This has resulted in the loss of at least 2 million U.S. manufacturing jobs in the last decade. Corporations are also able to negotiate give backs in both direct wages and benefits from U.S. workers under the threat of expatriating their plant or ceasing operations because of foreign competition. The alternative employment is in the service area where the average compensation is lower than the average $ 17 total compensation in the manufacturing area. The U.S. has lost over 14% of its manufacturing jobs in this process. Family heads who have lost manufacturing jobs often must accept work two service jobs to make up the compensation difference. The effect is to drive down labor rates in the U.S. in what has come to be called the "Race to the Bottom" in wages. The average real wages in the U.S. have trended downward for the last twenty years. When the effects of inflation are taken into account, many categories of workers are receiving more than 20% less than they did in the 1970's. In the last decade , the loss of benefits to many workers has made the decline in total compensation even greater.

The so-called "Free Trade" advocates have proclaimed the Myth that rising productivity will guarantee rising wages. Under the current Globalization system, however, we have seen rising productivity and declining real wages while corporate profits, CEO benefits and stock prices have soared. Fortune 500 companies have not increased their manufacturing work force in the U.S. for a decade. Virtually all their net investment in production has been in foreign countries. The support of these companies for Most Favored Nation treatment for China is an example of placing corporate interest above popular interest.

The principle advantage of the United States in trade negotiations has been our control of the prize of the world's largest retail market. In NAFTA and under the World Trade Organization, this advantage has been surrendered. Instead, the ultimate control of our trade policy has been given to multinational bodies which are not at all under our influence. In NAFTA we create multiple NAFTA Secretariats which may establish dispute panels to decide whether our federal or state laws are in compliance with NAFTA regulations. If not they are empowered to levy sanctions or fines in unlimited amounts until we are brought into compliance. The World Trade Organization has similar authority but there our posture is even weaker since each member of the European Union gets one vote while we get only one. In effect we have agreed to a system in which the ultimate arbiter of our trade policy is beyond the U.S. political process and has a set of bylaws which protect the operation of the multinational corporations from any attempt to redress the disadvantages that accrue to the American people by our Congress or our State or Federal governments. Our only recourse is to withdraw from these organization. It is this De Facto "protectionism" of the large multinational corporations by the international authorities that has been the real substance of the "Free Trade" movement.

The adverse effects of our trade policy go well beyond the loss of income by our workers and the loss of a tax base by our government. In 1976 we were by far the world's largest creditor nation. Since that time we have accumulated a total of nearly $ 2 trillion in merchandise trade deficits and have become the world's largest debtor nation. To put that into perspective, we have racked up in two decades a total foreign trade debt of several times the total amount of U.S. currency (or M1 money supply). That means that in addition to selling our holdings in foreign assets, we have had to sell, on balance, many of our real assets and companies as well as issue large amounts of debt to sustain these trade policies. The merchandise trade deficit is partially reduced by a much smaller surplus in services trade. However, this is offset in our current accounts by the interest we must pay on our foreign held debt. While it would seem obvious that we cannot long continue these practices, we see no change in our trade polices and ever increasing deficits. Yet these results follow directly from our policy which is to reduce our own manufacturing capacity while continuing to consume the products. Historically, the conversion of a country from a manufacturing base economy to a service based economy has been marked by its passing as a world power.