• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Occupy Philadelphia costs city $400,000 in police surveillance

What if the claim is that their general presence does any of those things? Can they indefinitely keep protesters away?

No one has said anything about keeping protesters away. Philadelphia has small groups of protesters advocating or protesting against various things in the downtown area all the time, and as long as they don't interfere with the activities of the city's residents or visitors, no one bothers them.
 
I don't think so. The OWS is a return in many senses to people paying attention.

Well yes, people are paying attention and they don't really care for what they see. And it is a message of sight, not an articulate message that might encapsulate a coherent message of some sort that people could actually ponder over when they see it on their TV's.

It is a chanting loosely connected rabble, a tribal experience which might give its participants a temporary sense of purpose and belonging but it is actually an expensive annoyance to most citizens. And certainly the Constitution allows the right to protest but it also should behoove the protesters to be clear on what it is they are actually protesting and who they are protesting against.
 
Yeah the banks who are suppose to be experts in their field have no blame in this fiasco. After all they were making money hand over fist!

Let's not forget who was responsible for the enforcing the banks to lend money to those who couldn't actually afford mortgages. Scroll down and a familiar name might appear.

Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
 
Great idea! How much more do you want people to pay for mortgages, auto loans, etc.?

I like the idea of a tiny microtax (fraction of a percent) on each share, option, or derivative traded. It'll put a damper on high-frequency computer-based institutional trading that fuels volatility and "flash crashes" without harming middleclass investors one bit. The Green Party has advocated this for years now.
 
No one has said anything about keeping protesters away. Philadelphia has small groups of protesters advocating or protesting against various things in the downtown area all the time, and as long as they don't interfere with the activities of the city's residents or visitors, no one bothers them.

Way to dodge the question.
 
If the police minded their own damn business, instead of attempting to disrupt and intimidate peaceful protests, the cost to the city would be ZERO.

Can you show me where the Police in Philadelphia have disrupted and intimidated peaceful protesters?

Thanks in advance..
 
How much would you like to bet that they are comfortably ABOVE the 50%?

That depends.... is 40K (average) per year above the 50%?
 
If some had wound up in their pocket the income and wealth divide would not be as wide now would it?
You prove my point perfectly, the protesters aren't against the concept of the government picking and choosing when it comes to wealth redistribution, the vast majority are upset they weren't one of the chosen few.
 
That is not about if the person can pay the loan back or not.

That's exactly what it's about. There was a charge of racism brought against banks because they weren't giving a sufficient number of loans to Black applicants.
 
It's a free country, they can protest where they like. It's not like they need to BE in Washington for Washington to see them. It's called TV...transmits images over great distances.

Then perhaps, out of civic duty and the magic of television, they should go somewhere where they aren't blocking pedestrians or traffic.
 
The international organizations behind the Occupy movement could care less what their actions cost anybody.

They only desire to bring down our capitalist system.
 
How much would you like to bet that they are comfortably ABOVE the 50%?
51%-98% still qualifies.

I read an article in the Dallas Morning News about how the OWS protesters in Dallas are praising local law enforcement Officers for their friendly attitudes and help that they have given to the protesters.
 
51%-98% still qualifies.

I read an article in the Dallas Morning News about how the OWS protesters in Dallas are praising local law enforcement Officers for their friendly attitudes and help that they have given to the protesters.


Well, I feel all warm and fuzzy now....That should also make the participants feel good since they are not supposed to report crimes happening to them to the police, but rather some internal BS where they say they will counsel the offenders....HA!

Also, I am waiting for the Tea Party to sue these municipalities over the fees they were charged to hold their events that these self absorbed, selfish OWS'ers are not.

j-mac
 
Well, I feel all warm and fuzzy now....That should also make the participants feel good since they are not supposed to report crimes happening to them to the police, but rather some internal BS where they say they will counsel the offenders....HA!

Also, I am waiting for the Tea Party to sue these municipalities over the fees they were charged to hold their events that these self absorbed, selfish OWS'ers are not.

j-mac
The Tea Party lawsuits are going to be thrown out of court. It's similar to hiring on a job at $11.00/Hr and finding out later that someone hired after you is making $14.00/Hr. Using that for an argument will not get you a raise.
 
