Basically, it's talking to them in their own terms to explain why much of what they are saying is wronging.  It's telling that economists have this tendency to assume that it's rent seeking by labor that's behind what's going on.

To be fair, it can go either way, but that's why it's vital to go beyond saying, "hey, there's rent seeking behavior shrinking the economy, it must be those damn lazy workers" to accepting the possiblity that it's the exact opposite.

You're right that the global market comes into play, but the phenomenon is happening, but outsourcing to low wage countries is a clear example of where employers are definitely causing a reduction in the wealth of the national society.  Because there is no reciprocation from the low wage country in terms of increased trade volume, creating jobs in the developed country.

The object is standard rentseeking behavior, the method is achieved through using trade agreements.  Trade can be beneficial, but in order to be so there has to be reciprocation.  And that's not what this is all about.

It's about increasing the big boys slice of the pie at a heavy cost to society.

By keeping the critique in economic terms, we force the neo-liberals to defend things that they take to be givens.  Such as the presumption that rent seeking is a pathology of labor alone.

And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg