tv Cavuto Coast to Coast FOX Business September 15, 2016 12:00pm-2:01pm EDT
fight for every last american job and every american company which a lot of companies in this room i can tell you we will be fighting for you. you are bringing the jobs. we are a nation that tamed the west, dug out the panama canal and won two world wars and put a man on the moon. it is time to start thinking big once again. that is why i believe it is time to establish a national goal of reaching 4% economic growth. [applause] change and my great economist don't want me to say this but i think we can do better than that. now they are upset. they will be very upset but i think we can do substantially better than that. and working with my economic team who put together a plan
that puts us on track to achieve that goal, over the next we 10 years, economic team estimates under our plan the economy will average 3.5% growth and create a total of 25 million new jobs. you can visit our website, just look at the map. it works. [applause] >> this growth means our jobs and plans including our childcare reforms my daughter is involved in will be complete. will be completely paid for in combination with proposed budget savings. it will be deficit neutral. if we reach 4% growth it will reduce the deficit. it will be accomplished through a complete overhaul of our tax,
regulatory, energy policies. right now, under the obama/clinton policies the economy grew only 1.1% last quarter. a number that was shocking to people that do this professionally and for life. it translates into millions of lost jobs and certainly millions of lost good jobs because we don't have good jobs anymore. those jobs are gone and going. this is the weakest so-c recovery since the great depression. over the last 7 years the economy grew only 2.1%, the slowest period in 70 years. had the economy grown under obama at the same rate of reagan it would have meant 10 million
more jobs. perhaps most shockingly, one in 6 men age 18 to 34 are either in jail or out of work. meanwhile another 2 million hispanic americans have been added to the ranks of those in poverty. on top of it all the obama/clinton policies have doubled the national debt. it took more than 230 years for the united states to accumulate its first $10 trillion in debt. it took president obama less than eight years to add another $10 trillion. it would be one thing if that money had been used to completely rebuild our nation, our military, our infrastructure
but that didn't happen. the opposite happens, we doubled the debt and in return we have dilapidated infrastructure, badly depleted military, greatest people on earth and a badly depleted military, it's equivalent old and tired and another 14 million people who left the workforce, never has so much money been spent so poorly and so unwisely, but we are going to turn that around and here is how. it begins with. they are going down, not up. you were concerned they were going up. as outlined in detroit, our tax plan will greatly simplify the code and reduce the number of
brackets from 7 to 3. the new brackets will but low income americans will pay no income tax at all. in fact our plan will remove millions and millions of workers from the income tax roll that work that we do in washington can be discontinued. they will pay tax. they will pay tax but they will pay tax when they start making a certain amount of income. by lowering rates streamlining process we will add millions and millions of new jobs. in addition, because we have strongly capped deductions for the wealthy, and closed special interest loopholes, the tax relief will be concentrated on the working and middle class taxpayer. they will receive the biggest benefit and it won't even be close. they have been forgotten. we are not going to forget them.
they have built our country. we will not forget. this is a0l working -- thank y. [applause] this is a working and middle class tax relief proposal. the tax relief for these workers will be expanded by my child care proposals that i have worked on with my daughter, ivanka. these proposals are central and very, very powerful central element of our comprehensive tax reform and economic growth plan. families will be able to fully deduct the average cost of child care from their taxes, including stay at home parents. because this deduction is capped, it will be disproportionately and it will benefit working and middle class families. got to take care of our middle-class families. the less you make, the larger a
share of your income you can exclude from taxation. parents will also be able to enroll tax-free dependentçó care savings account for their children or elderly relatives. low-income households will benefit from both an expanded earned income tax credit in the form of child care rebates and a matching $500 contribution for their savings account. a married couple earning $50,000 per year, with two children and 8,000 in child care expenses will save 35% from their current tax bill. that's a tremendous savings. and they will have a better life. a married couple earning $75,000 a year and two children, and $10,000 in child care, expenses will receive a 30% reduction in
their tax bill from what they're paying right now. by contrast, someone earning $5 million, like the people in this room, will receive virtually no change in their tax bill at all. one of our greatest job creation measures is going to be our 15% business tax rate, down from the current 35% rate, a reduction of more than 40%. [applause] i know that is what you people have been waiting for. an explosion of new businesses and new jobs will be created. it will be amazeing to watch. you watch and it will happen. we will allow flights-based manufacturers to fully ex-expense the cost of new
equipment. a big, big deal. [applause] on top of that we will bring back trillions in business wealth and business wealth that is parkedlzñ overseas. nobody knows how much it is. they say it is 2 1/2 trillion. i have people that think it is $5 trillion. we'll bring them back and it will be taxed only at the rate of 10% instead of 35%. and who would bring it back at 35%? obviously nobody becausern=#%ñ y is doing that. something that will be so phenomenal, far beyond what people even think. by taxing it at 10% instead of 35%, all of this morn any will come roaring back into our country and lots of good things we will turn america into a new magnet for new jobs, and that means jobs in our poorest communities. so important.
and right now we have companies leaving the country because taxes are too high but we actually have companies leaving the country to getze-z their mo. and that's first. nobody has ever heard of that one before but believe me, that's happening. next comes regulations. one of the keys to unlocking growth is scaling back years of disasterous!gí regulations unilaterally imposed by out of control bureaucrats. regulations have grown into a massive job-killing industry and the regulation industry is one business i will absolutely put to an end day one.yoñ [applause] in 2015 alone federal agencies issued over 3300 final rules and regulations, up from 2400 the prior year.
every year overregulation costs our economy $2 trillion a year and reduces household wealth by almost $15,000. i propose a moratorium on new federal regulations that are not compelled by congress or public safety. and i will eliminate all needless and job-killing regulations now on the books and there are plenty of them. [applause] this includes eliminating some of our most intrusive regulations like the waters of the u.s. rule. it also means scrapping epa so-called clean power plan which the government itself estimates will cost 7.2 billion a year. this obama-clinton directive will shut down most, if not all coal powered electricity plants. i mean all over the country they're shutting down. remember, what hillary clinton
said. she wants to shut down the miners, justlike she wants to shut down the steel mills and shut doesn't steelworkers and we're not going to let it happen. [applause]ly we're going to put our great miners and our steelworkers back to work. energy reform is central to our plan as well. according to heritage foundation, by 2030 president obama's energy restrictions will eliminate another half a million manufacturing jobs, reduce economic output by $2.5 trillion, and reduce incomes by $7,000 per person. and today you have workers, and i see them all the time, and i meet them all the time and they're part of this massive group of people that have just come on to this movement, but you have workers making less money today than they made 18 years ago in real wages. they're working much harder,
oóxt times because of the disasterous obamacare that we're going to repeal and replace. often times they're working two jobs. [applause] so they're working harder, they're older, and they're making less. like me. i'm working harder than i have ever worked also but these are -- nobody cares about that. who cares about that? [laughter] hillary clinton wants to go even further and her plan could cost the economy $5 trillion. a trump administration will lift restrictions on all sources of american energy production. according to the institute for american energy resources, this will increase the gdp by more than $100 billion annually. add over 500,000 new jobs annually. increase annual wages by more
than $30 billion over the next seven years. increase federal, state, local, tax revenues, by almosttrillion almosttrillion -- $6 trillion over four decades. increase total economic activity by more than $20 trillion over a 40-year period. the permitting process for all energy infrastructure projects which are desperately needed. including the billions of dollars in projects held up by president obama currently being held up. they just won't approve anything, creating countless more jobs in the process. finally comes trade. the foundation for everything, america's annual trade deficit with the world is now almost $800 billion a year. who are negotiating these deals? anybody this room negotiating
these wonderful deals? think of it. you have a trade deficit of almost $800 billion a year. that is going to change so fast. between world war i and the year 2000, the united states averaged a 3.5% growth rate. but after china joined the world trade organization, our average growth rate has been reduced to only 2%. predatory trade practices, product dumping, currency manipulation which is a big one, and intellectual property theft have taken millions of jobs and trillions of dollars in wealth right out of our country, right out of our country. so sad that we allowed this to happen. our incompetent politicians were not watching, and the ones that were watching were taken care of in some form because this should
have never allowed, been allowed to have happened. it is no great secret that many of the special interests funding my opponent's campaign are the same people profiting from these terrible trade deals. they are terrible. they're terrible for everybody. the same, so-called, experts advising hillary clinton are the same people who gave us nafta, china's entry into the world trade organization, the job-killing trade deal with south korea, another disaster, and now the trans-pacific partnership that they're pushing so strongly. the verdict is in. all of the special interests that the media race to comment and race to get comment from, have been proven wrong over such a long period of time. every single deal they have promoted, every lie, and every prediction has crashed, it has just crashed.
