Rick, why should you prevent someone from getting a job that’s better than what
they had before just because it doesn’t have some of the benefits that you like?
If the jobs aren’t better than the other options, people wouldn’t take them.
Even in the US in the ‘horrible conditions’ of the Industrial Revolution, people
were eager to take the jobs because they were better than the jobs (in large
part including farming) that they left.
And as people become more skilled, and more good jobs open up, the competition
for good workers means that they will get paid more (in whatever form, which may
include medical and retirement, or may just be more cash)
Now, I believe that trade agreements need to be fair, and when you have large
differences in the cost of living in different countries, getting a fair
agreement is hard (between near peers, it’s easy, ‘no tarrifs’ works well, as
long as it’s the same both directions) and there are lots of examples of bad
agreements out there.
‘globalization’ can mean a lot of things, some of them very bad, some of them
good. The Devil is in the details.