I fail to perceive the morality of your position. Is your argument that merely because certain people are in a position of economic and/or political weakness, that it is therefore OK to take advantage of them? Am I mistaken in the belife that the U.S. provides the world with an example, and a beacon of freedom and liberty for [legal] immigrants?
What, pray tell, is the value of *encouraging* the Red Chinese to harvest the labor (if not organs for transplant) of their political prisoners for your benefit or mine?
Try this, how can any law our country might pass long protect an inflated wage for an anachronistic job against a global market? The world has changed since there was a "big three" and your daddy drove either a Ford, Chevy or Plymouth(remember Plymouths?)and competition comes from anywhere. You can rail against it or you can compete against it but you cannot legislate it away.
This seems a blanket argument for amorality reflected in some supernational entity such as the WTO or UN.
Try this: if you and I wilfully and knowledgeably approve of and benefit from harvesting political prison or child labor, or wholesale environmental pollution, then who, if not you and I, are going to help stop it?
The world-has-changed line sounds like so much Clintonista era propaganda to me.
"belife" -> "belief"
That is the heart of our disagreement. Unfortunately, I can explain it to you but I cannot understand it for you. If you need it explained, I'm afraid it would be pointless to try.