With everything from call centers to web site design being outsourced, the clear trend in the business world is to outsource almost any task that can be done cheaper and quicker somewhere else. Reports that CBS (NYSE: CBS) and cable news pioneer CNN, owned by Time Warner (NYSE: TWX) are in talks about outsourcing the news, should come as no surprise.

According to a story in The New York Times, "Broadly speaking, the executives described conversations about reducing CBS's news-gathering capacity while keeping its frontline personalities, like Katie Couric, the CBS Evening News anchor, and paying a fee to CNN to buy the cable network's news feeds. "

With CBS stuck in third place among major networks for years, and general viewership of the evening news falling due to alternative news outlets such as cable news, blogs and internet sites, this tie-up would make economic sense. CBS would be able to keep its brand name and substantially cut costs, as they would be able to take CNN news feeds from around the country.

Christopher Johns is certainly well-traveled. For more than a decade, he has started ventures in places like Thailand, Malaysia and the Philippines.

His latest company is SupportSave, an outsourcing services provider for small and mid-sized customers.

I recently had a chance to interview him:

Some background on your company?

The company got its start in November 2004. Our founders strongly believed that the trend of outsourcing should not only benefit Fortune 1000 companies. So they set out to create a business model that makes outsourcing affordable to businesses of any size.

We thought the Philippines as the most suitable destination for our services because of the strong language skills, minimal accent and affinity towards American culture.

Back in October 2004, PeopleSupport Inc. (NASDAQ: PSPT) went public at $7 per share (the offering was fairly lackluster as the stock price fell on its first day of trading).

Well, now the company may no longer be public. That is, on Friday, PeopleSupport announced that it got a $15 per share buyout offer from IPVG and AO Capital Partners.

PeopleSupport provides offshore business process outsourcing services -- such as for customer management and transcription. The company operates in the Philippines, Costa Rica, and the United States.

However, the stock price plunged 38% in March because of a weak quarterly report. No doubt, the company faces intense competition from players like IBM (NYSE: IBM), Convergys, and eTelecare. Thus, it's likely we'll see consolidation in the space.

Interestingly enough, BloggingStocks had a piece -- a day before the buyout announcement --t hat showed that PeopleSupport had a "bullish 'flag'" pattern on its stock chart.

Yes, it certainly did.

Tom Taulli is the author of various books, including The Complete M&A Handbook and The Edgar Online Guide to Decoding Financial Statements. He also operates DealProfiles.com.

You don't have to be a fashionista to know that French fashion has a reputation for being uppity and tres expensive. They don't call it haute couture for nothing.

But according to the Wall Street Journal, "With the euro reaching new records against the dollar, U.S. shoppers are finding European designer labels even more expensive than in past years. But a young crop of French designers is now trying to prove that style doesn't have to be so costly."

Unlike the traditional fashion houses selling $1,000 bags, less expensive French labels are outsourcing manufacturing to keep costs down -- a big no-no in traditional fashion circles, where local production is considered key to retaining cachet. Some are also taking the hit on the euro's rise, rather than passing the expense on to American consumers.

Paul & Joe is even -- gasp -- designing a collection for Target (NYSE: TGT).

Will Wal-Mart (NYSE: WMT) be able to capitalize on the trend toward more affordable French fashions, as it struggles with its efforts to sell more upscale clothing? Doubtful. If outsourcing production in France hurts cachet, designing clothes for Wal-Mart, the international symbol of corporate avarice and apathy toward people, would be fashion suicide.

Wipro (NYSE: WIP), one of the largest companies in India, announced this past week that it saw a profit rise of 17% to $204 million in its latest quarter, on the back of new outsourcing contracts and gains from a U.S.-based acquisition. Wipro is currently the India's third-largest outsourcing company, and handles accounting, customer service, human resources and other functions for many firms in the Fortune 500. If you've ever read about outsourcing domestic jobs to India, this is a top company in that field.

Sales in the July to September quarter rose to $1.2 billion as Wipro acquired almost 60 new contracts and saw an increase in sales based on its acquisition of New Jersey-based Infocrossing Inc., a networking infrastructure company. Wipro announced that a single contract alone with an unidentified U.S. company was worth $160 million alone. At the end of the quarter, Wipro employed over 77,000 people.

In addition to labor outsourcing, the company writes software for the likes of General Motors (NYSE: GM) and Cisco Systems (NASDAQ: CSCO). With such a stellar quarter, the company's CEO stated that new clients were being charged 3% to 5% above standard billing rates, and that it was billing existing clients at higher rates. I'm not sure that's the kind of thing you want to release publicly, but there you have it. Wipro, expect from phone calls soon, okay?

Sunday's New York Times reported that government officials in at least 12 states are exploring the possibility of leasing out their state lotteries to private operators. California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has voiced his support for the idea, where he says his state has been told it could reap a windfall of as much as $37 billion.

