Revenue Neutral???

What part of "Revenue Neutral" does either Romney or Ryan fail to understand? Revenue neutral means that revenue from taxes will remain at 15.4% of GDP, having fallen from 19.5% prior to the Bush tax cuts. Revenue neutral will mean that expenditures will continue to exceed revenue by over a trillion dollars. The economy does not need a tax plan that is revenue neutral. The economy needs a tax plan that increases revenue and the best way to get that increase is to raise taxes on those with the highest incomes. At the last debate, Romney insisted that his plan would result in those at the top continuing to pay 60% of all tax revenues.  That is great if you are one of the 1% at the top because for the past 31 years, the top 1% have enjoyed 90% of the growth in income and wealth.  So, under the Romney plan, while your income grew by 90% your taxes will not increase but remain the same.  Mitt, how does that benefit the middle class?  Is there some new math that has a magic formula that shows how those whose income grew continue to pay the same while those whose income shrunk make up the difference?  If Willy Sutton robbed banks because that is where the money is, those claiming to have a fix for the economy should know that a need for additional revenue should point them to the highest paid citizens not the lowest paid citizens. What's more, voters should know better than to give Republican "voodoo economics" a second chance. It didn't work the first time and will not work in the future.