If We Were Only All Supply-Siders… (link fixed)


Read this article by Brian Wesbury, I think it’s amazing.  It does a fantastic job of explaining the two major economic worldviews.

Demand and Supply

If one view sounds like is shown a cheerier light than the other, maybe it’s because those who hold that view tend to be much more cheery and optimistic people.  Comments are welcome. 🙂


4 Responses to “If We Were Only All Supply-Siders… (link fixed)”

  1. Matt K Says:

    Or, perhaps one side is presented as more optimistic than the other because the author is coming it with a clear ideological slant.

    • mikehinton Says:

      Hi Matt, can you clarify who this is? Of course the author has his own beliefs, the question is if ones beliefs can be altered if evidence to the contrary is found. Do you dissagree with something in the article, or are you just being an instigator? I find it very insightful and thought provoking myself, but of course, I read the thing.

  2. Matt K Says:

    Yeah, I read it too. What I mean is both framing and word choice. Demand-siders “claim”, “think”, “believe” and “assume”. While Supply-siders “know”.

    You can present the argument in many different ways. To say that Supply-siders are optimistic and Demand-siders are pessimistic is the message here. Or maybe, Supply-siders are foolish and living with their head in the clouds and Demand-siders are just realistic. Perhaps Demand-siders are optimistic and Supply-siders are just self centered, because Demand-siders believe in what we can do as a society if we pool our efforts and Supply-siders just want to keep more of their money.

    Maybe, if you look at economic history though you would find the Supply-siders as un-realistic and that it is actually that Demand-siders are living in the real world. But, who knows? The article certainly does not address it. It’s really just a bunch of rhetoric. The piece you wrote, about deficit spending and inflation is a good example of looking at the facts. There’s a book called “The lost science of money”by Steve Zarlenga: it is a great read if you are really interested about how money has worked throughout history.

    • mikehinton Says:

      That’s a very thoughtful response, I appreciate it. I’ll agree with you that this article was much more declarative than scientific. It is speaking to people who were already convinced, and therefore maybe not be the best to throw out there without building up more supporting evidence. The way I see it, it’s not just that supply-siders want to keep their money, they know practically everyone wants to keep their money. Supply-siders desperately want what is best for everyone, and they see economic growth as the fastest way to make everyone’s lives better. Redistributing income, as noble as it sounds, slows this growth.

      The thing is though, I’m not wholly against demand-side in certain situations like our current one. When no one will spend money, the government is the spender of last resort. The government can save us from economic turmoil when the private sector is spiraling. But when the economy recovers, I think the government should back off. That’s where I differ from pure supply-siders, unfortunately, most commentators are either fully one side or the other.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: