@Chad: I knew a guy who used his supplement SS to smoke dope while attending school. What is your point? Beyond your ridiculous defense estimate? With entitlements already well beyond 60%, how does your math add up? Busted!

Chad, how many years did Paul Ryan's father pay into Social Security so that PAUL could have that benefit. You may as well cry to my mother who paid in for 40+ years about taking the government's money for her retirement!

Anti, isn't that precisely the point? We pay into this system as an investment. That's why it makes no sense that some call it an entitlement program or a Ponzi scheme.

It's rather hypocritical don't you think Bren? The Libs scream and cry about how Republican's want to kick Granny down the stairs, and yet when one of us uses Social Security for one of the reasons it is intended for, you kick and scream some more.

Funding for Social Security is disappearing faster than you want to admit. It won't be very long until benefits will need to be cut. Paul Ryan and the Conservatives are trying to save Social Security, but the Dems do nothing but get in the way.

@Bren -

How exactly is SS an investment? The 'investment' component of SS derives from the income tax. How is taking money from one pocket and putting it into the other generating any real interest at all, as at the end of the day, it's all coming from the same pair of pants?

@JRH -- in that case, how would buying any government bond be an investment? The interest on them has to be paid out of income tax. Yet our banks and the Chinese are finding that sort of investment to be worthwhile.

At least, if the Social Security Trust Fund surpluses are placed in T-bills, the taxpayers are paying back into the same pair of pants. Would you rather see it go to the Chinese?

@Randy1949 -

I'd rather have the ability to realize a true interest generating investment, as opposed to having to pay more taxes and falsely calling it an interesting generating investment. You're defending the model, but the entire model is flawed, in that it depends on the federal government engaging in deficit spending.

In our past, the deficit spending was justified and premised upon our need to engage in fighting world wars, remember? Under Reagan, the deficit spending was largely attributable to fighting what was called the 'cold war.' And although we're currently fighting a war against terrorism, you guys on the left claim that such wars are not legitimate or justified.

So, what reason do we now have to justify the need to engage in deficit spending?

Remember, on the right, we believe that there is currently no pressing need to engage in deficit spending. So, if the federal government operates according to a balanced budget, as it currently should be doing, where will the government invest the SS funds then?

We're still fighting a war in Afghanistan and paying off the debt on the older wars. Just as we were still paying off the cold war debt during the Bush 1 and Clinton years.

Also, when has the country ever run without a debt of some sort? The only President to pay off the national debt was Andrew Jackson in 1835, and a depression followed.

@Bren: Well there is always more to learn. So tell me then, who is going to stand up and put us on the path toward economic stability? Certainly you must admit our current national leadership is not exactly rectifying the situation.

Evan, without the stimulus spending (which began under George W. Bush) the economy would have crashed. The truly wealthy in this country can gain financial advantage even in times of economic crisis and one opportunity is to make Barack Obama a one-term president so we can ensure even more policies that benefit them personally. That's why we had the debt ceiling crisis (the debt ceiling was raised 7 times under Bush II). That's why Congress wasted taxpayer time voting 31 times on the Affordable Care Act instead of giving it a chance. Etc.

Now Paul Ryan is (until a few months ago apparently??) a proud follower of Ayn Rand, an atheist whose philosophy is fierce individualism over the common good (collectivism). Except of course when she needed Medicare and Social Security. Paul Ryan thinks everyone should fend for themselves too, as evidenced by his so-called "Path to Prosperity." (which would cost billions) But like Ayn Rand, "everyone" doesn't include him. He has a cushy pension and health plan (with automatic pay increases if the premium price goes up) for his old age. And have you heard him say he would turn that plan down, or Medicare or Social Security? No. There's a name for people like Rand and Ryan: hypocrite.

Here's a Ryan interview about Ayn Rand: http://www.atlassociety.org/ele/blog/2012/04/30/paul-ryan-and-ayn-rands-ideas-hot-seat-again

Who is already putting us on the path to economic stability? Barack Obama.

Actually Bren, the Bush administration enacted TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program). This was put in place to guarantee that the institutions that were "too big to fail" didn't fail.

The stimulus (ARRA - American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009) was completely Obama's and, based on the most generous estimates, created 4.5 million jobs at a cost of only 109,777.78 per job.

Bren has been explained this many times. It's fruitless to keep explaining something to a rock.

Anti I should have been more clear about TARP v. stimulus. My main point was that the government, regardless of administration, recognized the need for these initiatives.

Bren, I sincerely doubt Bush 43 would have seen the "advantage" of creating jobs at a cost of 109,777.78 each.

