tv Cavuto Coast to Coast FOX Business July 6, 2017 12:00pm-2:00pm EDT
government's job's number. neil cavuto is going to takateway and set the tone. neil, it's all yours. neil: did i just hear lizzie, stick it to putin, ashley, one of the nicest guys in the universe say geed up? [laughter] neil: i don't know about you guys but i have standards over here. charles: loosey goosy. neil: i will try to carry on here. but, of course, that's what everybody is waiting to here. lizzie put it best here, whether the president is going to stick it to vladimir putin and indicate no matter what role the russians might or might not have played in the election, he is his own man and will make it very clear, if you were monkeying around, you better
stop and work with me on some of the crises going on. a very busy for us and very busy day for people selling on wall street and a lot of this having to do with what's going on. president trump holding bilateral meeting with angela merkel. blake berman with the latest. all the stamps of the countries, what's the latest. blake: collecting stamps, neil. neil: right. blake: it's fun traveling around the world. can't complain at all. [laughter] neil: what's going on? blake: hamburg, president trump is set to meet with angela merkel any moment now. so many stories when you look at the g20 summit that's going to take place tomorrow, one-on-one meeting with angela merkel, bilateral meeting after that. you talk about vladimir putin, one-on-one meeting tomorrow. enrique peña nieto, one-on-one meeting tomorrow. so many different story lines,
however, on this day there's a leader in a country not involved with any of this that's grabbing a lot of headlines, that's kim jong un in north korea. it started very early this morning and the 4:00 o'clock on the east coast, 11:00 o'clock here in hamburg when the president was talking during a news conference about north korea. he called them a threat. he said they were acting very badly and that led to one of the reporters during the news conference asking the question about, well dow you expect north korea to take a u-turn or military action potentially from the united states? the president said three words, neil that are getting a lot of play as he gave an open-ended response. watch, here it is. >> as far as north korea is concerned, i don't know, we will see what happens. i don't like to talk about what i have planned. but i have severe thicks that we are thinking about. it's a shame that they're behaving this way but they are
behaving in a very, very dangerous manner and something will have to be done about it. blake: so those three words, they're pretty severe things and that's potentially even more the market earlier this morning in downward trend. by the way, in ham hamburg, the president will meet with south korean leader, japanese leader, chinese president, not a part of that meeting, potentially a message there as we know what the president has been trying to do, trying to take on the north korea issue somehow in one form or another and we have seen in his tweets over the last few day basically throwing up his hands with china, hey, they tried, maybe we need to move on. neil, we do get a lot of stamps traveling. we do have a little bit of lack of sleep, kim jong un front and center, we will send it back to you. neil: you do a remarkable job. blake, thank you very much. you're looking at the president, i believe this is when he
arrived for that meeting with angela merkel. but, again, this could be a tense one because, of course, she's already demoned the fact that he's going his own way on the government accord taking the u.s. out of it and trade issues, interesting comment she gave the german publication, while we are looking at the possibility of cooperation, globalization is seen by the american administration, ie, donald trump more of the process that's not about a win-win situation but about winners and losers, which is her way of saying, i don't know what to do with the guy. not really, i want to see if you might have gotten drift at all. that could be a tense meeting. obviously these are two major person powers leaders. they have to see ie -- eye to eye on issues and they don't see eye to eye. virginia republican senator, congress, good to have you, we do get a sense from all parties that they're nervous about what
north korea is doing. if you think about it congressman even back to your navy seal days we've had this problem and long before with the north koreans continue to go sort of spit in the west and those that want it to slow down from this and they keep doing it, so what now? >> no question. neil, it's great to be with you as always. yes, you have seen this over the past couple of days where you have seen weak action, some ib action as north korea has steadily marched toward having icbm and having nuclear weapon and be able to hit north america which is something in my opinion unacceptable for any president, democrat or republican for them to have it. i think that president trump introduced the potential of force there when he ship steaming there which obviously helps and the condition tons ground there but brought china
to the table. china hasn't been as cooperative. let's be honest. missiles shooting to the east and not to the west so they don't have an incentive. there are a couple of things you can do sanction wise, any bank doing business with north korea will be outside of system. russia, one of the things mentioned today while speaking on contracts there to make sure that in eastern europe and potentially western europe don't have to rely only on one source, you can use energy, certainly as a foreign policy tool and i hope that they do that. neil: it's interesting as we see angela merkel greet the president, there's a sense to your point, go after the ones that finance north korea and the president did target two largely financial institutions, we call them banks but they are not quite banks but i will call them financial institutions and the idea indirectly and in the
directly, but isn't the real trick going to get not so much sanctions to increase on north korea but to increase on china? >> i think you have -- listen, i think you're right. you have to do things that make -- that make china and potentially russia engaged. as i said, the missiles are shooting to the east and not to the west. that's something that geo politically they may be okay with unless it looks like there's going to be conflict and korean peninsula may destabilizize which is increasingly looking like that. neil: i'm sorry, sir, don't they worry about accidents? it's not as if the north door inteans have proven to be a master of the aiming -- >> no question. neil: something can go very bad here and could land on -- on someone's land, even china.
