>>That depends upon what it is you try of course....and your friend was tricked by Trump (and perhaps brainwashed by Russian propaganda) into voting against his own interests.
>
>HRC supported NAFTA.
>Trump opposed it.
> How in the world would NAFTA have helped him?
>
>
>>>. And look - times have changed just a little bit since 1945 right? Perhaps switching from manufacturing to importing might of been wise. (of course always easy to say things like that AFTER the fact) -- but you get my point right?
>No, I don't get your point.
>They were innovative and kept their products fresh.
>The products they make are in demand and they were doing well until the Chinese decided to enter the market with cheaper versions. The Chinese run a state-sponsored version of capitalism. The state subsidizes companies, allowing them to make products cheaper than we can here.
>

But the basic tenet of pure capitalism used to be that it is more efficient and will out-perform communism. Clearly China is not the 5-year plan economy of old USSR and satellites. Is calling China "state-sponsored version of capitalism" as you do only a ploy tp get out of own old arguments praising capitalism of private citizens ?

If it is really more efficient, might it not be the better mold for gov ? Or why not wait until China is unable to subsidize, which used to be economic argument ?