You are totally missing the point of what capitalism can do if left unchecked. Free trade and capitalism have one goal, that is making as much as a profit as possible. Ethical considerations for child labor restrictions, minimum work hours, paying workers a pittance, and detriment to American labor forces do not really figure into the equation unless they are forced by a regulating body. It is cheaper to do business there because they do not have the labor laws we do and can basically run their businesses like an indentured service fleet. Fighting communism is only used as  a rationale, when it conflicts with our personal political-economic issues. Even then, the power of agreeing upon trade agreements does not reflect what is best for American citizens, but rather what is best for American businesses. It is a classic example of trickle down economics, where increased wealth in the top of the society gradually flows down through the ranks to all people in that society. It doesn't matter that the system is an utter farce, because the frame and belief in the system are so ingrained in our society and many in our government. Look at our trade with Cuba vs. China, both communist regimes. We hated Castro(and his previous evil empire ties) so we embargoed them, plus they don't export that many things American society depends on(when compared with China).

Expanding free trade to countries with lower labor costs and lower standards of living than your own country always devalues the price of labor and sheds jobs in your country. The major political meme involved is basically freer markets=freer trade=more prosperity for all involved. This has been pounded into people's heads for the last twenty five years quite effectively and the opponents of the idea have not created an adequate reframing of the issue to refute the current meme.

Since I live in China, and am therefore familiar with the history (and speak the language)...China was a Maoist State until Mao died in 1976, which officially ended the cultural Revolution. The arrest of the Gang of Four after Mao's Death marked the end of the reign of terror of the radical Leftists. The Rightists, who called for moderation and reform, economically and socially, were freed (Liu Shaoqi, however, had been killed)

Deng Xioapeng, who was now free, began the process of opening China up to trade. China, since it has opened its markets and allowed foreign investment, has grown enormously fast. The US could not possibly compete with such a large manufacturing economy as China. The reforms of deng Xiaopeng have lifted approximately 250,000,000 people in China out of poverty, roughly the same as the entire US population at the time the reforms were instigated. The growth of China, at a rate of 10% or more pa, attracted huge numbers of foreign investors, convinced they were going to make millions by building industry in China. The process of modernization did not truly begin in earnest until the 1990s, but since then, China has grown to become the third largest economy in the world. Within several decades, it is likely that China will assume its historical role as the most powerful nation on Earth, which it has been for the bulk of recorded history (which is great for me since I speak Mandarin). Initially, China was known for cheap, shoddy, rip-offs, much like Japan in the early 1950s. Also like Japan, that changed very quickly (and is still in the process of change). With by far the world's largest population, a huge manufacturing base, strong nationalism, a history of economic dominance dating 5000 years, and a highly intellectual culture, it is little wonder that China is growing in double digits and that the Americans are falling over themselves to trade with China. I live here, I've watched entire cities being erected overnight (not literally, of course, but you get the idea). In Qinghai, Shangxi, Dalian, Xian, and in the cities across the vast Eastern Seaboard (Beijing, Shanghai, Nanjing) the growth has been so fast, you can go on a month-long tip and return to find you don't know your way around anymore.

Eight years

I hold dual British/Canadian citizenship

How curious...in the US, the media is wholly America-centric. The Americans are not interested in global affairs. Even on the state-controlled media in China, most of the news is foreign. The Chinese are very interested in world affairs, and most people are intimately aware of global events...which is the opposite of the American mentality.

This is one of those things where my innate instinct is to say no, there should be no limit to how much wealth an individual can accrue(in a legal way of course).

(Beware Yoda-esque reasoning) On the other hand, logically, I think one can make a fairly compelling case that money leads to power, power leads to influence, and influence can fundamentally change the society in which one lives. While in a microscopic view it does not seem to be necessarily bad, but in  the macro sense, people with vast fortunes like Warren Buffet and Rupert Murdoch can wield more influence on people through effective use of their money than the combinative efforts of millions of various private citizens. In that sense, it seems that capping the accrual of wealth may in fact keep a free and democratic society more equal with respect to the amount of influence any single individual can hold in that society.

In closing I would like to quote Forrest Gump, "and thats all I have to say about that."

Thanks deluded for the info. I appreciate your time once again on these forums!!!!! Must take time to process this all...