> To summarize: the US has enjoyed unfair, enourmous trade advantages for decades. It has been indulgent with its finances because the market has allowed it to be overspend. And now it wants the world to increase its already existing advantages, by claiming for "fair trade".

No, so this is where you are getting signs confused. An overvalued dollar is the same as having a trade deficit. Arguing to reduce that trade deficit is the same as arguing for a weaker dollar. The argument goes "the dollar is too strong and it should be weaker", not "you are saying the dollar is too strong and then you want it weaker also?? How dare you ask for both!" When you make these types of arguments, it worries me because it makes it sound like you aren't groking that I am advocating for a cure to a disease.

> Your whole argument comes down to "the dollar is overvalued".

Well, I think my argument is explaining _why_ we have a stronger dollar -- because we have open capital markets while our trading partners do not. This creates an asset demand for dollars that increases total demand for dollars beyond that which would be consistent with balanced trade.

> You are not going to mention the good things, so I will.

I guess I'm old school in thinking that any systemic distortion is a net harm. For example, you may not realize this, but the strong dollar doesn't actually allow us to consume more, because it reduces our income and forces government benefit spending to bridge the gap. If you look at patterns of household consumption, they have not gone up -- the big gain in consumption was higher healthcare costs, but that's a price inflation thing. Basically those areas that lose out to globalization end up receiving social security disability dollar for dollar.

Next, the trade deficit is primarily offshoring, so instead of buying a wrench made in the U.S., we are buying an american branded wrench made in China. How many chinese brands can you name? You are buying the same american products, except they are no longer made here.

But, it's the same wrench, and in real terms it costs the same. We are not getting an extra wrench, there is no "extra consumption" -- there is just loss of domestic production followed up with increased foreign purchases as large numbers of formerly productive people drop out of the labor force and rely on government assistance. We just stopped producing something domestically and bought it overseas. It's not extra consumption.

How can we afford to buy it? Well, it's those extra government benefit expenditures to make up for all the income lost, together with lower interest rates from foreign demand for our assets and then we get asset bubbles as a side effect. China, more than anyone else, was responsible for the great recession.

That extra government debt also crowds out public spending on public goods -- take a look at our hollowed out cities. So, on net, we are not enjoying any more consumption, rather the ability of our nation to produce is slowly being dismantled and shipped overseas. That's an unmitigated bad.

It is also destabilizing, politically, as we have large swaths of the country that are being written off and this breeds radicalism. Also, it's sad to turn our backs on our fellow americans who worked in factories that have been shutdown and are now living on food stamps and meager benefit payments in broken down cities.