Why The OWS Is Allowed in Public Parks

[martybegan]

It's not a public park; it's private property, and improper activities on private property are normally called "public nuisances" by the authorities and are shut down, with legal action taken against the instigators.

Privately Owned Public Space - New York City Department of City Planning

See the link above for details on POPS or privately owned public spaces. Basically developers traded space at lower levels of the properties for the ability to build higher buildings. Some of them, like zuccotti park, are open spaces at ground level of the property. Others are rooftop areas on smaller buildings in a development, still others are basically open areas in the lower floor of buildings, often with resturants and public restrooms. Some are just corridors between buildings with plants and seats.

The reason the protesters selected these instead of actual parks (NYC Parks Department) is that the rules state they must be availible for 24 hour occupation by people involved in leasure activities. NYC parks have more stringent rules, such as closing times, and equipment bans already in place. These spaces never had such rules, because they never really needed them.

"The reason the protesters selected these instead of actual parks ..."

Marty, the question is, rather, why they were allowed to remain by the owners.

And the answer is the essence of the OP....the owners were induced by a Left wing administration that hoped, believed, that this group would be the answer to the Tea Party.

"The Department of Energy finalized the loan guarantee less than a week after Occupy Wall Street protesters took to Zuccotti Park, and with the Obama administration's Tuesday endorsement of the protests, rumors are starting to circulate that this could be the reason Brookfield is allowing protesters to remain on its property."
Here's The Real Reason Why Occupy Wall Street Protesters Aren't Getting Kicked Out Of Zuccotti Park

The crux of the current legal argument is that, since the owners never enforced rules like no tents, no generators, no staying overnight, they cannot start doing it now.

The owners are bound to allow public access as part of the easment giving them the ability to build X additional floors in thier building. Under the agreement the city is responsible for policing the area, as a public space, but the company has to maintain it and provide upkeep, as it still legally owns it.

In a more structured court setting, i.e. one that doesnt have a raging liberal on the bench, the city and the owner will probably win the ability to enact the newer rules, including the no tent/tarp, as well as a time limit for occupation.

Please note that this is different from cases of property owners losing thier rights to thier property due to abandonment to the public. In this cases there is a set agreement between the city and the owner recognizing thr owner's possession of the property, regardless of the required public access.

 

[Luissa]

With my certificate I can do the very same thing my friend's dad does, and register with the state.

 

[martybegan]

Well, PC, for once your OP is almost on target, as far as explaining why Occupy is being allowed to continue doing things that are of dubious legality.

There are just a couple of errors in your analysis.

1) The Obama administration is not capitalizing politically on Occupy nearly as much as you imply, nor, in my opinion, as much as it should.

2) While talk about misbehavior on the part of the protesters may have become a major meme in right-wing circles, among the general population sympathy for the protest is running very high, and support for the movement's issues is huge.

So this is hardly a "strike-out" for the administration. First, it has yet to swing; second, this is a sucker pitch set up for a homer if there ever was one.

I'm not seeing much sympathy for the protesters in my circles. Most people who work in the area cant stand them, and most people in the rest of the city dont want them moving to where they are.

Support by the hipster/progressive manhattanite cliques? Yes. Among the outer boro working class? not so much.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Is like the Soros thing? Where he donated all this money to OWS, but really didn't?

The group speaks out against democrats and republican almost every day on their facebook page.
To put Obama aside, why would it matter is someone who is running for office supported the OWS?

I'm fascinated by your ability to cloud your own mind.

No, don't put Obama aside...his attempt to support the idea that there is a class that must be attacked is a key characteristic of the Left.

Had you remained au fait on this topic, you would be conversant with the facts that Wall Street is not the origin of the problem, that America has no permanent 'wealthy,' and that the only (slim) hope this incompetent has of re-election is to convince folks like yourself that he stands between "the 1%" and the 'wealth they have stolen'.

Sadly, no matter the remediation I provide, you remain immune.

