There is a looming cloud of threat over the heads of many Americans, with a lining of volatility; their jobs may be here today, and gone the next, shipped offshore to be put in the hands of foreigners willing to work for less.

The paradigm of American middle-class, as we know it, typified by healthcare, pension, and job security, may gradually diminish with the expansion of outsourced American industries. With advances in technology and communication, it is becoming increasingly more efficient and advantageous for American industries to produce their goods and carry out services overseas, where they can get the same job done at a lesser expense. With highly educated workers in India, China, and Japan, amongst others, white-collar jobs can be performed by them at a fraction of the cost it takes to pay an American to do the exact same job. Thus, it is no surprise that many U.S. corporations are taking their business overseas, much to the anger and dismay of employment-hungry Americans.

According to Robert B. Reich from The Washington Post, companies in the high-tech sector, like IBM, have high rates of outsourcing.

"More than half of all Fortune 500 companies say they're outsourcing software development or expanding their own development centers outside the United States," he said. "Already India has more than half a million information technology (IT) professionals. It's adding 2 million college graduates a year, many of whom are attracted to the burgeoning IT sector. The starting salary of a software engineer in India is around $5,000. Experienced engineers get between $10,000 to $15,000. Top IT professionals there might earn up to $20,000."

Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, in a letter of opinion sent to The New York Times, expressed great frustration and concern over this growing trend

"In light of these changes, we should at least be asking some tough questions about the real-world effects of free trade as we've known it," he said.

Among these questions is what the long-term effects of free trade will bring to the U.S. economy when Americans no longer have the disposable income they once enjoyed to keep the consumer economy thriving.

Dr. Della Lee Sue, a Visiting Assistant Professor of Economics at Marist College, feels that globally, outsourcing may be a good thing because it will bring wealth. However, for Americans, it could mean a more unstable economy. Furthermore, even if outsourcing may prove to be beneficial in the long run, it will be politically unpopular, because people will initially be negatively impacted.

"No one wants to lose their job and cut back on the luxuries they've become accustomed to," she said.

Perhaps then, outsourcing complaints are more a matter of the high American standard of living than a matter of necessity and survival.

According to an editorial written to The New York Times by John V. Rutledge, a resident of Myrtle Beach, S.C., outsourcing is not the fault of the Bush administration, as many speculate, but a consequence of the American way of life.

"We cannot do without luxury homes, cosmetics, prepared foods, and designer clothing. Our luxuries require salaries that a prudent corporate America is unwilling to pay," he said. "We want our incomes to be adequate to support our addiction to non-necessities, but we also want our commodities at commodity prices. We have not realized that one comes at the expense of the other."

Countering this pessimistic speculation, some feel that globalization will prove to be beneficial for the U.S. economy and consumers. According to Thomas Sowell of The Wall Street Journal, those who are loudest in denouncing the exportation of jobs tend to completely overlook the benefits of outsourcing and the jobs that are being imported to the U.S.

"Free international trade produces both the benefits of increased productivity and the adjustment problems that all other forms of increased productivity produce-namely, job losses in the less competitive firms and industries," he said. "The typewriter industry was devastated by the rise of the computer, as the horse and buggy industry was devastated by the rise of the automobile. Histories of the industrial revolution lament the plight of the handloom weavers when power looms were introduced."

Many agree with this sentiment, and feel that with the loss of these jobs, some technology will become more omnipresent, and in their wake, jobs based on new technologies will be created. Potentially, outsourcing could eventually make the price of living more affordable for Americans, and simultaneously increase their standard of living.

Dr. Laura Ebert, an Assistant Professor of Economics at Marist College, said that the transformation in the type of commodities produced and the manner of production warrants a shift in labor skills from traditional to new types.

"The phone operator who gets laid off from transferring calls could be hired in a computer chip manufactures job. This job could be higher in productivity than the phone-operating job, since it deals with more technology," she said. "Hence, it probably pays a higher wage. All this is good, except for a need for some workers to be temporarily unemployed until they find a new job in the new economy."

Some feel that outsourcing will prove to be completely beneficial. Blessen Kurian, a finance student at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, New York, said that he is in favor of outsourcing because it is ultimately profitable for corporations and American citizens alike, despite the fact that many Americans are being displaced by their foreign counterparts.

"When you outsource work, you're contributing to the loss of jobs in America. However, you're lowering prices, because there is less cost to produce the goods that you are trying to sell. It increases the profit margin for the company, which translates into a lower cost for the consumer," he said.

Dr. Tom G. Geurts, Associate Professor of Finance at Marist College, said that in the long run, outsourcing could be beneficial from many aspects.

"From a corporate standpoint, outsourcing is great because it reduces costs of production and is more profitable. The savings are translated to the buyers because competition drives prices down. Also, outsourcing can promote peace between the U.S. and the countries they outsource to, because it establishes mutual benefits," he said. "The American companies benefit because the cost of labor is cheaper, and the foreign countries benefit because the wages they are being paid by the American companies are higher than they would be paid otherwise. They would be stupid to bite the hand that feeds them."

According to Forbes.com, Treasury Secretary John Snow is a staunch supporter of the rights of U.S. corporations to outsource U.S. jobs for cheaper labor, and to break down trade barriers.

"I think American companies need to do what they need to do to be competitive, and as they're competitive, it's good for their shareholders, it's good for their consumers and it's good for their employee. Enterprises that don't succeed don't create many jobs," he said.

Despite conflicting opinions on outsourcing, the fact remains that American jobs are being lost to those who are willing to take them on for a lower salary, but the real consequences remain to be seen. Some, like Caroline Rider, Chair of Marist College's Management Department, feel that the outsourcing of jobs will level off after a while due to innovation, quality control, and protection of intellectual property, but have concerns that it will not do so in time before any major damage is done to the economy.

"If you let employment get below a certain level of quantity and quality, the whole country will suffer, it seems to me," she said. " So even if outsourcing will level off in time on its own, timing is an issue: if you have a bacterial infection that will run its course and be over on its own in ten days, but the patient will die of fever and shock in six days, shouldn't you try some medical intervention?"