CIA analysts willing to ‘go to jail’ to ensure NIE’s release.
Retired Col. W. Patrick Lang, a former official in the Defense Intelligence Agency, reveals that senior CIA analysts pushed for the NIE’s key judgments on Iran to be released, threatening to speak to the media if they weren’t:
The “jungle telegraph” in Washington is booming with news of the Iran NIE. I am told that the reason the conclusions of the NIE were released is that it was communicated to the White House that “intelligence career seniors were lined up to go to jail if necessary” if the document’s gist were not given to the public. Translation? Someone in that group would have gone to the media “on the record” to disclose its contents.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
92 Responses to “CIA analysts willing to ‘go to jail’ to ensure NIE’s release.”
Register
RSSLogin
View Most Popular
Visit Our Affiliated Site
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
Reports
In depth studies on select topics
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Beck
Big Oil
Bolton
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Dobbs
Drudge
Economy
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Feith
Fox News
GI Bill
Global Warming
Gore
Guantanamo
Hagee
Health Care
Immigration
Impeachment
Iran
Iraq
Justice
Kristol
LGBT
Lieberman
McCain
McClellan
Media
Military
O'Hanlon
O'Reilly
Obama
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Rove
Terrorism
Torture
Veterans
Wiretapping
Women's Rights
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
This is off topic, so I apologize in advance. I figure some of our more astute posters might know the answer to this question. An aquaintance of mine (a Rightard) was complaining about how us Lefties want to tax the rich more. His argument was that the top x percent of the income earners pay x+y percent of taxes in the US. For example, he might have said that the top 3% of income earners pay 20% of the taxes. My point was that the top 3% of earners probably earn MORE than 20% of the income, meaning they actually pay LESS taxes than the rest of us.
Am I right? If not, what argument should I make?
Sorry to post off topic, but I didn’t know who else to ask, and this has been bugging me!
December 7th, 2007 at 2:06 pmFinally, real patriots in Government. Georgie, ya got a medal of Freedom to spare for these guys? Nah–didn’t think so.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:06 pmWonderful! Finally, people are reacting to the criminals in the White hOuse. Enough is enough!
December 7th, 2007 at 2:06 pmNow that’s guts!
December 7th, 2007 at 2:08 pmMust have been threatening to go to the media in another country - ours would have:
a) colluded with the government in the prosecution of the patriotic whistle-blower, and;
b) refused to publish the report, and;
c) published reports demonizing the whistle-blower.
C’mon, who ya’ gonna’ call? The WaPo? Time? NBC? Fox?
Puhleeeeze.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:08 pmI, for one, have been waiting for the PEOPLE to take back this country. It can only happen when good citizens do the right thing, and that is to expose corruption or help us to avoid the costly war mongering by these seasoned criminals everyone refers to as “neocons”.
It appears that the NIE was released so quickly that bush didn’t have time to get his lies straight. cheney must have been out of town.
Stoopid puppet.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:09 pmsome pie-eyed Righty better hurry up and “out” those guys - we only want “good bushies” in the CIA, not seasoned pros who know wtf they’re doing.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:10 pm#1 Sorry Vet, but if the rightard has already fallen for this argument there is very little hope of convincing him otherwise.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:10 pm#5 - You could be right. But I still hope that this report is true. I would love to believe we still have some real patriots in our government.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:11 pm1 - is your rightard buddy a billionaire? if not, he surely never will be , and should find something aside from tax tables to obsess over.
ask him what red herring really tastes like, ’cause he’s eatin a big fat one.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:12 pmComment by VerbalKint — December 7, 2007 @ 2:10 pm
December 7th, 2007 at 2:12 pm——————————-
I think there’s hope for him if I can give him solid numbers.
#9
I’m sure there are true patriots in our government - I’m talking about our media. There are very few media personalities who are not bought and paid for by the BA and Cabal.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:13 pmJoe Klein: “He [Bush] didn’t try to block it. He didn’t try to postpone it.”
