Wednesday, June 14, 2017

Demand-side Economics and Supply-side Economics

Just as macroeconomics and microeconomics are taught separately at most universities, so too should demand-side economics and supply-side economics be taught separately.  Demand-side economics and supply-side economics are fundamentally different and require a program of coursework designed to explore each of these approaches to the study of economics in full, absent conflicting arguments and strategies.  Teaching the rudiments of each in one course is like teaching Spanish and French from the same textbook.  Without a suitable emersion into the efficacy of each of these approaches, the student is left with a confusing array of theories and counter-theories.

Tax policy provides a good example for this concern.  Tax strategies for demand-side economics and for supply-side economics come from a unique starting position and are almost polar-opposites.  On the supply-side, reducing inefficiencies and distortions in the market are of paramount importance.  Ensuring business has a ready supply of investment capital is an objective.  For supply-side economics, the market is king, and a low tax rate for movers and shakers is the order of the day. On the demand side, the consumer is king.  Demand for products and services drives the economy, and governmental infusion of money into the marketplace when growth lags can be critical.  For the demand-side approach, a sufficiently progressive tax code is a key component.

The end result of each of these strategies when set in motion will likely be distinct.  Without a deep dive into these outcomes we are left with nothing more than a bewildering array of counter-factual theories.  Academicians need to flush this out by examining competing theories in an untainted atmosphere of hard data.  This can only be done by examining the finer points of these strategies in a stand-alone, end-to-end analysis of these two distinct approaches to economic growth and sustainability.

Tuesday, February 28, 2017

Blaming Capitalism

We tend to blame capitalism for our own faults.  Blaming capitalism for a culture of greed is like blaming the victim for the crime.  We elect representatives that permit a systemic rape of our national wealth.  Don’t blame capitalism for this shortcoming.

Capitalism is an amoral economic and political system.  It is neither good nor bad.  The manner in which it's interpreted is what is critical.  In a democracy we have a choice in how we define and administer the tenets of capitalism.  Unfortunately, we have delegated that responsibility to those who favor the moneyed interests over and above our own.

“We the people” do not recognize the value of the society we help to create every day.  If there is a fault in capitalism, it is in its inability to offer an obvious path to greater prosperity for the many.  The tenets of capitalism require a thoughtful and studied approach to a greater understanding of its variations, which is something most are unwilling or unable to do.