+Devin Warren What if that move were to make all of their goods 50% cheaper for us consumers? What if only 25% cheaper? 10%? Whatever the percentage, I'm certainly not positive we can absolutely claim it is a bad thing. Division of labor is a GOOD thing. Yes, it can be challenging for people that may need to find new sources of work and new income, but that doesn't mean it's a bad thing for society in general.
Yes, free trade is disruptive to existing structures. It causes lots of challenges to people who work in lower skilled or more manual areas. I recognize that. But this type of disruption is not new to markets. The car was disruptive to horse farmers and horseshoers, tractors disruptive to farmhands, textile mills disruptive to hand loomers, automatic switchers to human telephone operators, etc ... But it doesn't mean that we should actively set up impediments to such change because it might mean that some people need to learn new skills.
Does it truly matter morally whether the local disruption happens because of technology or cheaper labor? What if the disruption happened closer to home? If West Virginia decides to reject the federal govt's minimum wage and abolish it in order to do something about their unemployment situation, would companies that move their manufacturing across the border from Virginia to West Virginia be evil because some of the people in Virginia lost their job? What if it moved from California or Alaska? After all, it would mean firing California workers so they can train their West Virginian replacements... Does that really change the nature of it?
"You are what is wrong with America."
Oh? How's that? Because we have nothing like what I advocate. So I'm not sure how I could be the cause of any of the "wrongness" in America.