I read an article sometime ago that analyzes some of your points in detail. The US has become a nation where a large percentage of people make their income not from producing anything, but from shuffling money around. I.E. buying a house and selling it for more (well up to 3 yrs ago this worked), buying and selling stocks, etc.

And history has shown that countries that stop making money by producing goods see their nation fall into disrepair, as is going on here now.

The shuffling of money works for those in the upper class. But makes it difficult for those on the lower rungs. As we see by the stats of the ever growing gap between those well off and those below the poverty level.


>>But that is not 'free trade' but protectionism. Increasing exports creates jobs but increases in imports diminish jobs because the imports displace goods that otherwise would have been made here. Since NAFTA we've experienced growing trade deficits and job losses.
>
>While I don't think NAFTA has been good, I strongly suspect that it is really corporate U.S. 'trade' with China that is the prime source of "growing trade deficits and job losses".
>
>I wonder how much of WalMart sales are not products of Chinese origin??? WalMart 'helps' its suppliers to relocate to China. This is where the jobs are lost in a big way. And of course many of the goods produced in China are for the U.S. market, so when they come in they handily create a trade deficit.
>
>Aside from armaments, I wonder what products are produced in the U.S. today that are in demand by other countries? Bank loans?... Insurance policies?... Marketing/PR firms?... Cars and trucks?... Beer/wine/liquor?
>
>
>
>>
>>Here is an interesting view from the Economic Policy Institute:
>>
>>http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/briefingpapers_bp147
>>
>>
>>
>>>For that to happen, rich nations should lower their own barriers to imports and allow poor nations to protect their own industries with tarrifs; but it seems to be the other way around.