they have been so absolutely wrong and they have been so bad for our country. our manufacturing base has crumbled, communities have been hollowed out, wages have declined, and households are making less today than they were in the year 2000. i proposed a detailed plan to reform our trade policies and bring vast, new jobs and wealth to america. we need our wealth back. we don't have wealth. we are a debtor nation. this includes the following steps. i'm going to direct the secretary of commerce to identify every violation of trade agreement that a foreign country is using to harm our country and our workers. that's what's happening. they're being harmed and our country is being harmed. i will use every tool under american and international law
to end these abuses and i will use our greatest business leaders and finest negotiators, and i will tell you, some of them are in this room right now. not all of them but some, and i know who you are, ande we're going to be calling on you because we have people negotiating the biggest deals in the world, far bigger than your company deals. your company deals are little deals by comparison. we have, it is true. you take some of these big ñss(anies and you look at some of these trade deals, hate to say it, but your companies are peanuts but we're going to use our best. right now we have political hacks negotiating the biggest, most important deals in the world. we're going to start with nafta, which is causing so much damage to our country. we will entirely renegotiate nafta into a deal that will either be a good one for us as a country and for our workers, or
we will terminate it until a brand new and productive deal can be signed. [applause] we'll also, and we have to, we're going to keep america out of trans-pacific partnership unless we can do something that is phenomenal and i'm not seein. it right now, i can tell you that, i'm not seeing it. [applause] next i'm going to instruct my treasury secretary to label china, and i like china, they're my tenet, they buy condos all the time, they're just fine, but you know what? they are a currency manipulator, and we're going to apply tariffs to any country that devalues its currency to gain an unfair advantage over the united states.
they are a manipulator, grandmasser level. we can't allow it to happen. our people and our representatives and our politicians don't have even a little clue as to how to play the game. we have a trade deficit this year with china of approximately $500 billion. what kind of a deal is that? and this has been going on for years. 200 billion, 300 billion, 400 billion, for years. i'm going to instruct the united states trade representative to bring trade cases against china. china's unfair subsidy behavior is prohibited by the terms of its entrance into the wto and i intend to enforce the rules. and i'm sure we'll deal somewhere along the way but they're not playing fairly and
our politicians don't understand how to play the game. [applause] if china does not stop its illegal activities including its theft of american trade secrets and intellectual properties, i will apply counterveiling duties until china ceases and desists. you know what that means? just a single action of enforcing intellectual property rules, alone, just alone, would add millions of new american jobs. according to the united states international trade commission improved protection of america's, just think of this. improved protection of america's intellectual property in china would add 2 million jobs a year within the united states, every single year. and we do nothing. we allow them to get away with it. who can blame them. i don't blame them at all. if you can get away with it,
they're going to get away with it. we're going to stop the outflow of jobs from our country. and open a new highway of jobs back into our country. here's how the plan adds up. we're proposing a $4.4 trillion tax cut that will score as a 2.6 trillion under dynamic growth models, which is how taxes should be scored. [applause] this includes the child care plan that we announced the other day. modeled that the growth induced savings from trade, energy, and regulation reform will shave at least another $1.8 trillion off the remaining debt. that leaves around $800 billion.
through simple, common sense reforms. if we just save one penny of each federal dollar spentwmq on non-defense, and non-entitlement programs, we can save almost $1 trillion over the next decade. one penny, we can all do that. [applause] save over a trillion. again this is spending that does not touch defense. because we have to build up our military which is so terribly depleted. and that does not touch entitlements. if our plan succeeds, the 3.5%, 10-year growth average, then our jobs proposed will actually reduce and start really, strongly reducing the deficit. savings will be compounded by the fact that people who are currently receiving unemployment or welfare, will finally be able
to find jobs. this is the most pro-growth, pro-jobs, pro-family plan put forth, perhaps in the history of our country. this is what our new future will look like. i am going to low you are your taxes very, very substantially. i'm going to get rid of massive amounts of unnecessary regulation. all of these regulations on your business, and in your life, i'm going to unleash american energy. i'm going to repeal and replace obamacare. i'm going to appoint justices of the supreme court who will follow the constitution. [applause] i'm going to rebuild our depleted military and take care of our vets who are treated so badly. [applause] and in many cases our vets are
treated not nearly as well as people who come into our country illegally. we can't have that. i'm going to save your second amendment which is under siege. i'm going to stop illegal immigration, an drugs from pouring into our country. and totally poisoning our youth and others. [applause] we have tremendous problem. and yes, we will build the wall. the wall will be built. and just in case you're worried about who is going to pay for it, mexico will pay for it. being totally serious about that. [applause] mexico will pay for it. and you understand, mexico, by the way, we look at the trade deficit we have with mexico, it's massive. the wall is peanuts compared to what we're talking about. mexico will pay for the wall. and i'm going to renegotiate our disasterous trade deals, especially nafta and we will only make great trade deals that put the american worker first and put the american worker back
to work. [applause] that includes our miners and our steelworkers. they're going back to work. we will rebuild our roads, our bridges, our tunnels, our highways, our airports, schools, hospitals. we'll rebuild everything. american cars will travel the roads. american planes will soar the skies. and american ships will patrol the seas. american steel will send new skyscrapers into the clouds. american hands will rebuild this nation. and american energy, harvested from american sources, will power this nation. american workers will be hired to do the job. we will put new american metal and new american steel into the
spine of this country.ídx jobs will return, incomes will rise, new factories will come rushing back to our shores. we will make america wealthy again. we will make america strong again. and we will make america great again. thank you very much. god bless you. thank you. [applause] neil: continuing to watch donald trump sort of outline his economic agenda and plans here, to the economic club at new york's waldorf astoria hotel. you know, hotel owned by the chinese i might point out. spent a great deal of time talking about that. he is going to take some questions here. his running mate mike pence is with him. spell out a couple of things he said. he did provide a bit more detail and fleshed out what his plans are, reducing seven tax rates as they are now to three to 12%, 25%, 33%.
increasing standard deduction for almost everybody, except super-rich. even with the lower tax rate it will be revenue neutral for them and presumably revenue neutral for the entire cash puply here. his national goal is to get growth going again. if you can double growth what it is now from 2%, 4%, specifically at the outset, you can see you how he gets to 25 million new jobs. a number of economists have quibbled with that saying that is simply not doable. he hasn't fleshed out how exactly he would pay for some new measures including parental care, maternity leave and the kind of things he outlined this week he said could be paid for by getting rid of waste, fraud and abuse. now again, to the questions that are beginning for mr. trump, maybe on some of the issues i just outlined. [applause] >> thank you. what happened with the teleprompter, man? [laughter]
hey, he is a little late, right? oh, well. i had nothing to do with it. first let me thank you for speaking with us today. i think many of us found your economic plan very bold and ambitious. >> thank you. >> i was talking with marti feldstein of, excuse me, with glenn hubbard, who is the dean of the columbia business school. >> big difference. [laughter] >> and, you know, we're talking about how many economists have resigned themselves to a low growth, one 1/2, 2% range for the u.s. you believe, with your economic policies we can grow;[úñ 3 1/2% plus. could you summarize the key components of that plan and, if possible, quantify the contribution to the increased growth. >> certainly.