they must be concerned about how erratic and how wacky this is getting and how dangerous it is getting. >> very dangerous. i believe there's a line in back channel. they are shooting to the east and not to the west. gdp to north korea is very low compared how much they are spending on technology, somebody is funding that, of course. they have to worry about the escalation and the potential danger that could really, really destabilizize the korean peninsula and quite frankly around japan and south korea and allies, i know they are worried about it. as i said before, to me it's unacceptable for them to have the ability to put a nuclear tip missile. can you imagine, neil, if they're shooting into the sea off of california as they do off the coast of japan, absolutely
unacceptable for any president, for america to allow that to happen. so i think we -- we are getting in a dangerous territory here and it is important that the president when he speaks to our allies, the japanese and south koreans and then, of course, the president of china that he's very, very clear on -- not necessarily a red line, i get that he doesn't want to do that, but there has to be a very clear -- a very clear, i don't want to use red line but there's got to be clear indication of what you will not cross or what the koreans won't cross and therefore the chinese need help out, they need to be a part of this because it will be very impactful in a very bad way for the chinese too. neil: kim jong un has learned from his father and grandfather that the west can complain and bark orders and draw a line -- >> that's the problem. neil: that's the problem, right. >> that's the problem. that's the problem. neil: thank you very much. good catching up with you.
>> thank you, neil. neil: meanwhile, it's early in the trip and the president's performance at poland is getting great reviews in the european press, polish press and powerful speech that he stands by nato and that the view if one member is attacked, all are attacked and the u.s. will honor. the western examiners tom on all of this very early on and some of the more tense meetings begin, how do you think it's going thus far? >> i think the first step of the speech in poland, the attendance of the summit, president trump did a great job. he talked about western values. he didn't apply moral that president obama was doing and that's very positive. that speaks to the fact that pro-american sentiments are real. today and tomorrow the hard work
begins with foreign leaders who are perhaps pretty less disposed on the president. neil: i'm wondering how much that plays into the reluctance to deal with him on issues of trade, the president famous i will saying that germany is all full of trade and they take advantage of us, he said that about a number of other powers. is that going to prevent progress in other areas or does it in a provers way sort of get europeans to act. we've already seen that with nato countries that weren't paying the minimum 2% to handle their defense obligations, goo many more have done just that, what do you think? >> well, i think the first thing will be the british prime minister theresa may and president trump will have a slight meeting in the vein of president trump. they are desperate for a trade deal. president trump suggested that
he would support that on a shorter timeline and so you may see an announce mint there. the important factor to consider as well is that chancellor merkel is very angry with president trump. she doesn't like him, she doesn't trust him. she doesn't see the potential for alignment and yet beneath her president macron of france showing olive branch to the president. the president has been invited to attend bbestal. you may see angela merkel somewhat outnumbered. i don't buy the idea that president trump is the boogie man that some have portrayed him to be. neil: well, that would be interesting. i did find that macron invite interesting as well because after the handshake i didn't think that he or president trump will pick up the phone. thank you, we shall see how that works. the president expected to be very firm. no handshake analysis there with
vladimir putin tomorrow. but, you know, vladimir putin has been through this with a few u.s. presidents and he has sized them up. we are told in one-on-one's he tends to be very quiet, listens a lot and doesn't say a lot but can quickly take the measure of a president or not and he has a few of this president's predecessors, what about the guy during the campaign he appeared to like? after this
to other parts of her body. she's also taking prescription ibrance with an aromatase inhibitor, which is for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor- positive her2- metastatic breast cancer as the first hormonal based therapy. ♪ ibrance plus letrozole was significantly more effective at delaying disease progression versus letrozole. and ibrance plus letrozole shrunk tumors in over half of these patients. patients taking ibrance can develop low white blood cell counts, which may cause serious infections that can lead to death. before taking ibrance, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills, or other signs of infection liver or kidney problems, are pregnant, breastfeeding, or plan to become pregnant. common side effects include low red blood cell and low platelet counts... ...infections, tiredness, nausea, sore mouth, abnormalities in liver blood tests, diarrhea, hair thinning or loss, vomiting, rash, and loss of appetite. julie calls it her "new" normal. because a lot has changed, but a lot hasn't.
