Globalism is fantastic for business and stocks, but horrible for the American worker.
Now dozens of countries can do what we can do, and our labor and talent is expensive.
We eroded a lot of our capabilities to chase after higher value of being the final step in production. Now we see how fragile that makes us. And everyone is gunning to compete at our level.
Globalism within the EU seems to work really well for Germany, even though there is far cheaper labour in the EU.
I am way out of my depth here, so I could be wrong.
"American" companies aren't always entirely owned by Americans. Sometimes they get purchased outright by foreign conglomerates or shareholders (eg. Anheuser-Busch) or take on foreign investment (eg. SoftBank). Once they're public, lots of entities can own the stock.
Labor doesn't have to be based in the US. Wages go overseas all the time. Your iPhone is manufactured abroad. Amazon hires lots of non-American programmers.
Is the only difference here that there is a possibility of federal tax revenue being distributed throughout one country? You can even go one more level down to cities and states rather than states and country.
You couldn't stop that, the rest of the world was going to catch up one way or another.
Often claimed, hard to prove.
In fact, isolating your economy to protect increasingly ineffective industries is the exact opposite of what is good for the avg. worker.
It sure helps those industries that are specifically. protected.
> We eroded a lot of our capabilities to chase after higher value of being the final step in production. Now we see how fragile that makes us. And everyone is gunning to compete at our level.
And the solution to this is exactly not to try to use restrictive trade policies.
America chose Wal Mart and then regretted it. The death of Main Street and the associated economic insecurity was a contributing factor to Trumpism, even if the people voting that way didn’t explicitly realize it.