tv Bulls Bears FOX Business August 7, 2016 2:00am-2:31am EDT
deserves to be told. i'm oliver north, good night. presidential nominees hitting the trail as good news on jobs hits the headlines. the u.s. adding 255,000 of them in the month of july. so with things improving which nominee's plan will keep it going? hi, everybody. i'm dagen mcdo you in, this is "bulls and bears." donald trump will be rolling out his plan on monday and now a new report on hillary clinton's proposals claim she will deliver a massive tax hike, $1.3 trillion. will that deliver a blow to the job market? the "bulls and bears" gary smith, jonas, and john layfield and katie pavelive and jessica
carlove. can the economy afford a tax hike? >> absolutely not. hillary clinton talks about being the champion of the middle class, but the fact is, that she wants a trillion dollars in tax increases, many of them may not be paid directly by the middle class but will be paid by the middle class through a lack of job increases. politically, this is why republicans have been beating their head against the wall for two weeks now because donald trump, according to polling this week, every indication was that hillary was ahead of him, except for in the area of the economy. he said he's had plans, coming out with a plan on monday, has to get refocused on the economic agenda. >> gary smith, this plan looks exactly like what we've gotten over the last 7 1/2 years. it is tax hikes, a lot more spending and that's delivered economic growth that is the worst since at least 1949. >> exactly, dagen. look, i think voters need to ask themselves if they really think the last eight years were good for themselves and good for the economy, then they should vote
for hillary. as you said, hillary is proposing a $1.3 trillion stimulus if you will. well what was the last stimulus we had? about a trillion dollars. she's proposing infrastructure spending, heard that with shovel ready jobs. proposing more spending on health care. we have obama care. you know, you add in then the free college, all the bernie sanders' stuff she adopted, and you basically have and voters need to think about this, am i better off taking the money that i have and giving it to the government for them to spend. and if the answer is question, i would just ask them one question, what part of the government do they think spends their money more efficiently and effectively than they do? i think most people would say wait a second, i spend my money the way i want and i spend it better and i'll tell you if i spend it on some company that goes out of business they go out of business on their own. so i think the choice is clear. donald trump wants to lower taxes. he's for fair trade.
he has some question marks in there. but just looking at it from the macro view, i would have to say i don't want eight more years of what we just had. >> jessica your do? >> oh, i absolutely do. i'm terrible with my own money so i'm happy for hillary clinton to tell me what to do with it. >> there you go. there you go. the person for her then. >> there you go. >> gary says he's sick of infrastructure spending. donald trump wants double the amount of infrastructure spending than hillary clinton. we saw moody's said that donald trump would take us into a recession and cause us 3.5 million jobs loss, bring unemployment back to 7%. she'll add to the deficit, not more than donald trump, though, but apparently going to grow the economy from 2.3% per year up to $2.7%. i'm not saying that's 4%. we want 4% of course. it is an improvement there. they said that she's going to add over $10 million. looking good to me. >> that moody's report that jessica is referring to they did a number of different scenarios and the one she's taurgts assumed that trump would put in
place everything that he's said and authored by somebody who advised president obama on his stimulus program and who's also contributed to hillary clinton's campaign. >> some questions. you know that guy on the late night show with the question marks on his outfit, about that many questions in the policy. look, i have to say if i had to choose between the two, more information out of trump in the coming weeks, hopefully, but i would say the whole thing i keep coming back to is an fdr grade project. it is a shovel program. you're talking about hiring people. i don't believe targeting jobs is a good policy for either person. you want to target the economy. especially when the job market is -- we got good jobs. you don't need to create government jobs unless it's a bad recession. that said, you got shovel ready project there, it's enormous. this trade thing could go bad if it starts a trade war and lead to less jobs. but it could go good. again, there's question marks. don't know the specifics but
