Occupy Wall Street. Police vs people in NY.

Kraint wrote:
WiredAsylum wrote:

When I have time, I am going to get to the bottom of who this group is, because it would amaze me if they actually are linked to drivers.

Not saying this is completely wrong, I am just not sure how you could do an open letter about driver conditions and leave out what the American Transportation Research Institute compiled through their annual driver polls as the top 10 issues facing drivers today (link is to a summary you do not want to have to read the entire report, if you do pm me your email address and i can email you a copy of the pdf)

Driver satisfaction is at an all time low for various reasons(source coming cant find my report on this), if they want to protest that issue, they need to be on capital hill not the ports.

After doing more research I do not think this is malicious, in fact I believe they have the best intentions here, they are just misguided with this target.

The authors of the letter give their full names, employers and experience. They are all truck drivers employed by the companies that are mentioned in the letter.

OK perhaps they cover the other issues in another part of their site, if that is the case, I have less issue. I made my bones with this company in carrier relations and am looking to move to the government affairs section should a decent role open up, and I can convince my wife to move to DC. So I am a bit overly passionate when talking about working conditions facing people working in all aspects of the transportation industry.

Ulairi wrote:

And to help get you guys started on the right foot:

Leftist Good! Conservative Bad! OWS Good! Tea Party Bad! Rick Perry Bad!

Aw crap, Mattdaddy hacked Ulairi's account!

Kraint wrote:
Dimmerswitch wrote:
Ulairi wrote:

Leftist Good! Conservative Bad! OWS Good! Tea Party Bad! Rick Perry Bad!

That does a disservice to the folks having an honest conversation in this thread.

I concur. When you think of those who disagree with you as caricatures you lose the ability to have any sort of meaningful discussion with them.

I actually wanted to post this but was beaten to it. And in a bit of fairness to Ulairi too, he's not wrong about the difference in how the Tea Party got kicked around as a public whipping boy on the forums here versus the treatment OWS has gotten. Now, granted, there were many legitimate criticisms to leverage against the Tea Party stuff, but the mockery of it got out of hand. Much like Ulairi's mockery of OWS.

Farscry wrote:
Ulairi wrote:

And to help get you guys started on the right foot:

Leftist Good! Conservative Bad! OWS Good! Tea Party Bad! Rick Perry Bad!

Aw crap, Mattdaddy hacked Ulairi's account!

Kraint wrote:
Dimmerswitch wrote:
Ulairi wrote:

Leftist Good! Conservative Bad! OWS Good! Tea Party Bad! Rick Perry Bad!

That does a disservice to the folks having an honest conversation in this thread.

I concur. When you think of those who disagree with you as caricatures you lose the ability to have any sort of meaningful discussion with them.

I actually wanted to post this but was beaten to it. And in a bit of fairness to Ulairi too, he's not wrong about the difference in how the Tea Party got kicked around as a public whipping boy on the forums here versus the treatment OWS has gotten. Now, granted, there were many legitimate criticisms to leverage against the Tea Party stuff, but the mockery of it got out of hand. Much like Ulairi's mockery of OWS.

I actually don't mean to mock OWS. I think the intentions of OWS are noble, just like I thought the tea party's intentions were noble. We do need to get the corruptible influence of corporations out of the public square. I just think that OWS like the tea party lacks the right solutions and brings more anger and divisiveness to the public square. I wish OWS would actually stop protesting and causing a bother for people and actually participate in the political process.

I appreciate the qualifications above, and largely agree. Where I disagree is that I think they actually are working through the political process right now. The freedom of speech is a powerful tool for change, and they are exercising their rights/voices now to bring volume to an issue that desperately needs it. I think the bother that they cause, while certainly troublesome for many, is the only way to get noticed and to keep the struggle alive.

Ulairi wrote:

I actually don't mean to mock OWS. I think the intentions of OWS are noble, just like I thought the tea party's intentions were noble. We do need to get the corruptible influence of corporations out of the public square. I just think that OWS like the tea party lacks the right solutions and brings more anger and divisiveness to the public square. I wish OWS would actually stop protesting and causing a bother for people and actually participate in the political process.

