????19世紀(jì)中葉，我們依靠人口增長(zhǎng)和活力，在經(jīng)濟(jì)上超越了英國(guó)。我們鼓勵(lì)商業(yè)、強(qiáng)烈的工作責(zé)任感和創(chuàng)新（其中有些是從英國(guó)人那里偷來(lái)的）。而在本世紀(jì)，中國(guó)可能超越美國(guó)，成為全世界最大的經(jīng)濟(jì)體。雖然有人指出中國(guó)政治制度的不穩(wěn)定性，但當(dāng)前中國(guó)的政治制度與50年或者20年前相比已經(jīng)有了很大的變化。中國(guó)或許需要解決更多問(wèn)題（腐敗、財(cái)富分配不均、國(guó)有企業(yè)、污染和鬼城等），但他們已經(jīng)證明有足夠的能力進(jìn)化自己的制度，同時(shí)解決所面臨的問(wèn)題。而我們卻一直在原地踏步。

????這個(gè)問(wèn)題無(wú)關(guān)中國(guó)的“好”或 “壞”，而是有關(guān)于這個(gè)國(guó)家的客觀情況。按照目前的發(fā)展速度，在25年內(nèi)，中國(guó)將成為全球最大的經(jīng)濟(jì)體，但人均GDP仍然較低，這意味著中國(guó)依舊有巨大的發(fā)展?jié)摿?。?dāng)然，這并不意味著中國(guó)的發(fā)展會(huì)不間斷地持續(xù)下去。期間可能會(huì)出現(xiàn)問(wèn)題。這也并不意味著我們就應(yīng)該停止反對(duì)某些問(wèn)題，比如網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全、領(lǐng)土爭(zhēng)端和知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)等。

????我們需要完成兩個(gè)目標(biāo)。第一個(gè)目標(biāo)是與中國(guó)建立牢固的商業(yè)關(guān)系，類似與我們?cè)?jīng)與英國(guó)建立的關(guān)系。美國(guó)獨(dú)立戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)之后的200年間，以及美國(guó)內(nèi)戰(zhàn)期間我們努力維持英美關(guān)系的中立狀態(tài)之后的150年間，我們和英國(guó)一直保持著牢固的商業(yè)關(guān)系。當(dāng)然這從來(lái)不是一件容易的事情。第二個(gè)目標(biāo)（為第一個(gè)目標(biāo)提供支持）是打造美國(guó)自己的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力。經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)模等于人口乘以生產(chǎn)率（即人均GDP）。如果比人口，美國(guó)可能永遠(yuǎn)比不過(guò)中國(guó)，所以我們需要專注于成為全世界最富創(chuàng)新力、生產(chǎn)率最高的國(guó)家?，F(xiàn)在，我們就像是在參加一場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)上的奧運(yùn)會(huì)，我們不能至專注于打敗屬于同一陣營(yíng)的其他美國(guó)人。我們需要共和黨和民主黨精誠(chéng)合作。雙方對(duì)每一個(gè)問(wèn)題的觀點(diǎn)都有道理。我們需要求同存異。

????政府不僅要對(duì)商業(yè)進(jìn)行監(jiān)管，還要保持商業(yè)的正常運(yùn)行。商業(yè)是生產(chǎn)率提高的來(lái)源，更代表了我們的生活標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。我們?cè)谶@方面有許多優(yōu)勢(shì)。有效的、明智的監(jiān)管對(duì)于設(shè)定最低標(biāo)準(zhǔn)至關(guān)重要，保持商業(yè)的正常運(yùn)行對(duì)于培養(yǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)所需的推動(dòng)力有著關(guān)鍵作用，而經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)將提供就業(yè)和更多機(jī)遇，這是所有美國(guó)人希望看到的。

????現(xiàn)在，美國(guó)政府應(yīng)該保持以下八個(gè)領(lǐng)域的正常運(yùn)轉(zhuǎn)。首先是解決債務(wù)問(wèn)題。我們不可能與糟糕的資產(chǎn)負(fù)債表爭(zhēng)輸贏。我們的資產(chǎn)負(fù)債表正在日益惡化，而不是好轉(zhuǎn)。估算沒(méi)有預(yù)測(cè)任何衰退，而衰退必將讓資產(chǎn)負(fù)債情況進(jìn)一步惡化。按照當(dāng)前的預(yù)測(cè)，隨著中國(guó)的GDP超過(guò)美國(guó)，我們的負(fù)債將超過(guò)GDP的100%。難道這就是我們希望留給子孫的遺產(chǎn)嗎？其次是重建瀕臨崩潰的基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施。第三是增加所有級(jí)別的數(shù)學(xué)與科學(xué)教育。我們需要更多的工程師，而不是律師和金融工程師。第四是移民制度改革。

