The liberalization of China's and India's economies proves beyond doubt what's possible when "economic freedom is increased", yet there are many unknown variables that could be suppressing economic mobility in the U.S.? Interesting that you find one so easy to explain, but not the other. But, then you seem to have figured it all out mid-comment! It's that dastardly regulation! Or is it? What, exactly, are you saying?
Whatever it is, you seem to suggest that the success of India and China has nothing to do with trade agrements. Nothing to do with currency manipulation. Nothing to do with technology. Nothing to do with the outsourcing of manufacturing and other jobs to these low wage countries. Just increase "economic freedom" (what does that even mean exactly) and voila!
And, why is it that even with regulation and suppressed "economic freedom", U.S. corporations realized record profits, while unemployment remained high, and wages low? Exactly whose "economic freedom" is being decreased here? How is it that we can pay CEOs so many times the average worker's salary even while that CEO is driving the company over a cliff? Meanwhile, full-time workers find themselves below the poverty line? No problems there, right? It's the workers' fault. Or perhaps it's the regulations, but which regulation(s)?
I'm just not following your argument. Are you saying there are no structural problems with our economy that cause the poor to be disenfranchised? And, what redistribution have I advocated, to which you are taking exception?