I've heard this argument as well, but I don't think it would change much. Why? Because

In 2010, the average American spent 34% of their income on housing, 13% on food, 11% on insurance and pensions, 7% on health care, and 2% on education.

None of those things seem to apply to insomniasexx's point. Maybe some housing materials, it's possible. But the rest are either intangibles or presumably domestic food. I think the article's idea stands firm, that goods in general represent an extremely small part of our monetary outflow, and thus Chinese manufacturing doesn't affect us as much as is assumed.

When phrased like that, things seem to make a lot more sense. These were the numbers that really surprised me:

Just 6.4% of nondurable goods -- things like food, clothing and toys -- purchased in the U.S. are made in China; 76.2% are made in America. For durable goods -- things like cars and furniture -- 12% are made in China; 66.6% are made in America.

I would have assumed we buy a huge percentage of our cheap plastic Christmas gifts, our furniture, etc., from China.