Greenway now sick of Occupiers

... doesn't mean that they're NOT out to get you.

Like Woody Allen said, much of success is just showing up. Those who insinuate themselves into the workings of the machine get to pull the levers.

I think that the Greenway certainly still needs some work (for example, if the money could be put together for that "Garden Under Glass", it would instantly become the most popular winter attraction in Boston - just think, tropical temperatures and humidity in the middle of January for a small entry fee), however, calling the Big Dig an "abject failure" is surely an overstatement.

For example, I have had to go from 128 in Waltham to Logan in the middle of the day several times over the last year and a half. It takes about 30 minutes (door to door). In 1995 that same trip took me 1-1.5 hours (most of that being spent on 93 and in the Callahan Tunnel). Multiplying that kind of productivity increase by lots and lots of people who use those roadways everyday (and not just to go to the airport) rules out calling the thing an abject failure. Ask any north shore or south shore trucking company and they will tell you about how "how it changed the world" (which is exactly what one guy told me - and that was just when the Williams tunnel opened to commercial traffic).

Could the Big Dig have been built better, cheaper and faster? Probably. Would I have rather seen 15 billion dollars get spent on a bonafide intercity high speed rail system and RER-type system for the area inside 495? Hell yes, but this is America, folks, and we will never have trains like that until our back is against the wall and gas prices go to >$8 (n.b., just back from UK where Shell station on in central London was getting $8.12 a gallon). But given the productivity increases associated with the Big Dig, under no circumstances can it be called an abject failure.

While, unfortunately, nobody in Congress does. Congress, including "liberals" like John Kerry, seems poised to slash the social safety net instead of raising taxes on the wealthy. Some in Congress, I believe, actually want to raise taxes on the working class and the lower-middle-class, slash social programs, and cut taxes for the rich. I think the rich should be taxed first, before you decimate domestic programs and, potentially, create the conditions for violent social unrest. Also, I think we should immediately eliminate the cap on income subject to social security tax (income above $108,000 or so isn't taxed, inexplicably) before we seriously consider cutting benefits. The Supercommittee wants to balance the budget on the backs of the poor, and bought-off Democrats are ready to go along with it. Occupy is the biggest sign of popular resistance to this protect-the-rich-at-all-costs mentality.

If the political path is ineffective, it is because voter turnout is pathetically low allowing only people interested in supporting special interests to get elected. You're probably right about me missing the point though, because I cannot understand how the occupation of a public space in any way advances any agenda and I am nowhere near alone in that regard. However, my alleged missing the point is not for lack of trying to get the point - it's for Occupy failing to effectively make its point. Others can't be made to understand a point when it is not effectively articulated for us, and it's not helping anyone for Occupy to insist that it knows what its about (it's a hell of a sales person who keeps the virtues of what she's selling to herself).

I have a pretty good handle on what the Teahadists want to do, and I've determined that it's not for me. I follow public affairs reasonably closely, and other than a nonsensical demand from some kids in NYC about student loan forgiveness and a vague reference to a flatter income distribution, I still, two months in, do not have enough info to make an informed decision as to whether I agree with what Occupy wants to do, because (perhaps because of the very diffused nature of the Occupiers) Occupy still has not adequately articulated its message.

You're onto something with the next phase however. If it does happen, it will consist of the Occupy folk taking over the left wing of the Democratic party (which, so far as I can tell, seems to be where most Occupiers I've heard would be most comfortable, but again, it's tough to tell), as the tea partiers have done to the right of the Republican party. In other words, they will take the political path, which actually is a way to advance an agenda. As one of many, many people in the middle of the political spectrum, I hope that that they are able to do so, so that we can have a robust intellectual debate in the upcoming election year.

and there is nothing preventing them from walking through it now.