 

[Luissa]

Is like the Soros thing? Where he donated all this money to OWS, but really didn't?

The group speaks out against democrats and republican almost every day on their facebook page.
To put Obama aside, why would it matter is someone who is running for office supported the OWS?

I'm fascinated by your ability to cloud your own mind.

No, don't put Obama aside...his attempt to support the idea that there is a class that must be attacked is a key characteristic of the Left.

Had you remained au fait on this topic, you would be conversant with the facts that Wall Street is not the origin of the problem, that America has no permanent 'wealthy,' and that the only (slim) hope this incompetent has of re-election is to convince folks like yourself that he stands between "the 1%" and the 'wealth they have stolen'.

Sadly, no matter the remediation I provide, you remain immune.

You mean class warfare, right?
You know what the funny thing is? Class Warfare is the product of someone interpreting it into English falsely. The original phrase wasn't Class Warfare. I always thought it was interesting.

And if you think I blindly support Obama now, well you haven't been paying attention. And it has nothing to do with attacking a certain class, it about holding certain people accountable for the problem they created and not just catering to that certain group while screwing over the middle class and poor. Of course, people like you will let yourself be brainwashed people who call these people ignorant. They might not agree with your point of view, but to call them ignorant is being a little partisan.

 

[PoliticalChic]

*''The current Occupy Wall Street movement is the best illustration to date of what President Barack Obama’s America looks like. It is an America where the lawless, unaccomplished, ignorant and incompetent rule. It is an America where those who have sacrificed nothing pillage and destroy the lives of those who have sacrificed greatly...."

This is a letter to the editor of Knoxville News-Sentinel . It is correct and true, and on the newspaper’s website. The letter was wrongly attributed to Thomas Sowell. Thomas Sowell did not write this letter to the editor, so I have been informed. It was written by a Knoxville local named Jack Furnari.

The rest of the letter may be found here:
Obama’s America | LibertyLog

So you consider a group who most have had some college, a large portion has bachelor's degree and master's degree unaccomplished and ignorant?
I think the person you quoted is partisan and it is showing.
And these kids are not destroying America, thinking the way that man does is destroying America. Putting corporation and Wall Street ahead Main street is destroying America.

And I also want to know who he is referring to when he said they sacrificed greatly?

Of course he is partisan.
Partisan means a strong supporter of a party, cause, or person.

I, too, am partisan. I believe stongly in the Constitution, and the safeguards of principles such as property rights.
The OWS and folks who have been fooled into supporting same are demanding things that do not belong to them, the lawful gains that others have accumulated.

"Putting corporation and Wall Street ahead Main street."
I couldn't have provided better evidence myself!

The bumper-sticker thinking that you provide indicates that there is a huge gulf between your beliefs, and reality.

In America, there is no class-barrier. Rather, there is opportunity. This is why more than three-quarters of those working Americans whose incomes were in the bottom 20 percent in 1975 were also in the top 40 percent of income earners at some point by 1991, says Sowell.
Source: Thomas Sowell, "How Media Misuse Income Data To Match Their Preconceptions," Investor's Business Daily, January 12, 2010.
For text:
How Media Misuse Income Data To Match Their Preconceptions - Latest Headlines - Investors.com

I strongly suggest you pick up a copy of "Economic Facts and Fallacies," by Dr. Sowell...pay special attention to chapter five.

In that chapter you will begin to understand to whom he was "referring to when he said they sacrificed greatly."

The wealthy in this great nation are very rarely those who inherit wealth. Some 90% earned it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Is like the Soros thing? Where he donated all this money to OWS, but really didn't?

The group speaks out against democrats and republican almost every day on their facebook page.
To put Obama aside, why would it matter is someone who is running for office supported the OWS?

I'm fascinated by your ability to cloud your own mind.

No, don't put Obama aside...his attempt to support the idea that there is a class that must be attacked is a key characteristic of the Left.