Critics contend that a privately held lottery would market itself more aggressively -- further victimizing the low-income and minority consumers who already form a disproportionate share of the lottery's customer base. Others worry that the traditional beneficiaries of the lottery -- schools -- would be shortchanged in the long run because the one-time cash infusion would be used to fund other needs.

But there's something else to think about. The only reason that the California Lottery is worth as much as $37 billion is that it exists as a monopoly, exempted from competition because the very government that sponsors it would send anyone to jail if they tried to do the same thing on their own. After all, gambling is wrong!

What makes the lottery a good business is that the payout ratios (tickets sold minus prize money paid out) are very low because there's no competition. If the lottery weren't a monopoly, competition would work, payouts would soar, and the lottery wouldn't be such a great business -- nor would it victimize the poor the way that it currently does.

But of course, private operators want to buy the monopoly rights to the lottery. But from a rational perspective, I have a problem with this: If Goldman Sachs (or whoever ends up winning the auction) can run a lottery, why shouldn't someone else be allowed to? If there's something wrong with the idea of legalized gambling (which, apparently there is, because it's illegal), does using it to raise money for state bureaucracy somehow negate that? What's next? The Massachusetts State Whorehouse?

We shouldn't be talking about privatizing the lottery -- we should be talking about abolishing it.

If you're tired of poisoning your kids with lead-painted toys from China or killing your pets with melamine-laced Chinese pet food, you may be wondering what you can buy that's made in America.

To its credit, China is trying to fix its reputation. Last week, according to CBS News, China's product safety chief Li Changjiang offered assurances that toys made in China would be "safer, better and more appealing. Before Christmas, we will certainly provide children safer, better and more appealing toys. They will certainly like them." To bolster that claim, on September 11th, China signed an agreement to prohibit the use of lead paint on toys exported to the United States.

As I posted in July, I expect that there could be a business opportunity to sell products to U.S. consumers that are made anywhere but China. Then I cited examples of an upscale New York grocery with no Chinese seafood and a New Jersey-based natural producer of premium dog food blended from meat and vegetables. However, I have not seen much in the way of new developments in the last few months.

So what are the choices for those who want to buy products made in the U.S.A.?

Me. A mom. Presumably the sort of human being who'd be up in arms with outrage over this latest bit of recall news. Instead, I'm rolling my eyes and wondering what's really behind all this recall madness. Is it a slow news week? (not with all the fun we're having with world's credit market meltdown!). Terrorists out to kill our children via poisonous toys? Or is is just our hysteria over China eating our lunch. The lunch we happily sent over to them.

I think it's probably the latter. And that's not to say I have any doubt over whether China is turning out mountains of subpar crap for us. Standards are different over there, after all. And at the end of the day, everyone gets what they pay for, right, Mattel (NYSE: MAT)?

I'm just starting to find it suspect that every day brings new screaming headlines about more poisonous, sub-par products being sent to us from China. Toxic toothpaste! Poisoned pet food! Lead-coated toys! Now it's killer bibs!

The initial consensus on Wall Street regarding IBM's (NYSE: IBM) announcement Wednesday that it would eliminate another 1,570 positions is that the effort represents another prudent action in its "reorganizational tripod" of fewer positions, cheaper positions, and reinvented positions.

Further, the reorganization effort represents nothing less than wholesale transformation of the company as it confronts the multi-directional competitive winds of the globalization era. Job eliminations bring Big Blue more in line with today's continuously right-sizing, temperature-taking business environment. Wholesale shifts of jobs to lower-cost markets -- IBM's India workforce surged to 52,000 in 2006 from a scant 9,000 in 2003 -- helps IBM make up for lost time vis-a-vis lower-cost competitors. And, perhaps most significant, IBM's operational shifts -- including rethinking how it delivers services -- create a more nimble, higher-value company that can respond to clients' needs quicker and more productively. IBM's shares closed Wednesday up $1.03 to $106.93.

Further, more position "rebalancing" may be ahead: IBM, which with Wednesday's cuts has now eliminated 3,700 positions in 2007, still has about 356,000 employees, including an eye-opening 128,000 based in the United States. And as part of those cuts, many analysts in the quarters ahead see a continued trimming of global services in favor of software, where revenue is growing faster.

We've come a long way from the days of crackling, garbled drive-through terminals at our favorite fast fooderies. Now many are equipped with a digital screen, designed to verify orders and cut down on errors (why would I ever order a bean burrito with extra onions and no cheese?).

Wendy's International (NYSE: WEN) is forging ahead with the latest innovation as it outsources the job of drive-through order taking. The home of the Frosty and the square burgers has established a call center near Wilmington, Delaware. A staff of about 12 workers utilizes Internet phone lines to man food orders for nine restaurants in five states, including New Hampshire and Florida.

While I wonder about the reliability of the new technology (what if the phone lines go out?), the CEO of Exit 41, a Boston company specializing in remote-ordering systems, affirms that outsourcing the order-taking both reduces errors and lowers stress for on-site employees. And if every drive-through transaction is shortened by even fractions of a second, the savings can be in the millions.