i think that, i watched the world and i look at china and other countries, and if china goes down with gdp to 7%, or even 8%, it is like they will have a revolution. and what do they(aç do? they start devaluing, devaluing. they do all sorts of things and get it back on track one way or the other. i have friend come to me that have been devastated, people that are manufacturers, great manufacturers, very successful people but they become less and less successful because they can't beat the system. in this way too it's a rigged system. they're almost doing well and boom, there is massive devaluation in china or other countries. and there are plenty of other countries out there, and some are actually hurting china you now. but the fact when they have 7% and you see it where they start dropping to 7 or 8%, they consider that to be a disaster yet we're stuck at 1%, probably real number is 1%, but6aa%ñ cery
no more than 2% and we try to learn to live with it. we can't do that anymore. so we're going to unleash tremendous opportunity. we're bringing back the trillions of dollars that doesn't come into this country. and that does really, i said it in my remarks, that does really bring a lot of companies out there. they go to get their money. they leave. not even because taxes are too high. they leave to get their money. so we're going to unleash a lot. we're going to unleash a lot with the regulations. i tell you, the thing that most surprised me in going around because i've been to, i've been everywhere. i have been working. this started on june 16th. who knew this was going to happen, right? it started on june 16th. it has been amazing thing. what really amazed me from a business standpoint. i speak to big businesses, the biggest businesses in the world. but i also speak to the small business people and farmers. if they had their choice between this massive tax cut from 35%,
down to 15, or regulation relief, they would take almost 100% of the time regulation relief. the regulations are a disaster. they're killing people. they're killing the farmers. they're killing the energy folks. they killed, they have killed the mines, and you know we all believe there has to be regulation for safety, for environment, for certain reasons but it has gone so crazy and gotten so excessive. but they would take that over taxes. so we're going to unleash tremendous number of jobs coming in. plus we're going to have great cutting of waste, fraud and abuse. but think of that word waste. with the penny plan, just a penny, out of every dollar, now i know you can do that very easily but we have to appoint people to head these massive, massive agencies. you know if they were companies they would be very large companies. they would be up there with the biggest. some would be bigger than any of the companies. but you take a penny, a penny off of the dollar, and you do
that for a number of years and all of sudden really great things start to happen. tremendous amount on military which we're going to increase. we have no choice. but we also defend other countries. and, those countries are not paying us nearly what they should be paying us. we're losing tremendous, billions and billions of dollars some of whom don't even appreciate the fact we're defending them. and many of them don't pay us. they don't pay us. and don't pay us, i say why, because they don't ask. we don't ask. so, those countries, i'm sure, will start to pay for the defense but it's a fantastic, it is a fantastic number. it is a very, very large, it is shocking number. it is a shocking number. i will just finish with saying this, i have great respect for japan but as you know, we defend japan, we defend germany, we defend saudi arabia, we defend south korea.
we have 28,000 soldiers right now in south korea. these are economic behemoths, behemoths. these are wealthy countries and when i said they have to pay more a general came to refute my statement, and said, doesn't mr. trump know that japan pays 50% of the cost of its defense? and i said, why don't they pay 100%? the numbers you're talking about are massive. [applause] and when you add it all together, a a lot of good things are going to happen. >> thank you. [applause] on the corporate tax rate, a cornerstone of your economic policy, is reducing the corporate tax rate to 15%. secretary of the treasury lew proposed a 28% rate. the uk is at 20%. and ireland is at 12 1/2%.
how did you settle on 15% as target for the u.s. >> a lot of that has to do with the cutting because we'll be cutting costs as part of our tax plan, we have to cut costs. i think we'll unleash something that will be so amazing and a lot of it is competition. you look ireland being about the lowest. a little bit lower. we're not lowest but we're getting down there. essentially we're highest in the world, certainly of the industrialized countries. and we set it from a competitive standpoint and we added to that, very importantly added to that the cutting, the cost cutting. there is tremendous fat. it is interesting when all of us, so many in the room do this, we buy companies, we like to buy companies that are poorly-run, right? we have so much room to cut. we don't buy a perfectly-running machine where we can't do too much. we're not perfectly running machine. which have tremendous waste, tremendous fraud, tremendous abuse. the military is orders equipment
because it is politically motivated, and order equipment that is not as good as equipment they want and equipment they want, generals want and it is less expensive. we have some things we can do if we do it properly. and you know, my whole theme is make america great again. we're going to make america great again. [applause] >> now it's time for martin feldstein who is also on our board, he is chairman of the department of economics at harvard. part of the issue in reducing tax rates is the impact on the deficit. so what offsets would you propose to compensate for the reduced revenue? you mentioned in your speech that you believe over time your economic policy can be revenue neutral. >> well eventually, we think, and hopefully will be on that, eventually with time, this is going to work out, absolutely. the big things in terms of
neutrality is the amount of business that we generate. the fact that companies are no longer going to be leaving. you have to look at the list of companies. i told you just before that ford motor company, this is a massive amount of business they're taking, taking small car, all small cars, they will make them in mexico. it is like, the story in the newspaper but it is devastating for michigan and areas of the country that have to go through this. we're going to keep our companies here. our companies are leaving us because taxes are so high. our companies are leaving us because they can't bring their money back in. our companies are leaving us because of regulation. the regulation is so massive, that our companies are leaving us. so i think we're going to, number one, we'll keep companies here. they will not be leaving anymore. now they will have a better deal than where they're looking to go. but importantly we're also coupling that with cutting costs. cutting budgetary costs and lots of costs. there will be many costs that we're going to be cutting and it
will be enhanced by certain things like i told you about with the military and defense of other countries which a lot of people didn't even know. i don't think too many people in this room, until i started speaking about it a year ago, i don't think a lot of people knew we defend, as an example, germany or japan. you pretty much knew scout cree. we're defending south korea. saudi arabia we know, lots of wealth, lots of money. they don't pay us very much for what we do. and you know, you could ask yourself, how long would saudi arabia even be there if we weren't defending them? and i think we should defend them but we have to, we have to be compensated properly for their defense. i'm sure they will be thrilled to hear that. [laughter] [applause] >> one issue that came up previously was the, was the potential for default on the
u.s. debt. you know the u.s. has a perfect credit history. is there any scenario you would consider defaulting o debt? >> no. no. there are scenarios where you could buy back debt. somebody put that out. i said buy back debt. this isn't like you're building a real estate project and the market crashes and you have your shot at a bank. i love those days. i loved that. [laughter] somebody said i'm one of the great in the world at that i love buying back debt. i love negotiating debt, but with the united states you're talking about something beyond a gold standard. no, the answer is no but you can buy back, we're not talking a discount. you can discount, you can do things but no, the debt of this country is absolutely sacred, absolutely 100% sacred. you have to -- [applause] >> regarding regulation, you said that we have too much
regulation and that excess regulation impeeds growth. what would be your strategy for reducing excessive regulation? >> well i go back to the heads of the various groups, agencies, you know, all of the different parcels of government, and i would be putting very, very top people into negotiate. we don't do that. we, honestly we put political people into negotiate. we put people that gave contributions. we put people that you know, worked the system. we put people that shouldn't be there. and when you say, can you cut 1% off your budget, they look like this is impossible, whereas people in this room, i know a couple of them, they're total killers. i won't call them that. they hear 1%, don, i can do it all year, down 25% in one year, maybe more. take it easy, just relax. but there are people in this room that would say that. when you hear 1% a year for 10
years. that is massive difference but 1% a year for 10 years. so i would really have it done at the level of the group running whatever individual thing within government they're running. and they will be able to do it if we have the right people. we don't have the right people. we have people that shouldn't be doing what they're doing. we have people that have people under them that are far, far more competent than they are. and they lose, those people lose respect for the system when they see what's coming. and i can't tell you how strongly i believe this. the trade deals are so bad. nafta has destroyed our country. nafta has destroyed the manufacturing leg of our country. you look at places upstate new york where they lost 40% of their manufacturing. and they're going to lose a lot more before it's out. don't forget hillary clinton said when she was running for the senate be she will bring jobs back to new york. she meant new york state but new york.
