No. Confiscation will do nothing to solve deficits and debt. Executive Orders have no force of law on common citizens, nor is it a power granted by the constitution.
I agree with this nearly 100%. My only question is - in terms of being unregulated does insurance come into play? What happens if an Uber driver gets into an accident and causes injuries/damage. Would his personal auto insurance company refuse to pay the claim insisting that it was a work related injury and should be covered by his employer? If so, that could be a valid reason for cities to oppose this. But I am unsure if this is how it works.
Latest Comments
Should Alphabet Split Up Into Four?
Did #Alphabet make or lose money on it's 2017 divestitures? $GOOGL
The Global Economy Seems To Have Settled Into A Stable Pattern Of Growth
Good read, thank you.
Gold Bogged Down In The Bus Station
Could be.
20 Questions For NuLife Sciences CEO John B. Hollister
This could be a major breakthrough for organ donor recipients! $NULF
Can Amazon's Alexa Lie?
Anything which can be programmed, can be programmed to lie. #Amazon's #Alexa is no different. $AMZN
Barnes & Noble, Inc. (BKS): Book It?
The question is can investors make money on $BKS right now and I believe the author made his case that the answer is yes.
The Citadel Is Breached: Congress Taps The Fed For Infrastructure Funding
From your mouth to God's ear, let's hope so.
Should You Actually Worry About Gold Confiscation?
No. Confiscation will do nothing to solve deficits and debt. Executive Orders have no force of law on common citizens, nor is it a power granted by the constitution.
The Dow Transports: Detecting The Issues
Good point, do you have any insight to add here? I'd be curious to know. Otherwise, very good read. Thanks for sharing.
Uber Thrives: Why?
I agree with this nearly 100%. My only question is - in terms of being unregulated does insurance come into play? What happens if an Uber driver gets into an accident and causes injuries/damage. Would his personal auto insurance company refuse to pay the claim insisting that it was a work related injury and should be covered by his employer? If so, that could be a valid reason for cities to oppose this. But I am unsure if this is how it works.