Free trade and protectionism: effects on U.S. automotive jobs

Free Trade

Argue whether you believe "free trade" is good for you and/or your employer (you may use a company that you are familiar with but not necessarily working for) in terms of keeping jobs in the U.S. (and not transferred abroad when U.S. companies relocate operations overseas).

Although protectionism is often advocated as a method of keeping U.S. jobs for U.S. workers, ultimately, because of the negative impact protectionism can have upon the world economy and upon domestic consumer buying patterns, trade barriers like tariffs, quotas, or subsidies, are not conducive to economic health and harm American workers in the long-term. A tariff or tax imposed by the United States on imported cars from Japan, for example, may seem to benefit U.S. companies in the short run, because it allows American car manufacturers to be less competitive and efficient because the price of Japanese cars is artificially higher. However, while the troubled automotive company General Motors might be happy with the initially increased rates of its sales, ultimately the health of the company will suffer if General Motors does not improve its products to compete in the global marketplace, and will have to let workers go within America's borders if it does not suit its product to changing American needs and demands for fuel efficient cars. Also, the importation of technology from abroad exposes consumers and producers alike to the innovative use of vehicles, such as hybrid technology, that domestic producers can implement even better than the original manufacturer. Innovation is the ultimate driver of new sales and the creator of new markets and new markets means more jobs for workers.