upstate new york, long island, look at things happening. unbelievable, building after building is empty. she didn't bring anything. they left, they all left. so when we negotiate great trade deals, we're not even including that to a large extent in the numbers that we're giving you, but when we take nafta make it a two-way highway, not a one-way, yes, things go out but we have at least equal, at least because we have a lot of catching up to do. they have absolutely stripped this country of its manufacturing jobs and jobs. companies have destroyed companies, thousands and thousands of companies, millions of jobs. we're going to get that back, we're going to get that back. whenever i talk about tax cutting and i talk about balancing, a big part of it is we're going to have great trade deals. he would be a man to negotiate. i think i will put him in charge of china. [laughter]. you know what, we'll do very well. put him in the room for a few days, we'll do very well. seriously, we have the greatest
negotiators in the world. we have to use, when china enters that negotiation, they come in with 20 people that are the toughest, smartest, meanest, they don't say good morning. it is not lovely day, is it wonderful, how did the yankees do last night. there is no talk. it is like, we get down to business, boom, no games. we put people in there that don't know what they're doing, because this is)pnm( why we have deficits of $500 billion with one country. we rebuilt china. and i say that with respect for china. i have a great relationship with china. they used to tell me before i i announced i was running, they can't, i have many friend from china, biggest people, the richest people, they can not believe what china gets away with. we said we can't believe it. when they announced running for president, they called, we really didn't mean that they didn't know this was going to happen. [laughter]. but, in the good ol' days they
would tell me, we don't believe, your government is stupid. [laughter] you but now they deny they have ever said that. [applause] >> on staffing, how would you run a government to make it more effective? what would be your criteria in choosing the senior administrators? >> track record. great competence. love of what they're doing. how they are getting along with people. references. i mean no different than when you're running a company how you hire top people. it would be no different. the government, you need people with heart also. you know, it is probably one thing you need in government they don't have in business quite as much but, some do. but not a lot. [laughter]. but, you need people that are truly, truly capable, and you
need, and i think so much has to do with past history. how have they done? how is it all worked out? you understand what i mean by that, perhaps better than anybody. and we have to get the best people. we can no longer be so politically correct. you know we do things today, we're so politically correct. people are afraid to walk, they're afraid to talk. they can't speak. they're afraid they will say the wrong word and be shunned from society. don't worry, it only lasts for about a week if that happens. not that bad. but we have to stop being so politically correct. we need to get the best and finest and if we don't, we'll be in trouble for a long period of time. and maybe never come out of it. i honestly believe, and i'm not saying this it is because myself, this is the last time, this will be the last election we have a chance to make this country great again, to really make it wealthy again, make it strong again, make it all of the things that we want to see. we have to have, but i really believe this is the most
important election we've been involved in, you know, for many, many, many, many years, many decades, and because it is going, it is going down. the supreme court justices that i told you about before, i mean if they you put certain people on to the supreme court, our country is going to be a whole different country. we'll be a large-scale version of venezuela. we're going to be a totally different deal. and this is the last chance that, in my opinion, our country has to really get better, to get well. and i just think this election is so important. not because of me but because of the ideas, the ideas that we have. the ideas that we need to do what we have to do. but i think it is going to be a very, very important election. that is why we're seeing such enthusiasm. we go make a speech, john, and we have people who are showing up, 25,000 people show up and 30,000 people. and we announced --
[applause] we announced one day, we had one in pensacola the other day, we had this massive, tens of thousands of people showed up. we announced like a he day 1/2 before the speech on twitter. we don't even take ads. people want to say great things happen to this country. people really love this country. the people of this country really love this country. even other countries want to see great things happen because it is so important. i think this will be the most important election we've had for many, many decades. i'm not sure you are going to have a second chance at it. [applause] >> donald, on jobs, what industries do you expect would benefit from your economic plan to create high-paying jobs going forward?bs= >> well i think h&r block would be a disaster.
because we're simplifying, you're not going have -- how about people, the tax -- it is so complicated. you need 180 i.q. to understand it. and people that frankly are making small amount of money, they have to go and have their tax returns done by people and by the way, when they're done, you will have 10 different tax people and you have 10 different answers to the same person. the whole thing is crazy. so that would be one industry that wouldn't do well. but i think almost all industries. i can tell you an industry that will do well and an industry that we can use and i know prices are low now, but when prices go up is the energy industry. we have amazing people in that industry and they are just being decimated. they are being absolutely decimated and, energy is, you know so important. we found out because of new technology, whether it's fracking or many other things, we're sitting on top, our land
turned out to be, we have more than just about anybody in the world. our land has turned out to be so valuable because of what is underneath it. we have to be careful. we have to be very environmentally sound, that is very important but it's incredible when you look at what's happened in the last five years. we can be self-sufficient, which we have to be. otherwise we'll be stuck in the middle east forever and we have to get out of that war. we have to knock out isis. i didn't want to be in that war but i wasn't a politician. nobody really cared. but, i didn't want to be in the war but we have no choice. the way they got out was bad, to get out so quickly and not leave anybody behind. isis developed. we have to knock out isis. you see the atrocities they committed. yesterday, i guess, 22 or 24 people hung from racks of a slaughterhouse, like a slaughterhouse and then throats cut. i have mean can you imagine this? nobody ever heard of things like this before. and then we talk about waterboarding. it's, it is an incredible thing.
no, it is incredible. we're not playing on the same playing field. but if you looked at what the atrocities committed, just yesterday with the meat hooks, we have no choice but to totally decimate isis. we have to do it. we have to do it rapidly. we have no choice. [applause] then we have to get back to rebuilding our country, folks. we have to rebid the instruction struck of our country. we have to rebuild our country because it's a mess. >> last question, if you, if you, if you were to advise the fed, what would you advise them to do regarding interest rate policy? >> well, as a real estate person i always like low interest rates of course, but i think what will happen you have them until january 1st. obama wants to go and wants to play golf. he wants to leave. he doesn't want to have any stock market disruptions. and i think there, i think the fed is being totally controlled
politically. they're not raising rates. and they're being controlled politically. i think they're going to be low until you know, i don't even know if;$ú they will have a raie but they are going to be low until the end of the year. obama he wants to go out. shouldn't be working this way. shouldn't even be discussing it. martin may or may not disagree with me. i think it is terrible thing that's happening because we're doing it for political, i believe the fed is very political. it has become very political, like many other groups in this country, beyond anything i would have ever thought possible. and so i think you're going to have low interest rates till the end of the year, maybe no increase at all. and the market will stay artificially high. and then we'll have to see what happens after that but i think, they're not doing the right job. now with all of that being said, you know, all my life i liked low interest rates. can you imagine, because i'm doing this, i can't even take advantage of it, but that's
okay. but i will say, it's very, it is becoming in my opinion the fed has become extremely political. i don't think they would do, i really believe, if it was a political decision or the right decision, they're going to go with the political decision every single time. [applause] >> well, that concludes our fire side chat. once again, on behalf of myself and everyone here, thank you very much for joining us today. >> thank you very much, everybody. thank you. [applause] neil: you have been listening to donald trump outline sort of the economic agenda and i'm putting a little bit more details to some broad based proposals that call for taking seven tax rates that we have now, reducing them to three:12%, 25%, 33%. not too long ago, mr. trump talked about a top rate no higher than 25%. he would limit deductions for the very wealthy. that would be a swap for them. that would mean it would be revenue neutral for them.
