That is not at all how natsoc works and you'll never spread your BS here.
Economically, natsoc was fascist (literally economically fascist - not what leftypol thinks fascism is).
Economic fascism = businesses are disallowed from practices which harm the worker. This includes exportation of jobs for goods to be sold in the nation.
It is for THIS reason that Soros chose "antifa" as the name. Economic fascism is just good sense. It ensures the worker does not give money to the rich of his own country while giving nothing to his fellow workers.
Imports are allowed, even encouraged. But they are taxed.
The nation or the worker must ALWAYS benefit from the sale of goods in the nation.
If you buy a Ford Fiesta - the $ goes to Mexican slaves and rich people. This is unacceptable.
If you buy a Honda, the $ goes to THE AMERICAN WORKERS WHO BUILT IT and rich Japanese. This is acceptable.
If you buy champagne, it is TAXED on entry and the nation gets $.
In economic fascism - EVERYONE ALWAYS WINS.
Foreign countries are sales markets and not slave markets. And mega corporations benefit from stability in those countries because stability = disposable income.
There is no downside.
But it certainly doesn't look like that picture, because that picture is missing the boss. And corporate ownership was never discouraged in natsoc, and it is never discouraged in economic fascism.
Tax incentives play a role as well. Corporations are easy to control. Either say no, or take the choice you want them to make and make it a little more profitable than the alternative.
Welcome to the lowest unemployment rate in 17 years, gentlemen.