Should Occupy have to pay??

[oreo]

The Tea Party is thinking the Occupy Protestors should have to pay for property damage, extra security, space and other expenses associated with their protests.

Since the Tea Party paid for all the permits, processed all the paper work necessary and cleaned up behind themselves, shouldn't the OWS have to as well??

I hear they are collecting quite a bit in cash donations. Seems like they could reimburse the cities for the costs.

The Tea Party had to pay and now their suing for a REFUND

Richmond, Va. — The Richmond tea party is demanding a refund of about $10,000 from the city, claiming it unfairly charged them for rallies while allowing the Occupy protesters to use the same space for several weeks for free.

The political organization is sending the city an invoice for the charges incurred for three rallies held in Kanawha Plaza over the past three years. The Occupy protesters have been camped in the plaza since Oct. 15.

Richmond Tea Party spokeswoman Colleen Owens says it's not fair that her group had to pay fees for permits, portable toilets, police presence and emergency personnel. The group also had to purchase a $1 million insurance policy.

Tea party groups across the nation have raised similar concerns since the protests spread from New York earlier this month.

Richmond tea party: Charge Occupy protesters or refund $10,000 we spent to rally in Virginia | The Republic

 

[Intense]

Only some should get Extorted I guess. It's only fair, right?

 

[Ravi]

Back at the beginning....they never refused to pay they asked for more time.

So you are being dishonest again on that one point.

They refused to pay approximately $6,000 in charges they disputed. That's why Trump paid.

What's also amusing is they said they shouldn't really have to pay anything for exercising their freedom of speech rights.

The truth still eludes you a little bit. They disputed that the total was too high, they asked for more time to pay, trump found out and offered to pay, they accepted his offer.

Like I said earlier I don't think that protests like the tea party protests or OWS should have to pay for permits to have their events however the laws on the books say people do.

They refused to pay for the charges they disputed. That's refusing to pay, no matter how you dance away from it.

 

[Douger]

The Tea Party is thinking the Occupy Protestors should have to pay for property damage, extra security, space and other expenses associated with their protests.

Since the Tea Party paid for all the permits, processed all the paper work necessary and cleaned up behind themselves, shouldn't the OWS have to as well??

I hear they are collecting quite a bit in cash donations. Seems like they could reimburse the cities for the costs.

They already did pay.Your masters gave it all away.

 

[Si modo]

They refused to pay approximately $6,000 in charges they disputed. That's why Trump paid.

What's also amusing is they said they shouldn't really have to pay anything for exercising their freedom of speech rights.

The truth still eludes you a little bit. They disputed that the total was too high, they asked for more time to pay, trump found out and offered to pay, they accepted his offer.

Like I said earlier I don't think that protests like the tea party protests or OWS should have to pay for permits to have their events however the laws on the books say people do.

They refused to pay for the charges they disputed. That's refusing to pay, no matter how you dance away from it.

And, that is a lie.

You are a liar.

 

[naturegirl]

They refused to pay approximately $6,000 in charges they disputed. That's why Trump paid.

What's also amusing is they said they shouldn't really have to pay anything for exercising their freedom of speech rights.

The truth still eludes you a little bit. They disputed that the total was too high, they asked for more time to pay, trump found out and offered to pay, they accepted his offer.

Like I said earlier I don't think that protests like the tea party protests or OWS should have to pay for permits to have their events however the laws on the books say people do.

They refused to pay for the charges they disputed. That's refusing to pay, no matter how you dance away from it.

So if you dispute a charge on your credit card are you refusing to pay?? Or are you actually making sure the charges are correct?? If you review the charges and they are not right, would you go ahead and pay anyway? Asking for more time to pay is not a refusal either.

You're the one dancing around the truth, you can't even own your mistake. I suggest you put the shovel down, that hole is getting deeper.

 

[The T]

The dirty filthy hippies of the 60's are lovin this shit...it's exactly what they were doing. They found another 'lost generation' to corrupt in thier own images.

YEP!

"Yesterdays "flower children", are todays bloomin' idiots!"

Actually most of them grew up and are now part of the 1%

While they deny that they are, and in the same breath, encourage the same horseshit they did in the 60's.

Is it insanity or a power quest?

 

[The T]

Back at the beginning....they never refused to pay they asked for more time.

So you are being dishonest again on that one point.

They refused to pay approximately $6,000 in charges they disputed. That's why Trump paid.

What's also amusing is they said they shouldn't really have to pay anything for exercising their freedom of speech rights.

