_jCdnZ2d@earthlink .com, dump-on- says... On 2/26/12 10:56 AM, BAR wrote: Where are the independently duplicated and peer reviewed research that shows that second hand smoke causes health problems? The medical and scientific fields are rife with incorrect conclusions, sub-standard methods and politically driven persons. What are your qualifications to find, understand, and judge legitimate medical research? You are too funny. What are you qualifications to question anyone else's qualifications? I think if you are going to try to challenge peer-reviewed medical research in scientific publications, you ought to have some recognizable qualifications. What are your qualifications to question anyone else's qualifications? It is having a huge effect on the market.. Changing the whole dynamic. Taking the manufacture and distribution to a totally different level. Away from organized criminal organizations, and directly to Suzie Homemaker... You must have excised the content here. I think so. My comment was directed at the notion that 350 dollar an ounce pot was not having an effect on the market... And it certainly is... Ahh. I missed that. Is that up or down? And what effect is it having? I do not endorse the use of any illegal substance, all of my information is based on hearsay, my own research over the internet, and other sources over the years who wish to remain anonymous. OK,...here we go... Well, back in 1976 an ounce was less than ten dollars. It would come over from Jamaica or Vietnam with traveling service men, and other world travelers, average Joes, it was still somewhat casual but beginning to go more main stream (move to the suburbs) from about 69 on. At that time there were two distinctive levels of quality available. Regular like I said, less than ten buck an ounce, and then the specialty stuff like Colombian Gold, and Panama Red which cold reach the amazing price of 40 dollars an ounce... Things really changed quickly in the 80's when criminal elements realized how much money was to be made on pot, and really decided to take over the business. One of the things they did right away was begin to develop domestic production by sending growers from California all over the country, north western Mass, and particularly to Canada where a lot of the production moved indoors. This all made for a much fresher and significantly more potent, hand tended product rather than the imported stuff which was often beat to **** and smelling of something foul by the time it gotpot to the US. Although the imported stuff was still available, by the mid 80's it was almost completely replaced by the domestic crop and the prices skyrocketed to an average 200 an ounce by the mid 80's ten times more than it had been just a decade earlier. The whole market swung back in the last couple decades for suburban consumers anyway. With the availability of technology, information on the net, genetically superior seeds in the mail with practically no possibility of discovery has turned the whole market right back where it started with random, unconnected (mostly non criminal except for the pot) producers all over the country. Distribution has gone back to the days of the local farmer, mostly serving local friends and family. Stronger and better (taste, smoothness, etc.) is being genetically developed all the time and some of the higher priced strains now can go for nearly 500 an ounce for top bud (top plant material)... There is still a good amount of poor quality imported stuff coming over the border, but no longer the great strains of the past like the golds and reds, just commercial bunk, mostly sold in the inner city in dime bags on the street corner. That can still go for close to 200 an ounce if you were to find a distributor willing to sell that much. Most of them want to cut it to dime bags and make a fortune... So, that's how the price of pot has effected the industry... in a nutshell Ahh, thanks. I don't follow the pot price curve... :) Hummm, yeah I know a couple here will get stupid but it's all on the up and up. I get my info mostly from legal sites representing legal retail stores across the country and world... I tend to stir them up a bit as although I know there are some very legitimate medical reasons for some folks to smoke, I don't subscribe to the whole "medical marijuana" hoax, I just believe in straight legalization... 95 to probably 98% of the folks using "medical marijuana" are full of crap... Dope is dope Scotty. Do you suggest that all regulations on dope be rescinded? No, I think Marijuana should be treated like Tobacco or Alcohol... I agree. We spend WAY too much time and money on the fight to stamp out pot. Those resources could be used for much better things. Why don't you guys come up with a list of dope that you deem acceptable for general consumption. I'll start the list for you. 1. The hallucinogen, marijuana Well, that's my list.. Let's turn the tables.. Would you rather get in the car with somebody smoking pot, or somebody on Oxycontin or Vicodin? I assume those drugs are powerful hallucinogens, just like marijuana. You aren't really offering a safe alternative. To answer your question, I would not knowingly be around any machinery being operated by a person under