@Bren -

DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz has said time and again that congressional SS and Medicare is the same as what the general public at large receives. Could you please cite your source showing how SS and Medicare are different for members of Congress than it is for members of the general public, as Hoffa can't find such congressional deviations anywhere in the authorizing statutes?

Anti, two thoughts on that $109,777.78 number: First I'd be interested in knowing if that breakdown includes indirect job creation and saving; and secondly, we know that the Iraq War was the War of the Contractor. At the peak of the war there were 180,000 contractors (http://usliberals.about.com/od/homelandsecurit1/a/IraqNumbers.htm). The average cost to deploy one U.S. soldier was $390,000 (Ibid). The salary of the average contractor ranged from approximately $74,000k to approximately $350,000k. In 2003 Zapata Engineering received a one-year, $3.8 million contract for 5 employees. That broken down is $350,000 salary plus $850,000 overhead, insurance and profit costs for the liaison officer and $275,000 salary plus costs for four project managers. In Feb. 2004 Zapata received another one-year contract of $32.5 million to hire up to 108 workers. http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=11843

Through this lens, $109,777.78 is a bargain!

Mr. Hoffa, I have a similar pay adjustment deal with my employer as Congress/Senators have with the U.S. government in their own benefit packages. If insurance rates go up I get a salary adjustment so the take-home doesn't change--that's what Paul Ryan gets as a Congressman; that's what he forgot to include for the rest of us in his so-called budget.

As far as I am aware they have the same SS and Medicare benefits as we do; they just receive the nice pension, etc. as well.

Very interesting that you are a prominent poster here as well as for the metro San Francisco market. So who exactly are you, a mouth piece for this liberal rag called Patch of maybe some DNC plant?

Weachater

"This liberal rag called Patch"? Post something half intelligent so I can respond to your comment about a "rag". Otherwise, do not waste the effort.

Bren, when it comes to Obama, you tend to choose the lens that makes him look best for you.

True, the cost to deploy a soldier in Iraq was incredibly high and so was Afghanistan. But that was for an overseas job in a tough environment with some incredibly advanced equipment. How did they calculate that number? Did they just take the cost of the war and divide it by the number of soldiers used? Does that $390,000 include tanks, planes, fuel,...

Regardless, 109,777.78 per job is not a bargain. Comparing it to the cost of a war is like comparing apples to hand-grenades.

Taoist, you don't believe in the Magical Secretion? I suppose you don't believe in the healing properties of unicorn horn either. Or mermaids.

Some people. ; )

I believe in the magical secretion, I believe the Earth is 5000 years old, I believe that climate change is a masterful hoax by the evil Al Gore, I believe that President Obama is a secret Muslim, I believe that we have the best damn healthcare in the world and I believe in trickle-down economics, but only because I really, really want to be the GOP's nominee for President.

@Taoist -

Can you please cite to a source showing how the referenced statements are a part of the official party platform?

Likewise, I guess that one could infer from Biden's 'jobs' is a three letter word comment that Democrats are advocating for a world in which we reassign numerical values without any logical sense. How can you support a party which claims that clearly a four letter word, such a 'jobs,' only contains three letters?

The Obama's have been tooling around in some pretty fine rides to be all up on Global Warming.
Translation: Democrats talk the talk but do not walk the walk, on climate change.

@Herschal -- You seriously expect the First Couple to travel around on a bicycle built for two? Or maybe matching Segueways?

Ignore Jason. He's unable to make comparisons. He believes word associations can be the basis of an argument.

Ryan is not against Social Security benefits or getting government contracts. Seriously, how would we build roads if the government didn't sign the contracts. Jason is lost in a mental fog, or perhaps a drunken stupor.

@Luke, Let me explain to you in simpler terms than Jason used. Hopefully, you're able to understand 3rd grade English. Public-Private partnerships have a place in our economy. When awarded fairly, they generate a lot of benefit both to tax payers and the private enterprises that get those projects. Roads, schools, business parks are examples of those win-win situations. The issue Jason is raising, is that Ryan is a hypocrite because he accepts government programs that benefit him and his family and friends, and decries (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/decry) government programs that help the poor and elderly.

My theory is that Jason's family was out-bid by the Ryans for the WPA contracts.

@Sammy,

Try to focus. If you had actually followed Jason's rants over the past few days, you would see that he thinks that Ryan is a hypocrite for cutting spending on infrastructure that would have benefited his family. As hard as it is to believe, it is true.

Of course, everyone has benefited from something, but that's no argument for expanding everything at the cost of borrowing 40 cents of every dollar.

