tv Cavuto on Business FOX Business November 1, 2015 1:30am-1:01am EDT
trend. people dressing up their pets for halloween. party city up 30%. lulu is a dolphins cheerleader. >> lulu is a true treat! happy halloween to everybody. ♪ 10% flat rate. what it would also enable use to do is for every citizen to fill out their taxes on a postcard. >> we're reducing taxes to 15%. bringing corporate taxes down. >> get rid of all the deductions and loopholes. >> only if it's about three pages are you leveling the playing field. >> my tax plan actually gets rid of the payroll tax as well. >> you know, they didn't agree on the moderators, the gop contenders also agreeing on the need for tax cuts, and big tax cuts. and tax reform to get our economy back on track. welcome, everybody. i'm neil cavuto. they were tripping over each other. i was tempted to hear one of them say no taxes for anyone,
ever. it will be about your taxes and money and jobs. we're hosting the next debate on fox business november 10th. what you can plan from what these candidates are saying. and this issue of other positions on revenue coming into washington. charles payne, ned stein. tony and julie. adam out this week. all the talk of tax cuts just, just very sick. he'll come back next week. all right, charles. the economy is slowing down again. we got reminders of this. the perfect prescription is tax cuts. >> how about letting people keep more money. this way they'll go out and spend it and circulate into the economy. >> what if they don't? >> you could argue, hey, what happened. the gas savings. that hasn't materialized.
that's different. i think most people consider that temporary. if they know there is something solid, that their check will be larger, and to a certain degree it is backward prosperity. it would be good if we had an economy where the whole thing was rising and we start making more money. the idea is how do we park it? four trillion of phony money hasn't done it. let businesses spend their own money. >> whether they spend it or not, guys, right? >> never in the history of man-kind has lower taxes led to more economic growth. >> in tben. >> they don't create the revenue. >> with all due respect, albert einstein, if you are injected with the blood of milton friedman, could not prove that lower taxes mean higher government revenue or a bigger, better economy. no one has ever been able to make that connection.
>> what happened under ronald reagan, ben? >> it's an interesting thing -- wait a minute. wait a minute. you are confusing an event with the cause of the event. yes, we had considerable prosperity. there were many reasons for that. we were recovering from a recession. we got a serious moderation of inflation. >> it could have been a reason. >> i got you agreeing. >> they have not led to -- >> i will say this. ben is right on this part. a lot of -- money was coming in fast and furious to washington. both sides were spending that money and then some. the issue i think these candidates are raising -- i give the tip of the hat to rand paul -- he doesn't care if the tax cuts are revenue neutral. he wants to choke tax money coming into washington. >> are you going to say tax increases aren't then bad for the economy? would anybody say, hey, the economy is barely growing right now. we're going to raise taxes on the american people.
>> so we did. we did. and it is growing. albeit slowly. >> it's wonderful. >> if you pass through a tax hike right now, i would argue that it would damage the economy significantly. >> wouldn't that have been the argument when we brought the tax rate up from 40%? >> let's try on the backs of the hard-working american people. >> what about rich people like you? >> ben says we should raise taxes on the wealthy. >> why do we have to -- >> raise taxes on the rich -- >> why don't we prove stuff that we can prove or get a bunch of comm economists in the room. why don't we say it's my money and i don't want the federal government to take my money. >> julie, who are you to tell us what we do with our money? >> i'm watching this because i -- >> you have to participate, not just watch. >> you guys are doing a great job. i can contribute the fact that,
every time we've had, i don't know, bill clinton in the white house raising taxes the economy expanded to the highest rate. >> he also cut taxes. >> so i am looking at this debate stage the other night, and i am thinking about all these people putting out their tax plans and thinking, something doesn't smell right here. you have ted cruz talking about a 10% flat tax. he forgot to mention the vast tax on top of that on services. you talk about marco rubio talking about his equitable tax plan forgot to say that the rich among us would get a larger lax break than the middle class. >> that was disproven that night. >> -- tax breaks for their buddies at the same time they're trying to balance the budget. >> i know what you're saying, julie. you make a couple good points. ben stein, the richer you are, it results in more money going to the rich. leaving that aside, do you think that the republicans did not
comport themselves well by focusing more on how much they're going to cut your taxes and how they're not going to deal with the debt? >> dwight eisenhower used to say every year, we used to have a balanced budget, i am too elderly to remember that. i'm elderly enough to remember that. none of the rest of you are. we had a great economy under dwightiz dwight eisenhower. >> we had a 90% tax rate, didn't we? >> at the top which would only apply to you, neil. we want a balanced budget at least in sight. >> we had a great economy under john kennedy, by the way, who cut taxes. >> after his death. >> related to simplifying the tax road. we have an irs that's dangerous. it's been wielded as a political weapon. if you simplify the tax code and reduce it from the tens of thousands of pages that it is, you basically take the power away from the irs. >> i understand but is it
unrealistic for carly fiorina to say to reduce it to three pages. is that realistic? >> i mean, every -- they all make that promise. the thing we haven't hit on is the spending. we have seen talk about revenue to the government. if they get 4 trillion they spend 5 trillion. that's what we have to deal with. >> i would have liked to have heard more of the other side. >> from a political messaging standpoint i think they fell down. maybe julie can help us with this because she does this stuff for a living. this is our money, not the federal government's money. none of them made that point. the federal government doesn't have an absolute right to my money. they have some right to it. not an absolute right. >> a lot of americans will tell you our stuff too. we want our stuff with your money. >> that's a conservative argument. >> -- talk about why -- more candidates did not talk about entitlement reform. they won't touch it.
