If only it were all so simple. Have you read the WSJ article about the U.S. Tax Code and offshoring? It was published on March 12th. You can read it here.
A quick summary is that a provision of the code, in place since the early 1900's, rewards companies handsomely for sending jobs offshore. So a viable first step might be to quit subsidizing the practice. Surely you wouldn't advocate corporate welfare?
Just let me get this straight, you want government to legislate private business, right? This is the Republican way, right?
I do believe that you're straining at a gnat, after having swallowed an elephant.
Let's see now - what sort of government legislation do we have regarding private businesses. OSHA, of course. Minimum wage laws. Workmen's compensation. Required matching of employee social security taxes. Mandatory overtime. Family leave. And then there's affirmative action. Oh, and we also have small business set asides, as well as set asides for women and minority owned businesses. Then we have SBA loans. And SCORE (Service Corps of Retired Executives) who can provide various advice to small businesses. The INS imposes certain paperwork requirements for hiring new employees. The EPA controls businesses too. And public companies are controlled by the SEC - if you don't think so, ask Shell about oil reserves. Ask Martha Stewart about being a control person of a public company - she owns 61% of the stock of her company, you know. And yet she won't be permitted to be an officer or director. That surely sounds like control to me.
And you're concerned about legislation? Now if we really want to get down and dirty, and compete in the global marketplace, we might consider doing away with all of the above. If a worker gets hurt or killed, that's too bad. If we can hire someone for fifty cents per hour, plus room and board, we should be able to do it. If we want to work our employees a hundred hours a week with no overtime - well, if that don't love it, they can leave it. Investors can learn to embrace the concept of caveat emptor. We should eliminate access to the courts for consumers, and product liability should be a concept stricken from the legal jargon.
You will find little popular support for such a position. A series of changes to the tax code, a variety of tariffs and other adjustments to the trade paradigm, and perhaps some restrictions on the award of government contracts should suffice to correct the current problem. Those changes are minimal considering the existing regulatory structure.
I'll consider tax credits and incentives, but NO LEGISLATION...or kiss our leadership good-bye!!!
Let's take a look at a certain vibrant, growing economy - China. From the Mercury News: "Increasingly, China is seeking to use its buying power to dictate separate technical standards for products sold within its borders, hoping to give a leg up to its own producers."
That sure looks like legislation to me. And it certainly seems to be having the desired effect. So China effectively restricts free trade, controls companies - and has notable success as a direct result!
Free trade is an obsolete strategy. It is failing. It is destroying the U.S. If something isn't working, the rational response is to do something different! Why not join the vanguard of the new economic thinking that will lead to new solutions instead of defending the U.N.'s globalist free trade agenda?
This would require a dictatorship in Pinochet style.