Also, you should not have capitalized "private." You will learn about that in 4rth grade.

my husband and I are middle class and we have a Romney/Ryan sign on our front yard.

What Obama "has done"..........
42 straight months of unemployment over 8%.
More people out of work now than when he took office.
$16 Trillion dollar debt.
Government borrowing 40 cents on every dollar spent.
Obamacare rammed down the throat of every American, needing bribes to get passed.
This is only the tip of the iceberg, and some Americans want to re-elect this Pretender-in-Chief?

@Carol -

Clinton created the mess - not Bush!

What good is Medicare to anyone if it runs out of money? The Democrats cut $700B from Medicare to fund Obamacare, and yet you appear to be OK with that - why?

What is it exactly that we are supposed to give Obama credit for?

I give Obama a lot of credit, he deserves it. He single handily increased the deficit by almost 6 trillion dollars, in 4 years. WoW, the man is a machine. Oh yeah, the Chinese gave him a lot of credit too, just a different kind.

Some folks have short memories. Aren't we in some sort of recession-thingy that began in 2008 or thereabouts?

►make Obama a one term President.◄

solutions are best served with a dose of reality

Randy1949....and you don't think Democrats wanted to make GW Bush a one-term president??? Give me a break.

@Randy1949 -

Obama promised the stimulus would drop unemployment to below 8%, remember? He deceived the people by claiming that a majority of the stimulus funds were going to go towards public infrastructure projects, but instead the money went to allowing states to engage in over-bloated budgets for a few more years before having to face reality and protecting his friends in the public sector unions.

Obama promised trade reform and has done nothing to truly reverse the economic downfall that started primarily under Clinton.

The only credit that Obama deserves is for taking a bad situation and making it even worse and constantly lying to his constituency.

@JRH -- I'm merely addressing the misleading dates and figures Evan used. The majority of the mess took place before President Obama even took office. If you think John McCain could have done a better job, please tell me if and how that might have been accomplished.

Certainly both parties want to win, Steve, Keith. I think what has changed is the length that one party is willing to go in order to win. As an example, Watergate was a break-in into Democratic Party HQ by Republican-paid agents.

I consider ALEC as aligned with right-wing interests because of its focus on promoting legislation that supports Big Business; whose interests have long been championed by the GOP. Their policy-writing also includes voter ID legislation which is determined to disenfranchise voters who would likely vote Democrat. Union stripping and Right to Work legislation destabilizes a significant Democratic revenue stream.

It's all a bit over the top, and I don't think our democracy would survive under a permanently dominant one-party system.

Lot's of books and reports coming out about how the GOP made a conscious effort to obstruct, and in the process set back economic progress for millions of families.

But aside that, R and R are promising us nothing different than the same imbecilic policies pushed by Bush, not to mention more wars promoted by the mentally Ill John Boulton.

Thanks to their obstructionism, they don't deserve to take over the government and history tells us they are not capable of policies that do the most good for the most people.

But that doesn't concern sociopaths.

How many more of these right-wing fake news sites are going to crawl out of the wainscoting of the World Wide Web? FreeBeacon.com, with a proud journalistic tradition stretching back to February 2012 is a child of the right-wing 501(c)(4) Center for American Freedom.

Not to be confused with a legitimate news source.

Gee, all of that can be pinned on Republican obstructionism and guys like Romney sending jobs overseas. Free Beacon is hardly mainstream.

Going over the cliff? Hell, Eddie will be driving that bus.

That must be the Obama budget where he is going to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. Check out that record.

Nick, that's why Romney is backing away from Ryan's budget. Paul Krugman broke down the Ryan budget quite nicely here: http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_21356175/paul-krugman-paul-ryans-economic-plan-is-joke

Some of the strings of comments contain photos, others do not;this string does not have any photos. How would one know one 'Bren' from the other 'Bren'?

Does anyone know why some comment strings carry photographs and not others?

@Jay - It depends on the browser you use. The Safari browser in the iPad and iPhone almost always shows the pics.

The Bren from Wisconsin has a handlebar moustache.

I always suspected that Bren was a hipster.

If you were educated enough you would realize that after a certain amount of comments the avatars are removed from posts.

You are unable to see the reality you participate in. It is telling and explains in full detail why you are a far left wing liberal. I for one had the same question months ago, but was able to come up with the answer on my own. You think that a class or union teacher should provide the answer.

It's OK though. In the long run less competition as a producer and job creator is a good thing for me, Steve®. We can't have too many self educated and successful people on the internet.

@Steve -- You don't seem to be able to spot when someone is being facetious. I guess you're just not 'educated' enough.

Or autism. Or sociopathy. It could be any of them.