*edit*
I know Sam and others tried to explain trade balances and how they aren't an indication of wealth, so I won't go there.
Just remember: The reason we're able to run such an insane trade balance is that during and after World War 2, we ran a surplus for ~40 years straight. That helped us grow and bring in a considerable amount of resources and wealth to surpass every other country.
I am of the opinion that trade deficits are bad because they can potentially suck wealth out of a country - which is what we're essentially doing right now (having a very high trade deficit while increasing the amount of debt held by the US government). However, they are cyclical which means that there is only so much debt that can be incurred by a nation - by trading, you are exchanging one resource for another. If you have an imbalance for too long, then you have nothing to trade, as your trading partner will own everything.
There are naturally-occurring ways to ensure that never happens, mostly due to currency devaluations - as you spend more than you take in, your currency tends to become debased, which acts as a hedge against purchasing more goods from outside your country, as they become more expensive, and conversely cheaper for people to purchase your goods for their country.
So in the end, real wealth has to be defined by PPP or other measures - showing the relative earning and living standards of one nation vs. another. That is why the US is near the top of the list. We have one of the highest average incomes in the world and exceptional living standards, which means we're certainly not poor (poverty is the absence of wealth, which is something that few Americans really experience).
Back from the dead, I'm afraid.
