natural forces or the invisible hand is a theory. For it to work as expected, the theory presumes the presence of floating exchange rates and the absence of govt interference. In short it presumes are countries are open to trade and the currency will balance the strong economies vs the weak ones. As the weak ones get stronger their exchange rates will cause new balances to happen.
so:
1. What happens is the govt and private central banks screw with the exchange rates?
2. what happens if a private central bank not the govt creates trillions of one currency and spread it around the world buying influence and assets and then pulling manufacturing out of the home country.
this is the big one...
3. Why do you presume that protecting jobs and creating complex goods the world demands in the home country will not result in a stronger economy and thereby a stronger currency. Therefore happy home consumers buying goods from overseas for less currency? It worked in asia. It worked in the US in the past.
I just don't think a weak economy and weak currency helps locals consumers in any time frame but a very short one.
I think value and wealth are created by making better products, and/or at a better price. China became wealthier by providing products at a lower price. I think the US became wealthier once upon a time by making better products at a better price. I do not accept the premise that we made nothing but standard fare products and became wealthy because the gov't forced everyone to buy them instead of better/cheaper stuff from overseas. It creates no wealth. It only redistributes what's in one pocket to another pocket.
Creating better/cheaper products makes the business that created it wealthy, and it also enhances the life of the people who bought it, because they have more money for other things.
And that's the problem with floating exchange rates and tariffs. People learn very quickly that they can charge a higher price for their labors and do less work if all they have to do is place a tariff or adjust the currency to keep the competition out.
People only buy products because it makes their life better. If gov't forces them to buy a product which isn't as good or cheap as one from overseas, then that person is less well off than they would have been.
I think it's an economic fallacy to think that wealth can be created by keeping competition out and not creating better/cheaper products. It only takes from one guy and gives to another.