A rational person might ask what the entire tax burden might be on a three mill earner if they can get a quarter of a million dollar reduction and still be paying tax!
But, much more important is where this new number the Bamster got regarding the middle class came from. He asserts that Romney will raise taxes by $2000/year on middle income wage earners. Since the core of the Romney plan is an across-the-board reduction of tax RATES, it becomes reasonable to wonder how that costs a tax payer more. Where is the source for the assertion? If you were paying 10% and now pay 8% how much more is that?
The Wall Street Journal devoted almost the full column on the editorial page to a detailed refutation of the data creation:
Making Up The Numbers As Necessary
Probably the best line in the article is after listing the results of previous tax RATE reductions on federal revenue, under both Democrat and Republican administrations, the Bamster number crunchers get the opposite conclusion.
So on four separate occasions what TPC says is "mathematically impossible"—cutting tax rates and making the tax system more progressive—actually happened. Hats off to the scholars at TPC: Their study manages to claim that what happens in real life can't happen in theory.
How stupid is the American electorate? We'll find out in a couple of months.