The cost of patches and gum, etc, is definitely an issue for some of us. I've tried and failed quitting smoking several times cold turkey and can't afford all the other stuff.
I am currently tapering down by diluting the juice. Yhat is working nicely.
Unlike tobacco, I am not in a hurry. Ending the health hazard was a source of constant angst. Today, it is about reducing cost and moving toward a more pleasure centered experience. Just getting rid of triggers.
The SMOK brand refillable vapor pens are great, not a lot of money.
Strength is there, at half the cost to start.
Good luck. Don't let people tell you it isn't rough. It is. I have kicked supposedly harder things before. Sucked, but doable.
I've actually quit for several months a couple of times, but the first really bad day made me run straight back to it. I guess part of what I need to do is educate myself on better coping mechanisms.
Infinix or Fit. Get the high strength nicotine salt juice.
There is a shift in how you deal with things. It is like an off brand smoke, or the difference between a menthol and regular.
It passes. Takes a day, maybe two. Once it has passed, you will find going to a real tobacco feels bad. It always was, but you became inured to it over time.
The other thing you will find is your craving isn't necessarily for nicotine. It's the extras, and of course, those are bad too. All an ugly cycle.
Scrape $50 together. That's enough for a unit, couple refillable chambers, and some good juice. Again, nicotine salt is where it's at. Get the highest strength, and use the device in moderation. You will self-select everything else quickly after that initial shift.
Then, no matter what, stay with it for a time. It will only take a few successful times for the psychological impact to fade and confidence grow.
From there, you've got a much healthier cost management problem. It's a nice problem to have.
Well... Facebook is worth ~$15bn and Google is worth ~$740bn. I'm sure Google could scrounge up 2% of it's overall worth to buy-out Facebook... but then, Google already know everything about you, so for them, Facebooks data is worthless.
Kafka is probably the only one I would recommend not reading first. If you were to summarise the plot it in a few sentences it would put a lot of people off, in murakami land though he can write a story about a guy killing his father and sleeping with his mother and while you’re in the book world it seems totally normal......
People commit horrible crimes. That's one of those things that happen. It doesn't actually mean that everything they did was a lie or a crime, even if they are a horrible, detestable human in many senses of the word.
I'd nearly argue that it would be in his worst interest to participate in defrauding something since it might have revealed his horrible offenses.
The issue is that "child rapist" implies "poor judgment of character". This implication cannot be made because there are plenty of accounts where "non-child rapist" have "poor judgement of character".
No one is arguing a child rapist is okay; the issue other posters are having is that it is a incorrect argument.
Any further "but what if's..." are simply assumptions that do not have proof.
1. The issue is that "child rapist" implies "poor judgment of character". This implication cannot be made because there are plenty of accounts where "child rapist" have "good judgement of character".
or
2. The issue is that "poor judgment of character" implies "child rapist". This implication cannot be made because there are plenty of accounts where "non-child rapist" have "poor judgement of character".
being at least a logical (regardless of correctness) statement
My apologies, you are correct. I suppose what I was attempting to say was that the connection between video game referee and child rapist was a weak connection due to the relation of "judgement of character".
The statements "child rapist" implies "poor judgement of character" and "poor judgement of character" implies "poor ability to be a referee" can be negated if the person turned out to be a qualified referee. The gray area is what people agree to be what constitutes good/poor "judgement of character". This is where I believe what AdmiralAsshat is attempting to argue in his post "While that's deplorable, it does not logically follow that a child molester is necessarily an unreliable referee."
I wouldn't want to listen to anything a child molester has to say, but that doesn't mean their knowledge of something completely unrelated is suspect at all. Just that I really don't care to know what a child molester has to say, on any topic. Although, I agree with the video in that I would question his honesty and character... So maybe you're right.
You can likely find info online. In San Francisco we get information in the mail once a year. Probably because they want to brag about how good it is :)
I'm not sure why the smiley face, I have received the same "bragging" letter in a midwest state and a state north of San Francisco. Lots of places in US have good (or should I say standard) water.
And that’s great! I never implied San Francisco is the only place with high water quality.
I’m not talking about “standard” water though. San Francisco gets water from snowmelt so it has noticeably less contaminants than most water supplies. It routinely ranks among the top few water sources in the United States
"You guys have the best water that we tested. Period," Snyder said of San Francisco's drinking water. "I don't think we've ever tested drinking water that didn't have any of our target compounds in it."
I don't know about "good," but it's always money well spent to get a test kit from the home store (Home Depot and Lowes both sell them for $20-$30). Sometimes you can have an issue caused by your home that has nothing to do with the public supply.
Knew one person who found out his sewage pipes were somehow mingling with his fresh water ones this way. How that even happens, I do not know...