Did MoveOn pay their bill?

It's pretty pathetic and cringeworthy to watch you refuse to be honest.

Seriously, what sort of profound insecurity must you have when it's so hard for you to admit being wrong? So hard that you brand yourself a liar?

That's just fucked up.

Or a typical Statist willing to assume the role of liar for power sake? (Ends justifies the means)?

 

[jillian]

The Tea Party is thinking the Occupy Protestors should have to pay for property damage, extra security, space and other expenses associated with their protests.

Since the Tea Party paid for all the permits, processed all the paper work necessary and cleaned up behind themselves, shouldn't the OWS have to as well??

I hear they are collecting quite a bit in cash donations. Seems like they could reimburse the cities for the costs.

No, idiota. The right to peaceful protest isn't intended to bankrupt you.

Hack

 

[Intense]

The Tea Party is thinking the Occupy Protestors should have to pay for property damage, extra security, space and other expenses associated with their protests.

Since the Tea Party paid for all the permits, processed all the paper work necessary and cleaned up behind themselves, shouldn't the OWS have to as well??

I hear they are collecting quite a bit in cash donations. Seems like they could reimburse the cities for the costs.

No, idiota. The right to peaceful protest isn't intended to bankrupt you.

Hack

I agree. Protest should not be about Dollar Signs and Permit's, as a means to obstruct Free Speech. However, for Large Demonstrations, there should be better Organization, in relation to Quality of Life. I think as a whole, most big Cities deal poorly with Public Rest Rooms, and could do much better.

The OWS could concentrate on Support more, Showers, Laundry, change of clothes, rotational sleep in doors one day a week.

 

[naturegirl]

The Tea Party is thinking the Occupy Protestors should have to pay for property damage, extra security, space and other expenses associated with their protests.

Since the Tea Party paid for all the permits, processed all the paper work necessary and cleaned up behind themselves, shouldn't the OWS have to as well??

I hear they are collecting quite a bit in cash donations. Seems like they could reimburse the cities for the costs.

No, idiota. The right to peaceful protest isn't intended to bankrupt you.

Hack

So one group gets to be treated differently because you're on their side. Ask yourself how you would feel if this were a Tea Party protest or a white supremest protest, would you expect them to pay?? Sure you would. OWS has collected a lot of $, they have the money to pay but they won't.

The Tea Party is thinking the Occupy Protestors should have to pay for property damage, extra security, space and other expenses associated with their protests.

Since the Tea Party paid for all the permits, processed all the paper work necessary and cleaned up behind themselves, shouldn't the OWS have to as well??

I hear they are collecting quite a bit in cash donations. Seems like they could reimburse the cities for the costs.

No, idiota. The right to peaceful protest isn't intended to bankrupt you.

Hack

I agree. Protest should not be about Dollar Signs and Permit's, as a means to obstruct Free Speech. However, for Large Demonstrations, there should be better Organization, in relation to Quality of Life. I think as a whole, most big Cities deal poorly with Public Rest Rooms, and could do much better.

The OWS could concentrate on Support more, Showers, Laundry, change of clothes, rotational sleep in doors one day a week.

I agree it shouldn't be about $. However, there are laws and fees required and permission needs to be given. What if there is another event scheduled for the same location?

The OWS have collected a lot of $, they can afford to pay and they should. The taxpayers of NY shouldn't have to pick up the tab with funds like this coming in:

As of October 10 -- roughly three weeks after the first protesters amassed in lower Manhattan -- donors had sent about $81,000 to various Occupy locations using the online payment service WePay, according to data provided by that company.

But since then, contributions to the Occupy cause have quadrupled. As of this past Thursday, October 27, more than $325,000 in donations have come in through WePay. The vast majority of those funds were donated in the past two and a half weeks.

Donations To Occupy Wall Street Skyrocketed In Last Three Weeks

 

[Londoner]

Why hasn't the Tea Party been informed about what happened in the derivative market prior the meltdown? - specifically the amount of stuff purchased on margin, and the criminally flawed risk models created by our innovators. Nobody pointed a gun at the large financial firms and said "place trillions in bets on the housing market"

If my unemployed illegal alien neighbor buys a mansion, than shame on him and shame on the bank. However, if I choose to buy that loan, shame on me.

When you buy a financial product based on the housing market, you are responsible for it; you made that bet.