the influence of any of those dangerous controlled substances, including pot. Listen, I get it.. You want me to get all upset and defend pot from your hysterical, uninformed suggestions about the drug... But I am not going to. I have known literally thousands of pot smokers in my lifetime, never once have I ever heard of one having hallucinations... so as far as I am concerned, as soon as you go there, you are talking about some fictional drug.. And I am not here to make up fairy tales... The pot smokers I have known in my lifetime have never mentioned hallucinations in connection with use of the stuff. This is a propaganda talking point used by the textile and alcohol companies who got it banned in the first place. Think Kennedy, yeah, wrap your head around that one... and more recently, big pharma... How would you describe the sensations derived from the act of smoking dope? For that, you would have to ask a smoker... You are implying that you are not a drug user. I'm happy to hear that. Lolling about with drug users is a dangerous pass time. You should distance yourself from them lest they influence you to become one of them. You have your causes, I have mine... who says I am not a councellor in a addiction clinic trying to help them quit? If I was, would you still suggest I abandon them? |
|
#189
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Update on ecigs...
On 2/29/12 12:33 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 2/29/2012 12:24 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 2/29/12 12:08 PM, JustWait wrote: On 2/29/2012 12:03 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 2/29/12 11:48 AM, wrote: On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 06:35:15 -0500, X ` Man wrote: On 2/28/12 11:02 PM, wrote: On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:35:06 -0500, X ` Man wrote: Cigarette smoke is not one of those trade-off thingies you like so much. It's like Hitler...there's no reason to compromise about it...it's all bad and *anything* that can be done to eliminate cigarettes is a good thing. We just have to hope the environmental weenies do not use second hand smoke as a precedent (infinitesimally small trace amounts of a chemical) to come after our BOATS (just to stay on topic). No matter how clean burning your engine is, there are still trace amounts of all sorts of chemicals in the exhaust. They could even cite the fiberglass that out gases for years or the paints and preservatives used on wood. Bottom paint is a super fund site compared to SHS. Somehow I bet you think these are all harmless because they meet some threshold limit value.. I can't do much more than giggle at your attempts to build your case here. Sorry. It is simply because you refuse to accept your prejudice. Nah. The general disdain for cigarettes isn't going to portmanteau into general disdain for boats. You must not have manatees up there in "Cawlvert county". There is a very vocal group around here who would ban all power boats in vast stretches of water. They will use any kind of junk science that becomes available. If they ever figure out you can set the threshold limit value of emissions to zero like we have done with tobacco smoke, power boats could go the way of asbestos pot holders. Your problems with manatees and manatee lovers is not "general disdain" for boats or boaters. We have lots of active boaters up here, and I've not seen much aimed at curtailing the activities of those who behave responsibly on the water. Who gets to decide whats responsible activity on the water? Someone who loves powerboats, someone who loves sailboats, or the guy who has a home on the water and only wants kayaks out there? To a degree, all the stakeholders should have some say. As an example, if you live on a moderately sized lake and suddenly there is an infestation of unmuffled "penis" boats zooming close by your house every Sunday morning at 8 am, you should have input into whether that sort of behavior is "responsible." When we lived in the St. Augustine area near the ICW, I was part of an effort to "ban" airboats from the shallow estuaries and marshlands in the immediate area because of their noise and the physical damage they were doing. The owners of these boats were not acting responsibly. Note I didn't say banned from the waterways. So, penis boats are bad for you... What if all the homeowners on the lake have them but you? Then, what if you have a sailboat and the rest of the folks are fishermen who hate sailboats moving in and around them while they were fishing. The lake we went to on the shoreline was a home to a skulling team. The only accident we ever had on that lake was when they hit my wifes row boat because they didn't think she was moving fast enough across the lake.... I say skulls are the most annoying and dangerous, mostly because of the assholes in them... So, who gets to decide again? The operative word was "responsibly." If they understand the nuances of that word, the operators of noisy boats wouldn't start their noise pollution so early on a weekend morning, eh? There have to be rules and regulations. Otherwise, you have the anarchy of libertarianism. |
|
#190
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Update on ecigs...
