is that without free trade, America is in for a rough 21st Century. With robotics, computers, foreign competition, etc., the way we have done things in the past will not provide the economic activity we need to sustain jobs; tax revenue for health care, welfare, education, research, even sustainable income, and the like; and more. Small businesses work fine here, but we are dealing with big corporations from other countries that will leave us trading among ourselves if we don't do something. Trading among ourselves will not produce the jobs and revenue necessary for "free or debt-free" education, healthcare, etc.
The future is bleak enough unless we make some major changes. Sadly, any candidate that levels with people will be defeated at the poll. While Clinton may be dancing around the issue to avoid that fate, she's not making promises that she can't keep. I admire her for that, and I am convinced she knows things are going to be tough and will work for policies that make the landing better for all of us.
I also think, a world where every country is progressing economically will help with that landing. That's why I am for all the trade we can encourage. Sanders derision of free trade is kind of like a poker player who wins most of the money at the table, and leaves without giving others a chance to win some back. We've taken more of our fair share of the world's resources and wealth, now we owe it to other countries, particularly the poor like Vietnam where all we've given them is fire bombs.
You are so right, trade is nuanced and quite complicated especially when you consider all the factors involved. Most people can't see beyond the fact that they had an uncle who lost his job making buggy whips or fitting bumpers on cars that can now be done by a robot. I'm not minimizing the human pain when that happens because I've felt it too, but we better find solutions for that kind of stuff happening at an increasing rate. But if you say it, you will lose.
= new reply since forum marked as read