Question

Unions in developed nations often oppose imports from low-wage countries and advocate trade barriers to protect jobs from what they often characterize as “unfair” import competition. Is such competition “unfair”? Do you think that this argument is in the best interests of (a) the unions, (b)the people they represent, and/or (c) the country as a whole?

Answer 1

The theory of comparative advantage suggests that a country should produce only those goods that are not quality compromised and buy goods in which it doesn't have enough efficiency not to compromise quality.

Furthermore, the theory suggests that opening a country to free trade stimulates economic growth, which brings dynamic gains from trade. Thus if the theory is to be followed, if low-wage countries can make certain products more efficiently than high wage countries, the low wage countries should produce and export those products and the high wage countries shouldn't hesitate to buy them. Imports should be only restricted where there is dumping of goods which is most evidently practised by China. Dumping is exporting goods at a very cheap price often lower than the exporter's domestic price to importing country to disrupt competition in the domestic market of the importer. To prevent this anti dumping duties and other restrictions are imposed.

While trade barriers may protect workers and companies, it is not prudent to do so in the long run as due to lack of competition domestic industries become overconfident and corrupt and inefficient. Consumers suffer due to higher prices and less choices

Thus this advocacy for trade barriers is in interest of the unions and the people they represent. It is not a constructive practice which will benefit the country as a whole.