Time for another correction, I guess.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:14 pmBetter yet, ask him why he wants to subsidize the rich (if he isn’t among them). I’ve noticed that many rank-and-file Repubs are sycophants - they fancy themselves as belonging to the group they root for. The rich are throwing them crumbs, like pigeons in the park.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:18 pmMutiny is all around this white house! It’s about time that the people stood up to this capricious gang of criminals within! Hoorah for the People.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:21 pmMarcus: Sycophants & Pigeons in the Park, indeed! Repukes are also liars, users, perverts and hypocrites.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:22 pmI’ve noticed that many rank-and-file Repubs are sycophants - they fancy themselves as belonging to the group they root for. The rich are throwing them crumbs, like pigeons in the park.
Comment by Marcus Aurelius — December 7, 2007 @ 2:18 pm
———————————-
To clarify, he is NOT my buddy. He’s a friend of a friend, and our bands played the same venue a couple of times. That’s all.
I can definitely see him in the role of a sycophant - happily eating the crumbs, thinking that one day he’ll get the sandwich.
That said, does anyone know the real stats, so I can make a real argument? I’d rather do that than just call him names…
December 7th, 2007 at 2:23 pmThank you mister CIA guy for doing what is right and not what the WAR CRIMINAL Bush and Cheney would tell you to to.
Out the criminals, bring them to trial, lock them away for good, ALL OF THEM.
Then gather their supporters and put those special detention centers to good use.
Bush/Cheney
Hague Trials ‘09
Buck Fush
December 7th, 2007 at 2:23 pmRightard - a couple of counter arguments (on the other hand, you may be trying to teach a pig to sing).
*) Most of the tax breaks go to the wealthy. The higher up the ladder you go, the starker the example. For example, the deduction for home mortgage interest you have to be able to buy a house. Then the deduction is higher for a $500k loan than for a $100k loan. Not to mention, that you have the funds to hire people to help you shelter your income.
*) For those in the lower bracket, a higher percentage of their income is spent on necessities such as food.
*) A lot of places like sales taxes. Unfortunately, the percentage of income spent on sales taxes is highly regressive.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:24 pm#15…why did they have to wait until the Captain ran the ship onto the rocks before starting their mutiny? They might have seen the warning signs a tad earlier.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:24 pmDumb question: What does this say about the timeline of when Shrub knew that Iran had no nukes ? Was it only a few days ago when the freshly printed NIE was published ? Or was there a pre-pub version awaiting release of which Shrub was fully aware and probably had a copy (albeit, it was definitely no, “My Pet Goat”).
December 7th, 2007 at 2:26 pmLets hope there is a snowball effect.
It’s time to reclaim our Constitution, America!
December 7th, 2007 at 2:27 pmVet - if you make your money from capital gains then you are paying 15% instead of the 33% that I pay. And they can cover their income by having their corporation supply their food, housing, cars, insurance, heating, water, utilities and phone bills, there by bypassing the taxes that they would have to have paid to have that money. That’s why they pay less in taxes then the average Joe.
Buck Fush
December 7th, 2007 at 2:28 pmGood for those REAL Patriots in the CIA.
As for the rest of D.C. ::
Put their heads on pikes…
and I mean that in the cheeriest sense of holiday spirits !!!
pikes wrapped in tinsel.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:31 pmsumovabeech, someone other than one of Digby’s DFHes finally stood up - hurraaayyyy for America… turns out some real Americans actually do still live here. (I wonder if colon powell recognizes what being an American, i.e., DOING WHAT’S RIGHT, looks like.)
December 7th, 2007 at 2:33 pm.
we used to tax the top tier at 70% and, ya know what? - they were still rich then!
why would any ordinary person be so caught up with concern over what billionaires pay for taxes??????
their interests and ours are worlds apart, and no one need fear they will be “abused” out of existence, leaving the emotionally immature with no one to envy.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:33 pmThis took guts. I tip my hat to them all.
Thank you for speaking out.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:33 pm#1:
“For example, he might have said that the top 3% of income earners pay 20% of the taxes.”
