I was hoping someone could break down the following sentence that I have written into its subject, verb, and predicate parts:
This is why supporting demand-side policies is a less-risky proposition.
I quickly jotted this note down in a text book and, upon reading it back to myself, it felt quite awkward. From my vantage, the intent was to convey supporting demand-side policies as a singular idea or concept, with that intention then more or less affirmed in (what I'm assuming is) my predicate; this consisting of a less-risky proposition, which denotes a singular idea.
Should I have instead used the verb are to link the subject and predicate? If so, is it because, simply, the subject cannot be construed as anything other than compound in nature?