I'm not the op so I'll pass on addressing the question directly. An earlier comment gave a robust criticism of protectionist policies. In general I'm inclined to agree. But I'd like to draw attention to potentially negative impact to society if things are not managed properly. And really a lot of it comes to trade offs. It might be more efficient to manufacture certain goods elsewhere but it is undesirable to see local industries collapse without alternative employment for the people concerned. I think that in some ways it is better to have a local relatively inefficient sector that keeps people employed. As an example I'm told that of late the French economy has been operating significantly more efficiently than the UK. But conversely unemployment in the UK is at record lows. The suggestion being that it takes more people to produce a unit of work as compared to France. I'd rather have it this way. The thing is that being a steel worker, a builder, machine operator in a car factory is about more than earning a living. As a result when a local industry is dismantled people lose a lot more than their paychecks. This is not to say that local industries should be protected at all costs but that perhaps thee could be a way to gradually re-train the workforce ahead of time.