Criticism #1: How Trump would stimulate the U.S. economy

          As we all know that the United States is the world's largest national economy in nominal terms. In a recent, the Washington Post article by Peter Navarro and Wilbur Ross entitled "How Trump would stimulate the U.S. economy" published on September 23, 2016,shows how Trump's plan would be growth-inducing for U.S. economy. Authors describe different strategies of Trump which would stimulate U.S. economy. They make the argument that how Hillary Clinton's economic plan would not improve economic ills over Trump's plan which would generate millions of traditional jobs and trillions of dollars in additional income and tax revenue.
         Peter Navarro is a business professor at UC-Irvine. Wilbur Ross is an international private equity investor. Both are senior policy advisors to the Trump campaign. They make a logical appeal in the article by showing statistics of GDP growth since from 1947. The article also shows that 43 million Americans suffer in poverty whereas 4.9 percent unemployment rate in the US leads to nearly 1 in 6 men ages 18 to 34 in jail or out of work. Authors claim that Trump's plan would realign corporate incentives so that it would be more profitable to invest in the United States by describing four component's which would drive every nation's GDP and as the United States structural economic problems are primarily focused on the investment and net exports growth drivers. Authors also claim that Trump's plan of cutting the high corporate tax rate, reducing unnecessary regulation and cracking down on trade cheating would make U.S. corporation competitive on domestic soil whereas Clinton's economic plan would not improve that anemic growth but would raise taxes, increase regulation, and impose further restrictions on fossil fuels that would significantly raise energy and electricity costs. Trump plan would also eliminate "trade deficit drag" not just by cracking down on currency  manipulation, intellectual theft but would also negotiate new deals and renegotiate bad deals whereas as a poster child of how not to negotiate, there is Clinton's 2012 Korean deal, she promised us 70,000 new jobs. Instead, we have lost 75,000 jobs, and our Korean trade deficit has nearly doubled.
               I personally feel that authors have very well explained their point in the article but, I do not totally agree with them claiming that only Trump would stimulate U.S. economy. It might be possible that Clinton would also increase the economic growth of U.S. It might also be possible that media is used to manipulate public opinion over the selection of a president. But, if Trump uses and applies all the strategies listed in the article then it could be said that the United States have rapid economic growth and millions of Americans can go back to work.