His argument (like most on the left) will change when it breaks down and does not support his theory. His theory is Free Trade=Bad Protectionist/Keynesian/Socialist economics=Good.
Congress lowered taxes more money was freed up and the job market grew. Before that it was Free Markets lost us Jobs. Now that argument left it is the kind of jobs now and people have to have three of them to survive. Then you point out that surviving doesn't mean you need two 40 thousand dollar autos and house with a mortgage over 300 thousand bucks and the argument changes again.
Businesses operate on one theory alone: Profits. The Left and Unions have loaded down American businesses with government regulations and employment rules to the point that many are finding it more profitable to go somewhere else to make more profit EVEN WHEN ADDING IN THE COSTS OF MOVING GOODS ACROSS VAST DISTANCES.
The three main rules in business used to be:
1. Location
2. Location
3. Location.
Now it is:
1. Avoid Regulation
2. Avoid Regulation
3. Avoid Regulation.
Want to fix outsourcing? Make it more profitable for businesses to set up shop in America. Not by making government rules but by getting government out of the way.
You still haven't addressed his specific points. He says that the private-sector job market is not growing, only the government-sector job market. He says that the composition of the private sector job market is changing - - that it's more at the low end, less at the high end. Do you have statistics that refute either of these claims? As a long-time freemarketer, I really want to believe he's wrong. But he's citing statistics, and I want to see evidence that he's wrong, not mere rhetoric.