that would mean revenue would be there to avoid large deficits which a number of people said he would produce with this economic plan, is in the eye of the beholder. he also said key to his plan is dynamic growth. in other words, the dynamic revenue you get from cutting taxes will propel a reagan-like advance in the economy. his national goal is growth of 4 1/2%. starting at 3%, which is essentially double what we have now. he also called for reducing the corporate tax rate to 15%, a number of investment-related tax rates would go down as well to put us as he said, competitive with the rest of the world, particularly ireland. he cited ireland a number of times. keep in mind this is group concerned about other aspects of the trump position including what they think of his tariff plans, for example, on companies that leave this country. like ford, now, vowing to go to
mexico to build all of its small cars. mr. trump saying he would slap a 35% tax on the cars when they come back to the united states. others said that would lead to trade wars around the world. by and large he did fill out some of the details and stated his rationale for them. the question is what kind of reception he got. connell mcshane there today. connell, what were you hearing? reporter: he definitely filled in some blanks, neil, you're right about that, when he talked about the three income levels of 12, 25, 33. put income levels at 75,000 and 225. people who make $225,000 or more per year. but in terms of broad strokes here, what we heard today, is that more growth, higher growth will be the result, if you cut taxes. that is the bottom line. especially corporate tax rate by going down to 15%. that probably got the biggest applause line from this room at the waldorf astoria. he earlier in the speech took shots at or drew contrast with
his opponent, hillary clinton and her economic policies. watch this. >> not one single idea she's got, will create one net american job, or create one new dollar of american wealth for our workers. the only thing she can offer is a welfare check. reporter: a welfare check. that was early on in the speech. trump started to go through his own policies, talking about, as i said the tax cut, particularly the lower corporate tax rate, trade and energy. even talking about his new child care proposals he unveiled the other night with his daughter ivanka by his side. that brings to biggest question about this, you heard it in the q&a, neil, a little bit, how do you pay what you're proposing, mr. trump? his advisors, talking the cost of the tax plan has come down, when tax foundation previously over a decade would cost
$10 trillion. now trump advisors are putting number 3 trillion. he said 3 trillion for $4.4 trillion tax cut. a lot of numbers to put together. the trump campaign is saying closing loopholes in large part, they brought undo the cost of this plan, with higher growth, you will see higher growth, especially if you cut taxes on businesses. that is where we are. back to you, neil. neil: thank you very much, very much. to update we'll continue to pursue this and look at it including a guy took a look at the first tax plan donald trump offered at the primary season and graded it a d minus. what does douglas holtz-eakin think of that republican plan right now. you might be surprised. stick around on a plan already getting criticized roundly by some economists in the press saying his numbers don't add up. idea of static versus dynamic accounting doesn't add up. don't get me started when accountants start fighting. more after this.
♪ (announcer vo) who says your desk phone always has to be at your desk? now, with one talk from verizon... hi, pete. i'm glad you called. (announcer vo) all your phones can work together on one number. you can move calls between phones, so conversations can go where you go. take your time. i'm not going anywhere. (announcer vo) and when you're not available, one talk helps find the right person who is. hi, john. (announcer vo) so wherever work takes you, you can put your customers first. introducing one talk-- another way verizon connects your business better. learn how at onetalk.com.
>> used to be cars were made in flint and you couldn't drink the water in mexico. now cars are made in mexico and you can't drink the water and flint. the regulation industry is one bliss mess i will absolutely put to an end day one. i am going to lower your taxes very, very substantially. i'm going to get rid of the massive amounts of unnecessary regulation. all of these regulations on your business and your life. neil: you were riveted that the people because they been eating lunch. a detailed possession. it is the luncheon.
the connect club -- economic club of new york. i don't know. i might get myself out of the camera appeared i don't know, that's me. many say the numbers add up. others say they didn't add up. static accounting. nevertheless, donald trump point that the fact these are the ratings that will help him get to double the growth we experienced it we will keep that up a number of years and off we go to a regular broom with 25 million jobs. trump economic adviser kathleen hartnett white. and last but not least, charlie gasparino. i read the remarks before his numbers today at which time you greeted him a d. now you give it an incomplete. i don't know if that's better or worse, that explain. >> first i would say the one thing he accomplished at the
outset was the strong contrast between his approach which relies on better economic growth which we desperately need in the clinton approach where there's no growth policy whatsoever. that was the first accomplishment. the second is to take seriously that his plan didn't add up. this news is static tax law from 10 trillion to 2.5, maybe 3 trillion. there will be growth effects in there. you have to give some details to see if it adds. but he took it seriously and said we'll have growth over also serious about protecting taxpayer dollars. neil: the top rate, which originally earlier this year don't jump has put up 25%. that might have brought it down as well as limiting rich folks deductions. we hear a lot of talk about static versus dynamic. you do get the argument that you get the bang for the buck in tax
cuts just don't materially show up right away. >> just to point out, he didn't change the business tax features much at all. so he cap process that produces growth. he got rid of the stuff that was wasting taxpayer dollars and that was the right way to go about this. tree until it comes back to paying for tax cuts. the school of thought says tax cuts will trigger revenue from the score them dynamically. others say no, it's like a program. move on there. >> all too often we have complete static analysis meaning you have to pay as you go for the tax cuts or you have people say the supply side immediately you get the bang for your buck. we do know from the reagan years there wasn't an immediate supply side pushed inside the growth for the economy. so you've got to draw -- come
right in the middle. i thought this was a great speech from that standpoint. i'm against his rhetoric on trade. i thought rhetorically the line about flint and mexico. to me, this is music to my ears. i wish he would stay on this topic. i wish he would give his speech every day, maybe variations come a change around the world to little bit every day until the election. given where the economy is, the fact that people don't feel better no matter what the recent numbers came out about income inequality getting smaller. i think he can win. neil: let me ask you about that appear former aide to chuck schumer was very critical about the numbers of donald trump uses on the hillary clinton and her plan to boost the middle class and spend more money to do so is the way to go. it's worked with barack obama. it will work with her. donald trump is outlining a
different way to approve the anemic growth we have seen. put more money in everybody's pocket. it is better than the government's pocket. >> i certainly defer to the ceo commissioner on the numbers. my gut is i see for the numbers in a further rhetoric. i absolutely agree with my previous colleague who correctly pointed out the disconnect between recent reports that show income inequality shrinking and families making more money. people are feeling that in the disconnect is where trump is going to thrive in pick up more votes and a stronger message in swing states. it actually comes across as condescending before you leave and for economists to say really you're doing better. you are doing well. people look around and say i don't feel like i'm doing any better. this guy is telling me things will get better and i will feel
better. if their economic improvement in some families in favor of the income administration party? yes. if people don't feel it comes across as condescending. >> there is a strategy to this. this is his comfort zone talking about these matters. you can win but the prospect of the potential trade were in the trump administration whether he was five for 35% tax on those companies like ford that want to build cars and bring it back here because americans pay that. not the government. having said that by targeting those companies come in the populist pitch is certainly nothing elitist via it is a strategy? >> and you're speaking to me, is that correct? neil: correct. >> yes, i think it is. in the policy arena, getting away from the numbers at the heart of the effort of great jobs and really lets the
ignition switch to economic growth. two elephants in the room. energy and the regulatory state. i thought more than any previous speeches that really starts to put meaningful meet on the bones of those issues. tree until you know this is different accounts come up with different ways to crunch them. charlie, the one thing i noted as he wanted to go at it this way not only to get that crowd in that room, but also to remind them you are not going to be cozy and not in everything am going to tell you including the trade name. it was a popular page. >> somewhat popular. neil: i wonder how resonates in the campaign. >> is obviously a contradiction. i've been to the economic work. david is right behind them. i don't know if larry cut the receding, but he was back there.
the food isn't that good a chicken wings with via an upgrade. horrible food there. but i will say this. it is a contradiction. you can tell larry kudlow has taken a deep rat when he started to speak and you could see their wheels turning because they are free traders and they're his economic team. neil: reaching out to average folks. >> everybody i talk to insert the campaign thinks the trade stuff is pure rhetoric. they think is full of you know what. he uses that as a wedge issue in the battleground states like pennsylvania, michigan, where there's high percentage of blue-collar people who he thinks really believe straight is the root with your group but are not. i don't think now because detroit's demise for chumps at one point. it's absurd. but it will say this. it's the bargain that the conservative supply-siders are
making within. they will take his trade stuff which they know is absurd. they will say he doesn't need it inside the tent and they'll say look at all this other stuff that he doing which is recognized to the max. truth to if you can help me with some of the numbers here because depending how you score this, the only way you can get the deficit to drive, the only way you pay for a lot of stuff is growth. you get a boom in the economy and sustain it for a few years. it can work like magic and fast did bill clinton discovered that, ronald reagan discovered. they get the extra revenue impulse ended and then some. he didn't really fret much about deficit. he talked about the debt, but he didn't talk about taking a lot of days to pay it down should be worried about that. or is that too boarding?
