Capital Gains and Games

I also consder myself to be right of center, and I am concerned about marginal tax rates, especially as they drive incentives away from economic growth. I don't understand the liberal problem with exposing SS as a wellfare program. That is the only way it makes sense. I also pay the max rate for SS. Why would I want to pay more so that the government can do a lousy job of saving for my retirement? The value of the program is in that it provides some dignitiy to those who don't fit into the system well and can't (for whatever reason) manage to save. Jeff's concern was solely related to political survival of the program, I imagine. It seems to me that the unimpervious 'third rail' has some political capitol margin to spend in order to make it more effective and less wasteful. I'd like to reduce its scope to where it makes sense. The other program pieces your proposal adds, in the way of mandatory private savings accounts, are an improved way of saving for retirment and probably are beneficial to many of the middle class. However, people like you and I , can do better without the regulation and administration. If we reduce the scope, then perhpas the marginal tax hit can be reduced some. However, I find the regressive nature of the tax unappealing. We are moving toward a system where the income tax is just for the 'rich' (that would be us not Warren Buffet) and payroll tax is for the poor and middle class. I do not like this stratification. We should have a simple, mildly regreesive system that is as low as we can get away with. I am a recent fan of Vox Baby, who has followed to the new blog. I appreciate your style, insight, and the topics you write about. Thanks.