[Willie Green]

protectionism is anti-capitalism therefore anti- free market

Trade "agreements" are also anti-free market.
The transnational companies that promote such agreements are not capitalists. They are risk-adverse corporatists. Unlike capitalists, they shun market risk and negotiate agreements that subordinate the sovereign rights of representative governments. They are undeserving of the term "capitalist".

[Pukin Dog]

A hypothetical situation for you, Willie:

Suppose Boeing was prohibited from signing trade agreements with other nations, who insist on taking a portion of manufacturing as part of the deal?

You have Airbus out there, willing to deal with anyone with a dollar, who undercuts Boeing on most sales deals anyway, able to win a much larger share of deals, resulting in less revenue for Boeing, with layoffs and plant-closings needed to remain in business.

When that happens, then you have an impact on every sub-contractor, who has to do the same. Then you have a bulge in unemployment, increasing costs (deficits to the states) resulting in reduced economic activity. In a place like Washington state, you are talking about an ecomomic full-blown depression.

Please dont tell me that trade agreements are anti-free market. The opposite is true. Transnational companies are not risk-averse, they are COST-averse. The cost of doing business determines how many people a company can employ.