>> i think it was russia and i think it could have been other people and other countries, it could have been a lot of people interfered. barack obama when he was president found out about this in terms of if it were russia, found out about it in august. now, the election was in november, that's a lot of time, he did nothing about it. they say he choked, well, i don't think he choked, i think what happened is he thought hillary clinton was going to win
the election and he said, let's not do anything about it. neil: all right, you hear from president trump in poland that the russians had a role in the election whether they acted alone is anyone's guess but he's expected to relay his dissatisfaction with vladimir putin tomorrow. he's already led that a lot of aggressive moves and threat to shoot any american plane that is try to do the same with syria and, of course, it's not sitting well and the tension between the two has built while it's necessarily not that of the same level of distressed and contempt that vladimir putin and barack obama finished. it's moving pretty close in that regard. this divides the notion that two of them are in cahoots or inclined to be nice with each other. of course, vladimir putin
and the security just like the marines did. at one point, i did change to a different company with car insurance, and i was not happy with the customer service. we have switched back over and we feel like we're back home now. the process through usaa is so effortless, . . . ♪ (music plays throughout) ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪
♪ ♪ >> i will say that cnn has really taken it too seriously, and i think i've hurt themselves badly. very, very badly. and what we want to see in the united states is beautiful, free, but honest -- neil: what do you think of all of this? >> as you said, it was just a goof. it was something funny, and i think people need to lighten up. come on. why can't the president have a sense of humor? why can't we all have a little bit of a sense of humor, not take everything so serious? neil: now, you know what this means, right? you people know when i do this, because it's the pro wrestling thing and putting cnn over the
head of the wrestler, but i have to do it again. it's a big wrestling story, brother, but is it a constitutional crisis? okay. i got that out of my system here. gaspo loves it when i do that. he's back with us. >> first off, i want to say congratulations for getting the great jerry hawler. neil: he was phenomenal -- >> do you do you remember what e did -- neil: at the time that looked real. do you know professional wrestling is fake though? >> yeah -- neil: i had no idea. >> i had no idea that donald is a showman. [laughter] neil: what is the controversy here? cnn, in the case of this video, got and learned who did it. right? and was going to reveal -- >> let's be real clear where the sort of storyline that led them to reveal or try to find out who did it, who did the video. the storyline was when donald trump retweeted this with cnn's face, logo on it, it was an
incitement against journalists. i'm not saying -- i don't believe that. neil: it was stupid. >> it was over the top. neil: by the way, we have so many cases of real violence on the left against the right -- >> right. and as a civil libertarian, i'm saying to myself, you know, we know that people -- i mean, there was no 234-hour news -- 24-hour news coverage when charlie manson did his evil. this doesn't incite violence, lots of things can. so that's the initial, i guess, source of the story. because this made site violence on behalf, against reporters, let's find out who's behind it. what gave it a little more, i guess, juice for cnn or anybody is that allegedly the guy behind it wasn't exactly a model citizen on social media, we should say. allegedly. he apparently posted some anti-semitic stuff -- at least this is the storyline. i have not done my independent investigation. neil: right. >> i don't know this for a fact -- neil: so they were dangling that over him. >> well, no, this is how they
premised doing the story. this guy does some unsavory stuff on social media. we should find out who he is. they found out who he is. the guy apologized, took his stuff down x they agreed not to publish his name. and then there was a little rejoinder in the story that was written by, i guess, i keep pronouncing the guy's name wrong, alex kaczynski, i think his name is, where he said we reserve the right to -- and i'm paraphrasing a little bit -- to tell you who this guy is if he ever does this stuff again. neil: hence, the threat. >> i think that's over the top too. neil: right. >> the threat's over the top. criticizing cnn for that as a threat is over the top. the fact -- neil: be that was a threat. it was a stupid threat, it was a childish threat. it was we hold this in our hip pocket if you try to do something like -- >> i think what they wanted to say, in their defense, listen, we didn't cut any deals with this guy. neil: well, if they have these great investigative powers, could they maybe look into the
