Tax reform, basically. It will never happen in our lifetimes. There is zero incentive for politicians to take action on it, and it would take away all the funding for all their special interests. Not to beat on the current President, but if any were to lead such an effort, it would be the guy running on "hope and change". If he won't even touch it, who will?

You don't deserve more of what someone else has just because they have more. That's not the type of country we live in. You're bending over backwards to justify theft.

It's so true. I don't even bother trying a lot of apps because it's just more advertising. They're just hurting themselves. Google's own "news and weather" app is a great example. A good percentage of the sites they link to for news articles are not usable due to invasive ads.

"The nickel-metal hydride batteries found in hybrid vehicles are basically 'zero-landfill' products. Whatever can't be recycled is consumed in the recycling process, leaving no trash behind."

"Lithium-ion batteries now are somewhere between 70 and 100 percent recyclable, depending on the particular chemistry of the batteries. [..] Recycling specialists say that as volume grows, it will become more economically feasible to recover some of the content now wasted."

http://www.edmunds.com/fuel-ec...

So the most popular wastes nothing. The newer variety no worse than thirty percent waste down to zero, and will improve as the quantity of "expired" batteries increases. Seems pretty good to me.

How much of that was our money to begin with? But I like your thinking.

Does electricity come tax free in Oregon? I bet EV owners are still paying into the tax base, just not directly into the road funds.

Those batteries aren't disposed. They're reprocessed into new batteries.

Tax the shit out of semis and you're going to pay for it when you buy groceries or durable goods or pretty much anything.

Why not just take everyone's money all at once? At least it would be honest.

No, the driver isn't compensated for checking the app. He's not working at that point.

No. If he doesn't pick anyone up, he doesn't get paid. Otherwise he could go after the passenger for theft of service. He can't, therefore he's not "on the job".

No, it'd be "I'm on the way to work" insurance. The driver should be covered under their personal insurance.

Exactly right. So the parent stating that Uber's insurance starts when the passenger enters the vehicle makes sense. Parent then states that some private insurance won't cover the driver heading to the pickup location. Seems to me they should. It's the individual transporting themselves to the job, same as when I drive to the office in the morning. Right?

I don't think there are any direct comparisons to make, but it's not far off. An Uber driver responding to a ride request but not carrying passengers is not all that different than an office worker responding to the start of the business day by driving to the office. Both have commerce in mind, but they're both "off the clock" heading to where the job is. Seems to me that insurance should cover that.

That doesn't make sense. You're not "in business" then. If I get into a crash on my way to work (not Uber), my insurance covers it.