What about countries with large natural resource endowments? We have observed the consequences faced by economies that depend heavily on the extraction of natural resources (which according to your argument would be the optimal thing for them to do because it is consistent with their endowment structures).

It does not seem feasible for developing countries to follow your advice without first strengthening domestic institutions. This is the area where Development Economics 3.0 should focus its thinking and research.

The cost of services like healthcare and education relative to the cost of goods increases when productivity increases in the services sector lag behind those in the primary or secondary sectors. Since the ICT revolution that the author talks about also leads to productivity benefits in producing goods (not only in providing services), the costs of healthcare and education will only fall relative to the cost of goods if ICT allows greater productivity increases in these sectors relative to primary or secondary sectors in the economy.

There has already been work within the field of behavioral economics that questions the fundamental assumptions behind rational choice theory or utility maximization, and it has also been referred to by some observers as a revolution. But unlike neuroeconomics, the way it is studied relies on revealed preferences (like more conventional economics), and not physical processes. Perhaps for this reason it has been accepted by economists as something that isn't necessarily from "out of space".

What are the implications of this for the US trade deficit? The US trade deficit is increasing, while China's trade surplus is falling (even if one disagrees with official Chinese data and is not convinced about the magnitude of the change, there is no doubt that there is a reduction in the surplus). Does that mean the composition of American trade is changing, and that the US - China trade relationship is becoming less sizable?

Taking the argument of the final paragraph further: is global economic rebalancing an unavoidable and automatic outcome of the current crisis, which is characterized by recessions in the US and Europe, high unemployment in the US, and rising global inequality? Will domestic consumption in developing economies rise fast enough to balance out the recessionary pressures originating from the West?

If American policymakers attempt to push for global rebalancing by putting pressure on China through measures such as punitive tariffs on Chinese imports
(as some economists such as Nouriel Roubini and Martin Wolf have argued), it could lead to Chinese exports becoming less competitive, leading to a slowdown in Chinese growth, making a hard landing more likely.

Since growth has stalled in Brazil and India, it is important for the global economy that China keeps growing. Therefore, it is important that global economic
rebalancing occurs as an outcome of growth in China, leading to an increase in domestic consumption, rather than be forced through external punitive measures.
On the bright side, the January numbers of China's manufacturing growth suggest that growth isn't slowing.