That's a misnomer for the most part. That's like saying a man tempted to have sex with a beautiful woman is voting for lower standards across the board by failing to hold up his moral high ground and giving in. That's the way it may be read whether it's the intention or not. If consumers are left with no choice, their "vote" is not much distinguishable than voting for a Soviet Russion politician. Let's see, we have a choice between Kruschev.. If incomes are so low they have no choice what are they going to do but get the best they can for their money. If you give people the clear choice between losing there 50k job and having to go to work at a 15k a year retail job, while getting 10 cents off a tea-shirt from china, that's no contest. They aren't being given that choice; but, that's essentially the way you portray it. We do all bear responsibility; but, it helps to know that you're making a choice when you're forced into something due to circumstance.
As it stands now, if we just stop now and put things back the way we were, the US worker has been set back 10 years or more. It will take a long time for the economy to recover. And the longer this goes on, the more damaging and the longer it will take to recover.