Ask him what the effective tax rate is - that’s the rate paid after deductions and exemptions. The wealthy tend to have lots of deductions which lowers their effective rate. They might have withholdings at 20% during the year but probably get a good bit back after they file their taxes.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:35 pm#23 Dividend income is also taxed at 15%. Rich people earn most of their money from capital gains and dividend income. Also, most of them are able to defer taxes by deferring large amounts of earned income, during which time the money is invested and earns yet more money. And they don’t pay FISA like the rest of us. FISA is 7.65% of our paycheck, paid on our full income up to 90-something thousand. We actually pay FISA on our income taxes, which is double taxation. Our employer is forced to match this tax, which effectively reduces our wages by another 7% or so. If you are self-employed you get to pay the full 15.3% yourself, with a slight tax break that reduces it so around 13%. Throw in federal and state income taxes on top of that, and we are getting clobbered compared to the ultra-rich.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:35 pmSomewhere around 45% of Bush’s first tax cut went to the top 1%
December 7th, 2007 at 2:38 pmMakes me feel better about wanting to work for the government when I graduate. It’s nice to know that I’ll be working around people with integrity (hopefully).
December 7th, 2007 at 2:39 pmThe Bush administration’s policy has a dual purpose, to prod Iran towards serious negotiations and to be there as a resort if negotiations fail.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 7, 2007 @ 2:37 pm
Bush has refused to negotiate anything with Iran, you idiot.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:40 pmIf we take away the deterrence, what motivation will Iran have to negotiate?
Comment by CaptainMantastic
They will have the sme motivation they had before, which was the Diplomacy of Europe and Asia - get used to the fact, Capt. that the whole world doesn’t have to wait for us to go along any more, and that will only become more true as time goes by, because Republicans have mortgaged our entire country to the Chinese.
We’re not the bmoc any more.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:42 pmThe paid trolls have really come to life lately. The sinking Republican party and White House are throwing everything they’ve got at this site lately. CHL, DC, CM, FM, they’re all here kicking up huge clouds of dust on every thread. Even Exley has reemerged, as well as the amateur Hendler.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:42 pmThrow in federal and state income taxes on top of that, and we are getting clobbered compared to the ultra-rich.
Comment by VerbalKint — December 7, 2007 @ 2:35 pm
—
No sh1t. But what can we do? The “We” you speak of are too uneducated to know the difference. Thats what the nobility wants. “we” are distracted by fear, cable TV, and newsfotainment etc.. It will never change.
Better to just get rich and forget about tax injustice.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:43 pmHere’s the question. There’s tons of classified information kicking around government. So why were the spooks so determined to get this information declassified? In Col. Lang’s words, to have the status of Iran’s nuclear program “given to the public”?
I suggest three reasons - (1) the information Chimp ‘n Dick were spewing about Iran was so egregiously false; (2) there’s past history with these mofos; and (3) the Democrats weren’t doing enough to confront the lies.
So here’s where I’m coming to. There’s the news today that some Democrats may have known that the CIA was destroying torture tapes. So let’s ask the question what the Democrats knew about the Iranian nuclear program and when they knew it.
It’s not hard to establish that Chimp ‘n Dick were lying. But what about our side? Are they still, after all these years, hesitant about confronting these lethal bozos with the truth?
December 7th, 2007 at 2:43 pmCapt.– you can’t negotiate with someone if you aren’t willing to talk to them. So this has all been some kind of a “playing hard to get” ruse on Bush’s part? He really wanted to negotiate, but he had to convince the Iranians that they wanted to negotiate? Um. Sure.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:43 pmWell, you could put it this way: By any rational accounting measure, the Federal government is tapped out (we’re far below the classic definition of bankruptcy). By most measures of wealth, the average (middle to upper-middle class) Americans are in debt up to their eyeballs (cushy lifestyle, debts exceed assets).
Now, if you’re the Fed Gov, and you need money, where are you going to go? To the people who have money!
Due to the current structure of our system, the rich are net gainers. Everybody else, the government included, are net losers. How would you balance the system? (If your friend says the system is not out of balance, then he’s out of balance).
December 7th, 2007 at 2:45 pmBush has refused to negotiate anything with Iran, you idiot.
Comment by VerbalKint — December 7, 2007 @ 2:40 pm
Exactly. The Bushie idea of “negotiate” means “you agree to everything we demand before coming to the table, and then we’ll talk.”
December 7th, 2007 at 2:45 pmThe shining example of Daniel Ellsberg lives on!
