> It's sad that TwoBit's perfectly reasonable objection to this got downvoted to death rather than countered with some plausible argument. Probably because he

> It's sad that TwoBit's perfectly reasonable objection to this got downvoted to death rather than countered with some plausible argument. Probably because he needlessly brought a controversial issue into the discussion (prostitution). The taxi issue is, in fact, interesting. Especially when you extend it to Uber. If your capital comes in the form a vehicle, you apparently aren't required to pay imputed rent but if it's a house you do. That being said, the labor issue muddles this. You could argue that when you get a taxi you're paying exclusively for the driver's time, not the vehicle.