Worse: The decision to turn the housing market into a casino - where firms purchased and sold stuff they didn't properly evaluate, and then placed massive bets against the shit they were selling - caused the risk to spread around the globe. The only thing the tea party has been told is that irresponsible poor people defaulted. They haven't been told about the criminal forces which constructed a kingdom of risk on top of the housing market.

Wall Street was responsible for evaluating those mortgages prior to purchasing/bundling/selling. If there was any question about those loans - any lack of transparency about the quality of those mortgages - they should not have bet the American economy on it.

 

[Intense]

Why hasn't the Tea Party been informed about what happened in the derivative market prior the meltdown? - specifically the amount of stuff purchased on margin, and the criminally flawed risk models created by our innovators. Nobody pointed a gun at the large financial firms and said "place trillions in bets on the housing market"

If my unemployed illegal alien neighbor buys a mansion, than shame on him and shame on the bank. However, if I choose to buy that loan, shame on me.

When you buy a financial product based on the mortgage market, you are responsible for it; you made that bet. The decision to turn the housing market into a casino - where firms purchased and sold stuff they didn't properly evaluate, and then placed massive bets against the shit they were selling - caused the risk to spread around the globe. The only thing the tea party has been told is that irresponsible poor people defaulted. They haven't been told about the criminal forces which constructed a kingdom of risk on top of the housing market. They were responsible for evaluating those mortgages prior to purchasing/bundling/selling. If there was any question, they should not have bet the American economy on it.

This Recipe was a long time in the making. Ask yourself who these innovators were related to. Who's Holiday Tables are they eating at.

What is the Tea Party's role in this, as opposed to Big Government and Big Money? Who gained again? How much was gained in the transfer of bundles of unknown worth? What's with the sleight of hands there?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Just look at the damage and problems those dirty liberal bastards are causing in NY.......Christ, those pieces of shit are even stealing the soap and toilet paper from local restaurants....Nothing more than typical liberals who have zero respect for anything or anybody.

www.nytimes.com/2011/10/08/nyregion...to-chafe-its-neighbors.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1

What would they want with soap?

 

[Uncensored2008]

It does if we have another revolution.

As a paid agent of the democratic party, are you saying that the party is advocating revolution? Is the party now openly Marxist and promoting violence?

 

[Intense]

It does if we have another revolution.

As a paid agent of the democratic party, are you saying that the party is advocating revolution? Is the party now openly Marxist and promoting violence?

He won't answer.

 

[Uncensored2008]

They refused to pay for the charges they disputed. That's refusing to pay, no matter how you dance away from it.

Rati, lying ain't helping your case!

I know you always ask yourself; "What would Clinton do?" And the answer is always "LIE...."

 

[Uncensored2008]

He won't answer.

I know.

But it does appear that he is advocating revolution.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

They refused to pay approximately $6,000 in charges they disputed. That's why Trump paid.

What's also amusing is they said they shouldn't really have to pay anything for exercising their freedom of speech rights.

The truth still eludes you a little bit. They disputed that the total was too high, they asked for more time to pay, trump found out and offered to pay, they accepted his offer.

Like I said earlier I don't think that protests like the tea party protests or OWS should have to pay for permits to have their events however the laws on the books say people do.

They refused to pay for the charges they disputed. That's refusing to pay, no matter how you dance away from it.

The truth still eludes you a little bit. They disputed that the total was too high, they asked for more time to pay, trump found out and offered to pay, they accepted his offer.

Like I said earlier I don't think that protests like the tea party protests or OWS should have to pay for permits to have their events however the laws on the books say people do.

They refused to pay for the charges they disputed. That's refusing to pay, no matter how you dance away from it.

And, that is a lie.

You are a liar.

The truth still eludes you a little bit. They disputed that the total was too high, they asked for more time to pay, trump found out and offered to pay, they accepted his offer.

Like I said earlier I don't think that protests like the tea party protests or OWS should have to pay for permits to have their events however the laws on the books say people do.

They refused to pay for the charges they disputed. That's refusing to pay, no matter how you dance away from it.

So if you dispute a charge on your credit card are you refusing to pay?? Or are you actually making sure the charges are correct?? If you review the charges and they are not right, would you go ahead and pay anyway? Asking for more time to pay is not a refusal either.

You're the one dancing around the truth, you can't even own your mistake. I suggest you put the shovel down, that hole is getting deeper.

Like they said Ravi, you are wrong on this one. I don't know if you are missinformed or intentionally being dishonest but you got it wrong.

 

[Ravi]

Did they agree to pay?
No.

The opposite of agree is refuse.

Did they pay?
No.

They refused to pay.

Done.