people want their stuff. >> let me talk about charlie said. >> you don't have to repeat it. >> you don't want to send your money to washington or to your state capitals, great. who is going to take care of the roads you drive oregn or send y kids to school. >> we've been talking about an infrastructure 40 years after raising taxes we still have one. you take my money, you liberals take my money and waste my money. >> what am i wasting your money on? i want to fund your roads and schools and businesses. >> i remember ross perot and so many candidates running on a platform of an infrastructure crisis. bill clinton. they raised our taxes to pay for the infrastructure crisis, and we still have an infrastructure crisis. >> charlie -- >> you are wasting my money. you don't deserve my money. >> who is going to deserve the fact that next time you go to
new jersey the pulaski freeway will collapse. >> hey. did you say new jersey? i thought you did. i just wanted to suggest. >> julie, the scare tactics don't work. to charlie's point, we have been told this. we had a stimulus package. had it over and over again. yes, we want more of our money. >> by the way, in new jersey -- in new jersey that's rude. jersey! even in jersey. >> the next time you try to drive from new jersey to here, the roads will collapse under you. i don't know where the money is going. but you're right it's not going to infrastructure. you want to pour more money into that. we'll see. these are the types of issues that come up. i will use a variety of accents as well including the new jersey one, which i think is a jim dandy. the big debate. we're this on november 10th, in
milwaukee, wisconsin. it is a clothing optional evening. we urge you to tune in. students, if you think the administration's new push is all about kids, someone here is saying, well, you have got to be kidding. today on forbes on fox, fbi director not siding with the administration when it comes to the anti-police sentiment all over the country. all business owners need to listen to this one. impeaching the irs chief over the targeting scandal. is that justice or wasradar.
now back to more of cavuto on business. all right. getting testy over all these tests. remember the teachers unions protests over the new standardized tests or the ones to better evaluate students and schools and whether they're doing their job? the white house wants to limit the time our kids spend time preparing for them and taking them, maybe by just cutting them out altogether. charlie, you say this is not helping anyone. >> no. i know new york city schoolteachers who are very good. what they complain about is that the unions in large part protect the really bad teachers, to protect their own power. >> their concern is that the test, which is the only metric you have to judge their success, you take that out -- >> i don't know a single new york city schoolteacher who is smart -- i know a few who are smart, who are afraid of this test. there are plenty of morons to be
weeded out. >> the unions are being smart here because they know parents hate testing. >> unless your kid does very well. >> most parents detest it. right. or they're super bright. >> then you're fine with it. >> the unions are on the ropes. you have it tenure taking a hit. collective bargaining rights lost in some states. the performance has been increasingly linked to students' scores. they are smart. they know to go after testing. >> i know that depending on the kid, they -- i do know this from my children. a lot of tests, a lot more that they're taking now than ever before. i don't know if it's over done. but i do know that there's more testing than ever. >> i think you can argue it's overdone. >> that's just what i said. >> but parents need to look into the tests themselves. you know, years ago, my son was talking about his homework and
forgot to bring home his study sheet. i googled it. he had two tests. hard test and the easy test. his school was giving him the easy test. i don't want my kid to get an artificial a and not be able to do anything as an adult. i think the students are getting hurt by this, at the teachers' expense. >> julie, it goes back to you. it's all your fault. >> it is. i want them tested 24/7. i think the administration stood up to the n.e.a. probably than any more democratic administration before. the teachers unions have been weakened. as you pointed out. we're teaching more to the test. the kids are taking more tests than we used to. i like the idea that you're measured against other kids and empirical data. >> what about the teachers being measured up?
