In the United States, the main argument for protection of domestic industry is that foreign competition costs Americans their jobs. When we buy Japanese cars, U.S. cars go (1) . This leads to a (2) in the domestic auto industry. When we buy German steel, steelworkers in the nor them part of America (3) their jobs. It is true that when we buy goods from foreign producers, domestic producers in the U.S. (4) . But there is no reason to believe that the workers thrown out of employment in the contracting sectors will not find jobs in other expanding sectors. Foreign (5) in textiles, for example, has (6) thousands of workers out of work in New England. (7) with the expansion of new industries, the unemployment rate in this area (8) one of the lowest in the country in the mid-1980s. (9) time the United States lost its advantage in textiles (10) countries with larger unskilled labor (11) , but other new industries have (12) in which the United States does have a greater advantage. Of course, it is very difficult for workers to (13) the fact of being jobless. The knowledge that some other industry, perhaps in some other part of the country may be expanding, is of (14) comfort to the person whose skills become out of date. The (15) and personal problems brought about by unemployment and out of date skills as a result of foreign competition (16) close attention. These problems can be solved in two ways. We can stop (17) and give up the gains from free trade, claiming that we are (18) to pay more to save domestic jobs in industries that can produce more (19) abroad. Or we can aid the victims of free trade in a more effective way, helping to (20) them for jobs with a future.