Then let me start over.
1) I agree that my standard of living would be improved if I drank foreign coffee, had a nice big TV and drive a fine Italian sportscar. My life would be pleasant and enjoyable because I have these foreign goods available to me.
2) I maintain that it is a poor national economic policy for our government to put in place corporate taxes and regulations (labor, environmental, safety, etc.) which make it difficult for Americans to run profitable businesses in this country and thereby make it easier for companies in other countries to compete against us with low cost goods.
I believe both of these statements can be (and are) simultaneously true.
I would further maintain that a trade deficit, while it may help us have pleasant lives, is probably evidence that our national economic policy is flawed. As a nation, we spent money we do not have, to fund a lifestyle that we, as a nation, have not truly earned. It's been a pleasant ride, but eventually we need to pay for it.
Excellent! I like microeconomics.
I maintain that it is a poor national economic policy for our government to put in place corporate taxes and regulations (labor, environmental, safety, etc.) which make it difficult for Americans to run profitable businesses in this country and thereby make it easier for companies in other countries to compete against us with low cost goods.
Cool, now you want to discuss macroeconomics.
Yes, I agree that the government really makes it difficult to run a business in the US.
I would further maintain that a trade deficit, while it may help us have pleasant lives, is probably evidence that our national economic policy is flawed.
Or it is evidence that foreigners like to invest in the US.
As a nation, we spent money we do not have, to fund a lifestyle that we, as a nation, have not truly earned.
The nation doesn't earn or spend money. It's clearer if you discuss what Americans do or what our government does.
You never clarified your claim about monetary policy.