Actually all rank below the US by quite a bit... thanks to the chart you so helpfully provided.

So countries like Great Britian, Belgium, Denmark and Switzerland all still are disadvanaged compaired to the US.

Though yeah, public healthcare does help.  It's one of the things that hurt the autocompanies.

They had Europeon labor standards more or less, yet also had to pay for healthcare and such.

I think what you fail to realize is that the Obama plan makes this WORSE for America.  Since employers actually have to pay a tax on the healthcare benefits they provide... as do the workers who get it.

Really, the only kind of healthcare that would HELP would be fully socialized that was mostly paid out of the pockets of the people and not businesses.

At which rate one would wonder if it would curb consumer spending domestically causing a problem in jobs anyway.

Consumer saving needs to be positive, but also vigorous afterall.

It is possible to increase exports by that much, but it certainly would not be politically popular; and I’m positive that no democrat would be willing to take the steps necessary to make it happen. The core approach would be to make credit more readily available to businesses and dramatically less available to consumers, which would shift most of the economic growth towards export driven industries at the expense of domestic spending. This would probably translate into an individual needing a 25% down payment on a home where they could only get a 25 year mortgage if they had excellent credit, car loans would skyrocket to nearly 10%, and most credit card debt would be beyond 20%. Beyond this there would need to be steps taken to make business more cost effective in the United States which would probably include dramatic cuts to social spending, and laws designed to reduce the power of unions.

Overall, this approach generally matches the approaches of Japan and South Korea through their meteoric rise from the 40s/50s through the 70s/80s; which probably represents the greatest period of economic advancement in the history of the world. There are differences between the two situations, including distinct cultural differences, which might mean that the growth may occur differently with drastically different problems. The most obvious is that the United States is more advanced and people are very used to the instant gratification culture that easy credit provides; and having to save up for a year or two to buy a TV, to own the same car for 20 years, or to save up for a decade to buy your first home may be completely unacceptable to the typical American today. On top of that, simple elements like Japan’s ability to achieve great educational success are far beyond what we have seen in the United States.

The core problem with this approach is the same core problem with any approach that could be successful; it can only work if you have the backing of China, who are (realistically) going to be unwilling to support any growth in US exports that come at the expense of China’s ability to sell products to the United States. If American’s start saving 10% (or more) of their income, and/or Americans become direct competitors for Chinese manufactured products internationally China has a lot to lose; and being that China is enough of a financial backer today to crush the US economy if they wanted the US can do little that would go against China without massive repercussions.

I don't know how tariffs can increase exports. I mean, you could argue that lower imports = higher consumption = greater profit from American corps = greater investment = lower long-run costs = lower export prices = greater exports. But that certainly won't happen quick enough for it for double exports in five years (which, according to my brain means 14% growth a year). What's more, he can't increase tariffs in NAFTA, and it will probably cause reactionary tariffs, particularly from the EU and China, which will cut demand from American exports. It will also go against the WTO, which will cause all sorts of issues, including delaying the Doha Agreements even further.

So, yeah, tariffs would be stupid.

----

He could take some heavy supply-side policies, such as killing trade unions, lowering minimum wages, reducing welfare systems - this would be very good for both increasing exports and helping long run economic activity, but it will kill in the short run (which, as we all know, is all that Obama really seems to care about, atm), and it'll go against the Democrat-grain. So, the best way of actually achieving what he wants, is also the only way that he will never consider.

Well if I've learned anything about politicians is that the short term is always more important. Probably because most of the electorate is too short-sighted to vote for politicians who promise to fix the long-term problems at the cost of short-term pain.

Well, to be fair, it is just human nature. We always put short-term benefits ahead of long-term costs. Hence drug/alcohol abuse, obesity, unwanted pregnancies, etc, and why things like why we refuse to make sacrifices to curb oil depletion, etc.*

* by "we" I imply humanity, not specific people.

Nope, perhaps you should try to read the source.

http://www.doingbusiness.org/economyrankings/?direction=Asc&sort=1

America is near the top, but no better than many other European countries that you claim dont make up for their healthcare advantage.  Business wise, the United States lacks in ease of paying taxes, permits, trading across border, and closing business.

What I really hope for Obama is that what he said about preferring to be a strong one term president than a weak two term president is true.

So far he hasn't really shown himself to be a strong president, he needs to be.

I don't know how you guys can get angry at the President, I mean he is trying something. No one really knows if it will work, and how much progress he will make, but at least he is taking a course of action. No one person (he doesn't work alone) decides how to fix an entire continents economy.

I don't see why we bother criticizing him; if we could do better we'd be the ones telling him how to fix it.
At least now we have cushioned the recessive blow.