Had you remained au fait on this topic, you would be conversant with the facts that Wall Street is not the origin of the problem, that America has no permanent 'wealthy,' and that the only (slim) hope this incompetent has of re-election is to convince folks like yourself that he stands between "the 1%" and the 'wealth they have stolen'.

Sadly, no matter the remediation I provide, you remain immune.

You mean class warfare, right?
You know what the funny thing is? Class Warfare is the product of someone interpreting it into English falsely. The original phrase wasn't Class Warfare. I always thought it was interesting.

And if you think I blindly support Obama now, well you haven't been paying attention. And it has nothing to do with attacking a certain class, it about holding certain people accountable for the problem they created and not just catering to that certain group while screwing over the middle class and poor. Of course, people like you will let yourself be brainwashed people who call these people ignorant. They might not agree with your point of view, but to call them ignorant is being a little partisan.

First, I must tell you that I really appreciate this back and forth. This is the reason the USMB was created.

" it about holding certain people accountable for the problem they created..."
Well, we agree....as long as you realize that said people are the Progressives, starting with President Wilson, who had every desire to scrap the Constitution, and most especially FDR who, via his Second Bill of Rights speech, changed the impetus from equality before the law to equlity of wealth. FDR's GSE are the origin of the mortgage meltdown.


"...and not just catering to that certain group while screwing over the middle class and poor."
The middle class is doing very well, and continues to grow in wealth and income.

1. There are those who have been mislead into believing that American workers’ incomes have not risen in recent times.
a. “In the 25 years from 1980 to 2004, a period during which U.S. gross domestic product per person grew by almost two-thirds, the wages of the typical worker actually fell slightly after accounting for inflation.” A Rising Tide?

2. The statistics that claim the above fail to include the value of benefits such as health insurance and retirement benefits, etc., which have represented a growing share of compensation over the years. See Cox and Alm, “The Myths of Rich and Poor,” p.21

a. Nor do these sophists separated full time workers from part time (part time work has been growing, another indicator of rising prosperity). Of course, including the weekly wages of part timers pulls down the statistical average.

3. In actuality, the income of full time wage and salary workers increased between 1980 and 2004, and so did real income- either by 13% or 17%, depending on which price index is used in the calculation. Reynolds, “Income and Wealth,” p. 63.

a. If health and retirement benefits are included, as they should be, worker compensation rose by almost a third. And, even this is illusory, as it doesn’t include the “statistically invisible (not on tax forms) returns inside IRA and 401(k) plans.” Reynolds, op. cit., p.64.

b. And, the way real income is computed tends to understate its growth (money income divided by some price index, to account for inflation), and government indexes are open to questions of accuracy. Many economists regard the CPI as inherently- even intentionally- an exaggeration of inflation. http://www.econport.org/content/handbook/Inflation/Price-Index/CPI.html

c. An example: while the price of automobiles is increasing, also increasing are the features, once defined as add-ons, or found only in luxury autos. Therefore, not all of the increase is simply inflation. And this is true of many if not most consumer products.

4. Stagnation? The broadest and most accurate measure of living standard is real per capita consumption. That measure soared by 74% from 1980 to 2004. U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Economic Analysis

a. A study of table 7.1 would show that between 1973 and 2004, it doubled. And between 1929 and 2004, real per capita consumption by American workers increased five fold. The fastest growth periods were 1983-1990 and 1992-2004, known as the Reagan boom.

Thank you for this opportunity.

 

[Old Rocks]

Ol' PC with the usual political shit.

No, the 'Progressives' and 'Liberals' are not all about scrapping the Constitution. If any Americans are about that, it would be the 'Conservatives' that love torture, and would far rather see money for the rich than health care for America's children.

But keep up your BS, PC. People like those within the OWS movement can definately point to people like yourself as the reason that they are out in the street, and use your message in the coming elections to influence people.

 

[Rocko]

Ol' PC with the usual political shit.