Ah; my apologies for the misunderstanding on my part, but it did seem that you were coming across the opposite. I do agree with your entire statement here, but with the caveat that sadly I think the system is so corrupt that it's stacked against the introduction of a meaningful force of individuals representing either group who could manage to change things from within. But that may simply be my cynicism talking; at this point it's honestly hard for me to tell with myself.

Hey, if you're going to back out of a thread, then back out of it. Don't keep coming back because you can't help yourself. It's a bad habit.

Farscry wrote:

I actually wanted to post this but was beaten to it. And in a bit of fairness to Ulairi too, he's not wrong about the difference in how the Tea Party got kicked around as a public whipping boy on the forums here versus the treatment OWS has gotten. Now, granted, there were many legitimate criticisms to leverage against the Tea Party stuff, but the mockery of it got out of hand. Much like Ulairi's mockery of OWS.

The big difference, to me, is that by the time I noticed the Tea Party, it was already taken over by the Republican party and getting veered far far away from it's cause. I've since heard the history of the Tea Party and understand the early Tea Party had very different ideals/goals than what we see now. It's quite a different animal from OWS, which has gotten to more prominence, faster, without really being steered too much by the Powers That Be yet.

Well, Ulairi thinks we're applying double standards to the Tea Party and to OWS. Are we? He could be right.

I actually just emailed him asking for opinions on the things I post. I try to post both good and bad things but I seriously wonder now if I am being biased in my postings. I would love to hear feedback either way.

Malor wrote:

Well, Ulairi thinks we're applying double standards to the Tea Party and to OWS. Are we? He could be right.

I think he's partly right, honestly. Granted he's frequently mocked the OWS folks as kids with bongo drums, iPhones and no interest in working. So it's hard to take that line of reasoning seriously. But being objective, yes the Tea Party was not given the same fair shake by many people that OWS now is. That's probably a whole other thread, honestly, so I don't know if it's worth getting into why that happened or how it happened. But that it happened seems obvious to me. Identity politics came into play and the next thing you know the message of "tea baggers" (scarequotes used as that was the term being bandied about at the time) was being lost in who they were.

I've said before and I'll say it again, the Tea Party and OWS have a lot in common deep down. If the actual human beings in each group could set aside identity politics long enough to engage in a dialogue they'd probably find they were all frustrated by the bailouts, the intrusion of government into the lives of Americans and the prolonged wars.

DSGamer wrote:
Malor wrote:

Well, Ulairi thinks we're applying double standards to the Tea Party and to OWS. Are we? He could be right.

I think he's partly right, honestly. Granted he's frequently mocked the OWS folks as kids with bongo drums, iPhones and no interest in working. So it's hard to take that line of reasoning seriously. But being objective, yes the Tea Party was not given the same fair shake by many people that OWS now is. That's probably a whole other thread, honestly, so I don't know if it's worth getting into why that happened or how it happened.

I would agree with that (I think I even made note of that when the Tea Party thing was going on, how they weren't getting a fair shake...). I'd also agree it's probably a different thread, but it's good to note our biases to continue in this one.

Saying the Tea Party and OWS have something in common because they were both focused on the intersection of corporate culture and government is like saying Ayn Rand and Karl Marx had something in common because, um...they were both focused on the intersection of corporate culture and government.

Minarchist wrote:
DSGamer wrote:
Malor wrote:

Well, Ulairi thinks we're applying double standards to the Tea Party and to OWS. Are we? He could be right.

I think he's partly right, honestly. Granted he's frequently mocked the OWS folks as kids with bongo drums, iPhones and no interest in working. So it's hard to take that line of reasoning seriously. But being objective, yes the Tea Party was not given the same fair shake by many people that OWS now is. That's probably a whole other thread, honestly, so I don't know if it's worth getting into why that happened or how it happened.

