Consumers have vastly benefited from that competition, far in excess of any losses from the domestic automaker labor group.
Itβs not entirely voluntary, but if you want to see what protectionism and economic isolation will bring, go visit Cuba. Then hop over to Grand Cayman, Grand Bahama, or Puerto Rico to see what being more integrated but competitive has to offer.
Also, if the long term cost is "Western lifestyle regressing to mean" (original context I replied to), I'd still prefer crappy cars to preserve well-paying jobs.
Hasn't its neighbour and biggest economy in the world been levying an embargo on Cuba for over half a century? Doesn't seem like the appropriate example for your argument.
Trade helps poorer nations more than it helps richer nations, but it helps both.
There is no justification for the embargo. It was Cold War aggression, pure and simple, now sustained for the last decades purely because of electoral reasons.
Agreed. Fundamentally, if you want to institute protectionist policies for labour, you also need capital controls to prevent all your businesses from exporting their operations to avoid these policies.
less competitive against whom? If West had not shipped its factories to China, I am sure West would have still stayed competitive against China by miles. In fact, by shipping its technical know-how for manufacturing, West has allowed China to become more competitive.
> I don't like gravity, but it doesn't mean I can ignore it and jump from tall buildings.
Sure, but outsourcing is nothing like gravity. It is a mixture of greed on part of corporations to reduce labor costs, naivete on behalf of politicians who thought China and others would welcome Western values along with Western jobs and stupidity on part of voters who traded short term cheap junk for long term stable jobs.