Posted on 08/08/2005 6:19:03 AM PDT by robowombat
She's is correct that additional costs require additional capital.
Link? Citation? (Specifically for this type of situation, this state...)
>Link? Citation? (Specifically for this type of situation, this state...)<
Common sense.If the vender has adequate policy limits any settlement is paid by their policy.Deep pockets only come into play when first pockets are not deep enough. If you were in business you would know that certificates of insurance are required by any major reseller or retail landlord before doing business with any vender and they set minimum policy limits.
>Nonsense. Fair officials don't usually carry a copy of the policy around with them; they use the "list" which has been compiled based on either empirical data or obvious common sense.<
Never seen a commercial insurance policy have you? The risk manager and or city attorney is very aware of the policy categories that are excluded from coverage.Insurance Companies pay underwriters very well to write broad exclusions in policies and analyze whether they have excluded every possible risk.They then charge big bucks for an endorsement granting an exception.
Yep. And how's that Republican Party promise of Tort Reform coming along? Or was that just more electioneering crap from the "Party of Limited Government" that claims to free us from such legal oppression?
"Yep. Small business are the key to keeping America economically vibrant. Politicians have no idea what it takes to run one."
Go back to the early days of the Clinton administration. When Robert Reich was Secretary of Labor. Reich was extremely anti-small business, and wanted to consolidate businesses into "combines" I believe the term was. Did he really mean collectives?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.