Beth Gaston Moon is an analyst at Schaeffer's Investment Research.

My recent stories about American Idol inflamed reader passions from many perspectives. Sanjaya aside, the idea of American companies out-sourcing jobs to India or anywhere else offends many people. Some readers of American Idol: Are Indian call centers skewing the vote? thought I was singling out the people of India which they interpreted as hostile and racist. I thought I would set the record straight about my views on the subject.

1. The jobs we are sending overseas to India, or elsewhere, is not affecting the employment rate in the United States to any appreciable level. Last I read the unemployment rate stood at 4.5%. It has been hovering between 4% and 5% for several years. To me that is actually close to full employment in a market society as complex as ours. I have no expectation that we could sustain anything lower.
2. Our connection and developing relationship with India in particular is extremely valuable. I believe India has as much potential as any nation, and more than most, to help us expand our economy. It's size, value system, geographic location, history, English foundation, and more make it a great partner. There is much more to gain than to lose for both sides.
3. The fluidity of markets and the greatest transparency in business dealings should be our focus and the word globalization is sometimes a distraction. It is not specific and means different things to different people. Integration is a better word. International partnering is a better term. Since the market is becoming more and more fluid we have not only witnessed call-centers and software development moving overseas, but in some cases they are coming back as companies experiment and decide they function better with local talent and control.

One of the greatest ironies I find in this whole discussion is that the people that complain about the outsourcing of work to other countries are the same ones that complain if a foreign company comes to set up shop in the United States - bringing jobs here!

I've just returned from the World Money Show in Orlando where more than 10,000 investors gathered to learn about global investing. I had a chance to meet with many of the U.S. and foreign financial experts featured at the show, who have shared some of their top investment ideas. To view all of the stocks featured in this special global report, click here.

Global expert John Christy -- editor of the Forbes International Investment Report -- has been very successful in selecting Indian outsourcing companies; two such firms -- Infosys (NASDAQ:INFY) and Wipro (NYSE:WIT) -- are both strong performing holdings in his model portfolio in recent years.

A third player in the sector -- Sify (NASDAQ:SIFY) -- has not shared in that success. Christy explains, "Sify shares got off to a decent start last year. But like other emerging market stocks, they got clobbered in the sell-off last May. Problem is, unlike the rest of the group, Sify never bounced back."

However, the company's prospects may be changing. He notes, "Sify's outsourcing business serves global companies like GE, Oracle, and Whirlpool, as well as local blue-chips such as Ranbaxy Laboratories, Bharti, and Jet Airways.

"It runs a chain of internet cafés throughout India and a family of internet portals. It also provides broadband access to about 200,000 homes. Sify's internet backbone reaches 186 cities across the country.

Is America bleeding cutting-edge technology research, development and leadership to foreign soil? If so, why is that? Well, that question was put to some of the top business leaders in the U.S. recently, who all chimed in on why America could lose some (or all) of that leadership, to the economic chagrin of us all.

It makes pure economic sense for global companies -- which all companies have to be these days -- to locate resources next to growth areas. Increasingly, those growth areas are outside the U.S. and the employees are -- in many cases -- well-educated and can be paid significantly less than American counterparts -- although this can backfire in drastic fashion sometimes.

Result? Dollars siphoning off America and into foreign economies, either directly or indirectly. What can we do? Further educational initiatives? More motivated workforces? Globalize entire workforces to work from anywhere in the world? Read what some of these business leaders say on the topic here.

On tonight's MAD MONEY on CNBC, Jim Cramer talked about two savage American IT consulting companies and two Indian outsourcing companies. Cramer is saying this is a match against the two groups to see who is better. They are all fighting for a larger piece of the pie.

Accenture Ltd. (NYSE:ACN) and Electronic Data Systems (NYSE:EDS) are the American plays here. Wipro Ltd. (NYSE:WIT) and Infosys Technologies (INFY) are the Indian plays.

Here is what Cramer says about Accenture being better than Electronic Data Systems.

Here is what he said about Infosys being better than Wipro.

Cramer thinks that the overall prospects for the Indian teams are better and that they have more business to win since they only have 2% global market share. But he thinks that Accenture and Infosys are the two winners here, and that you should buy both of them. Infosys is the better growth company, but since it's is just starting to look profitable it is better if you have to have the earnings. Cramer thinks both companies are best-of-breed and can be winners for shareholders.

DaimlerChrysler (NYSE:DCX) and Chery Automobile Co. of China will join forces to manufacture a line of tiny cars to be sold under either the Chrysler, Jeep, or Dodge brand. The move is the latest in the phenomenon of outsourcing of U.S. manufacturing jobs, as U.S. labor costs would be too high for such inexpensive cars.

The move is a good one for the American consumer. A line of small, affordable cars is good for the financial situation of working Americans and for the environment. If you're like me, you're getting sick of all the big SUVs everywhere, and you'd love a return to smaller compact cars that are better for the planet and less dangerous to other vehicles.