I posted this comment to a member here in response to a PM he sent me and think the reasoning is sound, even if it's simplistic (sometimes, the more simplistic, the better). Please tell me if any of you disagree with the main gist of the point I'm making. I'd like to know if there's a logical rebuttal that can demonstrate that I'm missing something. Please don't raise the issue of jobs as a 'lagging indicator' UNLESS you also go the extra step to tell me what sort of jobs will replace those we have lost and continue to lose, what the wage and benefit structure of those replacement jobs will be, how many jobs will be created (ballpark), what industries they'll be in, and why you're confident the number and type of replacement jobs you speak of will come to fruition. Thanks. Thank you for the feedback and the link to that great article. It's all about jobs and wages. That's it. People get snowed listening to people and all the statistics they cite - it's all useless without jobs and good wages. People buy stuff when they make money. They buy even if interest rates are high. They buy even if there's robust inflation if they're making good wages and secure in their jobs. The inverse is true when they lose jobs, see wages stagnate or fall, or even fear that they will lose their jobs or get pay cuts. They don't spend except on bare necessities, money stops circulating along normal channels, and a vicious cycle is created as more people are laid off. Stockbrokers and fund managers don't want people to know the truth because it would suppress trading and investing, which is how they make a living. This ends badly for the U.S. because unlike other nations that have representatives who do their best for the good of their country, our politicians are for sale to the highest bidder. Unlike some of our competitors, who actually would try and execute a governmental representative who aides a foreign company in overtaking a domestic firm, we actually have a beltway of 'professionals,' who are highly regarded, with the highest contacts to our highest governmental officials (many were high governmental officials), who act at the behest of foreign countries and firms in destroying American companies and industries, even calling in political favors when possible to assist them in this task. Also, unlike some who keep pushing the 'jobs as a lagging indicator' argument, I don't believe this your typical, business-cycle recession, with a temporary dip in consumer and business spending caused by a variety of temporary conditions, but a structural reorganization of the American Economy in such a way that entire classes of jobs and even industries are being offshored, and the U.S. will be a much more service-sector oriented economy in the wake of this phenomenon, with my opinion that the service sector jobs won't be higher wage, but rather lower wage, than the manufacturing ones they replaced. In fact, the green jobs will be few in number, and engineering, financial professionals, legal professionals and medical professionals will be needed in a smaller ratio as there will be less flow up money because of a smaller middle class. Cheers.