Today the Wall Street Journal published an article questioning whether the U.S. economy can remain competitive in the world-market with the continued expansion of China’s economy.  WSJ quotes economic historian Niall Ferguson, asserting the U.S. “has gotten bloated with bureaucracy, litigiousness and excess regulation” when explaining why China’s market is more appealing to many manufacturing firms. I think that this is shortsighted. Yes, the U.S. has stricter regulations than China. We also have melamine-free baby formula. Ferguson brings up a very relevant issue: the necessity of regulations. While I recognize regulations create market inefficiencies, they are a necessary evil in order to protect often unassuming consumers and a fragile environment. We also need financial regulations, as counter-intuitive as that may seem. For example, financial regulations may have prevented the mortgage crisis. McClatchy News Agency asked in a recent article; “Why didn't Wall Street firms tell potential investors that the bonds they were selling them were rotten? Why did their business partners, including subprime mortgage lenders, ignore glaring evidence that borrowers weren't qualified and give loans to virtually anyone with a heartbeat?” They misguided and misinformed investors because they could, given the lack of regulations. Although many like to blame regulations for the U.S.’s economic shortcomings, repealing or even reducing regulations is not the way to improve our stagnant economic growth. In order to allow the U.S. to remain competitive against burgeoning economic powers, we need innovation to cause an outward shift in our production-possibilities frontier curve. A need for innovation makes improved education prudent. Although I have little patience with, or affinity for math or science, increased emphasis on these subjects and education in general is prudent, especially when the educational achievements and standards of the U.S. are continually surpassed by other nations