trump economic record, look into the -- >> yeah. i mean, yeah. neil: could you save it for the things you say the administration is not doing, rather than the stupid -- >> i agree. but, you know, in this reporter's defense, he covers social media. neil: no doubt. but that's a threat, buddy. that's a tony soprano thing. >> i would just say this, i wish they didn't do the story. do you really care who this guy is? neil: no. but it was not an administration official, right? >> no, no. they pulled it from the guy's reddit account. i didn't even know what that is before this came out. [laughter] reddit's like a blog, apparently. i would say one thing, if i learned anything from this story, and like i said, i don't think it was a worthwhile story, it's that the guy who was, had this -- did you catch his name, by the way? we probably shouldn't mention what his twitter, what his social media handle is, you know? it has the word rear end in it
and -- but not using rear end. neil: one can just imagine. [laughter] >> and han solo. this guy, apparently, is a 48-year-old man that's doing this stuff. neil: okay, well -- >> you know, it just shows you what social media -- neil: here's the thing about the threat or the presumed threat to the media at a time we already know whether you're left or right on this, that the really violent acts we've seen, the hostile acts we've seen from a comedian holding up the head of donald trump, shakespeare in the park showing the killing caesar-style of a donald trump character, all that's fine. multiple berkeley protests over conservative speakers, all that's fine. that is a little hypocritical. that's what i'm -- >> yeah, i mean, listen -- neil: if you're talking about threats, real or imagined, those are real. none of those cases i mentioned are imagined. >> by the way, kind of a weird death fetish with trump, don't you think? neil: absolutely. >> i'm a first amendment protector. i wrote a column in the post where i said we should all get a
grip on ourselves. i didn't have a problem with the shakespeare in the park. okay, it was a dramatization. neil: sure. you should see what they're going to do on you. >> i'm sure. but there is a weird thing where these liberals have this blood-death fetish -- neil: well, a lot of it is woe is me. you know, calm down, all right? and i'm the first to say he tweets to go off topic, nutty, don't help him. but on this, we in the media, let's get over ourselves. >> i agree. would you tweet something out with my face -- neil: han solo? in a minute. >> han -- solo. neil: you remember ralph? he's upset. [laughter] i'll talk the ralph. you can't go over on the time. [laughter] when we come back, ted cruz is making some noise here with fellow republicans on maybe a health care alternative that just might do the trick. unfortunately, a lot of his
neil: all right. what happened to tesla, right? wasn't too longing ago this stock was closing on $400 a share. it's down 18% since that all-time high on june 23rd. a lot of concerns about whether its new production models will be up to speed or with volvo getting into battery-operated cars, whether that's a threat. other automakers doing the same. whatever's going on is still going on. all right, meanwhile, the congressional budget office set to score ted cruz's obamacare fix. now,, this is the one that calls for open-ended premiums. in other words, you can get coverage that can mix and match your needs that you don't have to subscribe to the rules that are one size fits all with obamacare and get covered for everything that isn't important to you. it's meant to entice younger workers, younger americans in
general to sign up for this at a cheaper price and have more people sign up period. the trouble is that not everyone in leadership is flipping over this because it's such a departure from the republican senate measure that's out there already. that would include mitch mcconnell who seems to be once again at loggerheads with the guy who had just a few years ago called him a liar. to douglas holtz-eakin, the former cbo director during the george w. bush administration. doug, there's so much going on here, i don't have time necessarily to get into the politics of it. [laughter] but on the surface, the idea of, you know, allowing people to pick and choose the kind of plan they want and the kind of things they want -- not a one size fits all -- would seem to be a very republican idea. so what's the problem here? >> i think the problem is mostly the fact that they're trying to do this in so-called reconciliation, and the handcuffs that those special procedures put on them make it the case that while you can create these rules for people
who are not on obamacare exchanges, you have to also sell policies that comply with the obamacare rules on the exchanges. what that'll probably do is split the pool into two pieces; a piece that will buy these nice new policies. they'll be cheap, they'll be the young invincibles. but left behind will be the older, sicker workers paying very high premiums on the exchanges, and that's the downside. because you can't do it for everybody. neil: all right. a lot of people separately score this, so obviously that means it could have some potential traction, but if it fails, i would imagine they're back to repeal and replace later. is that right? >> i don't think they're going to go back there. neil: really? >> remember, that was the original plan -- neil: absolutely. >> that's what mcconnell had in mind. the president said, no, no, we can't do that -- neil: do you think if they had done that, they could have gotten a lot of this out of the way, the drama of it -- >> sure. neil: they missed an opportunity?
