The Glade 4.0

Isn't issuing permits for use of public property on a limited basis the solution then?

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

No. It creates a conflict of interest as those charged with issuing the permits are the same people who are being protested.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

Yep but since the OWS protests have gone around this, and the State has been deliquent in collecting the agreed fees for such a protest, hasn't this policy now been considered defunct?

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill

It's the same coin - flip it the other way.

It's only a conflict of interest because they want to use public property as if it were their private property. If they would observe the established procedures for using the property there wouldn't be a conflict at all.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

Strawman much?

You do realize there's a difference between someone getting in your way, and someone getting in your way so that you can't move and refusing to get out of the way, right?

The water fountain example will serve here. If you are inconvenienced because someone is getting a drink ahead of you, that's one thing. But if someone gets a drink then starts leaning on the water fountain and refusing to move so you can get a drink, that's something else.

Wait, what? That doesn't address what I wrote at all...

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

Sure it does.

You claim there's a conflict of interest because one group wants what the other controls, as if the onus is on those being protested against. It's not, but that seems to be your argument.

I claim that a resolution can be that the protesters should either provide property for themselves or follow established usage requirements for the use of the property they want to occupy, the onus being on the ones protesting. This is in response to your apparent argument.

The onus, of course, being described as "the coin".

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

What's funny here is the spin you're putting on what I said. I didn't mention state sanctioned, anywhere. I said that those inconvenienced.... meaning those stuck on a bridge or somehow impeded by protestors should clear the way so they can move. Peacefully if possible, violently if peaceful persuasion fails.

Get a good old-fashioned riot going between the protestors and the Joe Six-Packs who are trying to earn a living and just want people to get out of the way.

If only the OWS folks in NY, at Zuccotti Park, were protesting on public property and not private.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

It's an interesting dilemma, it's technically open 24 hours a day due to an agreement with the city.

Quote:

New York City Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said on September 28, 2011, that the NYPD could not bar protesters from Zuccotti Park since it is a public plaza that is required to stay open 24 hours a day. "In building this plaza, there was an agreement it be open 24 hours a day," Kelly said. "The owners have put out regulations [about what's allowed in park]. The owners will have to come in and direct people not to do certain things."

I say that they hire Xe to come in and clean out the park.

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill

Apparently, they've declined to have the "authorities" clear out the park so they can do maintenance, etc.
It's interesting to note that as private property owners, beholden to the city, they have fewer rights regarding their park than the city does regarding its parks. OCCUPY NY!...oh wait.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Interesting thought there. zuccotti park in new york is technically private property, I was provide as a semi public space as part of the building permit process, With the owners providing maintenance, and up keep of the space, and the City responsible for law enforcement.
The City has defaulted on their end of the deal, and the current situation is interfering with the property owners ability to uphold their end. from items I've read the property owners are getting irritated at the city and may close the park to public use, due to breach of terms by the city.
Be interesting to to see if this plays out, but trespassing is an actual charge that can be filed. After all the the terms and conditions are usually very well spelled out.

_________________
History of the Condom
In 1272, the Muslim Arabs invented the condom, using a goat's lower intestine.
In 1873, the British somewhat refined the idea, by taking the intestine out of the goat first.

Absolutely not. I claim that there is a conflict of interest because, overwhelmingly, those involved on the government side of the issue will issue, or not, permits on ideological lines, while they hold all the cards. Your point fails to address this in every way, unless you feel that you are nothing more than property owned by your government. If so, your point holds water. If not, reshuffle, and re-deal.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

OWS isn't protesting the government, as far as I know. They're protesting Wall Street, and want to base their attack on private industry from public property.

Or, that's what I've read that they want. Kinda hard to actually pin them down. Still, I have to base what I know on what's been said by the protestors I've heard being interviewed.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

And this is why they fail.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

If they succeeded in getting banks to remove the stupid debit card fee, they might have gained at least a couple minor victories.

I never thought making campgrounds in weird places and blocking traffic would achieve anything, but maybe I was wrong. They still won't decrease unemployment though no matter what.

They are protesting government irregardless of their own thoughts on the matter at hand.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

Really? You're giving them credit for that? I thought you were smarter than that.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

I give most credit to the clients of the banks for voicing their concerns and canceling their accounts. But I think the protesters had a slight effect on this by increasing public awareness.

I am just now learning about this protest.....

I have to say these people are f*cking morons and don't know how economy or money or society in general operates at all.

I imagine those crazy topless chicks, after the protest, go back to their house and put on their 50 dollar top that matches their 70 dollar shoes so they can get a coffee at Starbucks for 6.99 and sit and talk on their $500 iphones.


This quote is from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_are_the_99%25


"page after page of testimonials from idiots that can't think for themselves who did what society told them to do and put themselves into a huge amount of debt, then proceeded buy even more **** with money they don't have so they can pursue their "American dream" of sitting on the couch watching Jersey Shore and prepackaged overpriced diet food, got laid off from their job because they're lazy and think their company should be paying them more, and ended up unemployed or radically underemployed and on the precipice of financial and social ruin."

fixed.


Hmm, yeah. Lets see if I'm getting this right. These people are slightly below average intelligence at best, they put themselves into a ridiculous amount of debt and now blame Wallstreet / The "1%" because they weren't smart enough to actually earn their money instead of feeling entitled to it, and not buy expensive crap with money they don't have? You mean they KNOWINGLY put themselves into a situation where it would take 30 years or more to get out of slavery (debt) and they're blaming people that are rich?


Lets take a look at this elusive "1%"

also from the same wikipedia article:



No surprise here. Look at what the stock market is. It's the companies. These companies support the entire American populace...they provide the goods and services. These businesses are useful to society (well, that can be debated, but I'll leave that out of this argument for simplicity's sake)---and the people investing in the stock give more resources to the business, which can lead to more and better goods and services. I really don't have a problem with these people being rich.


These people shouldn't be protesting Wall Street. They should be protesting the Fed.

_________________
Ron Paul 2012

So, you just frame the issue to fit your argument and ignore what is actually being communicated...

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

I would say OWS is protesting almost entirely Wall Street and very marginally the government.

It's ironic to me because Wall Street is actually one of the places that make America so great. In the game Civilization it is actually treated as a wonder of the world. Wall Street is a major component in allocating capital to ventures that go on to create a large amount of wealth (new wealth created from hard work), and making the economy much more efficient.

I see value in getting banks to remove their debit card fees, but that's about it...

For the most part, it seems we are on the same page, with the understanding that the concept of when inconvenience becomes obstructing is subjective. I would say though that the occupation of the park in NY has crossed over to obstruction just by their occupation for such a long period of time, and not considering their "security" details removing people.

And I included "group" in parenthesis as a collection of their individual right to assembly, or to associate, which is a group activity. Not as some proclamation of the group having rights.

Tell me, where do you live that corporations directly pass laws and can levy taxes? It seems to me that the group that does those things is the government.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

It can seem that way to you, but we're not talking about you, we're not talking about me, we're talking about a group of folks that have self-identified as protesting against private corporations and are occupying public property as a part of their effort at protesting against those private businesses.

I can't argue that it would make more sense for them to protest against the government, but that's not what they're doing.

Probably cause the government is damn near broke. Only storm castles with loot in them, don't get into a boss fight with a mob with empty pockets.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.