December 7th, 2007 at 2:46 pmDumb Fox…I’m with you there. There is complicity in many strange things from the Democratic side of the aisle. Not just Lieberman, either. The strange silence from Reid and Polosi over the NIE affair, for one.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:46 pmYes, Captain Mantastic. The Bush foreign policy has been very successful… for Iran. They enjoy unprecedented political power in the middle east, their scary Sunni neighbor has been transformed into a friendly Shiite neighbor, they enjoy a newly resurgent trading relationship with Europe, Russia and China and now have diplomatic help from all their new trading partners - all as a result of your dear leader’s foreign policy.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:49 pmI suggest three reasons - (1) the information Chimp ‘n Dick were spewing about Iran was so egregiously false; (2) there’s past history with these mofos; and (3) the Democrats weren’t doing enough to confront the lies.
Comment by Dumb_Fox — December 7, 2007 @ 2:43 pm
The neocons have a long history of animosity with the CIA, going back to the Ford administration. They went so far as to establish a “Team B” office within the CIA apparatus to review intelligence and spin it to their liking. The intel manipulation and cherry-picking in the run up to the Iraq Quagmire was just the most egregious case.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:49 pmVet -
I agree, it would be cool if there were an “off topic” thread to ask people for sources, thoughts, etc. Is this possible on the site?
December 7th, 2007 at 2:50 pmOne broken tooth on the gears that drive us to war is all it takes to derail the machine. And they thought it would work twice. Sheesh. Thanks anonymous CIA people.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:52 pm#13,
How do you reach that conclusion?
December 7th, 2007 at 2:56 pmthe Democrats weren’t doing enough to confront the lies.
this is a good point: because democrats weren’t doing their jobs, people in the CIA had to risk their jobs to make the truth known. Thanks Vichy Dems…FOR NOTHING!
December 7th, 2007 at 2:57 pm.
This whole CIA leaking thing is very interesting. I’ve heard it speculated that perhaps it’s partly because of the Valerie Plame affair?
Vet-who-is-apparently-also-a-musician,
Here’s a link in which the comments pretty much sum it up.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/ archives/ individual/ 2007_10/ 012212.php
and this one has all the most recently available raw data:
http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html
While the top 1% paid a larger share of the federal taxes in 2005 this isn’t surprising considering that their average income also rose. While their average tax rate (23.13%) continues to drop.
A tank of gas is going to hurt the wallets of the bottom 50% a lot more than the top 1%…
December 7th, 2007 at 3:00 pmI hope it IS because of the Plame/CIA exposure.
A COVERT agent’s career was destroyed, and so National Security was SABOTAGED,
because her husband, a SPY BOSS with commendations from Bush Sr,
told the TRUTH about Bush’s LIES in order to invade Iraq.
THEY don’t want to be thrown under the bus by TRAITOR Bush and his WAR CRIMINALS, and I say GOOD ON THEM!!
I hope the CIA agents come out and expose ALL the LIES that Bush has told.
Sincerely,
NRA Gun Nutes
December 7th, 2007 at 3:09 pmTranslation? Someone in that group would have gone to the media “on the record†to disclose its contents.
And that person would have been hailed as a hero by a grateful nation. It’s nice to see that there are government employees who have had enough and are willing to put their careers on the line to keep the Bush Crime Family from causing any more harm to our Country. Now, if the Democrats in Congress could just have as much courage….
December 7th, 2007 at 3:11 pm#1 vet,
December 7th, 2007 at 3:13 pmI read comments before I replied to your inquiry, and I see that several posters here have made all the points I would have offered as well.
The middle class is being squeezed and pushed down into the lower class, which is in a desperate situation itself. The rich are getting richer: their income is not all from wages, but from the lower-taxed dividends and other investment loopholes. They can afford top notch accountants to shelter their income.
Meanwhile, we pay FICA on approximately $98,000 wages every year. Those who earn $250,000/year, stop paying FICA at the $98,000 level.
Those who want flat tax, sales tax, etc, would hurt those who must spend all of their income on food, shelter and clothing. In the case of the wealthy, while they consume more for sure, how many yachts can they buy? They pay for more services and other non-taxable items.
The rightards like to compare apples and oranges when making their arguments, using percentages and other accounting and actuarial techniques learned at the knee of their financial advisors; the rest of us working schmoes pay taxes on everything, our incomes are stagnant, our expenses are rising, our options are few.