On 2/29/2012 12:43 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 2/29/12 12:33 PM, JustWait wrote: On 2/29/2012 12:24 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 2/29/12 12:08 PM, JustWait wrote: On 2/29/2012 12:03 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 2/29/12 11:48 AM, wrote: On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 06:35:15 -0500, X ` Man wrote: On 2/28/12 11:02 PM, wrote: On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:35:06 -0500, X ` Man wrote: Cigarette smoke is not one of those trade-off thingies you like so much. It's like Hitler...there's no reason to compromise about it...it's all bad and *anything* that can be done to eliminate cigarettes is a good thing. We just have to hope the environmental weenies do not use second hand smoke as a precedent (infinitesimally small trace amounts of a chemical) to come after our BOATS (just to stay on topic). No matter how clean burning your engine is, there are still trace amounts of all sorts of chemicals in the exhaust. They could even cite the fiberglass that out gases for years or the paints and preservatives used on wood. Bottom paint is a super fund site compared to SHS. Somehow I bet you think these are all harmless because they meet some threshold limit value.. I can't do much more than giggle at your attempts to build your case here. Sorry. It is simply because you refuse to accept your prejudice. Nah. The general disdain for cigarettes isn't going to portmanteau into general disdain for boats. You must not have manatees up there in "Cawlvert county". There is a very vocal group around here who would ban all power boats in vast stretches of water. They will use any kind of junk science that becomes available. If they ever figure out you can set the threshold limit value of emissions to zero like we have done with tobacco smoke, power boats could go the way of asbestos pot holders. Your problems with manatees and manatee lovers is not "general disdain" for boats or boaters. We have lots of active boaters up here, and I've not seen much aimed at curtailing the activities of those who behave responsibly on the water. Who gets to decide whats responsible activity on the water? Someone who loves powerboats, someone who loves sailboats, or the guy who has a home on the water and only wants kayaks out there? To a degree, all the stakeholders should have some say. As an example, if you live on a moderately sized lake and suddenly there is an infestation of unmuffled "penis" boats zooming close by your house every Sunday morning at 8 am, you should have input into whether that sort of behavior is "responsible." When we lived in the St. Augustine area near the ICW, I was part of an effort to "ban" airboats from the shallow estuaries and marshlands in the immediate area because of their noise and the physical damage they were doing. The owners of these boats were not acting responsibly. Note I didn't say banned from the waterways. So, penis boats are bad for you... What if all the homeowners on the lake have them but you? Then, what if you have a sailboat and the rest of the folks are fishermen who hate sailboats moving in and around them while they were fishing. The lake we went to on the shoreline was a home to a skulling team. The only accident we ever had on that lake was when they hit my wifes row boat because they didn't think she was moving fast enough across the lake.... I say skulls are the most annoying and dangerous, mostly because of the assholes in them... So, who gets to decide again? The operative word was "responsibly." If they understand the nuances of that word, the operators of noisy boats wouldn't start their noise pollution so early on a weekend morning, eh? There have to be rules and regulations. Otherwise, you have the anarchy of libertarianism. Don't care to address the sailboats going over fishing lines, or the skulls arrogantly trying to bully their way to a private lake?? |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| update | Boat Building | |||
| GB update | General | |||
| "26 Again" update | ASA | |||
![X ` Man[_3_] is offline](https://www.boatbanter.com/images/SultanThemeVB3R/statusicon/user_offline.gif)
Linear Mode
