Even amoebas learn by trial and error, but some economists and politicians do not.come on... that's funny... it's sensible to assume that you examine historical evidence to base your hypothesis for future outcomes... if you burn your hand on the stove, you shouldn't touch it again... if raising the tax rates of the highest income brackets has not produced additional income, maybe you shouldn't raise the tax rates.
the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) fell from $14.369 trillion in 2008 down to $14.256 trillion in 2009... that's a $113,000,000,000 (that's billion) free-fall in one year... that doesn't necessarily mean we produced less quantity... but the value of what was produced has fallen... the net result is, businesses made less capital (e.g. money) for their investment... this equals less profit... less profit means these companies have less to reinvest in future gains (i.e. less research, less new hiring, less development).
however, China isn't having these problems... and if a business invests its excess capital (e.g. profit) into this foreign market, it will make a higher return on the investment (e.g. more money).
so, to keep companies from moving to China, we need to raise the GDP... to raise the GDP, we need to keep companies from moving to China... sounds circular?... you bet... but you can do things to keep companies from leaving other than raising the GDP... what do you think one of these things would be?
perhaps some sort of incentive could be used... i don't know... maybe tax incentives... or maybe, just maybe, you don't penalize people for being successful!