I keep reading one article or another about 'globalization' (which seems to have no universally accepted definition). To some, it simply means offshoring jobs to lower-cost countries and results in increased unemployment at home along with poorer quality goods and services. To those who accept this definition, 'globalization' is a dirty word, and something to be avoided.
To others (myself included), this reallocation of of manufacturing and service jobs to economies that can perform the work more efficiently and economically is an example of true Darwinian economics. It's obviously unpleasant to those negatively affected by job loss (and I've been among them), but I don't have a problem with offshoring in general because it forces companies, countries, and economies to focus their resources on areas in which they can operate most efficiently.
Over time - perhaps even a generation - there should develop some sort of parity. Jobs lost in the US will gradually drive resources to create new markets that are based less on manufacturing and more on providing professional services, design, quality craftsmenship, transportation and the like. Meanwhile, manufacturing jobs sent overseas must maintain and grow their competitive advantage in cost and product quality or risk losing these jobs. We've seen what's happened with a lack of quality control in some of the goods manufactured in China - tainted baby formula, dangerous childrens' toys, tainted pet food - the backlash was rapid and severe. There will always be a market for quality goods at market prices. International tariffs and price controls muddy the waters obviously, but they dont' make a bad product good or vice versa.
