If you don't understand why you do not use averages for income calculations, you really should take a basic stats class. Use median income, and that's household, not individual.
I don't think you understand how tax brackets work. I've explained already that that tax increase will impact some "middle class" Californians, but most that range is in the top 10 15 percentile of income in California. Are you trying to tell me that someone in the 90th percentile of income is middle class?
Nah that dent in tax revenue is because California's tax base is disproportionately tied to stock market performance and very high earners. That's not to say that how California generates tax revenue can't be improved, but the idea that tax revenue is falling because of a middle class exodus is flat out wrong and unsupported by data.
Indeed, which leads to a much higher tax burden on lower-income Texans. Unless you think not having an income tax and over half of Texas' tax revenue is sales tax are unrelated. There are disadvantages and advantages to both states' approaches.
Again, which is a related quality of life issue that is separate from income. It makes no sense to decide whether an individual is middle class or not on their school district, by that logic, we should consider geographic access to hospitals or parks. Which is quite silly.