I would agree with that (I think I even made note of that when the Tea Party thing was going on, how they weren't getting a fair shake...). I'd also agree it's probably a different thread, but it's good to note our biases to continue in this one.

In the early stages of the movement, I'd agree. After they became the Fox News darlings and started shouting over town hall meetings, I stopped taking them seriously. It just became a more extreme wing of the Republican party. I respect that OWS is putting in the effort to not just be a ball in one party's political court, but a significant movement in its own right.

I think that there is actually a lot of common ground between the original Tea Party and OWS. From either side's POV, the middle class is getting hosed on taxes and the government is not using that money very well. Both want people to have a fair chance at succeeding in life.

Kraint wrote:

I think that there is actually a lot of common ground between the original Tea Party and OWS. From either side's POV, the middle class is getting hosed on taxes and the government is not using that money very well. Both want people to have a fair chance at succeeding in life.

Is there anyone that *doesn't* believe that to be true? Everyone seems to agree the middle class pays too much in taxes, so that's the common ground of...everyone. It's like saying two movements are both against putting babies on spikes.

As for the government not using that money very well, is that even accurate? Again, it's a 'babies on spikes' issue, where *everyone* has a problem with the government not using money well no matter where you are on the political spectrum. I don't know if OWS was ever about the message that bailouts were wrong, but instead was about the only people to get a bailout was Wall Street while students and homeowners and the rest of the 99% get told their problems are their own fault and they should take personal responsibility when they asked for a bailout for the rest of us.

edit: as for both want people to have a fair chance at succeeding in life, that's real 'babies on spikes territory. Is there anyone who *doesn't* believe that? If one group thinks government needs to get out of the way in order to do that, and the other thinks government needs to step up and level the playing field, I can't think of two more radically different positions without going off into truly fringe territory.

Farscry wrote:
Ulairi wrote:

I actually don't mean to mock OWS. I think the intentions of OWS are noble, just like I thought the tea party's intentions were noble. We do need to get the corruptible influence of corporations out of the public square. I just think that OWS like the tea party lacks the right solutions and brings more anger and divisiveness to the public square. I wish OWS would actually stop protesting and causing a bother for people and actually participate in the political process.

I do agree with your entire statement here, but with the caveat that sadly I think the system is so corrupt that it's stacked against the introduction of a meaningful force of individuals representing either group who could manage to change things from within.

That's the foundation of the argument for why OWS needs to take a path outside of the current political system. This system is too big of a monster to slay from within because grassroots politicians either end up converting to the status quo as a result or many factors or they are simply marginalized through a variety of strong-arm tactics. This beast has to face an equally large and powerful force, which is going to be the 99% that rises up against it. The only question is when and how this will play out.

A Kenyan who is in NY participating at OWS, wrote a letter to an Iranian prisoner. It's pretty heart wrenching to hear this guy lose it emotionally.

Some photos from Seattle's port blockade.

IMAGE(http://www.thestranger.com/images/blogimages/2011/12/13/thumb-1323794966-portshutdownpanocops.jpg)
IMAGE(http://www.thestranger.com/images/blogimages/2011/12/13/1323795010-port12-12ib-1.jpg)
IMAGE(http://www.thestranger.com/images/blogimages/2011/12/13/1323795040-port12-12ib-2.jpg)
IMAGE(http://www.thestranger.com/images/blogimages/2011/12/13/1323795068-port12-12ib-3.jpg)
IMAGE(http://www.thestranger.com/images/blogimages/2011/12/13/1323795092-port12-12ib-4.jpg)
IMAGE(http://www.thestranger.com/images/blogimages/2011/12/13/1323795126-port12-12ib-5.jpg)
IMAGE(http://www.thestranger.com/images/blogimages/2011/12/13/1323795158-port12-12ib-6.jpg)
IMAGE(http://www.thestranger.com/images/blogimages/2011/12/13/1323795180-port12-12ib-7.jpg)
IMAGE(http://www.thestranger.com/images/blogimages/2011/12/13/1323795216-port12-12ib-8.jpg)
IMAGE(http://www.thestranger.com/images/blogimages/2011/12/13/1323795412-port12-12ib-9.jpg)
IMAGE(http://www.thestranger.com/images/blogimages/2011/12/13/1323795444-port12-12ib-12.jpg)
IMAGE(http://www.thestranger.com/images/blogimages/2011/12/13/1323795470-port12-12ib-14.jpg)
IMAGE(http://www.thestranger.com/images/blogimages/2011/12/13/1323795539-port12-12ib-17.jpg)
IMAGE(http://www.thestranger.com/images/blogimages/2011/12/13/1323795566-port12-12ib-19.jpg)
IMAGE(http://www.thestranger.com/images/blogimages/2011/12/13/1323795592-port12-12ib-21.jpg)
IMAGE(http://www.thestranger.com/images/blogimages/2011/12/13/1323795629-port12-12ib-23.jpg)