>> i agree. i'm very merit-based. i don't think you need rubber rooms for the teachers who stink. get rid of them. i agree with you guys on that. i don't like the fact that more and more we're teaching to too many tests. what's lost in the translation is that the kids are only learning how to take the tests. >> the whole class -- the class you take to take the sat and the act. ben stein, you have more ivy league degrees and mbas and law degrees than i can count. you have a very smart son. is it overdone? do you think the president has a point or there is an agenda going on here? >> i think there are several things going on. one, the unions are throwing their weight around. two, there is an astounding, horrifying, terrifying racial gap in achievement on the nation's standardized testing. i think the obama administration wants to try to cover that up. three, there is a complete misunderstanding about the value
of memorization and teaching to the test. memorization and teaching to the tests have been the classic way of people being educated for centuries and it makes a lot of sense now. >> area what he said, but you were agreeing? what did he say? >> memorization was the basis of how people studied for stuff. >> but you didn't retain it that long. >> you did. when you memorized it. >> learned how to think. >> you said -- >> when you memorized it, you eventually did understand the concept. that's how i got through algebra. >> did you? what's going to happen here is we have a metric. so you can say -- we have a metric -- if you didn't have tests, think about that, then we'd have the grades, right? we'd have the grades? can't you use the grades you get in school instead of the test as the metric? >> no. you have to take it a step further and hold it to the teachers' fire and have a formalized way of evaluating their performance. >> grades can be rigged.
>> i went to public school. i went to one of the worst public schools in the country, i would argue. i was wildly under-educated. i could barely perform -- >> i wish you had brought that up earlier. i'm kidding. i'm kidding. >> we needed metrics then, and i'm happy with them now. >> it's valuable to have pictures of your bosses in compromising positions. >> offering yourself up, right? >> when we come back, lawmakers called them villains when gas prices were soaring, where are the same lawmakers now that gas prices are plummeting and energy cops are laying off thousands?
remember this? >> every dollar that oil goes up their profits rise $375 million dollars. >> the sign symbolizes record profits the oil companies are making. >> families are struggling while the big five oil companies are raking in record profits. >> except like right now. fast forward to today. where is washington bashing energy companies now that prices are plunging, profits are cratering and chevron laying off upwards of 7,000 in the oil and oil reelated services industries. north of 100,000. where are the hearings looking into this? i want to know. >> the politicians and the left wingers and the academics have never understood the oil company. they are not a conspiracy. they are america. they are owned by american
stockholders. the profits go to college edgele indications and requirements. the markets determine the price of oil. incredibly idiotic jejeune -- good word. >> love that one. >> julie, what do you make of that? >> i also used the word cabal. >> don't you find it odd that now, not a peep? >> >> >>le prices are record lows for consumers who are keeping more of the money which charlie and charles will be happy to hear about. we want to have hearings about, what, the gas prices are low? >> prices go down. you're smarter than that. when prices go down based on market forces as they were, why do you look at them when they go up and ignore them when they go
down? celebrate them. >> the point was when prices railroad high because of market forces instead of that -- >> you can choose -- [ all speaking at once ] >> what you're saying is absurd. i can understand the craven, disgusting, mealy-mouthed politicians like chuck schumer and mendez using it as a way to create class warfare but when reasonably intelligent people like julie -- >> reasonably? >> oil companies make money. >> i want to know why i'm just reasonably intelligent. >> -- america from going into a great depression over the past few years. the fracking miracle saved miracle. >> we should have been cheering innovation. hillary clinton wants an investigation into exxon mobile and research into climate change including bernie sanders so they can't go after him for low gas
ben? >> you still see the markets in the aggregate? >> in the long run, you bet. in the very long run, you bet. >> aggregate is another s.a.t. word. here comes david. top it. fbi director james comey doubling down on comment that is the anti-police movement in america is making it harder for police to do their job in america. take a listen. >> i spoke to officers in one big city who described being surrounded by young people with mobile phones, video rolling as they stepped out of the car taunting them, asking what they want and why they are there. they described a feeling of being under siege. >> the white house saying something else. >> the available evidence at this point doesn't support the notion that law enforcemen