I bet his pension is better than your standard Social Security benefits. And I bet that taxpayers know that, too.

As a life long Democrat, it's hard for me to say just how fucking angry this makes me.

It's surprisingly difficult to figure out what the Vice President's pension is, unlike the Presidents. It's the same as he would get as any member of Congress, which as far as I can figure out is highest salary times years of service times 0.025 which is $230,700 x 32 x 0.025 = $190,327.50 per annum. That could go up, as the veep's salary is subject to annual COLA adustments just like other Congresscritters.

@5, that should read "x 33", Biden's number of years of service as of January 20, 2016 when he leaves office. The result is the same; I corrected my calculation but not what I wrote here.

All politicians--in all parties--are woefully oblivious to how most Americans live.

I wish Elizabeth Warren would run and put this establishment bitch out of her misery. She has to know she is an even bigger target than she was back in 2008. And there are a lot of things she can be attacked on.

@8, but she is fabulously wealthy. She and her husband earn a combined salary of around a million a year, and they're probably worth north of $15 mil.

I don't understand how anyone could vote on national budgets or any economic issues at all if s/he didn't have a savings account, which is one of the basic things a working adult should have.

People don't compare themselves with everyone when they estimate how rich they are.

They rank themselves against the very richest people.

Bill and Hillary have 80 million in assets.

Bill Gates has 80 billion in assets.

They are 1000x poorer than the richest person and have every reason to gripe.

In some sense, Hillary is educating the public about orders of magnitude. Something that is sadly lacking in our society and even among the vast intelligentsia collective known as SLOG.

And right on cue, here's Chelsea lately.

Nice to know that little Ms. Married to a Hedgehog, lives in a $10M New York apartment, gets paid a zillion bucks to do who-can-explain-what has no worries about the munnies.

There's one thing that's true about the 1% regardless of political affiliation: They are completely oblivious to the economic hell that most people are going through, and they couldn't care less.

For people living paycheck to paycheck it is quite tone deaf. HIllary Clinton makes more for a single speaking fee, reportedly $200,000, than most people make in a year of labor. Just two talks annually at the level put her in the 1%. Not to mention the big dog.

Biden seems more genuinely to be familiar with the day to day problems 99% of Americans face.

Biden profits off his brother's charter school fiascos, but because of the tricky way charters cook their books, it can come across as a tax credit so that he doesn't have to pay as much in taxes rather than out and out profit.

@14
substitute Dan Savage for Hilary Clinton, and the figures are probably way off, but still in the "ridiculously sad" range.

Most liberals have more money than moderates, conservatives or libertarians, so this comes as no surprise: http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/ec…

Also, it should be noted that Seattle's favorite socialist (who the rest of the state and the country hates) Sawant is herself rich, being married to a Microsoft exec: http://www.seattlemet.com/news-and-profi…

But the Stranger would never, EVER question its loyalty to Chairwoman Sawant of the great Socialist worker's paradise, now will it?

@8
And, being one herself, she understands the plight of the Native American…

@14, that is actually more than the median adult in the US will earn in SIX years, not one.

This is why we just gave the City Light CEO a hundred grand for no reason. And have two deputy mayors who make more than almost anyone In town. Establishment Democrats.

These are not normal household budgets. First of all by the time the Clinton's left office they did in fact have a negative net worth, millions negative. But they'd also become a brand a corporation unto themselves, corporations are people in reverse of how we are use to thinking about it. As a result the accounting completely changed thus Hillary is both right and dissembling at the same time.

Biden is a bit different mostly in terms of size, he really doesn't have the money most politicians who reach his level have. That said, you bet there are blind trusts, family trusts, illiquid assets, etc... laying around in his closet. Oh and he does have savings account/checking account it has around 15,000 in it, think it was the Daily Beast I saw that on. Who cares of course he has a 15,000 debit card on hand.

Neither one of them should be playing this stupid game. Nor should we as citizens be falling for this stupid game.

Welcome to Pareto inequality. The difference between mere multi-millionaires and billionaires is so large that every time a multi-millionaire hangs out with a billionaire, it makes them feel poor.

Well no shit. How anyone can be so deluded as to think that a neo-liberal snob like Shillery is somehow a champion of the proletariat is beyond me. A plutocrat is a plutocrat, no matter what side of the bullshit political spectrum they claim to represent. You can't rant about the Koch brothers all day and then turn around and praise George Soros, for example.

Democracy, where the price goes to the one who can fake it the best.

Prize. Not price. Prize.

@23 Oh nonsense. I don't know if she is a snob or not, in someways sure but there is an inherent snobbery that comes with Office.

As for the Koch brothers and George Soros, big picture, worldwide picture, most good for the most people, yeah I'll praise George Soros. The Koch brothers not so much with the helping out the neighbors thing, next door, down the street, they play for themselves alone.

As for wealthy, sure the Clinton's are wealthy, so were the Roosevelt's. Hell the plutocrats of the day, Robber Barons, shoved Teddy into the VP slot behind McKinley in order to shut him down. Didn't work out as planned.

We could move forward in time to FDR or JFK, or backward in time to oh IDK Jefferson and Madison, how about Washinton and Adams? They were all technically plutocrats. One needs to be able to move money in order to play at that level.

Short version; Plato got it right in the Republic. There are reoccurring themes, types, a constant struggle for balance and a never ending cycle.