>> totally boring. whoever wins is going to inherit from this president a mass quite frankly in which deficits will reach a trillion dollars over the next eight years. one where an unsustainable track. one of the difficulties mr. trump has pledged not to do social security 6% a year on medicare at 5.9 on medicaid at 5.2, all of which are much faster than even his best economic growth would produce. so it is hard to make progress on the fundamental problem they inherit when even growth can catch up with them. >> educate growth going first? >> you've got to do it, charlie. i'm with you on not. if we don't get better growth, they won't have the nerve to fix any of this stuff. this 2% economy is a disaster and i applaud him for recognizing that.
i'm genuinely concerned that democrats are checked out. i don't understand it. neil: we will watch closely. you've got more growth, more people paying taxes. you have the whole enchilada here. one irony on this event today where he would frequently criticize china so they have one up on all these deals could the chinese on the hotel in which he was speaking. in the meantime, people have been crunching a lot of the numbers here and what this means politically for donald trump. the number of poultry got one to share with you right after this as well as fund-raising developments. whatever is happening here, they are getting a lot of money. the national finance guys. when it comes to healthcare, seconds can mean the difference
between life and death. for partners in health, time is life. we have 18,000 people around the world. the microsoft cloud helps our entire staff stay connected and work together in real time to help those that need it. the ability to collaborate changes how we work. what we do together changes how we live.
juswho own them,ople every business is different. but every one of those businesses will need legal help as they age and grow. whether it be help starting your business, vendor contracts or employment agreements. legalzoom's network of attorneys can help you every step of the way so you can focus on what you do. we'll handle the legal stuff that comes up along the way. legalzoom. legal help is here. everyone thought i was crazy to open a hotel here. everyone said it's so hard to be a musician, but i can't imagine doing anything else. now that the train makes it easier to get here, the neighborhood is really changing. i'm always hopping on the train, running all over portland. i have to go wherever the work is. trains with innovative siemens technology help keep cities moving, so neighborhoods and businesses can prosper. i can book 3 or 4 gigs on a good weekend. i'm booked solid for weeks. it takes ingenuity to make it in the big city. then smash it into a tree. your insurance company raises your rates.
maybe you should've done more research on them. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. just one of the many features that comes standard with our base policy. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.
>> answer questions. i'll talk about that later too. >> i've got to be tonight. >> i am so bad. i really am. so that is something to look forward to. i actually get a big kick out of that. i watched it with a bit soaked into it and really like the story minds. really realistic. >> the price continues to have very hard, you name it mike wallace type line of questioning with hillary clinton.
the cable so i guess she's a fan. i got a kick out of that. heading out to north carolina at the key swing state trailing in the polls. other tough issues will. i'm sure the journalists will be asking those questions. i do want to show you this. a new iowa poll, one of those swing states and donald trump has built up a considerable lead. for a 5% to 37%. he led by 2% in july. this continues a trend that larry sabado follows this better than anyone on the planet. he is a fan of the little intricacies of the politics. there does seem to be a trend. what is driving it? >> what's driving it is a horrible week for hillary clinton can there really a horrible week for hillary clinton.
we are seeing this burst in and quite a number of states. there's just been released a third poll in ohio that shows trump ice cream together to adding up by five. we are denial about florida, one in virginia that has clinton up by only three. she's supposed to be secure here. she's had a horrible week. if she doesn't come roaring back in that first debate, then the pattern may be said. neil: you are great at the history of all of this. i am wondering what happens or what is that profit if there is such a thing about this unique collection or trend is changing at this point in the campaign and it might not last because your mini me is how the candidate the lead around labor day is the candidate who sustains that in wins. maybe the exception which george bush in 2000.
but what do you make of this and whether that holds? >> well, that is the rule and it has worked most of the time. probably the example you gave in the year 2000. maybe this is another exception. we have thrown away so many rules this year that i've got to get a new rulebook except one hasn't been published yet. will have to work on that together. i'm going to split the royalties they do. that's the kind of guy i am. 50/50. neil: of the last century is any indication, those world. people can look at the numbers, but i feel this is his sweet spot, his comfort zone. he feels most comfortable expressing business and economic issues. i think he is more at home in that environment discussing these issues than he has than he is when it veers off-track and goes into other areas that i think to me are perilous for
him. should he be doing more of this? a lot of people don't know this economic plans. they get sidetracked discussing other things as all candidates do. >> well, most survey showed he has a match when the economy is mentioned. he seen as better in the economy probably because his identity is as a businessman and he's a successful businessman. he's done while in his personal life and he could apply those lessons in the oval office. the more he talks about the sorts of issues, the more he also reunites the republican party. listening to your earlier panel, there is something for everybody. the republicans don't like to trade part of it. he is kind of anti-free-trade that they love the tax cut, corporate and personal. they love the high growth rate he's promising. but they love that part. if you are trying to reunite republicans and he's still in the low to mid 80s among our
public hints he has to get up. neil: professor, thank you. always good. we have donald trump's national financial chair with us, steve chin. good to have you. thanks for coming. >> banks. great to be here with you. neil: have you seen any traction given donald trump's poll numbers in one battleground state as well as nationally with money that's coming into the campaign? >> yeah, it's been an incredibly exciting few weeks both in terms of online donations as well as traditional fundraisers. but it's really about the economic plan. today we couldn't be more excited about what the second major economic speech going through a plan that will create 25 million jobs for americans, go into releasing the details on the website. we will have the tax ban model by the tax foundation.
donald trump is a pain to get to 3.5% or 4% growth in the 4% we pay down debt and we couldn't be more excited about the announcement in the details on this. neil: part of getting the numbers down so this wouldn't be a multi-trillion dollars had was to try to maybe raise the top rate on what mr. trout proposed at the outset from 25% now 33%. a substantial of the 39.6% prevailing rate. but is it going to move again? some people read into this, wait a minute, he we figured this to raise the rate and he might do it again. what do you think? >> he didn't refigure this at all. there is a tax land that came out in the primary. we acknowledge that tax plan costs too much money. i redid the detroit beach we came out with their personal tax rates.
we said there would be another speech that goes to the details. this is the same plan we announced in detroit but now we announced other details of the tax brackets, details of the business tax, having a model by the tax foundation. go into the job numbers. this is merely a refinement of the detroit speech in the plan donald trump will put forth as president. >> will quickly as a successful businessman are you comfortable with the prospect of a potential trade war that critics say donald trump could unleash if you start typing 35% tariffs are taxes on in this case the ford vehicles made abroad? >> we are definitely not going how trade were sundry trump administration. i heard you're just talking about donald trump not been for free-trade. donald trump is for free and fair trade. the only thing he is paying is america needs to stand up for itself in this trade agreements.
if this trade agreements in mexico and china are not honoring them, this is not about creating a trade war. this is clearly about fair trade and protecting america's interests and america's jobs. neil: you'd be happy with a 35% tax on american companies that need to make their product cheaper. >> again, we will not have a 35% tax. neil: he just said 35% before he goes through with this one. >> no, what he said was to the extent that foreign countries don't honor our agreements and we don't have fair agreements. neil: he's talking about ford who did that. >> again, let me be clear. what he was talking about was that there are incentives that afforded others don't need to leave.
we will put tariffs to have forced their trade. this is the most incredible tax plan at economic gains and this is about putting america back to work. neil: thanks for taking the time to finance terrorists. teen trump. hillary clinton. what's going on with her? a lot. remember here at ally, nothing stops us from doing right by our customers. who's with me? i'm in. i'm in. i'm in. i'm in. ♪ ♪ one, two, - wait, wait. wait - where's tina? doing the hand thing? yep! we are all in for our customers.
ally. do it right. we are all in for our customers. we ship everything you atcan imagine.n, and everything we ship has something in common. whether it's expedited overnight... ...or shipped around the globe, ...it's handled by od employees who know that delivering freight... ...means delivering promises. od. helping the world keep promises. . . . .
♪ guys, what's happening here? hey nicole, this is my new alert system for whenever anything happens in the market. kid's a natural. but thinkorswim already lets you create custom alerts for all the things that are important to you. shhh. alerts on anything at all? not only that, you can act on that opportunity with just one tap right from the alert. wow, i guess we don't need the kid anymore.
custom alerts on thinkorswim. only at td ameritrade. >> there is no question phone calls made to get appoint for people, mohamed yunis a nobel laureate. melinda gates. these are people that any secretary of state would have seen courtesy appointments. >> business people. >> there were also business people. no question about it. i don't see any evidence that there was policy decisions made as a result of that other than courtesy appointments. neil: all right. former clinton aide, key member of clinton foundation president
donna shalala, whether anything pay for play for those that made contributions to the clinton foundation whether they got anything out of it. she says no, there was no. "judicial watch" attorney on that. michael, is she telling the truth? can you hear me, michael, is she telling the truth, donna shalala, there was no pay for play, quid pro quo, that those that had access to bill or hillary clinton were getting not getting favors cash or otherwise? all right. we don't have that a little more after this. just the kind of thing you don't want to sea happen on otherwise great show. bottom line, she is still arguing that there is nothing there. on the heels of a report on her health, as she goes to north carolina, she hopes to put away two days recuperating from pneumonia. this issues still dogs her. michael is good right now. can you hear me? >> i can hear you now. neil: i apologize.
donna that hail lay from the clinton foundation says there is no there there and no quid pro quo or pay for play. what do you think? >> surprising to hear somebody from the clinton team tell the truth. she actually said that individuals were large clinton foundation donors that gave significant money were getting time with the secretary and senior officials. but you know, what she says everybody does it. first of all that doesn't make it right. second of all the obama administration went after the former virginia governor doing the same things, receiving money and getting favors in return, getting meetings. so you know, she tries to say there is nothing there there but, you know that is just not true. neil: i heard that analogy too. one of the things they said about governor mcdonnell, he got stuff, rolex watches, ride in ferrari, $20,000 in clothing for his wife. and that this is a little different. just getting access or someone gets a chance to sit down with bill or hillary because they
give a lot of money. you and others argued said there is same thing with big difference there. the others are saying fact is, that it helps if you give money and we discover, in politics, that it does get you a seat at the table. >> absolutely. mrs. clinton may have not gotten a rolex from some of these people, but the clinton foundation, "judicial watch" released emails about two weeks ago, that showed dow chemical gave between one and five million dollars to the clinton foundation. and president clinton was pushing pretty adamantly that mrs. clinton as secretary of state and sit down to meet with president of that organization. maybe she didn't get a rolex but one to five million dollars to the family foundation is not nothing. neil: all right. we'll watch this very closely. michael, thank you very, very much. in the meantime we're keeping eye on what is going on corner of wall and broad. triple digit run-up on the corner of dow. i believe apple playing a big
i just saved thousands on in less than a minute, i found out how much home i can afford. i like how you shop for loans the same way you shop for flights online. i didn't realize that lendingtree you can save money on almost any sort of loan. i consolidated my credit card debt with a personal loan. i found a new credit card with 0% interest for 15 months. you just shop, compare, and save, and it's all free. go to lendingtree right now and start saving. neil: all right. something is going on here. take a look at latest iowa presidential poll, donald trump opening up his lead against hillary clinton there.
it was statistically even a little more than few weeks ago. far from that now. this is playing out in number of states. what is congressman steve king think about all this. the republican, the other congressman king, fine fellow from the fine state of iowa. congressman, i apologize for that. >> we're doing fine, thank you, neil. appreciate being here. neil: good to have you. i screwed up there. let me, first of all get your take on these polls in your state, other states, donald trump seems to be getting traction. what's going on? >> well i can feel this momentum. and what i have said to people over the last two to three weeks is, that i think donald trump is in a better position to win iowa right now than george w. bush was to win iowa in his re-election in 2004. i know what kind of work it took to pry people out of their homes in 2004 and bush, that is the last time a excuse me a republican has won iowa for presidency is 04. it was only by 10,000 votes. that tells you a little bit what
is going on. you can feel the current flowing in trump's direction. momentum definitely on his side. neil: i heard a professor on this issue, larry sabato saying more hillary clinton imploding than donald trump soaring. i guess it really doesn't much matter to the trump folks because they're in front. but, what do you think of that, that, her people are getting nervous? she is back off the bed and recuperating and now, you know, in north carolina another crucial swing state she suddenly finds herself trailing. what is going on? >> well there are two components to this. one of them is that trump has articulate ad populist argument and that touches people, their senses, their instincts. they feel it in their gut and in their bones. you can feel momentum picking up. they are to the point where they don't believe washington is serving them. someone that will come in here and shake this place up that continues to sell. the other side of that equation is, that hillary is just continually gets more holes
poked in her boat. as she takes on water it will be hard for her to row her way across the finish line to hold the lead she has held. it is both sides of this thing. there is populist energy on one side. she is taking on water day by day by day. question really is does she sink between now and november 8th. there is still some concern that trump might make some sort of a blunder. he pretty much inoculated himself from blunders. neil: i want to know your thoughts. some conservatives in your party what they would think would be a trade war position on the part of a trump administration advocating a 35% tax or tariff on a lot of these ford cars that are now going to be made abroad in mexico once they get here. are you concerned about that? >> well, i am concerned about that and i'm concerned about some of the positions that have been taken with regard to making border adjusting for currency manipulating coming out of china as well. that has iowans concerned it
could launch a trade war. what i'm hopeful about, i watch people donald trump put around him. i know a new president that comes in, there is all kinds of things coming at him. so, i only has so much political capital. he will have to make some decisions where he wants to spend the political capital. i think these issues get pushed further back on priority list with some more important issues, neil. neil: congressman. sorry i moved geography where you eside. very good having you again. >> it will always be iowa, neil. neil: thank you. it will always be massachusetts for liz warren, the liberal senator. icon of the left. next.
with this level of engineering... it's a performance machine. with this degree of intelligence... it's a supercomputer. with this grade of protection... it's a fortress. and with this standard of luxury... it's an oasis. introducing the completely redesigned e-class. it's everything you need it to be... and more. lease the e300 for $549 a month at your local mercedes-benz dealer. mercedes-benz. the best or nothing.
reporter: live on the floor of the new york stock exchange, i'm lori rothman with your fox business brief. stocks rallying on expectations that the fed will not raise interest rates when it meets next week. weaker-than-expected economic data, retail sales and industrial production is kind of locking in wall street fed outlook on rates not going up next week. you see the dow up 142 points. you have technology and energy
sector stocks leading the charge today. look at the list of names driving the dow. apple, that is class all its own, up almost 3%, along with intel, chevron, walmart stores. walmart up 1%. apple up today, up nearly 7% on the week. all thanks to stronger than expected iphone 7 sales. that is giving a nice lift to some apple suppliers too. you have cirrus logic hitting all-time high today with gain over 7%. skyworks, broad come, all up on the apple news. back to "coast to coast."
