History shows that there are two ways to get the same result when it comes to tax revenues.

You can increase taxes.
Or, you can decrease taxes.

Sounds like a contradiction, but it is not. Increasing taxes does increase tax revenues, but stagnates the economy. It will show with a reduced GDP growth.
Reducing taxes properly, increases investment and spending which increase profit and thus increases tax revenues. This increases the GDP growth which in turn makes for a better standard of living.

I realize that this is simply put and not the details and figures that the so-called "experts" want to hear, but if you look at history you will see it works out like that. If you need figures to support what I said, you can get them from the gov. websites such as Treasurydirect.gov.

Both sides of the argument are right. Raising taxes really does increase tax revenues, and lowering taxes also raises tax revenues. The second takes longer to realize because the increased tax revenues are more of a delayed gratification in that the investments, hiring and profits from sales have to increase before the actual increase in tax revenues are realized. The difference is that the economy is stronger with the second, as well as the standard of living increase.

Like someone else stated, the gov can either have a large piece of a small pie, or it can have an equal sized piece of a LARGE pie. The large pie satisfies the gov belly as well as satisfying the bellies of more of it's citizens.