>> i think they missed an opportunity, no question about it. they started out with one strategy, switched in midstream, and they've had trouble ever since. and you can see it. so now they're looking for a silver bullet late in the game, and quite frankly, i don't think there is one, neil. there's not a provision you can write that's going to unite republicans in the senate. they're simply going to have to decide whether they can unify for purposes of passing a bill, advancing the president's agenda and going on to things they want to do like tax reform. neil: all right. i know you're a numbers cruncher, and i think you've dold me the cbo -- told me the cbo is only as good as the numbers it gets. it's the only game in town, and it's taking variables that could change. it's numbers in, variables out; numbers out, variables out. having said that, the view seems to be that fewer americans are going to have health insurance ten years from now on the republican plan than would be
the case with the affordable care act. now, that didn't shock me insofar as if you take away the mandate or the demand, the requirement that you have to have insurance, naturally, a lot of young people are going to opt out. what it also leaves out is still more people than today are going to have insurance, just not as many as if you stuck to the affordable care act. >> right. neil: how is it that democrats have gotten the advantage of this argument? >> i think the key is the democrats always want to have the battle be about coverage. neil: right. >> they have proven with obamacare itself they will write infinite amounts of taxpayer-financed checks -- neil: all the the republican plans, deficits shrink, costs shrink. they're not ideal, but that's ignored. it's all about those who have coverage, isn't it? >> yes. and if you look at the republican plans, what do they do? they take the opposite approach of obamacare. a, they get rid of taxes and regulations so the economy is stronger, not weaker. b, they make the deficit smaller
so the debt problem begins to get addressed. and, c, instead of creating new entitlements and adding to old ones. but all this is, is a numbers battle. neil: on the tax cut thing, there's a camp in the republican party that says make them big, make them significant, a lot of bang for the buck. you'll lose revenue in the near term. deficits, debt could get worse, but the money will come pouring in later on. are you in that camp or in the deficit-neutral, revenue-neutral, whatever, budget-neutral camp? >> i think we know from all the evidence that permanent tax reform is more powerful than a temporary one. so i'm in the case -- in the camp of permanent. and if it takes revenue neutrality to make it permanent, i think they should go for that. they should dynamically score it, they should do it in a principled way. but they really want to get a big reform that gives powerful
incentives to invest and innovate and employ people in the united states. that's the number one priority this year in the congress. neil: you could interpret that to mean if it's revenue-neutral or whatever, even if it is under the guise of tax reform itself, revenue-neutral by definition will not be a big tax cut. right? >> it depends on how you do it. you and i both know you need the growth, so you do the dynamic scoring. a traditional, static way of doing it it'll look like a tax cut, but because the revenue comes in, it can be treated as revenue-neutral under the rules. if you look, for example, at the house plan, that's a big tax cut for people. there's a big middle class tax cut, a big increase in the standard deduction, and it's a very powerful pro-investment reform on the business side. it's those kinds of combinations i think they need to be effective. neil: doug, i always learn a lot having you on. very good seeing you. thank you again, my friend. that guy is a genius, my friends, whether you agree or disagree. just the numbers. always the math.
in the meantime, on numbers and the math be, wall street now doing a little bit better than it had been but still down, again, on growing concerns and then enter someone like a mark zucker or burg who says forget about these people on wall street, we have an obligation to pay people a minimum salary, an income to give them a start. all people a start. but he likens it to what they do in alaska, something special they do in alaska. and i'll give you a hint after this. ♪ ♪
neil: all right, you ever get the feeling united must be close to considering taking everyone's smartphone away? yet another incident, and you guessed it, caught on a lot of smartphones. tracy haskell with the latest. >> reporter: hey, neil. a mother from hawaii said what happened to her son was unsafe, uncomfortable and unfair. check out these pictures taken by shirley of her 2-year-old son. that's a 5-pound toddler forced to -- 25-pound toddler forced to sit on her lap. united requires children over the age of 2 to have their own tickets and occupy their own seats which this little boy did, but the airline gave his seat away to a stand-by passenger. the woman says she paid $1,000 for the ticket and tried to tell a flight attendant about the
mix-up but was told nothing could be done because it was a full flight. not wanting to cause a scene or worse, instigate an incident like this in april, she sat her son on her lap and kept quiet until she reached boston. a united spokesperson says the little boy's boarding pass wasn't scanned properly at the gate, and as a result, his ticket appeared not to be checked in and was given away to another customerment united says, quote: we deeply apologize for this experience. we are refunding their tickets and providing compensation as a goodwill gesture. we are also working with our employees to prevent this from happening again. shirley says she isn't sure if she'll fly united again and, neil, you really can't blame her. neil: this company cannot get out of its own way. >> reporter: no. neil: it's just incredible. tracy, thank you very much. meanwhile, mark zuckerberg, worth $60 billion cool, says that maybe there should be, like, a basic income.