there are areas of trade that could lead to a situation where there will be more jobs. >> questions, dagen. >> john, nothing is unfair on this program. we are fair and balanced always. but to that point, we got two good months of job growth, but we've had the economy growing at 1% the first six months of this year. that's what we've gotten under this administration. and under the policies that hillary clinton wants to -- wants more of? >> yeah. not only this administration actually started under the bush administration. we've had ten straight yearsder. that's the first time that's happened since they've measured gdp. this is going to be the 11th year going to break the previous record they set, a record you don't want by the way. i don't understand hillary clinton here. hillary clinton should run on bill clinton's record, pro-free trade, balanced budget, lower regulation. after she lost the michigan primary to bernie sanders she moved massively to the left and all of a sudden now wants to punish business, her words, go after wall street, she wants to
increase regulation, she wants to increase government oversight and raise taxes. i don't understand why she would not run on her husband's record instead of the past eight years and bernie sanders. when you ask whose policy is better, there is a problem with trade, jonas, last time you had an independently wealthy guy running for office as a political neophyte, against global trade, put us into a decade long depression. the entire world because of who herbert hoover did with smooth and the tariffs and protectism he had. overall wall street likes certainty and there's not much granularity with donald trump. i think hillary clinton actually gets a little bit of the nod here. >> if i were a liberal -- >> i'm voting for gary johnson. i don't like either one. >> if i were a liberal i would be offended because you're saying hillary clinton, a woman, potential first female president of the united states, should run on her husband's record. don't you think she should be running on her own ideas.
>> she was there and associated with it. that is not a feminist statement whatsoever. if you know who my wife is, quality of wall street for a long time and done a lot more i promise that you or anybody else has for women's quality on wall street. she should run on bill clinton's record more than against bernie sanders' moving to the left. >> she's running almost as a neo socialist, gary b. smith. and one thing that if you look at these plans, one thing her biggest expenditure is the paid family lead. which essentially will turn into another entitlement. and she doesn't want to fix the broken entitlements, the social security and medicare will be insolvent in less than 20 years, she wants to expand social security and expand medicare. >> exactly. look, you're right, another entitlement program and i defy anyone to tell me what is the -- not the profitability but at least the break-even path for any of the entitlement programs. throw in social security.
throw in medicaid. throw in medicare. throw in the family leave and you have a country we're already horribly, horribly over leveraged with debt. this just gets us more. two more points. one, is that earlier for all the great infrastructure, let us remind people that the new deal did not get us out of the depression. we had continually high unemployment rate and even if you think it did i defy to find one government project, near budget and near deadline, the big dig, the parking lot at the center, the new department of homeland security, all horribly expensive, not within deadlines but i guess that's where jessica wants her money spent. >> poured into a big giant hole. >> exactly. >> mostly in my shoe closet at this point. >> but those shoes will go to the government because they're going to take everything. >> they can wear and walk in
them. it's theirs. >> thank you, guys and ladies. "cavuto on business" 20 minutes from now. what have you got coming up. >> hey, dagen. president obama claiming isis is on the decline, but elite governmentasses telling different story. 7 million americans are default on their student loans. is the government going to deliver another bailout. see you at the bottom of the hour. >> thank you, charles. we can't wait. up here first, the iran cash controversy shaking up the 2016 race as both nominees weigh in. one of our guys says the next president needs to send president needs to send sanctyour insurance company won't replace
girl: when i was in foster care, i never knew when i would have to move, so, i always had my suitcase ready to go. then one day, i was adopted. my new parents opened their hearts and home to me. my parents cook my favorite breakfast for me every morning. my parents take me on trips i never thought i would go on. they gave me a home and an even better reason to use that suitcase. my parents aren't perfect, but they're perfect for me.
nuclear warfare. i'm leland vittert. back to "bulls and bears." president obama addressing the iran cash controversy this week, saying the $400 million given to iran at the same time of hostage release, was not ransom. critics not buying it. and now john says instead of sending plane loads of cash to iran, send sanctions instead. >> yeah. that's right. look, it's hard to put
toothpaste back in the tube and once you've opened up the sanctions a lot of companies starting to do business with iran but you have to stop it when we can. it took three and a half decades to get sanctions on iran where they had to come to the table. they came to the table with us, the ones holding a pair of deuces. we're holding a full house and let them dictate the terms. this is one of the worst deals ever negotiated. >> katie, we actually circumvented the sanctions in place to deliver that $400 million. >> right. >> because we don't transact business with iran in cash. it's against the law. what do we give them? francs and euros. >> let's not forget the european companies lining up immediately after the iran deal was signed to start doing business there. on the political and national security part of this, i think it's important to point out even if president obama is telling the truth about this not being ransom, even though many people don't believe that's the case, and considering the administration hasn't been transparent at all with the iran
deal and had tons of side deals, the point is that they had an obligation through negotiation, not to deliver this plane load of cash, whether it was part of the hostage situation or not, on the same day because it makes it look like ransom and puts americans at risk overseas whether it was or not, because people are going to go, was it or wasn't it? let's try it out. let's kidnap some americans and see if we can get cash for it. >> sanctions ahead, jessica? >> i'm not sure. we have a lot of sanction policies in place associated with the deal and that was something that john kerry was touting on the trail constantly saying that we know that we have to -- what was it, distrust but verify and hillary clinton has been using that line as well. it's, obviously, concerning. i appreciate how katie phrased her comment to say whether it was ransom or not because the administration says that it was not. of course this looks a little shady there. but we have to go with what we're being told. that's the facts of the matter here. we need to prepare to put the sanctions back on with something that was effective for decades. but we need to take into account
that there are a lot of people who work in the field in nuclear weapons, physicists, et cetera who say this is the best deal we could have gotten. i'm on the side of diplomacy. >> gary, no way, iran has already launched ballistic missiles and the way that the -- the language in this nuclear deal is so vague, there's no way sanctions are put back in place, once the money starts flowing towards this country? >> well, it's unfortunate because we need to -- look, anyone that sit backs and thinks $400 million as you point out in francs and deutsch marks and all that stuff on palates on an unmarked plane in the middle of the night is being upfront, we just owed them the money, kind of ridiculous, come on. everyone knows it was a ransom payoff and now as john pointed out it's tough to put the toothpaste back. but we have to. look, sanctions with iran, it will not work with every country because every country is different but worked with iran, it will work again. when we did it the first time
they basically went into a depression. oil revenues dried up, their currency collapsed. unemployment went through the roof. all that made them come to the sense of wait a second, we need to rethink how we deal with the world and as john pointed out that brought them to the stabta and the only good thing we got out, step forward on this whole nuclear deal of whi tossing away because quite frankly this administration has the worst foreign policy ever. just pointed out by this goofy incident. >> yeah. state sponsor of terror, jonas. >> was lebron james one of the hostages? because who pays $400 million for ordinary people. i'm serious. if you look at the biggest hostage payoffs of all time, like warren buffet, rich people, executives and oil tankers. no one would pay that kind of money for ordinary people. it's never happened in the history of the world. so that makes it -- if it was $40 million or $4 million you could make this story. >> look, they made a deal, so, you know, you can -- believe what obama administration says this is a $400 million basically
thing that was owed to the iranians. >> you believe -- >> they said -- >> you would negotiate $400 million. >> the administration is saying $400 million is ours in exchange for what is ours, we will give you what is yours. >> well, to their money you're saying. it's not our money. kachl. >> they're saying it's our money, we'll give it back to you. it's their money. >> you know what, this -- >> the core issue the bottom line is, carrot and sticks work. you have different deals with this country. you can have sticks with the other stuff they do that's in violation of whatever other thing. the many, many wrongs in iran. but you can reward them for the nuclear thing which they are more or less following. punish at the same time. >> you know what, we don't have any sticks. iran has them and we're feeding them bon bones and they're 2 billion in a bank in this country supposed to go to the victim of iranian sponsored terror and they're still demanding it back. >> confiscated and -- >> they've taken three more hostages. mark my words they're going to come to the table and want that
money. >> thank you, guys. >> carbshin' in over an hour fr now. what do you have? >> hi. president obama dissing donald trump in front of another world leader. should he be insulting someone who could be the next president of the united states. the message it sends to the rest of the world. plus clint eastwood is going ballistic about political correctness. the cashin' in gang will see you at 11:30. >> if you hated your cable company before, wait until you hear what they want you to pay more for now. her nurse. her personal assistant. her housekeeper. her cook.
