Reducing Social Security benefits, veteran benefits, government pensions are some of those normally talked about but here are a few others.

The new index could reduce the number of people eligible for programs such as Medicaid, Head Start, food stamps, school lunches and home heating assistance.

If the so called protection is modeled after that provided in the Bowles/Simpson report, here is some relevant data:

The Bowles-Simpson bump-up would restore her monthly benefits to current-law levels for only two years - and then her benefits would fall behind again.

The report also explains that the bump-up would provide no relief to most of the poorest elders who rely on Supplemental Security Income (SSI). SSI beneficiaries would get a double hit from the chained CPI, because it is used to adjust both the initial benefit level and subsequent benefits. But every additional $1 in Social Security benefits reduces SSI benefits by $1 - so a small increase from the bump-up would provide no additional income to most SSI beneficiaries. And some SSI beneficiaries could be even worse off, if the bump-up in their Social Security benefits pushed them slightly above the SSI eligibility threshold - and they lost automatic Medicaid eligibility.

People disabled at an early age also would be severely impacted by the chained CPI. The Bowles-Simpson 20-year bump-up would apply to recipients of disability benefits, starting 20 years after the disability determination. But some proposals for a "birthday bump-up," such as the proposal in the Rivlin-Domenici deficit reduction plan, would provide no help to recipients of disability benefits. link

As a government agency explains, "Pork and beef are two separate CPI item categories. If the price of pork increases while the price of beef does not, consumers might shift away from pork to beef." So if people can no longer afford pork, they're spending less. Under a chained-CPI approach cost of living adjustments (COLAs) would then go down.
....
How would this work for Social Security? Let's see: If old people stop buying pork their "chained CPI" benefit will go down. If that forces them to live on catfood, their benefit goes down again. And if that forces them to switch to the local supermarket's cheap generic brand instead of the tastier cat foods (Fancy Feast's "Grilled" line was my late cat's favorite), benefits would go down even more.

It's a death spiral. Soon we'll be calculating the cost of survival, not the cost of living. It's a process that leads nowhere but down, until even survival is factored out of the equation. link

Everyone is taking pains to point out that this is just the beginning of what Obama is prepared to offer. Boehner has said that this is still not enough.

There are still plenty of disputes to iron out. And people familiar with Obama's proposal were careful not to describe it as his final offer.

Even in this offer there are to be additional "savings" (i.e. 1/2 a trillion dollars in cuts ) to social insurance programs next year.

Instead Boehner has agreed to pony up even more revenue, and a couple extra goodies for President Obama, in exchange for a real up front Social Security cut and a promise of major social insurance savings next year
...
I don't think it's quite so black and white for Democrats. Everyone (including Republicans) knows Obama could have netted nearly a $1 trillion in revenues without offering Boehner anything. On top of that, though, he's prepared to pony up chained CPI and about half a trillion in future, unspecified cuts to social programs

Let me repeat that one sentence:

Everyone (including Republicans) knows Obama could have netted nearly a $1 trillion in revenues without offering Boehner anything

It's not clear that going over the cliff would yield something better; on the other hand, those benefit cuts are really bad.

Officials said the rifle was purchased legally by Lanza's mother, Nancy, in 2010, well after family friends said Lanza's behavioral issues were clear. The same year Bushmaster ran an advertising campaign extolling its customers to buy their assault-style weapons to prove they're a "Man's Man" in a "world of depleting testosterone."

It ain't rocket science. The secret to a fiat economy is don't be an as*hole and don't let degenerate as*hole money addicts run the game.

People don't lose faith in money, it is a thing and can have no human qualities except those WE project onto it. We lose faith in each other.  And that only happens because of two things: natural disasters or people with power screwing people without.

It's all the phucking Golden Rule, everything else us yapping commentary.  And usually a con.

Peace.

Slayerzero: "... Not only by some about how bad and corrupt the Democrats are now that you've effectively not punished them for stabbing you in the back before, but just how precarious the world financial situation and the United State's really is."

Seriously. Are you?

Because to be perfectly blunt, your side lost this argument a dozen years ago when they cut taxes, before doubling federal spending and entering into a very expensive war of choice in Iraq -- and thus they squandered the surplus, ran up the national debt more than twofold in only eight years, and placed the country on on a ruinous trajectory to run up even more.

Your side has no credibility anymore when it comes discussions about paying off debt and balancing budgets and reining in spending, Zero. Don't you get that, at long last?

Now, it may well be that you're right about "just how precarious the world financial financial situation and the United States' really is[,]" not unlike how a broken dial clock can still tell the correct time twice daily. I happen to think that you're demonstrating a talent for stating the obvious, because most of us here are in fact quite acutely aware of the present economic circumstances.

But even if you are right, given your obvious political bent, you're really not the guy to be lecturing us about that, Zero -- don't you see?

You want to talk about political ethics and corruption? Why, your precious GOP hasn't played it straight since Mr. Lincoln was shot 147 years ago. Would like me to tell you what damage the Crédit Mobilier scandal of 1872 did to this country's economy during the halcyon days of the Grant administration? Ever heard of Teapot Dome? Watergate? Iran-Contra?

Look, I've never hidden or denied my partisan leanings, and I'm also not afraid to admit publicly that we Democrats certainly are not perfect. We have our quirks and faults and problems, and yes, we can phuque things up sometimes, same as everybody else in this life. Nor do I hesitate to criticize my own side if I feel it's so warranted. And all you have to do is read up- and downthread in this particular Open Thread to see others here doing the same.

It's too bad that you can't see fit to do the same, too. I mean, the best you can muster up right now in terms of even obliquely criticizing Republicans is "I'm not claiming that what the Republicans want - and the Democrats are going along with- will save social security." That's it. And by that, I mean -- that's it?

So please, don't treat us like we're stupid by waving this thin veil of political independence in our faces like you're some big independent thinker, 'cause you're not. You come here for one primary overarching purpose only -- to criticize the left, take pot shots at Democrats, and then pee on our legs and tell us it's raining.

I'm not saying that JFK wasn't evolving, and the real tragedy of his own assassination is that we were denied the opportunity to ever find out one way or another. But honestly, I've never seen much evidence to the effect that he was anything but a rockribbed Cold Warrior. He was different only to the extent that he demonstrated a personal capacity to learn from his mistakes, and not make them twice.

LeMay is some piece of work.....He really must have been psychotic, but then again he and the Cheney Republicans would fit right in.

What did stop Roberts was both his lack of familiarity with the AR-15 and that the particular gun he had in his hands had not been kept clean and in working order. So, what Meli saw was Roberts hitting the side of the weapon because it had jammed. It was the poor upkeep of the gun that kept Roberts from spraying the mall with bullets and taking more lives.