in other words, you get out of school, the government or somebody provide you some money to give you sort of a jump-up, a lift-up in life. and he likens it to what they do in alaska in this sort of bonus fund that they have for every resident of alaska that's really built on oil revenues. so it's not a tax, it's not something that comes from the government, per se, but something that oil companies pay into in the state and then is shared with everybody in that state. to the key review's deneen borelli, democratic strategist robin -- [inaudible] deneen, what do you think of this idea? >> it's ridiculous, neil. neil, i speak at a lot of events around the country, and one of the things i tell the attendees is that our country does not guarantee you success, but liberty guarantees you the opportunity to succeed. and that is what it comes down to; individual liberty, personal responsibility. americans able to pursue their hopes and dreams and whatever
wants and needs that they desire on their own dime and their own time. it's not the government's role to provide americans with their wants and needs. neil: all right. but in this case i think what he's trying to say, or maybe clarify here, robin, is it wouldn't be the government doing this, it wouldn't be a tax doing this, it would be some sort of a revenue. of course, on a much grander scale than what goes on in alaska which, of course, benefits from the oil companies and all the stuff going on there. i think average residents get a check of $1,000, maybe a little more. but everyone shares in that. he's talking about far bigger figures. $1,000 isn't going to get you past, you know, the fist month you have i to work -- the first month you have to work. what do you make of that. >> that is exactly what's going on. alaska's got a population of 742,000. i live here in georgia, we've got over 11 million. so that $1,000 is not going to do a lot to change people's lives. and frankly, this idea -- you
know, i appreciate mark zuckerberg because he thinks out of the box. i will assert that americans want us to try and work together to actually get something done. but i think this is, frankly, a terrible idea. if you think this is going to work, frankly, i think you should go ahead and respond to that e-mail from the nigerian prince that says he's got $10 million for you if you give him his social security and bank routeing number. neil: you know, he never got back to me? i couldn't believe that. [laughter] deneen, the concept he was saying is something that other very successful guys have hearkened back to when they had a net worth that supported -- a network that supported them. it could be well-to-do parents, we all had structures built in to help people early on and that's just taking it one step further. what do you make of that? >> well, sure. if he wants to write a check to people, listen, he has the resources to do so. but it shouldn't be something that is forced, neil, and it should be something that is, perhaps, voluntarily if somebody
wants to do it. but for -- neil: would you be anti what they do in alaska, deneen, with these $1,000 checks that the oil companies pay? it's not a government thing -- >> yeah. no, i understand that. that's their choice with what's going on in alaska. neil: they, to do business in alaska, that's a requirement, they give money into this fund. >> well, then that's wealth redistribution -- neil: i gotcha. >> -- my view, so i don't agree with that. neil: robin, your thoughts on that. >> still i think it's a terrible idea. the greater issue right now is a livable wage. the minimum wage right now is $7.25. $1,000 a year, like you said, neil, i don't think that's going to make enough of a difference in people's lives. we've got to focus on the real issues, and this is a bad idea for democrats specifically. neil: both of your facebook accounts went down -- >> and twitter. [laughter] neil: thank you both very much. meanwhile, president trump, besides that meeting with angela
...prilosec otc 7 years ago, 5 years ago, last week. just 1 pill each morning, 24 hours and zero heartburn. it's been the number 1 doctor recommended brand for 10... ...straight years, and it's still recommended today. use as directed. neil: all right. after meeting with german leader angela merkel. president trump schedule to meet with leaders of south korea and maybe time to deal with china. years before the president even
ran for president, even thought about being president, he did use a lot about china for as long as i had known him including going back to the 2011 interview on fox news. he was saying china was the biggest problem on this planet. take a look. >> let's say you were to become president and they own all this debt, would you tell them to screw off? >> it's a tinny amount of money. it's less than a trillion dollars. that sounds like a lot of money to people. that's a tinny fraction of what we are dealing with respect to the economics of the world, worldwide economics. neil: what if president trump, said, you know what, cowboy, we are out of here. >> neil, we have all the cards. neil: is that the strategy he'll be taking with chinese leader, maybe they would string us along, are there fears that whatever we do, china responds
