“If business can import goods for less than it can manufacture them the net effect of that is positive as long as consumers are compensated sufficiently to allow them to purchase the cheaper products. It is only when trade is used as a weapon in the continuing war between labor and capital that both end up suffering.”

The above prompts further discussion. If the “business” is a retailer (e.g. Walmart) it is motivated to utilize the cheapest supplier (often overseas) of a satisfactory product so it can be sold at the lowest price. Cheaper prices result in increased sales and a demand for lower skilled employees. The greater the demand for employees, the greater benefits the retailer will offer to fill vacancies. If the “business” is a manufacturer (e.g. General Motors) it is motivated to utilize the cheapest supplier (often overseas) of parts that meet specified requirements with reliable delivery and the cheapest labor with the needed assembly skills. The average base pay for a GM assembly line worker is $20 per hour. Before 2007 the average base pay was considerably greater. Additional benefits include cash bonus, stock bonus, profit sharing, health coverage (medical, dental, vision), 401(k) and paid time off. I’ve read that in 2018 the pay for an assembly line worker in Mexico was a little greater than $2 per hour. The only way American assembly plants can financially compete with Mexican assembly plants is if Mexican workers are paid comparable to American workers or if tariffs are imposed on Mexican imports. Arbitrarily raising American wages to some value based on workers’ needs instead of supply and demand requires a shift from max profit driven corporations to humanity motivated businesses or/and a subsidy from public funds.