Then perhaps, out of civic duty and the magic of television, they should go somewhere where they aren't blocking pedestrians or traffic.

Your inconvenience does not override the rights of the individual.
 
The international organizations behind the Occupy movement could care less what their actions cost anybody.

They only desire to bring down our capitalist system.

So long as their movement isn't to make retard comments and arguments like the one you presented here; we're headed in the right direction.
 
The Tea Party lawsuits are going to be thrown out of court. It's similar to hiring on a job at $11.00/Hr and finding out later that someone hired after you is making $14.00/Hr. Using that for an argument will not get you a raise.

Sorry Mickey, bad analogy. Fees, and permit hurdles in your mind are only for those that don't promote the message you agree with?

j-mac
 
Sorry Mickey, bad analogy. Fees, and permit hurdles in your mind are only for those that don't promote the message you agree with?

j-mac

I actually think protest permits are similar to poll taxes.

Paying to exercise your rights.

I don't think anybody should be charged to protest.

And I wonder what philadelphia is getting for $10,000 a day in police "surveillance".
 
Your inconvenience does not override the rights of the individual.

We have right to protest for redress of grievances, but what are the Occupy people protesting? Corporate greed and inequality of wealth? These are slogans, not real ideas or demands that can be implemented by the government, so perhaps the Occupy people have no more right to protest than people who are unhappy about the weather. In the 1960's, the anti war people held massive protests demanding the government end the war, and the civil rights people held massive protests demanding that Senate Democrats allow enforceable civil rights legislation pass into law. In the 1960's we had the anti war movement and the civil rights movement, but today, we have only the Occupy Tantrums in various cities.
 
So long as their movement isn't to make retard comments and arguments like the one you presented here; we're headed in the right direction.

Do you dispute that there are international organizations behind the scenes...calling the shots? If so, perhaps you should read these links:

Adbusters Culturejammer Headquarters | Journal of the mental environment

Adbusters Calls For Occupy Wall Street To Demand G20 Impose 'Robin Hood' Tax

#OCCUPYWALLSTREET | Adbusters Culturejammer Headquarters

David Graeber, the Anti-Leader of Occupy Wall Street - Businessweek
 
I actually think protest permits are similar to poll taxes.

Paying to exercise your rights.

I don't think anybody should be charged to protest.

And I wonder what philadelphia is getting for $10,000 a day in police "surveillance".


Regardless of your personal feelings on what is the law, it is a fact that to hold rallies, or protests in most municipalities a group must file for the necessary permits, and or pay the fees in order to help defray the costs of city services that are provided. It is a fact that these gatherings are skirting the laws in that nature, and as such I think should be fined daily for the cost that they are causing the cities to incur.

j-mac
 
We have right to protest for redress of grievances, but what are the Occupy people protesting? Corporate greed and inequality of wealth? These are slogans, not real ideas or demands that can be implemented by the government, so perhaps the Occupy people have no more right to protest than people who are unhappy about the weather. In the 1960's, the anti war people held massive protests demanding the government end the war, and the civil rights people held massive protests demanding that Senate Democrats allow enforceable civil rights legislation pass into law. In the 1960's we had the anti war movement and the civil rights movement, but today, we have only the Occupy Tantrums in various cities.

Seems like Buffalo Springfield had a different take;

Buffalo Springfield - Stop Children What's That Sound - YouTube
 
We have right to protest for redress of grievances, but what are the Occupy people protesting? Corporate greed and inequality of wealth? These are slogans, not real ideas or demands that can be implemented by the government, so perhaps the Occupy people have no more right to protest than people who are unhappy about the weather. In the 1960's, the anti war people held massive protests demanding the government end the war, and the civil rights people held massive protests demanding that Senate Democrats allow enforceable civil rights legislation pass into law. In the 1960's we had the anti war movement and the civil rights movement, but today, we have only the Occupy Tantrums in various cities.

So those who protested the old wars were fine, civil rights is fine. Protesting the gross mixture of State and Corporate interest, demanding a return to free market capitalism and the end of our corporate capitalism structure....that's no ok? I don't know if assembly and protest should be decided by those hostile to the protest. I'm not certain you get a fair reading of what the protest is about from those folk.
 
Back
Top Bottom