From what I've read on the 'outsourcing' issue, the savings are very short term to the corporations and eventually comes back to bite them in the butt. I know because I joined this company at the time its previous 'outsourcing' blew up in their face and we had to scramble to fix the problem.
I personally fault the shortsightedness of the corporate "leaders" who've allowed this state of affairs to happen.
No, those of us who are affected will find other jobs, develop other skills and get on with our lives. It's just a shame that a good corporation can be so pathetically lead or rather mislead.
Then there's the ulterior motive that many believe is behind this, at least in the case of some companies. A CEO is hired for the express purpose of trimming the "fat" so it can be merged, sold, or otherwise taken over by other corporations and thus the 'stockholders' reap the profits. And it doesn't take much to figure out who the 'stockholders' are in this case.
The problem is the clash between long and short term perspective. What is a fat from in the quarterly/yearly bottom line might be decade or more corn seed.
"Free" market by itself is an inanimate process.
This may come as a shock to you, but entrepreneurs and investors are not in business to employ people; that is an effect of their endeavor. You seem to hold the aforementioned CEO and stockholders in some sort of disdain, as if they were up to no good. I can assure you if they were not making profits, the job outlook in their particular organization would be much worse.