Sure they can, and have been in the millions.
Both parties have supported this.
Fortunately we have a new president elect, who will finally, once again support American jobs.
If you disbelieve me, ask yourself if Amazon owns the right to have you spend in 2017 at least the same amount of money shopping at that website as you spent there in 2016.
Oh but, the givernment can mandate I spend money on a product I don’t want.
Irony....
The word “stolen” is a pretty obvious straw man. No, the jobs aren’t owned, so they are not “stolen” in a criminal sense. Powerful incentives have been created by government to send those jobs overseas. This has been done on purpose by the same people who have opened the borders. Those people have internalized the savings from cheap labor, and externalized the mammoth coats. Maybe he could focus on those issues a bit for his next column.
Fallacy: Each worker agrees to give his effort ...
Workers are coerced into accepting trash money in exchange for honest real labor.
Free trade is not free and is not trade.
Except for health insurance companies. We are all have an involuntary arrangement to labor on behalf of insurance companies. (Well, except for congresscritters and muzz slimes)
There is free and unfettered commerce between the states as regulated by the feds. All 50 states have to follow the same federal commerce regulations.
There is NOTHING in the Constitution providing for economic freedom across international borders, the opposite is true.
“Because no worker owns a job, jobs can’t be stolen.”
Really?
Can a job be lost? Yes. Can a job be taken? Yes.
Can someone jerk the rug out from under a fellow employee and get his job? Yes.
Can a job be stolen? Yes.
He is one of these idiots that seeks to define any concept into oblivion and thinks he is brilliant.
I’m not sure what you mean by “state control over where I buy and whom I hire.” What exactly does this mean in the context of the article you posted here?
The alternative view in the article assumes that but for foolish and illegitimate US domestic laws, we would live in a world of frictionless free markets in which citizenship, nationality, nation states, cultures, race, language, and faith do not matter and goods and services and people would move about freely and efficiently. Of course, although cash is said by economists to be fungible, people are not. America's national cohesion and the interests of the country and its people matter and are not just fit but are essential considerations for public policy.
For direct political appeals to the American public, the most potent way to raise such issues is to talk of jobs and national greatness and avoid stating considerations of American national interest in ways that can be derided as based on race. Indeed, polling shows that most Black Americans get the point that immigrants from Latin America and other parts of the world now have many jobs that they used to fill.
Thus Trump's call for jobs, his visit to inner city Detroit, and sympathetic remarks about conditions in the inner cities made small but politically significant inroads with Black voters. Indeed, slams of Trump as racist for his comments about illegal immigrant Mexican rapists probably raised his net standing with Blacks, while Trump's general call to make America great again also resonated with many patriotic Black Americans.
Call me a nationalist, but I see policies aimed at bettering America and its citizens as essential to our prosperity and even to our survival as a free society. Indeed, I put America first, even at the expense of mere economic efficiency.
The government has no right to set a minimum or maximum hourly pay rate. (not “minimum wage”).
Minimum wage isn’t what must be paid, it is a restriction on allowing any job worth less than minimum wage from being performed.