You do make some valid points, but when a country gets to the point where it is imports are greater than it's exports you will have more money leaving than coming in. Also, if you take away good paying labor jobs from those in your country, and ship them overseas, that contributes to money leaving the country instead of circulating within the economy. The only benefit to exporting labor is to increase stockholder dividends and executive pay and bonuses.

Very few companies actually suffer failures because they are unionized. There are some cases where unionized workers demand higher pay and benefits from a company that's not capable of giving them what they want. Hostess was one of those but they failed because the general population in the US has changed it's overall diet choices to either healthier options, or upgraded their tastebuds from American cafe food to gastropub grub. It's easy though to reference Ford paying its workers more because so that they could afford to buy Fords but that's not the case for companies producing random widgets or even Boeing aircraft. Maybe Boeing employees travel more when they have more money, but I don't know if that supports their own industry or not.

One of the other problems is when a countries raw resources start to dwindle or in some cases there are plenty of resources but extraction costs are higher than what it would cost to import the same materials a manufacturer would rather import the material. That of course hurts mining companies but helps transportation companies. You could shift workers but that's not easy to do.

This problem certainly isn't unique to the US though as many industrialized countries have shipped manufacturing jobs overseas in order to save a buck, and once that snowball starts rolling an avalanche soon follows. Sometimes the cost increases aren't entirely related to labor costs either and have a lot to do with environmental regulations. Coal mining might be adversely affected in a country based on environmental regulations and/or diminishing resources.

As far as immigration is concerned small amounts in any country generally helps boost economies, but massive amounts left unchecked can upturn economies very quickly to the point where it's difficult to adjust. The US as a melting pot shouldn't be overly concerned with migration and those concerns are usually related to labor competition disguised as criminal intent of immigrants that citizens claim when they feel threatened. In countries where resources and space is more limited like the UK unchecked immigration is probably more problematic economically and culturally than in places like the US. One could make the argument that entire cultures are being displaced by too high of a flow of immigrants in too short of a time period and that it is pushed on the people politically. This is where countries that have huge numbers of refugees should retain them as much as possible as cruel as that may seem. In some cases you could argue that there is politically motivated colonization happening in many countries and it's okay for more heavily melanated people to rage over past colonization but the lighter melanated people are being forced to suck it up or be labeled racists.

The most basic issue though I think is boiled down to population vs. resources in most countries and corporations and garbage politicians that exploit them both. If the livable land mass in any country could easily be expanded and they had unending resources there wouldn't be much of a reason to compete for anything. So maybe the most obvious, but also the most difficult to change, problem is the exponential increase in populations in nearly every country on Earth.

The only thing wrong with your second statement is that there is an assumption that there is a competent team behind the Biden administration.

Biden literally did nothing noteworthy during his term as president. Former vice presidents serving a term as president afterwards rarely amount to nothing more than attempting to carry the torch forward in a half-hearted way. Bush senior, a former vice president, might have led the nation during Desert Storm but I can't think of anything else he did that was noteworthy during his presidential term that I can remember. Al Gore, I suppose, invented the Internet so I guess that's noteworthy :joke:. Biden skipped a term to rest up to do nothing more than walk around the White House lawn with his caretaker while wearing out of style aviator sunglasses. One of the most important things for America is healthcare and Biden did nothing to try to fix the mess that Obama created (Punishing people financially for not having healthcare does not make healthcare affordable). So I wouldn't expect much from Harris other than an unconstitutional attempt to confiscate guns. She'll do nothing but talk in circles, enrich her stock portfolio and write a boring book afterward. Liberals will rejoice with the same sadistic fervor that Trump supporters did when he was elected because there is no concern for what a president could or will do during their term. The only thing going through voter's minds these days is either my team one or my team lost and that it won't matter to them after the hangover is gone because baseball season is right around the corner....

Harris doesn't have to do anything right, or anything at all, to secure the vote for most women. There will likely be conservative women voting for Harris as well literally for sexist reasons. My ex-wife literally couldn't tell me how the president actually gets elected but is super excited to see a woman as president regardless of party affiliation.

For this election cycle I don't think that it matters much if Trump or Harris is elected because neither are a good choice. One will make gun owners and major corporations happy and the other will make anit-gun nuts and major corporations happy. I think the people should focus more on who is controlling the house and the senate during this election cycle if you want to see any difference made even though so many of them are in the pockets of corporations themselves.