and get a trade war deal. this could be a key opportunity for the president to show case negotiating skills. north korea is only pal in the region and they finance a lot of things. the president went after two financial institutions that fund those efforts but he has to do a lot more and china is the way to do it, what do you think? >> i think you're right. i think the president is right. we hold all the cards. i mean, north korea is the largest trading partner is china. we do $578 billion a year with china and i think the opportunity here is great, neil, because of the go 20 meeting is a financial meeting, donald trump is a negotiator. if you notice, he's backed off to talk about the tariffs and
manipulation of currencies and stuff because he wants to sit down with xi and say, hey, look, we have a lot of stake at here, 870 miles of border with north korea, if you cut this guy overnight, if you have a refugee problem, we have to go about it the right way, even ask mr. putin's input on this and squeeze this guy down where he behaves and i happen to believe that donald trump is absolutely right. a trillion dollars when you talk about the $20 trillion worth of debt, 130 trillion, 230 trillion worldwide, neil -- neil: right. >> this is the most important part. china is in trouble economically. they have a 250% debt gdp rate right now with 166 billion of that being in corporate debt. they can ill afford any hiccups in the economy right now. every time this crazy guys sends
off a missile, look what happens to the market. >> do you think that that alone and the reality would hit home. the only thing that gives me room the chinese or cut them slack, what if they can't, because logic will tell you they would be worried about what's going on in their neighborhood and worried about the clear reality that a donald trump unlike his predecessors will follow up, he's already going after these two chinese banks, so he's already implementing what he threatened he would. i've given you enough time to deal with this. you tried to do your rest and didn't deliver on the goods. maybe i'm flipping it to give china the benefit of the doubt, that they can't control this guy, he's a nut case. >> you're absolutely right. if they cut off the food, kim jong un will allow people to starve. kim does not care about his people and china understands that.
that's why if you have a leader like donald trump who says, i'm going to lead from the front, i'm going to lay this predicate down. i need you to back me up and putin to back me up. maybe we need a regime change. no one wants to hear the rhetoric, neil, that may be that's going to take, a leader that willing to starve his people by meeting ends, you can't deal by cutting off coal exports, any other things that we attempted to do, maybe time for a tough guy to lay a tough line and hold it and make sure it's in the process. neil: all right, we are going to go ahead and, you know, penalize economic for stuff you do, maybe drop tariffs on you, shun you in the global trade deals, they can come back and say we will buy less u.s. debts, but this they start selling that or the fear,
you know, selloff, skyrocketing interest rates materializes, but this president calls their bluff, are we willing to endure the country the prospects of more expensive goods and possibly higher interest rates as a result of getting tough on china? >> i believe the answer is yes because i happen to believe that higher prices in america, ie, inflation, and a higher interest rate so people have a return on their money will actually attract a lot of money to america, will create a little bit of inflation which will cause housing to go up and i don't think that will be a bad thing for america. if you remember, the big monster in the room under bernanke was deflation and why should we be worried about inflation? xi is a smart guy. neil: he also thinks that donald trump isn't going to do
anything. >> this is where i disagree with you. neil, i believe donald trump is not going to go in there with a giant stick, he's going to go in there with a stick and a carrot, come on, for your country to survive, we have to get world consumption back on track. it's been off track since 2008. we have to get household con summing -- consumption back on track. we can do this together but we have to get rid of this irritant called kim jong un which is creating uncertainty. he's not going to do it or i'm going to punch -- it's not going to be a twitter fight. neil: craig smith, very good seeing you, my friend. thank you. >> good seeing you, neil. neil: meanwhile the president has a lot of confrontations to look forward. that's the warm-up act, the big one will be with vladimir putin tomorrow.