No, the 'Progressives' and 'Liberals' are not all about scrapping the Constitution. If any Americans are about that, it would be the 'Conservatives' that love torture, and would far rather see money for the rich than health care for America's children.

But keep up your BS, PC. People like those within the OWS movement can definately point to people like yourself as the reason that they are out in the street, and use your message in the coming elections to influence people.

You are a pure moron. the constitution says nothing about health care for America's children, you dumb fuck. You show me one conservative that says they love torture.

The stupid ows movement is made up of incoherent adolescents, who want something for nothing, protest your heart out, moron.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Ol' PC with the usual political shit.

No, the 'Progressives' and 'Liberals' are not all about scrapping the Constitution. If any Americans are about that, it would be the 'Conservatives' that love torture, and would far rather see money for the rich than health care for America's children.

But keep up your BS, PC. People like those within the OWS movement can definately point to people like yourself as the reason that they are out in the street, and use your message in the coming elections to influence people.

I’ll slow down…I didn’t realize it was an ‘idiot x-ing.’

Am I going to have to make you look foolish again???

1. Wilson wrote in “The State,” 1889, that "Government does now whatever experience permits or the times demand." His writings attack the Constitution, and the ideas of natural and individual rights. Along with Frank J. Goodnow, they pioneered the concept of the ‘administrative state,’ which separated the administration of government from the limitations of constitutional government. American progressivism: a reader - Ronald J. Pestritto, William J. Atto - Google Books

2. “A main problem was that Americans believed their rights "unalienable," to use the Declaration's term—i.e., they cannot be defined or taken away by government. This made it difficult for Progressives to put the government in charge of private property, and so Goodnow argued for a positive understanding of rights as granted by government itself:
The rights which [an individual] possesses are...conferred upon him, not by his Creator, but rather by the society to which he belongs. What they are is to be determined by the legislative authority in view of the needs of that society. Social expediency, rather than natural right, is thus to determine the sphere of individual freedom of action.” The Claremont Institute - Leaving the Constitution

And, of course, this doctrine of progressives, expressed by Wilson:

3. Justly revered as our great Constitution is, it could be stripped off and thrown aside like a garment, and the nation would still stand forth in the living vestment of flesh and sinew, warm with the heart-blood of one people, ready to recreate constitutions and laws. … Woodrow Wilson [Woodrow Wilson
"The Modern Democratic State" (1885; first published in 1966)
The Papers of Woodrow Wilson, Volume 5]

Poor, sad Rocks....
See how much you'd have known if you could read?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Is like the Soros thing? Where he donated all this money to OWS, but really didn't?

The group speaks out against democrats and republican almost every day on their facebook page.
To put Obama aside, why would it matter is someone who is running for office supported the OWS?

I'm fascinated by your ability to cloud your own mind.

No, don't put Obama aside...his attempt to support the idea that there is a class that must be attacked is a key characteristic of the Left.

Had you remained au fait on this topic, you would be conversant with the facts that Wall Street is not the origin of the problem, that America has no permanent 'wealthy,' and that the only (slim) hope this incompetent has of re-election is to convince folks like yourself that he stands between "the 1%" and the 'wealth they have stolen'.

Sadly, no matter the remediation I provide, you remain immune.

You mean class warfare, right?
You know what the funny thing is? Class Warfare is the product of someone interpreting it into English falsely. The original phrase wasn't Class Warfare. I always thought it was interesting.

And if you think I blindly support Obama now, well you haven't been paying attention. And it has nothing to do with attacking a certain class, it about holding certain people accountable for the problem they created and not just catering to that certain group while screwing over the middle class and poor. Of course, people like you will let yourself be brainwashed people who call these people ignorant. They might not agree with your point of view, but to call them ignorant is being a little partisan.

Luissa I have 3 questions for clarification before I respond to you.

1) What is the problem that was created?
2) Who created the problem?
3) how did they create the problem?

 

[Luissa]

Is like the Soros thing? Where he donated all this money to OWS, but really didn't?