neil: welcome back, everybody. apparently we weren't only ones following donald trump's comments before the economic club of new york. so too was peter barnes, but so too someone he just finished talking to. hey, peter. reporter: neil, that is right, senator elizabeth warren, democrat of massachusetts, the progressive rock star and today she pointed out is the 8th anniversary of the failure of lehman brothers. got wells fargo scandal to talk about and donald trump's speech. here is what she said. could you work with a president trump on, and find some common ground with him on some of these issues? >> look anytime there is something that advances the economic interests of hard-working middle-class
families i will work with anyone. the problem i've got right now with donald trump on this is that donald trump is on record saying he would repeal dodd-frank. i think he said first day after trump presidency it's gone. that includes the consumer financial protection bureau which is the little bureau that has been set up now for five years, and that exposed this whole wells fargo fraud. so if donald trump had his way, that little agency wouldn't be there. wells fargo would still be cheating its customers and you and i wouldn't know anything about it. reporter: ceo of wells fargo, john stumpf is coming up to the senate banking committee which you're a member to testify next week. what do you plan to ask him? >> i want to ask him, we have only five minutes. i would like to ask him a whole lot of things but i really want to ask him about what exactly has gone wrong as wells fargo? is this a case of a bank that is so giant that you really can't manage it?
you can't tell when 5000 of your employees are cheating your customers, when they're opening more than two million checking accounts and credit cards against, without permission of the employees and generating millions of dollars in fees? you can't even manage this place? if that's the case, this is a bank that is too big to manage and it should be broken up. or alternative, did you actually know and in which case, there is personal responsibility here. reporter: and on that point, do you think that as a result of this john stumpf should quit or be fired by his board? >> i got to tell you, i just don't how there is no responsibility. so here they fire thousands of low-level employees, the people actually on the line who have been squeezed by their management to get out and sell, sell, sell. the people who preside over this
widespread law breaking within the -- they keep collecting their bonuses. reporter: so what should happen? >> there needs to be accountability. you shouldn't be able -- reporter: now we know several u.s. attorneys launched criminal investigations. >> and they should. there has to be personal accountability. not enough to say the bank will pay a fine. we need to hold people personally responsible. that is the only way we're ever going to get change. reporter: heads should roll including john stumpf eventually? >> i don't understand how he answers the question, either you didn't know in which case there's a problem and or you did know there's a problem. he is responsible. reporter: you wait to see how it plays out? >> we'll see how it plays out. >> reporter: speaking of prosecuting banks you released letters to the inspector general of justice department and letter to head of fbi, mr. comey. what are the letters about?
>> following the 2008 crashed, we got in place a financial crisis inquiry commission, bipartisan, republicans and democrats and god bless them, they went out and they brought in tons of testimony. they looked at financial records. they poured through everything. and they issued this huge report about what had gone wrong during the financial crisis. they then as was required by law, sealed up all their other stuff, sent it over to the archives to be opened five years later. reporter: national archives. >> national archives. reporter: they just released it in march. >> they just released it and it started in the papers, turns out the financial inquiry commission, the ones gathered all the data, had recommended to the justice department that they prosecute both ceos and cfos of some of these large financial institutions, and the large financial institutions
themselves. in other words, they said there is ample data here, ample information, evidence, to suggest that federal laws have been broken. so they give this to the justice department. they named names. this is not a vague go after them. they named names. and essentially nothing ever happened. so i sent a letter to the inspector general and i said to the inspector general, what happened to each one of those referrals? that's what i want to hear. reporter: this was during the obama administration under eric holder. >> yes. reporter: the attorney general, former attorney general. and as you know, set one that testified to congress that, asked this very question, why weren't there any prosecutions of big banks and some top officials. he is one that suggested they were too big to jail. the obama administration dropped the ball here, that what you're saying? >> for me, this is not about politics this is about the
failure to have real accountability following this financial crisis. and i also want to put one other piece in here. there were two letters. one to the inspector general of the justice department. the other one to the head of the fbi. you know, the rule has long been, their practice has long been the fbi, if there is no indictment, they don't say anything more. they don't release any of their notes. they don't release any of their investigation materials, and they don't stand up and make any public comment other than to say there is no indictment here. however, in the case of hillary clinton, with her emails, director comey released a lot of information. he had a long press conference about it and came down to congress and testified about it. and his standard for doing this, he said there is intense public interest. that was, those were his words. and he said when there is intense public interest, you don't have to follow the usual rules. the rule is complete transparency. that is what he wanted, transparency.
my view is, there is intense public interest over who caused the financial crisis of 2008, that cost millions of americans their homes, their jobs, their savings, and so i want him to do the same thing here. i want him to reveal the documents. i want to see those notes and i want him to hold a press conference. i want him to come down to conference and testify. reporter: and just to rewind for a second, neil, on one hand donald trump supports repealing dodd-frank, but he also supports reinstating glass-steagall to break up the investment banks, pull them out of commercial banks. so i asked her, at beginning, could that, could you then work, she favors that. could you then work with a donald trump and you heard her answer. neil: that was riveting. first time i heard her a lot of problems and acknowledging going after wall street and big banks allies with this administration
well, not pursuing this administration aggressively enough. reporter: thanks. neil: as peter barnes was talking about the things with the senator where this gotten to be potentially big issue, at least elizabeth warren hopes to be, stocks are riding higher with same financial issues, which she alluded, apple is riding high here on growing optimism that the prephone orders for iphone 7 are off the charts. tomorrow when people get their hot little hands on it, it will be even more off the charts. or will it? after this. (announcer vo) that's right, keep rockin'.
siriusxm's free listening event might be over, but now you can turn us back on with packages starting at $5.99 a month, plus fees. just call 855-874-7746 to keep hearing all the things that make you love taking the long way home. ♪ so call 855-874-7746 or visit siriusxm.com/getsxm to turn us back on. and up.
reporter: the head of the consumer financial protection bureau tells fox business the investigation into potential criminal activity at wells fargo could rise as high as the c-suite. wells fargo paid $185 million in fines and restitutions for illegal activity against its own customers. "the wall street journal" reports that they are subpoenaing documents from the bank and richard cordray says it could go up the manager's chain when you say managers of managers, how high up did it go? did it go up to mr. stumpf, the ceo? >> some of that is still being determined. i think it has been acknowledged by the bank the firings of employees included hundreds of people who were not simply front line employees committing fraudulent acts with accounts but people who were managing those people and people who were managing the managers. that goes up the children a good ways. reporter: neil, we reached out to wells fargo. they declined to comment the. neil: you know, adam, what i was
hearing elizabeth warren as i'm sure you were with peter barnes and she finds it incredulous that, i guess he damned if he does or damned if he doesn't. if he did know that's bad, if he did know that's bad. he seems to be in a real precarious position here. reporter: he is in a very tough bind, you might say. for instance the fine you paid, it is shareholders who wind up taking the hit. the executives don't pay the money. shareholders of the bank who pay the money. he has to explain that to the shareholders. what he really has to explain is, if you were firing people in 2011, if you knew your front line employees were doing this in 2011, what did you do to stop it and why did it continue? neil: and if you didn't, a whole set of questions with that. thank you very much, my friend. adam shapiro with breaking news development. all right donald trump says we can get up to 3 1/2% growth and there would solve all our problems. does it? after this.
it's scary when the lights go out. people get anxious and my office gets flooded with calls. so many things can go wrong. it's my worst nightmare. every second that power is out, my city's at risk. siemens digital grid manages and reroutes power, so service can be restored within seconds. priority number one is keeping those lights on. it takes ingenuity to defeat the monsters that live in the dark.
neil: let's look at the latest polls, we will get more tonight that will update a trend that is widening a lead in this crucial battleground state as he has in ohio and florida, brought it to single digits in pennsylvania. something is going on. but i handed to you. trish: may have to do with the economic plans we are hearing. donald trump laying out a very detailed, bold economic plan that focuses on creating jobs he says will put america first. he vowed 3.5% growth and says his plan will add 25 million jobs, promising to cut taxes and make china and our trade partners play fair. donald trump blasting president obama and hillary clinton for the economic mess we are living with today.