For some time I've been struggling with my alignment with strong free market economists of the 50s-90s like Milton Friedman or Thomas Sowell and the obvious downsides of "deindustrialization." I don't want to nail Friedman on a single talk , but his statement that "you don't want to be sending out more than you take in" seems completely at odds with being economically productive. That's the basis of economic productivity: a farmer sends out far more than he gets in return, but he lives off a margin of what he creates.
But starting in the 80s we started exporting industries themselves. Friedman would argue that exporting our textile industry merely freed up our country to produce more valuable products, so it was a win. Then went our heavy industries and from almost the beginning we paid to create our semiconductor ICs and related things in SE Asia (ultimately China). Ok that's fine? We're being freed up for more valuable industries, right? Except that's not the case; we're now a "services economy."
As far as I can tell a "services economy" produces nothing but add generation platforms. Every fucking "tech" idea for the past 15 years is about extracting value from the shrinking bits of the productive economy (with much funny money to keep things going)?
So I have two opposing questions for the economics nerds. 1) Are guys like Friedman and Sowell right about global trade, ie bring me back to the team Milton Friedman. 2) If I wanted to start a communist revolution and seize the means of production, is there anything left to seize?
Have you read any Rothbard? Someone who is around now that you might find interesting is Bob Murphy.
As far as your question goes, the problem is that we don't have a free market. The government has a ton of red tape making it unprofitable for many companies to operate in the US. This causes companies to set up shop overseas for good reason. Because of this we have become a service economy, not the other way around. It isn't the free market that is hurting our country, it is our lack of a free market that is preventing us from competing with the rest of the world.
Ok, reading up on Rothbard and Murphy will take some time, but
I don't buy it yet. Every important industry in the states went tits up over the past 40 years, and American investors made bank on it (see also: boomer psychology); is this an American regulation a ploy? On whose behalf? Either the free market libertarians are wrong, or there's a national conspiracy that would make most alienated thinkers blush.
As the government got more and more involved. I'm not saying pure libertarianism is necessarily the answer, but it's very, very true we don't currently have an actually free market. Everything the government touches turns to shit, and the government touches the economy and private business repeatedly and without consent.
We don't have a free market. Look up Marx's ten pillars of communism...we actually meet most of the criteria of a communist system. Specifically the heavy centralization; credit via central bank, communication and transport, and, most importantly, education. Also, phony fiat currency.
No one but the most retarded neocon would argue for capitalism and hold up our current system as a positive example. Our whole system is fake, and built on oppression and lies. Not concepts of free exchange.
We have fake money controlled by the Fed. Every transaction is taxed at least four different ways on all ends. Government loans and grants are in nearly every sector, and massive regulatory bloat controls what everyone can do. This is not a free market.