When people have been proven to vote against their own interests you can be sure that the demagogues have been effective in duping them with the old shell game.
December 7th, 2007 at 3:19 pmSome people in the middle class dream of being rich one day, they don’t realize the deck is stacked against them.
) - how can you discount any possibility that it was not, in part, due to Bush policy?
Easy - He’s never succeeded at anything in his entire life. Well, cheerleading, maybe.
December 7th, 2007 at 3:21 pmAnd subsequently, Iran actually softens it’s position (if you believe the NIE report) - how can you discount any possibility that it was not, in part, due to Bush policy?
P.S. The fact that you don’t like Bush, isn’t a good enough reason.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 7, 2007 @ 3:11 pm
Oh, mighty aphrodite, how ‘tarded of you! You excuse lying to congress, the american people and taking a position in contradiction to reality as ’strategy’ of a president? Which president are you referring to, Nixon or Bush?
P.S. The fact that you idolize Bush, isn’t a good enough excuse for you being a traitor to the Constitution.
December 7th, 2007 at 3:22 pmAnyway, good on the CIA agents who stand up to TRAITORS like Bush and Cheney.
Sincerely,
NRA Gun Nutes
December 7th, 2007 at 3:29 pmAccording to Lang in light of the recent NIE report, Bush policies are working. If we take away the deterrence, what motivation will Iran have to negotiate?
Comment by CaptainMantastic
The problem is, you moron, Bush was not threatening to attack Iran back in 2003 when they decided to stop their nuclear weapons planning. Why don’t you go to redstate where you will be applauded and adored?
December 7th, 2007 at 3:29 pmGod Bless them!
December 7th, 2007 at 3:31 pmIf the Bush administrations policy has been, in part, an attempt to soften the Iranian position by taking a hard line (a position that your democratic frontrunner shares, BTW:
And subsequently, Iran actually softens it’s position (if you believe the NIE report) - how can you discount any possibility that it was not, in part, due to Bush policy?
P.S. The fact that you don’t like Bush, isn’t a good enough reason.
Comment by CaptainMantastic
You really are a moron, aren’t you. Iran made this decision back in 2003. Bush was not taking a hard line position with Iran (threatening to attack them) at that time. Iran “softened it’s position” due to negotiations with other Europeans nations, it had absolutely nothing to do with Bush who refused to participate in the negotiations. Why don’t you pull your head out of your ass, your would would be a much better place if you did.
December 7th, 2007 at 3:36 pm“Liar. The corporation still pays taxes on those things.”
Unless they bought an exemption from DeLay, Abramoff & co. Which all the smart ones did years ago.
You really like tyin in to the sure-loser topics dontcha Dixie???
December 7th, 2007 at 3:39 pmComment by Southern Man — December 7, 2007 @ 3:26 pm
Look here, I found a study that says the top 1% of the population (in terms of wealth) controls 42% of the wealth. Then by your numbers they’re getting off easy in terms of taxes, wouldn’t you agree?
http://www.stateofworkingamerica.org/swa06-ch05-wealth.pdf
December 7th, 2007 at 3:45 pm84.6 percent of all federal income taxes are paid by the top 25 percent of income earners. The top 50 percent pay 96 percent of all federal income taxes. The top one percent pay 36 percent.
http://shell.windows.com/ fileassoc/ 0409/ xml/ redir.asp?EXT=xls
—
Southern man, do you have the numbers that include the payroll tax (15% split between employee/employer) and Medicare Tax?
I didn’t think so.
If Federal income tax was the only tax that we paid, then those %s would actually mean something.
December 7th, 2007 at 3:48 pmVet:
December 7th, 2007 at 3:51 pmIf you want solid counterpoints to the right wing tax mythology, go here:
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/LiberalFAQ.htm
There’s tons of good stuff here.
watch now folks, as Dixieboy shows off his 3 card monty moves by bastardizing some statistics to prove his point.
guess he must be a billionaire, to be so worried about the welfare of billionaires. those poor folks are just trying to get along, ain’t they Dix??
