> I generally believe, from the perspective of the US market, that every job that can cost-effectively be exported to Asia already has been. Do you mean "every

> I generally believe, from the perspective of the US market, that every job that can cost-effectively be exported to Asia already has been. Do you mean "every TYPE of job" or every instance of job? Plenty of jobs have been exported, and plenty more will be, until the world is basically flat. As one example, right now, US doctors are still commonly reading and interpreting X-rays and CAT scans. This is being automated and also outsourced. In other words, this TYPE of job is already being done by doctors in China. But large portions of work remain here in the US. The export and automation of jobs will continue. Maybe you're right by qualifying your comment with "cost effectively". Surely that's the case in an efficient market. But "cost effective" will change as technology and culture develops. As hospital administrators become less tech-phobic, more xray-techs will work from Shanghai. > I don't think job exports are a good thing Why not? It's the most efficient way of providing economic well-being to less developed countries, which means better food security for their people, better education, better healthcare, and more stable politics. You might say exporting jobs is the #1 best way the USA can deliver aid to foreign countries. > also don't think TPP has much to do with it. For a counterpoint, see this link previously posted here: http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/06/26/417851577/episode-635-trade-deal-confidential http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/06/26/417851577/episo...