in a properly regulated market, supply shouldn't be driving demand, but that's not exactly what i'm saying. what i'm saying is that a lack of supply is inflating prices, and those inflated prices (called a housing bubble) are suppressing demand. this is a subtle but important point. supply side economics is the theoretical mistake that you can control demand by changing levels of supply, generally - that it goes up and down the graph, proportionally. i am not remotely making that argument, although i realize that a novice might think i am due to the language. to the extent that i'm arguing that demand is low due to artificial scarcity hiking the price too high, and that you fix the demand issue by hiking supply via direct government spending, i'm explicitly describing that as a market failure, and presenting direct government investment as the solution to the broken market.

these are very different analyses and very different arguments, but i acknowledge that the language is confusing.