December 7th, 2007 at 3:53 pmIf you don’t count the first election which was stolen…
December 7th, 2007 at 4:11 pmAnd the second in which he won the election based on terrifying the public…
December 7th, 2007 at 4:12 pmCapt. - cheating doesn’t count.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:12 pmGet of the kitchen if you can’t take a little heat, Captain
December 7th, 2007 at 4:14 pmThe best the Left can offer isn’t = Dem candidates for any office.
That being said, no Democrat(s) have ever plumbed the depths of corruption the R’s have. That’s factual history, not spin-product.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:14 pmThe entire World is waiting anxiously for people like this!!! It is time to unmask the ‘modus operandi’ of the war criminals of Bush & Co.! HAGE 2009!
December 7th, 2007 at 4:15 pmEasy on the Capt. Longo.
He’s a borderline case, and as soon as he’s confident no one will force him into gay vegetarianism, he’ll come around to the Patriot’s side.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:16 pmThis is a tidbit from an article about the NIE from the Toronto Star enititled:
Speaking truth to power on Iran
(subtitled: Credibility of Bush administration sinks to new low after report demolishes bomb claims)
‘While Iran’s ruling clerics do understand carrots and sticks, Bush has little credibility to use either.
Instead of helping Iran’s human rights activists and its strong civil society, he has only strengthened the clerical regime. “No Iranian wants to see what happened to Iraq and Afghanistan repeated in Iran,” noted Akbar Ganji, Iran’s leading dissident’
http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/283053
December 7th, 2007 at 4:18 pmSouthern Man: “84.6 percent of all federal income taxes are paid by the top 25 percent of income earners. The top 50 percent pay 96 percent of all federal income taxes. The top one percent pay 36 percent.”
So what. The vast majority of families in the country pay more payroll taxes than they do income taxes. If you take payroll taxes into account, you get completely different money. And, since they’re using Social Security taxes to pay for government and tax returns to the wealthy, what’s the difference? Clinton raised the top marginal rate by a whopping 3.5% and achieved more or less balanced budgets, a stronger dollar and a decline in the rate of our debt growth, not to mention declining poverty rates for 8 straight years. Do you think the wealthiest Americans can’t afford another 3.5% on their top income tax rates? They did just fine with that rate under Clinton.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:32 pm#1 Comment by Vet — December 7, 2007 @ 2:06 pm
Your argument should be ‘So what! they can afford a tax increase’.
I’m all for people making as much money as they can but how much money do you need in order to thrive and survive. When you make a half-a-billion dollars a year and have to pay an additional $50 million you will not have to skimp on wardrobe or food expenses. Your private island would still be waiting.
on the flipside their is a fear that by increasing taxes to much on the very rich they may move their wealth out of the country.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:34 pmshit colonel, they did just fine when the top rate was 70%
December 7th, 2007 at 4:35 pm79 - they already did move most of their wealth outside the country.
vacation homes in tuscany confer way more status than those in the Ozarks.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:36 pmIs there a statute of limitations on prosecuting administration officials for illegal activity even after leaving office ?
Our country needs a Reboot after some bug fixes and malicious chimp removal. The world will thank us.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:40 pmtom: “shit colonel, they did just fine when the top rate was 70%”
No kidding, and the public schools and libraries were well-financed, the roads were in good repair and politicians spoke seriously about “extending Medicare to all citizens.”
December 7th, 2007 at 4:52 pmMy favorite current right-wing argument is “JFK wanted to cut taxes…”
Right. He wanted that top marginal rate lowered to 70% I think.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:55 pmshots of grain alcohol and pure, spring water all around!!!
I do not abstain from contact with righties, but I do deny them my essence, Mandrake.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:56 pmAnd the second in which he won the election based on terrifying the public…
Comment by Longo
And with the help of Ken Blackwell in Ohio, thanks to his disenfranchising voters by only allowing one or two machines for precincts that had thousands of voters.
And yes, cheating doesn’t count. That is the only way Bush could ever win anything, by cheating.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:58 pmbilbobaggins. I can disagree with you without insulting you. I believe that if you’re confident enough in your opinions, you probably don’t need to result to insults or name calling. What do you think?
Comment by CaptainMantastic
Nope, I call a spade a spade. You are a moron and I will continue to call you done as long as you act like one.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:59 pmon the flipside their is a fear that by increasing taxes to much on the very rich they may move their wealth out of the country.
