of this interview. However one line in the first paragraph appears to be an outright lie:

"As America has become more globalized in the last 25 years, American workers and their families have enjoyed significant increases in real compensation, disposable incomes, and wealth."

I think this is contrary to the truth - a glance at the average household debt carried now as compared to 25 years ago should be one indication of the falsehood of this remark. Also, a consideration of the percentage that "American workers and their families" pay for basic necessities like gas and utilities should be another indicator of the falsehood of this statement. The average American worker of today is mired in debt and has little if any disposable income. People that I've talked to in their 50's and older say that our standard of living has never been more under attack than it is now.

I'm gonna have a hard time listening to what he says in the rest of the interview without being intensely skeptical.

"We can produce more with fewer workers because manufacturing productivity has been growing so rapidly.

Good news for the robots!! But wait, how does the "American worker" experience an increase in standard of living if he is no longer employed?

"When U.S. multinational companies invest abroad, their primary motivation is not a search for low wages and low standards. More than low costs, they seek wealthy consumers,"

They seek wealthy consumers??? THat's why we have factories in Mexico and China. That's why we import directly from those factories???

So far, this guy sounds like he is spewing hogwash to the senators -- perhaps to allay any feelings of guilt they have over the exit of manufacturing jobs from the US!

The bottom line that both sides seem to agree on is this --- if you are a dirt poor, trash sifter in a third world country -- sweatshops are good because they'll give you a chance to work 14 hr days 7 days a week and earn a better income.

At the same time, all the labor and union laws that were built up in America over the last century are now irrelevant since the American worker no longer has any leverage --- seeing as how the factories and centers of production can be picked up and moved to where labor is the cheapest.

This results in lower prices for American consumers which is good but also results in unemployment and lower paychecks and lower standards of living for American consumers which could be bad. So the new American consumer has to shop at Wal Mart because that's all he can afford.

The American consumer is just a pawn in this game and to try to sell globalization as good for the middle or lower class American is a joke. The most people in the lower half of our country will be able to contribute is to a welfare statistic, a filled prison cell, or a minimum wage job competing with hungry Mexicans. That is if we continue on this path.

Libertarianism works well if applied across the board, when it's offerred to large corporations while police state fascist tactics are applied to the majority of the people --- well , I don't think that's really libertarianism. I'm commenting on our current situation as this interview doesn't mention the police state. etc.

> For the people on this site who have absolutely no idea what freedom is
i see you've noticed that as well. i have read comments that are downright socialist in nature. how these people found their way here is beyond me.

great post! inspiring to read. one good point after another.