????第五是侵權(quán)法改革。侵權(quán)制度對(duì)于解決社會(huì)不公平問(wèn)題非常重要，但它同時(shí)也應(yīng)該對(duì)提供投資與就業(yè)的公司做到公平。第六是資金充足的專利制度，能夠更快承認(rèn)專利和解決爭(zhēng)端。第七是鼓勵(lì)效率、生產(chǎn)更多能源（既包括傳統(tǒng)能源，也包括經(jīng)濟(jì)上可行的可再生能源）的能源政策。第八是自由和公平貿(mào)易。美國(guó)總統(tǒng)需要通過(guò)貿(mào)易促進(jìn)權(quán)（TPA）來(lái)促進(jìn)貿(mào)易協(xié)議，支持美國(guó)就業(yè)。如果沒(méi)有貿(mào)易促進(jìn)權(quán)，將無(wú)法推動(dòng)貿(mào)易協(xié)議的達(dá)成。貿(mào)易的支持者與反對(duì)者對(duì)這個(gè)問(wèn)題都心知肚明。

????

????During the mid 1800’s, we eclipsed the UK economically because of population growth and dynamism. We encouraged business, a strong working ethic, and innovation (some stolen from the UK). During this century, China may eclipse the US as the world’s biggest economy. While some might point to the unsustainability of China’s political system, it is very different than it was 50 years ago or 20 years ago. China may have more issues to deal with (corruption, wealth disparity, state owned enterprises, pollution, and ghost cities to name a few), but they have shown tremendous capability to evolve their system and address their issues. We are standing still.

????This is not a case of is China “good” or is China “bad,” rather it’s a case of China “is.” At current growth rates, in about 25 years China will be the world’s largest economy and will still have a lower GDP per capita, meaning more growth is possible. This is not to say China’s growth will continue uninterrupted. Something could go awry. It also doesn’t mean we should stop objecting to issues like cyber security, territorial disputes and intellectual property issues.

????We need to accomplish two goals. The first is to develop a strong commercial relationship with China similar to what we’ve been able to do with the UK in the 200 years since we last fought them in a war and the 150 years since we worked to keep them neutral during the U.S. Civil War. It’s never easy. The second (which supports the first) is to have our own American competitiveness agenda. Economic size represents population times productivity (defined as GDP per capita). We will never have more people than China so we need to focus on always being the most innovative and productive country on Earth. There is an Economic Olympics going on now and we can’t just focus on beating the other Americans on our team. We need Republicans and Democrats working together. There is truth to arguments on both sides of each issue. We need to find that common ground and act.

????Government doesn’t just regulate business, it enables it. Business is the source of productivity and our standard of living. We have a lot of strengths to build upon. Good, smart regulation is important to set minimum standards and enabling is important to foster that dynamism essential to a growing economy that provides the jobs and opportunities we all want to see.

????There are eight areas the U.S. government should enable now. First is resolving our debt. We can’t successfully compete with a bad balance sheet. We have a bad balance sheet that is getting worse, not better. The estimates don’t forecast any recessions, which will of course make them worse. Using current forecasts, at about the same time China’s GDP eclipses the U.S., our debt will exceed 100% of our GDP. Is that the legacy we want to leave our kids and grandkids? Second is rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure. Third is more math and science education at all levels. We need more engineers, not more lawyers and financial engineers. Fourth is immigration reform.

????Fifth is tort reform. The tort system is important to address social inequities, but it also needs to be fair to the companies that provide investment and jobs. Sixth is a well-funded, patent system with faster acknowledgment of patents and resolution of disputes. Seventh is an energy policy that encourages efficiency and production of more energy (traditional and economically viable renewables). Eighth is Free and Fair Trade. The President needs Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) to foster trade agreements that support U.S. jobs. Trade agreements are unlikely to move forward without it, and both opponents and proponents of trade know that.???