Comment by SkyPete
Like all those corporations incorporated in the Caymen Islands? Many of those “corporations” are an individual or a couple. And why do they incorporate in the Caymen Islands? To avoid paying income tax.
December 7th, 2007 at 5:03 pm#58 Southernman umm, how can I put this delicately I believe you are dead WRONG once again. You see when a company provides things to employees such as use of a company plane, company car gasoline etc… the company does not pay taxes on it. I have no clue where you got your information from, but I’ll explain exactly how it works and exactly how it benefits an individual.
Companies do not provide these benefits to the rank and file. Generally they go to people who are already highly compensated the top %5 club. Lets say you have use of a company car. Lets assume they pay $60,000 for the vehicle. So you have a vehicle that someone else has paid for. The company has paid the sales taxes, true, but is there income involved. So you use the car for the year, sometimes for company business, sometimes for personal use. The personal use portion is income to you. If the personal use portion was $12,000 for the year, you get $12,000 added to your W-2. Now when you pay taxes on that you pay at lets say the %33 rate. So you pay $4,000 for the use of a $60,000 car for one year and your employer has paid all the fuel, all the repairs, they might wash and wax it daily (they do at my company), they deduct all the expenses, all the costs. Is that a bargain for you?
How about use of a company plane. Let assume you use it for business but 7 or 8 time a year you take your wife. Normally you are charged commercial fight cost, which is much lower than chartered jet costs. But lets say those trips add up to the equivalent of $3,000 in flights. The company deducts the cost of operating the plane and you get $3,000 added to your W-2 and again you pay $1,000 in taxes. A bargain to get $3,000 of flights for $1,000 don’t you think? This is exactly how it works.
#64 those figures do not include FICA and Medicare. They purposely do not include them because when those figures are included you suddenly see that the top of the pyramid pays a disproportionately low % of taxes. When you add in Sales taxes, property taxes and state taxes the disparity grows even more.
December 7th, 2007 at 5:16 pmdixieboy - sounds like you’d better do something, quick, to help out those poor rich folks
if you can find’em, and they don’t call security on ya when they see ya comin’
December 7th, 2007 at 5:46 pmSouthern Guy, we can see that you’re deeply troubled and concerned that the wealthiest members of our society could possibly have to pay marginally higher taxes to help us dig out of this huge hole Bush has put us in, but maybe it would help if you knew that your savior Jesus Christ was a believer in progressive taxation:
“For everyone to whom much is given, of him shall much be required.†— Luke 12:48
December 7th, 2007 at 6:10 pmProperty taxes are considerably higher on a 1,000,000.00 home than a 100,000.00. 30,000.00 a year compared to 4,000.00 a year. And in most states that have high property taxes, they have low sales tax. 1.5 percent compared to 9.5 percent. The rich pay taxes. They just make more, thus paying more. Simple freakin math.
Comment by Southern Man — December 7, 2007 @ 5:31 pm
That depends on where you live, and when you bought the house…
The rich often pay a smaller percentage of their income in taxes than the poor do, thus they pay LESS taxes on each dollar. Simple freakin math, which explains why a ‘tard like you doesn’t understand it.
December 7th, 2007 at 6:12 pmWarren Buffet pays less property tax on his Malibu beachfront home than he does on his home in Omaha, Nebraska. He pointed this out in the process of telling California what was wrong with its tax policy.
December 7th, 2007 at 6:16 pmIsn’t it wonderful that in times of great danger, patriotic Americans always stand up and risk everything they have for our country? Even against a madman tyrant like George W. Bush, who already Swiftboated and destroyed one career CIA agent?
December 7th, 2007 at 6:51 pmNameless senior CIA analysts;
Thank you for your service!
December 7th, 2007 at 8:40 pmAll I can say is: God bless them and their families for generations to come.
December 7th, 2007 at 11:31 pmWrong term to throw around when referring to people who definitely read TP comments, Frankie.
December 8th, 2007 at 9:51 am97 - as long as they honor the Constitution, they’re not traitors.
the Cheerleader-Prince, and his buddies, now, there’s a different story.
December 8th, 2007 at 4:13 pm