I am definitely no expert on markets or economics but I feel as though the market is more about key players and limited rewards. To think that everyone wins when a company gets a tax break, that the companies will invest more seems to make sense but there is one particular problem. The problem is this, how big and influential can a company become? Of course companies can become huge and that seems to be the direction tax cuts head toward but even then truly the beneficiaries are quite limited. Let us say shareholders may benefit other companies can also get business there are definite gains but it is still limiting. The market has to limit the winners. This sounds all left field and kind of confused but the market as a whole keeps most of the wealth in few hands. This is the real problem of the market.
As an example look at private health care in Australia. Before Medicare it was 64% of the market then Medicare came along and it dropped to 33% then the government basically blackmailed people into taking it up again through levies and it has stayed around 46% since. Almost 64% of people who use private health care are dissatisfied with it. It is another example of profit driven business suiting shareholders and the minority of users. The users in the top bracket benefit more and the average user loses out by default. It is basically market driven thinking.
Or let us look at the biggest companies and think who are really the biggest beneficiaries? There can be all sorts of positive investment for sure if you consider Apple and some of their renewable investments but these are more about marketing than anything serious. They can only do so much in the market. There are always tiers. That is why a taxed system like Medicare is good. It doesn’t necessarily compete in the market but it benefits most users. The market can never do that. It is an ideological hierarchy based around money. To put it simply it comes as bronze, silver and gold but unfortunately that is still a minority.