Time gave person of the year to.....'The Protestor'. Obviously it's primarily for the uprising in the Middle East but OWS and Russia deservedly get recognized.

Thank goodness, our CEOs are managing to thrive in spite of the economic downturn. I was so worried.

This year's survey shows CEO pay packages have boomed: the top 10 earners took home more than $770m between them in 2010. As stock prices began to recover last year, the increase in CEO pay outstripped the rise in share value. The Russell 3000 measure of US stock prices was up by 16.93% in 2010, but CEO pay went up by 27.19% overall. For S&P 500 CEOs, the largest companies in the sample, total realised compensation – including perks and pensions and stock awards – increased by a median of 36.47%. Total pay at midcap companies, which are slightly smaller than the top firms, rose 40.2%.

GMI released a preliminary report on 2010 CEO pay earlier this year, before all the data was available. Paul Hodgson, a senior research associate at GMI, said that report had shown a significant bounce but he had expected a wider sample to dampen the effect.

"Wages for everybody else have either been in decline or stagnated in this period, and that's for those who are in work," said Hodgson. "I had a feeling that we would see some significant increases this year. But 30-40% was something of a surprise." Bosses won in every area, with dramatic increases in pensions, payoffs and perks – as well as salary.

Thanks Dimmer. Now I can finally sleep at night.

I would have liked to have seen a comparison within those companies between the executive level and the plebians.

absurddoctor wrote:

I would have liked to have seen a comparison within those companies between the executive level and the plebians.

Not a direct comparison, but still useful.

Bureau of Labor and Statistics wrote:

Real average hourly earnings fell 2.2 percent, seasonally adjusted, from October 2010 to October 2011. The decrease in real average hourly earnings combined with a 0.6 percent increase in average weekly hours resulted in a 1.7 percent decline in real average weekly earnings during this period.

[Edit to add: found at least one direct comparison]

Time[/url]]Walt Disney’s CEO Robert Iger, who received a $13.5 million bonus. That was an increase of 45.5% from a year ago.

[trimmed]

Workers at Disney’s Florida amusement park Walt Disney World fought for months last year and early this year for higher wages. What they finally ended up getting, in a new contract settled earlier this month, was an annual raise of 3% to 4% over the next three years. The workers will get a bonus, too, of $650, a mere 20,769 times less than Iger’s bonus.

Dimmerswitch wrote:
absurddoctor wrote:

I would have liked to have seen a comparison within those companies between the executive level and the plebians.

Not a direct comparison, but still useful.

Bureau of Labor and Statistics wrote:

Real average hourly earnings fell 2.2 percent, seasonally adjusted, from October 2010 to October 2011. The decrease in real average hourly earnings combined with a 0.6 percent increase in average weekly hours resulted in a 1.7 percent decline in real average weekly earnings during this period.

[Edit to add: found at least one direct comparison]

Time[/url]]Walt Disney’s CEO Robert Iger, who received a $13.5 million bonus. That was an increase of 45.5% from a year ago.

[trimmed]

Workers at Disney’s Florida amusement park Walt Disney World fought for months last year and early this year for higher wages. What they finally ended up getting, in a new contract settled earlier this month, was an annual raise of 3% to 4% over the next three years. The workers will get a bonus, too, of $650, a mere 20,769 times less than Iger’s bonus.

Thanks, I failed at the googles today. While I suspect that is the norm with most of these companies, its nice to see the numbers put together.

  • Civil Disturbance and Criminal Tactics of Protest [Scribd] It's a 2003 document for law enforcement agencies.
  • Seattle High School students walk out to protest cuts to education funding, taking a cue from recent protests. [Seattle Times]
  • Occupiers, Writing Their Own News Article, Call Yesterday's Port Action "Wildly Successful" [The Stranger]
  • More photos from the Oakland port shutdown. [Turnstyle News]
  • ILWU: Workers Will Not Be Paid for Lost Shift at Terminal 18 [The Stranger]
    Work was disrupted at Terminal 5, but not canceled, so the ILWU dispatched work orders "through completion." However, ILWU says that the shipper, American President Lines, is refusing to pay workers for the disrupted shift, a contractual dispute that will ultimately be worked out between the shipper and the union. "It's being discussed," the union says.

    Considering the scope of yesterday's west coast port protests, I'd have to call shutting down all or parts of four ports a bit of a success. But when they're impacting the livelihoods of fellow members of the 99 Percent, Occupiers need to honestly own up to the consequences of their actions, even if they're unintended.

    So here's a free PR tip to the Occupy Seattle media team: It's more effective to spin the facts than to ignore them.

[Crooks and Liars]

IMAGE(http://www.thestranger.com/binary/a89f/grabbag-570.jpg)

I saw this in our local press, looks like it came from an AP article.

With the loss of its Manhattan base camp, Occupy Wall Street movement is at a crossroads

[b]

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2011/12/with_the_loss_of_its_manhattan.html

My concern has been OWS's lack of organization would cost them their momentum, and subsequently, their movement. If OWS breaks into smaller movement I think they have a very limited window to impact government at the local level or they risk becoming an afterthought.

Well, when you're constantly deriding them as bongo-playing hippies, I'm not sure why you ever thought they'd be effective in the first place.

Bear wrote:

I saw this in our local press, looks like it came from an AP article.

With the loss of its Manhattan base camp, Occupy Wall Street movement is at a crossroads

[b]

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2011/12/with_the_loss_of_its_manhattan.html

My concern has been OWS's lack of organization would cost them their momentum, and subsequently, their movement. If OWS breaks into smaller movement I think they have a very limited window to impact government at the local level or they risk becoming an afterthought.

Yeah. It's interesting to actually see what a local general assembly looks like. For all intents and purposes they're basically paralyzed from making significant decisions by the very methods that get people in the movement so energized. They eschew strong leadership and "traditional" democratic methods because they see those as corruptible.

It's all at once inspiring and depressing. Inspiring that they want to do things differently. Depressing because you quickly realize that you're not going to have a dialogue with longshoremen or other unions about general strikes with mike checks.

Edit: nm

DSGamer wrote:

Yeah. It's interesting to actually see what a local general assembly looks like. For all intents and purposes they're basically paralyzed from making significant decisions by the very methods that get people in the movement so energized. They eschew strong leadership and "traditional" democratic methods because they see those as corruptible.

It's all at once inspiring and depressing. Inspiring that they want to do things differently. Depressing because you quickly realize that you're not going to have a dialogue with longshoremen or other unions about general strikes with mike checks.

That's where I was going earlier in this thread when I talked about them needing to engage at the local level and focus on winning some elections.

You're not going to overturn the system fighting it from the outside. You need to infect it like a virus and kill it from the inside.

It's pretty interesting how everyone sitting on the sidelines knows exactly what OWS should do next. If you want to see OWS go in whichever direction you think is best then the best way to do that would be to go an participate, find the like minded people already there and organise the thing you think should happen.

If you support the movement and you honestly think it'll flounder if it doesn't go in the direction you think would be best then it's kind of on your head to go out there and help.