With all respect think about what you are saying.  If someone builds a factory in China, they have unfettered access to both their markets, and our markets.  IF they uild their factory in this country then they face unfettered access to our market, but they face a tarriff wall, currency manipulation wall, administrative wall, and subsidy wall from china.  You can't have that kind of imbalance persist.  There has to be steps taking to ensure that the goods that we make are treated the same way that we treat goods coming into this country.  Intelectual property is just common sense.  we can cut the corporate tax rate to Zero, but if we invest billions of dollars in RD and all someone in china has to do is plop off the back of a flat screen or open up a laptop and take that proprietary knowledge then what's the point! 

 

I am a free market guy, i have faith in the People of this country and our entrepeneurial spirit.  That belief is not, however, a suicide pact with the rest of the world to let them keep taking advantage of this country without consequences! 

 

As far as competitiveness he is loweirng the corporate tax rate, BIG LEAGUE from 35 to 15%, he is capping and reviewing our entire regulatory structure, he is advocating a 1% reduction in non defense discretionary spending and thinks that we can go much further without reducing service to key constituencies.  He also thinks that we can go much further than that.  Reducing the size of government will make our more competative tax structure sustainable over the long run.  He's also going to lower the repatriation of funds rate so that companies holding liquid assets overseas can bring that money back to this country to invest in private sector expansion.  This will increase the amount of capital in domestic markets without increasing the global money supply through quantative easing and have a positive affect on the treasury instead of the negative affect of fiscal spending.  Further, the reinvestment will affirm profits generated in the open market not pick winners and losers from the bowels of the appropriations comittee. 

 

That would be the most conservative approach to global competitiveness possibly even more conservative than reagan.  Are we really going to concede the election to the dreamboat in a pants suit because we have a legitimate disagreement about prosecuting trade partners vs. punative tariffs when the altrenative is the disolution of american sovereignty as we know it in favor of a North American Union style trading system that will cede our legislative authority to a central body that doesn't believe in federalism limited government or the ideals we both cherish?

---