Does it work on a micro scale? Private Investors had zillions sitting idle through 2008 - 2012. Could they have stuffed all that cash into companies and created demand for their product? Could Private Equity have stuffed billions into their portfolio companies and seen growth? Could industries have chosen to spend a lot in that time period and made premium profits? If so, why didnt they?
Or somehow, is it only on the macro scale? Only big Federal levers can accomplish supply side growth? This is because supply siders say cut taxes, leave more money with business owners and they will hire more people, buy more equipment and create a virtuous cycle. (the same thing i suggested above at a portfolio or industry level). Supply drives demand? And we know this as fact because it worked a few times at a Federal level.
So, if, nationwide, we put a lot of money into the hands of private business owners, we would have Reagan-esque type growth, not Obama growth? OK. I'm with you so far. But what if we did that by a mechanism other than the Federal Govt? That should still work, money's money, right?
I like economic models and theorize a lot about placing bets. If I could get Reagan type growth with a fixed formula, I'd like that. This is why supply siders push their policies politically, they like Reagan type growth. We all do.
But let's look at it from an investor's view; what if US industry took all it's cash and invested it in privately held Canadian companies in 2008 - 2012 and it was as impactful as a Reagan type tax cut - would that have delivered a massive premium to Canadian GDP? Would it have spread to the US?
If you're right about stimulus/response nature of supply side tax cuts, then we should be able to create demand through supply and make all the right bets. And if not Canada, how about Mexico or New England, there are plenty of small economies. Or does it have to be US size economy and why?
Or somehow, is it only on the macro scale? Only big Federal levers can accomplish supply side growth? This is because supply siders say cut taxes, leave more money with business owners and they will hire more people, buy more equipment and create a virtuous cycle. (the same thing i suggested above at a portfolio or industry level). Supply drives demand? And we know this as fact because it worked a few times at a Federal level.
So, if, nationwide, we put a lot of money into the hands of private business owners, we would have Reagan-esque type growth, not Obama growth? OK. I'm with you so far. But what if we did that by a mechanism other than the Federal Govt? That should still work, money's money, right?
I like economic models and theorize a lot about placing bets. If I could get Reagan type growth with a fixed formula, I'd like that. This is why supply siders push their policies politically, they like Reagan type growth. We all do.
But let's look at it from an investor's view; what if US industry took all it's cash and invested it in privately held Canadian companies in 2008 - 2012 and it was as impactful as a Reagan type tax cut - would that have delivered a massive premium to Canadian GDP? Would it have spread to the US?
If you're right about stimulus/response nature of supply side tax cuts, then we should be able to create demand through supply and make all the right bets. And if not Canada, how about Mexico or New England, there are plenty of small economies. Or does it have to be US size economy and why?