The group speaks out against democrats and republican almost every day on their facebook page.
To put Obama aside, why would it matter is someone who is running for office supported the OWS?

A lot of the groups that donated money and paid people to go to the OWS receive Sorros money. The connection is as good as, and even better than, the Koch connections people bring up.

The only connection I have seen made is the Tide Foundation. And like I said before that was no smoking gun, but you get an A for effort.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Is like the Soros thing? Where he donated all this money to OWS, but really didn't?

The group speaks out against democrats and republican almost every day on their facebook page.
To put Obama aside, why would it matter is someone who is running for office supported the OWS?

A lot of the groups that donated money and paid people to go to the OWS receive Sorros money. The connection is as good as, and even better than, the Koch connections people bring up.

The only connection I have seen made is the Tide Foundation. And like I said before that was no smoking gun, but you get an A for effort.

Like I said the connections are as good as the Koch connections so by proxy you are actually admitting that the Koch/teaparty thing is really not all that people play it up to be.

 

[Luissa]

A lot of the groups that donated money and paid people to go to the OWS receive Sorros money. The connection is as good as, and even better than, the Koch connections people bring up.

The only connection I have seen made is the Tide Foundation. And like I said before that was no smoking gun, but you get an A for effort.

Like I said the connections are as good as the Koch connections so by proxy you are actually admitting that the Koch/teaparty thing is really not all that people play it up to be.

You do realize the media outlet that originally ran the story pretty much retracted their statement, right? The Tide Foundation gave $170,000 to Adbusters over something like 13 years, and Soros has donated money to the Tide Foundation. That still doesn't prove he gave money to the OWS. For one the OWS is a different group than Adbusters, with different bank accounts and everything.
That would be like if Ronald McDonald House donated money to a certain group, and someone claiming I donated money to that group because I give them my change when I go to McDonalds.
Koch brothers have directly donated millions of dollars to the Tea Party.

 

[Luissa]

It was actually $185,000 according to this link, the other one I read said $170,000. Sorry!
Reuters: George Soros Money Behind Occupy Wall Street Protests | Politicons

Soros: not a funder of Wall Street protests | Reuters

Soros spokesman Michael Vachon said that Soros has not "funded the protests directly or indirectly." He added: "Assertions to the contrary are an attempt by those who oppose the protesters to cast doubt on the authenticity of the movement."

Soros has donated at least $3.5 million to an organization called the Tides Center in recent years, earmarking the funds for specific purposes. Tides has given grants to Adbusters, an anti-capitalist group in Canada whose inventive marketing campaign sparked the first demonstrations last month.

Vachon said Open Society specified what its donations could be used for. He said they were not general purpose funds to be used at the discretion of Tides -- for example for grants to Adbusters. "Our grants to Tides were for other purposes."

So can we stop stating Soros donated money to them now?

 

[Luissa]

I think it was funny that one article was posted at 630am and another saying he wasn't a supporter was posted by 930pm that night. I guess they realized they were kind of stupid trying to say he donated to them. I guess some people around here should do a little follow up. Just sayin

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

It was actually $185,000 according to this link, the other one I read said $170,000. Sorry!
Reuters: George Soros Money Behind Occupy Wall Street Protests | Politicons

Soros: not a funder of Wall Street protests | Reuters

Soros spokesman Michael Vachon said that Soros has not "funded the protests directly or indirectly." He added: "Assertions to the contrary are an attempt by those who oppose the protesters to cast doubt on the authenticity of the movement."

Soros has donated at least $3.5 million to an organization called the Tides Center in recent years, earmarking the funds for specific purposes. Tides has given grants to Adbusters, an anti-capitalist group in Canada whose inventive marketing campaign sparked the first demonstrations last month.

Vachon said Open Society specified what its donations could be used for. He said they were not general purpose funds to be used at the discretion of Tides -- for example for grants to Adbusters. "Our grants to Tides were for other purposes."

So can we stop stating Soros donated money to them now?

