>You must have responded to the wrong post as it has nothing to do with my statement.

OK. You can't handle context, noted.

>That statement is that there is nothing about capitalism that prevents a country from prioritizing its own citizens.

The free market is what prevents it. The purpose of capitalism is the creation of capital and its transfer to the capitalist class, and the purpose of corporations is to maximize profits to facilitate that process as quickly and efficiently as possible. Neither capitalism as a system nor corporations have an obligation to improve quality of life for their employees beyond their market value, or to "prioritize" the social welfare over profit, or to hire more people than they need.

It's simple supply and demand and there isn't a demand for American labor.

>Additionally, the exact percentages of unemployement rates also has little to do with capitalism

which is weird because you're arguing that capitalist companies need to prioritize "citizen" labor in order to reduce unemployment, or that governments need to force them to.

> Neither capitalism as a system nor corporations have an obligation to improve quality of life for their employees beyond their market value

If by capitalism as a system, we are refering to countries that are capitalists, it seems fairly uncontroversial to say that such countries can prioritize their own citizens.

It is not weird or controversial to say that countries, even capitalist ones, prioritize their citizens in certain cases, nor is it weird to suggest that they aught do so.

> which is weird because you're arguing that capitalist companies need to prioritize "citizen" labor in order to reduce unemployment, or that governments need to force them to.

I am suggesting that it is compatible with being a capitalist country, and is not weird, unusually, or bad to do such a common thing as prioritizing your own citizens.

I wouldn't say that they need to. Merely that it is a normal and compatible, and in many cases desirable goal for said citizens.