the economics of it are a little more complicated than has been discussed in the thread really... a lot of what's made it difficult to pay a living wage to workers in this country while still making competitive products has a lot to do with the difference between a private and public company. With a private company, the profit incentive is there but not as much as a public company, so a private company can sometimes take a loss for a year or two to invest in new equipment, or training, basically things that will help them be competitive in the longer term. Credit is harder to get for a private company, because they're basically relying on leveraging their actual assets, and/or relying on a small group of stakeholders. However, they can make the call as to what's going to keep them in it for the long term, and those who have a stake in the business are more connected to it and better understand the need to reinvest in the company to maintain long term growth (they basically understand the benefit of earning 3% over 20 years with a sustainable company, vs earning 10% for 2 years and risking the health of the company).
Public companies are basically the same, but instead of their credit coming from small groups of stakeholders and bank credit based on their assets, their credit comes from a large unattached group of investors "wall street", the price of their stock more or less determines their borrowing ability, and the price of their stock is based on anticipated health and growth of the company, as well as assets. The issue with the public model is that often the stock price, and the company's ability to borrow and reinvest in itself, is largely subject to speculation. In that, people who invest professionally will accept the need for a company to reinvest to remain in the game, and will accept a lower rate of return on stocks over a longer term, they understand that some return rates aren't sustainable and often avoid companies who post returns but are fundamentally weak. The problem is that with short term investors, companies who post 10% returns often see a huge spike in their value based on the desire for quick returns, while sustainable companies making steady but lower profits get looked over and find it more difficult to get the credit they need to grow reliably. So what happens is that public companies almost have to seek the fastest growth model to stay viable in "wall street", and that often means shipping production overseas, sacrificing quality, not investing in new technology, etc. So it's great for a little while, but it's not a sustainable way to run an economy, and eventually the 10% growth model will slow and reverse as people are put out of jobs and can't afford the products that are being imported now. So in a way, it's the way things go, it's no one in particular's fault, it's just a system that has inherent flaws... that being said, I buy American wherever I can, and if the hardware store down the street has it, I won't go to Home Depot for it, I still seem to have enough money to keep a roof over my head and feed my dog, so I think it's not a bad way to do things...
