Nope.
The article’s claim is that other countries are out-competing us, not that we could do better. Obviously I agree we could.
A man wearing a 20 pound ball and chain is likely to win a race when he’s competing against others with a 50 pound weight on their chain.
The question here is not whether X is as fast as he could be, it’s whether X is in the process of losing the race to Y. For this assertion to fly, you must come up with a believable Y who is faster than X.
With the exception of some small niche players such as Hong Kong, Singapore, Ireland, etc., there are no such runners in the race. Especially since the race is one of size of economy as well as growth.
Ireland can never be a serious threat, simply because it isn’t large enough. Anyway, the EU is about to start imposing its “fairness” rules on Ireland and there goes their competitive advantage. Nice while it lasted. The Irish people just pissed-off the powers that be in Brussels, and they will have their revenge.
To use a military analogy, WWII-era weaponry might look primitive to us, and we may be aware better armaments are possible. But if the other side fights with WWI or Napoleonic weapons, the side with WWII weapons is likely to win.
That statement could go under the classification of "famous last words".
Hong Kong is an economic powerhouse that sits on a tiny rock and is inhabited by an olio of nationalities.
BTW, the US has the second highest corporate tax rate in the world. Are you saying that cutting that rate (or eliminating it) would do no good?