He donates money to groups such as these:

Some of those groups donated money to, sent people to, and had a physical presence at OWS locations.

Like I said the ties of soros to OWS are as strong as, if not stronger than, any ties Koch has to the tea party. Going by your own standard used to tie Koch to the teaparties I can make this claim all day long, unless you want to backtrack on the whole koch/teaparty business......

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I'm fascinated by your ability to cloud your own mind.

No, don't put Obama aside...his attempt to support the idea that there is a class that must be attacked is a key characteristic of the Left.

Had you remained au fait on this topic, you would be conversant with the facts that Wall Street is not the origin of the problem, that America has no permanent 'wealthy,' and that the only (slim) hope this incompetent has of re-election is to convince folks like yourself that he stands between "the 1%" and the 'wealth they have stolen'.

Sadly, no matter the remediation I provide, you remain immune.

You mean class warfare, right?
You know what the funny thing is? Class Warfare is the product of someone interpreting it into English falsely. The original phrase wasn't Class Warfare. I always thought it was interesting.

And if you think I blindly support Obama now, well you haven't been paying attention. And it has nothing to do with attacking a certain class, it about holding certain people accountable for the problem they created and not just catering to that certain group while screwing over the middle class and poor. Of course, people like you will let yourself be brainwashed people who call these people ignorant. They might not agree with your point of view, but to call them ignorant is being a little partisan.

Luissa I have 3 questions for clarification before I respond to you.

1) What is the problem that was created?
2) Who created the problem?
3) how did they create the problem?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8E_zMLCRNg&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PL2E08DD322E3B5DDC]Cricket Sound - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Caroljo]

That's government for you | Nealz Nuze | www.boortz.com


Cub Scouts reduced to tears for picking up leaves in a park.

As I understand the story, Governor Granholm --- and remember that she is a Democrat --- initiated a program whereby all adults in Michigan who accept Medicaid dollars for the care of their disabled adult children are deemed to be providing care for their children as employees – yes, as employees – of some government outfit called the Michigan Quality Community Care Council.

In this section the author has no clue what he is talking about, just so you know.

You know how I know? Because I take care of Adults who are disabled, and my friend's dad is paid to take care of his............ through the state. When you do this, you are also usually required to go through training, and for good reason.

Do you live in Michigan? I do.....
Here's a link to their webpage. At the bottom it shows they're represented by SEIU, which should be a warning to everyone to stay away from it! There's alot of information on it if you just google it.....

Home | MQCCC

There's talk now that Gov Snyder will be phasing this out....but there's nothing definate to post right now.

 

[Luissa]

No, but they have the same program in many states including mine. The reason they have to join the union is because they are a paid caregiver through the state. Would you rather they not get paid? If I went through the training and wanted to be an independent caregiver through the state I would have to join the union. It also doesn't mention if they qualify they can usually get benefits. Personally, having been a caregiver I would rather they be trained. My friends dad is even nurse delegated, and has as many training hours as I do. And if he goes through hard tines he can pick up other clients other than his adult son.

That's government for you | Nealz Nuze | www.boortz.com


Cub Scouts reduced to tears for picking up leaves in a park.

As I understand the story, Governor Granholm --- and remember that she is a Democrat --- initiated a program whereby all adults in Michigan who accept Medicaid dollars for the care of their disabled adult children are deemed to be providing care for their children as employees – yes, as employees – of some government outfit called the Michigan Quality Community Care Council.

In this section the author has no clue what he is talking about, just so you know.

You know how I know? Because I take care of Adults who are disabled, and my friend's dad is paid to take care of his............ through the state. When you do this, you are also usually required to go through training, and for good reason.

Do you live in Michigan? I do.....
Here's a link to their webpage. At the bottom it shows they're represented by SEIU, which should be a warning to everyone to stay away from it! There's alot of information on it if you just google it.....

Home | MQCCC

There's talk now that Gov Snyder will be phasing this out....but there's nothing definate to post right now.