Didn't we already try that too?

How did that work out?
 

This is my problem. When I was born, I knew nothing of economics. Now that I'm grown I hear the following two narratives:

We've been doing the Reaganomics thing for thirty years now, more or less, and if it had all worked the way they were selling it to us, we'd be in economic Nirvana by now, not facing the prospect of one out of every two Americans in or near poverty. It's a real world study: cutting taxes, destroying the social safety net, and deregulating industry have all been tried, repeatedly, and failed utterly. Time for a new economic paradigm, or rather, time to return to FDR's New Deal.

and

We've been doing the new deal thing for eighty years now, more or less, and if it had all worked the way they were selling it to us, we'd be in economic Nirvana by now, not facing the prospect of one out of every two Americans in or near poverty. It's a real world study: raising taxes, erecting the social safety net, and overregulating industry have all been tried, repeatedly, and failed utterly. Time for a new economic paradigm, or rather, time to return to Reaganomics.

Who do I believe? Both sides cherry-pick isolated facts from history to support their case that we've been doing it the "other way." When it comes down to it, I have to use common sense. The more expensive something is, the less people buy. Taxes make things effectively more expensive, including services, and labor, and even merely being in business. So, the higher the taxes, the less economic activity (generally speaking). Doesn't that make sense?