privacy could soon be a premium feature. comcast telling the fcc they should charge customers more for not selling their data. unfair some. >> yeah. and i hate comcasts and let me tell you they are a monopoly already and congress should do something about it. >> john, what do you say? >> look, i hate it also, but i don't think it's unfair. it's the right, just like buying a $13 beer in new york city. don't want to do that. if you want a beer you have to spend $13. >> totally unfair. another way to penalize the poor in this country and since money doesn't trickle down it's just a terrible plan. >> jonas, what do you think? >> that's what google does. is it free to search? no. they're collecting everything and selling that to advertisers. the internet every year is getting eviller on this level. before you know it, everything
is free, but their whole business model of major multibillion dollar tech companies is your privacy information and friends and your creative. very often your information you put out and just turning to a business model and you don't have to opt into that. it's the default we will take everything from you. at the very least if you get free deals you should have to choose that and get a discount and the regular price should be there for privacy and that should be the default. >> gary, final word? >> well, the default setting for nonprivacy is everywhere you go. go into a supermarket what you bought, how often you've been there. go to a gas station and movie theater. everyone knows everything about privacy. but i'll tell you what, i don't mind if comcast wants to charge for it. you don't want to use comcast don't use comcast. i went to the internet and i spend about literally two minutes searching for how to make my stuff private. there's a million ways to do it. you can go through -- download the tour browser if you want
complete privacy. but no, the people want to have the government clamp down on business. >> i want to read this statement that comcast gave to fox. the fcc's extreme and unprecedented opt-in proposal not justified by the record requires us to consider how to create additional choices that would allow us to compete in this ecosystem and benefit customers. katie, final word to you? >> again, call on congress to investigate this. and the monopoly that is comcast. >> katie for bigger government, never see that happen. >> today. i'm all about it. >> people would put free cameras in their houses if they could let peoplep. >>. >> bye, jonas. many thanks to katie and jessica, both of you. the boys will still be with us because in the 2016 summer olympics in full swing and one of our guys has the stock to keep you in the green. as you root for the red, white and blue.
predictions, gary, go. >> dagen, i think the olympics have started i don't know. maybe just a rumor. but i know one thing, nike is going to be all over that tv screen. i think the stock is up 20% by the end of the year. >> you're not athletic, do you like it? >> in the short run the death of golf is hurting that company. >> john, prediction? >> unsert times buy dividend stocks. bp has 7% yield, count the yield. >> do you like it? >> i like my oil companies with just a little less scandal. exxon the way to go. >> jonas your prediction? >> the unofficial sponsor of the olympics this year is cutter bug spray.
getting more free publicity than donald trump is and that's good for spectrum brands up 20% in the year because they own that sucker. >> john, you look like you need bug spray. >> need a jonas spray. look, unless they get [ inaudible ] to endorse it i'm not buying it. >> bye, guys. isis ramping up because we're taking them down? >> the decline of isil in syria and iraq appears to be causing it to shift to tactics that we've seen before. even greater emphasis on encouraging high-profile terrorist attacks including in the united states. >> the president says we're seeing isis act out because we're taking them out on the battlefield, but now it shows isis is expanding its reach beyond the battlefield. is the president right or wrong? hello, i'm charles payne in for neil cavuto. charlie, jonathan, scott, and julie. dagen mcdowell subhosting "bulls and bears" and