I'm generally for free trade, but there has to be a more equitable arrangement than what we've got now.
If the USA is enforcing environmental regulations for their factories, this will obviously cost more than just dumping used chemicals outside in a pit. So the cost of goods in another country will be less if it doesn't have good (or any) environmental regulations. This is separate from labor prices.
So it is not fair to the USA, and it isn't fair to the people living in countries without good environmental regulations.
ignoring environmental protection costs for monetary success is mostly short-term planning and will - i'm a software developer, so i'll take this as a comparison - have the same consequences as short term planning and accumulating technical debt in software development. see it as an indirect investment in infrastructure that ultimately benefits everyone (but also you). you can't run a factory without government funded roads and railways, aka funded by your tax payer money.
it's the same for environmental expenses: skimp now, and you might not have a market to sell to in a decade.
so, if you outsource to another country it wont help in the long term because climate is global.
that much is clear. the rest is sufficiently explained by dawkins stable dove-hawk systems. you might want to try to gamble the system for personal gain, but if everyone does it, it'll collapse and everyone dies. so you shouldn't and protest transgression by others, otherwise the system might collapse.
i'm convinced you can play fair and still make a profit.
If the USA is enforcing environmental regulations for their factories, this will obviously cost more than just dumping used chemicals outside in a pit. So the cost of goods in another country will be less if it doesn't have good (or any) environmental regulations. This is separate from labor prices.
So it is not fair to the USA, and it isn't fair to the people living in countries without good environmental regulations.