Distribution of child porn is a serious crime. Has the FBI pursued the Bernie website assault or is the crime being treated as just another campaign dirty trick? I would like to know whether the assault came from a Republican (paid?), a Hillary supporter (paid?) or a regular, independent, lowlife troll. Nonetheless, some jail time might get a few folks attention. Anyone see a parallel with our Wall Street situation involving fraud and the DOJ's flaccid inaction?

I know that Saint Raygun screwed federal employees in 1983 cutting the federal pensions to 1% from 2% for 30 years of service. Then the traitor introducted a plan whereby employees could invest in their retirement with a government match. Saint Raygun also prohibited federal retirees from drawing Social Security even though they me the minimum 40 quarters. That is who screwed the federal employee. After Saint Raygun started destroying unions, it caught on with the cheap bastard ceo's.

Though I have the impression Warren won't run, she is dedicated enough to seeing Big Money out of politics, that maybe she would reconsider. It would, as you suggest, be an unstoppable ticket.

Hey Thom, I know we have been hard pressed to find anything the GOP has done recently to help average Americans. I see there are several similar posts asking the same question, but they have different timelines.

I only just found out today while researching a friend's response in a comment thread that the Earned Income Tax Credit was passed in 1975, and it had bipartisan support. While it's not as great as a negative income tax or other proposals, it's still a pretty good program that helps many to this day, and has been opposed by the conservatives for quite a while now. That's still a very long time ago when the GOP was less extreme, so I think that maybe we should just stick to what have they done since Reagan, since Reagan was pretty much the beginning of the end of this country. I know you would probably agree that he was the turning point. Wasn't there a joke that said your tombstone was going to say "It all started with Reagan!" Heh. Since Reagan, there has been absolutely nothing, unless you count COBRA in 85 that allowed workers to have insurance even after they left their jobs. Of course that had all sorts of bad things as well, and the good things that were in it were fiercely opposed by the GOP I'm willing to bet.
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/09/republicans-and-47-case-study

I have known for many years that my retirement party will be my funeral, one way or another.

There is another down side to retired people having little to live on. They don't have much money to spend and that hurts, not helps the economy and businesses. I'm almost 66 years old and have not seen any relatives retire on savings. One grandfather retired with a pension from Cotton Belt Railroad. He was a member of the Railway Clerks union. The other retired with a pension from Southern Bell Telephone Company. He was a lineman. My dad, an uncle, and I retired with pensions from Plumbers Local Union # 17. I've seen people retire on savings and Social Security only to return to the workforce because their savings ran out. I've seen people dip into their 401Ks during employment gaps and now don't know when or if they will be able to retire. I see ads on TV for retirement accounts. I don't know who these ads are targeting. They must be for wealthy people or suckers. The average person can't save enough to live well on until they're 92. Lets say you want to retire at 62 and live on Social Security and savings until your 92. Besides Social Security. you want $40,000 per year for ten years, $50,000 for the next ten years (adjusting for inflation), then $60,000 for ten years. You would need to save $1,500,000. Most people can't do this, so retirement savings plans will not work well for most people. Only pension plans provide a secure future for retirees. My grandson wants to be an auto mechanic. I advised him to get a job with a defined benefit retirement program. He said he didn't know of any auto mechanics unions. I told him to get a government job. I asked him who he thinks works on police cars, fire trucks, and code enforcement vehicles? Those mechanics usually have a pension plan. Social security is better than nothing but Social Security payments would have to at least be tripled to live well on without a pension. It's not a bad Idea to triple Social security payments. That would be good for all retirees and the economy. It would require putting money into Social Security instead of pension plans. 401Ks, and other retirement accounts. Unions may not like this idea because pension plans are great union recruiting tools but as a union man, I'm for helping all workers, union and non-union alike. One great benefit to tripling Social Security is a person will not lose a great retirement program every time they lose or change jobs. The biggest problem I see is the misleading of young people in the workforce into thinking that a person must save money for retirement. They are not being taught the difference between a defined contribution plan and a defined benefit plan. This is information they need to be given to make an intelligent choice for a decent elderly future.

Would love to lower social security and medicare down to age 50 or lower.

However, if a national ID card can not be effectively implemented, then how can a US citizen be distinguished from an illegal?

Dems think ID cards are just another way that Repubs screw people out of their vote.

But the cards would also be useful to track status for driving, health, and benefits.

A single national database would clearly save millions of adminstrative dollars.

ct

Thanks for that! I am a retired 70yo physician, who lives on his $2445/mo Social Security and I'm comfortable but certainly not well off. Some years ago an investigative news program took a trip to Harpers Ferry, WVa., and visited a small Federal office bldg. there. Inside was a single clerk sitting behind a gunmetal desk. When asked, she showed the reporter the Social Security Trust Bonds, which were housed in a single room lined with filing cabinets. When the reporter asked to see one of these Bonds, she opened a drawer and pulled out one Bond. It was title "Social Security Trust Fund Bond" or something of the kind and denominated as $100,000,000. It stated: The Congress of the United States owes the American People $100,000,000. The total debt stored in that room about a decade ago was $14,000,000,000,000. George W. Bush once stood on the steps of the White House and suggested that one way to handle this debt would be to simply destroy these Bonds, but, then, he's an international war criminal anyway. I expect the Congress to honor their debt, my debt, as I paid in the maximum amount over much of my 40 yr. medical career, when my income was $120-130K/yr. This is not an "entitlement". It is a fair and true debt owed to those of us American working people who trusted this government to honor their debt to us. Otherwise, I'm goin' gunnin' for them. I know that they, the Congress and President, think that they can get away with stealing our S.S. contributions to pay for their endless wars, and their kick-backs from the Military Industry. I've got news for them. We have not forgotten their obligation to the American people, even if they would like to. Go Bernie!!!

Hi Kend, what you say is absolutely, positively true....I spent the last 6 years of my sales career in Canada as National Sales and Marketing manager. I lived in T-O, but traveled the entire country. I especially enjoyed Alberta. The work ethic is alive and well there. I spent more time in Edmonton than Calgary, how can I forget those -39° mornings. Stay well, you have great insight.

ya know. . . . . . for being such an intelligent person - your 'thinking' is certainly: narrow... 1-sided... and closed... to the point of being--->Nasty !

Part of the reasoning for the Reagan tax reductions was that if the Marginal Propensity for Investment was increased by tax reductionhen then job creation rates would be increased. However, the Marginal Propensity for Spending does not dictate where the excess over necessities of life the money will be spent, saved, invested or whatever. The desire for personal satisfaction, aggrandizement or leisure enters into the equation so that bankers bought expensive yachts for weekend parties for pretty secretaries to show off their wares. This was not investing for productive jobs that increase the national economy but would be calssified as the type of spending the Roman elites did prior to the fall. Too bad we don't read history.

Just because two factors vary together done not mean that one is the cause of the other. Thee are many variables that vary together and it is sometimes easy to think that one is the cause of the variable characteristics of the other.

Nevertheless, it is an interesting fact that suicides tend to increase when far right economic policies are dominant in politics.

Seems like the capitalist system of business, or, more specifically, the manner in which many capitalists practice, could be a prime mover in causing suicide in our modern society, although I have no quantitative data on this. Not being able to put bread on the table and the resulting psychological damage might have strong correlations, beginning long before Reaganomics. Greed can be a killer.