Wouldn't the fairest, most beneficial policy to the average American citizen be true isolationism?

I sometimes wonder this myself. In a true libertarian world there would be no borders but since other countries have different labor laws there is always a difference in labor costs that mess up so called ';free trade agreements.'; Isolation sounds good sometimes.Wouldn't the fairest, most beneficial policy to the average American citizen be true isolationism?
Not isolationism - that means NO TRADE and complete protectionism. We need non-interventionism. Peace, trade, and friendship with all, alliances with none.





The words are commonly mistaken for each other, however, they are VERY different.





A foreign policy of non-interventionism would mean we trade with EVERYONE AND ANYONE who has something to sell us, or wants to buy from us. We would ignore all foreign politics. This way, all we see is economic benefit. Every consumer and producer benefits by maximizing potential customers and potential product and services they themselves consume.





Non-interventionism really respects the differences of societies around the world, meeting in the common ground of a marketplace through free trade.Wouldn't the fairest, most beneficial policy to the average American citizen be true isolationism?
yes but it's way too late to be the leader of the world again like right after WW2 america was the most industrious nation on earth exporting and leading in prosperity but we made our deals with the devil, just like ancient israel and now we will become 3rd world just like the Vatican wants. It's all headed towards Revelation 13 where no man will be able to buy or sell unless you bow to Rome.
We aren't self sufficient. We can't even satisfy our own oil needs.
no, we need free trade.





we just need to cut off foreign aid and our military intervention abroad.
We tried that already. We ended up with the Great Depression as a result