While economists and businesses largely oppose President Trump's tariffs, some unions, such as the United Auto Workers (UAW) and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, have surprisingly voiced support. This support stems from a long-held union stance against free trade agreements, which they believe have led to job losses in American manufacturing. However, not all unions agree; the AFL-CIO, for example, has criticized Trump's policy.
The article highlights the decline of manufacturing jobs in the US, often attributed to free trade agreements like NAFTA. Unions argue that NAFTA resulted in the relocation of factories to Mexico due to cheaper labor, leading to job losses and suppressed wages in the US. This is why unions have historically opposed such agreements.
The article notes that even though some economists largely viewed free trade as beneficial, unions' opposition has continued, especially concerning the massive influx of Chinese imports post-2001.
The prevailing consensus among economists supports free trade. However, the article challenges this view, pointing to evidence that free trade deals haven't always been beneficial for all. It shows how various political figures, including even some initial supporters of free trade, have eventually opposed these agreements, citing increased inequality and job losses.
This opposition to free trade is a factor in the union support for tariffs, even if implementation under Trump has been viewed as inconsistent and possibly harmful to the economy overall.
While the article acknowledges that some unions see Trump's tariffs as a positive step towards protecting American manufacturing, they also highlight the flawed and inconsistent approach of the Trump administration. The broader conclusion is that while there might be potential benefits to strategically implemented tariffs, Trump's broad approach is potentially damaging to the US economy and may not revive American manufacturing in the long run.