“How does a “conservative” justify interring in the business decisions of a private enterprise? What if Carrier discovered a new manufacturing technology that resulted in similar output with less labor. Should the government ban that technology to save jobs? If it should not, then why not?”
If the price doesn’t come down, then corps are pocketing the difference (which was my original point) and the consumer is no better off, be it by offshoring or automation. Unemployed consumers probably won’t care anyway. If corps want to continue exploiting lower costs countries with lax environmental laws, you’re right, how does a conservative justify interfering. Maybe we can’t. But hopefully we’ll figure something out by the time the entire country is an empty shell like Detroit.
Never ceases to amaze me how many conservatives equate conservative economics with radical libertarianism. My conservatism incorporates the old fashioned notion of the national interest. If something is good for corporate profits but bad for America it's bad and we can stop it. Period. The cheek of the libertarians in claiming the Founding Fathers as retroactive allies in their fight for globalism is something to behold. Tariffs are written into the Constitution! The Founding Fathers opposed pure free trade! They were nationalists, not libertarians!
“If corps want to continue exploiting lower costs countries with lax environmental laws, you’re right, how does a conservative justify interfering. Maybe we can’t. But hopefully we’ll figure something out by the time the entire country is an empty shell like Detroit.”
Despite what most liberals believe, corporations do not exist to provide jobs. They exist to make a profit for their owners.