adam shapiro on what's on that agenda, adam. >> hey, neil, he met with the leaders from baltic states at the baltic and countries that border those seas, he was not only reiterating the u.s. support for nato and its commitment to nato but also sending a message to the russians and vladimir putin. now, he will be meeting with vladimir putin tomorrow in germany and, of course, mr. putin, is expecting that meeting, he has published op-ed in a german newspaper in which he cite -- criticizes the united states and points out that russia is more than happy to comply with the climate accord and the united states is leaving the climate accord. the big question is what the president say to vladimir putin
all of this much to do about what is slow growth but steady growth, reliable growth. everyone, calm down. >> i think the fed is very much excited to begin that process of tapering reinvestment but also very squishy but they do want to see the evolution of the data in the second half of the year. neil: we know it when they are doing it whether they are announcing it or not.
we know they are you positive to something? >> we will absolutely know and want to be transparent to the market but very likely that even if they do continue to raise rates at slow moderate level addressing the balance sheet could be pushed out to 2018 or beyond. if they are concerned that the market is going to have adverse effect or we see undo volatility. the data is starting to move away from if fed target and inflation is slowing and addresses justification. >> i don't know if it is. we are stuck, we are mired in 1.5. corporate earnings aren't slowing. we had pretty good corporate earnings. i'm just saying that -- excuse me? i would just be real careful about the apocalyptic notion of the markets right now because if
you have sort very low inflation, if you have slow but modest growth, if you have corporate earnings that, you know, come in decently and you have low interest rates, well, generally you buy stock. neil: this leaves out all black swan developments. a mug scheme for you, if you don't mind, carol. where would we be right now if the federal reserve not been buying so many treasury notes and bonds to prompt this, if the fed had never gotten involved to the degree it did, where do you think we would be? >> i don't know if we would be in a different place today but we essential would have gotten here more quickly and so perhaps, you know, just speculating that the fact that that drove more quickly and drove early on that that would
be more growth in the future. they have two different mechanisms, they can either sell securities or as securities mature, they cannot reinvest that money and, again, this is a big experiment, there's no benchmark for $4.5 trillion and this grand experiment and we know that the fed has not been good at forecasting inflation, in forecasting growth and forecasting anything. the fact that they think that they understand what this is going to mean for inflation, we should be a little bit concerned about that. charlie: remember why they did it? they did it to save the banking system. neil: ben bernanke's big fear. >> that's initially, they didn't have to go on -- neil: bottom line they did it and now they have to undo it and that could be the wrinkle here. guys, i want to thank you all very much. i don't know if you guys are boxing fans but manny paquiao
lost a fight that he shouldn't have lost. he lost to an australian, i don't know if that means that a rematch is on. i'm told from a guy who arranged it that it is, we will ask him, the bob arum, legendary boxing promoter is here i wanted to know where my family came from. i did my ancestrydna. the most shocking result was that i'm 26% native american. i had no idea. it's opened up a whole new world for me. ♪
neil: all right, who knew that australia boxer jeff horn would be the one saying good day, mate ? iconic figure in boxing and the guy who put on this fight among many that he has, bob arum, bob, very good to have you, welcome. >> thanks for having me, neil. neil: you know, what happened here? manny paquiao, i thought this
was going to be a lay-up for him and he ends up losing by decision and many people seen the fight and say they argue the decision but you had said, you could argue either way and maybe had distractions, he's an elected official back in his home country of the philippines, but the fact of the matter he wasn't bringing a-game, is there going to be a rematch? >> well, that's going to be up to manny. we have a clause in the contract guarantying a rematch but manny has a lot of duties as senator in the philippines. he has to train while he goes to senate sessions unlike some of our senators. he has never missed a session of the philippines senate, there's only 24 senators. they do the work of the country, so if he can balance his
senatorial duties with preparing for a boxing match, sure, they'll be a rematch, but that's up to manny. neil: are you surprise that had this got lost in all of the commitment around this upcoming fight between floyd maywetter and connor mcgregor, challenging each other, it's actually, you know, big as when you got muhammad ali with antonio back in 1976, right? >> well, i'm not surprised because espn showed the fight between manny paquiao and jeff horne on television, on espn, the ratings were absolutely mammoth, which really didn't surprise me because espn talked about the fight before it was shown and indeed, after the fight at 1:00 a.m. in the
morning on sports center they did 1.8 million people, watched the sports center. neil: is that right? the numbers are off the charts people ordering this thing because it's so unusual, how do you think it's going to go, you're not a fan of it, why not? >> well, you know, floyd maywetter -- maywetter great boxer, it's a different sport. it's a lebron james fighting for heavy weight championship of the world. he wouldn't have a chance. it's a different sport. neil: he has to essentially box? >> that's why it's not a real context and people have to pay a lot of money to watch it and last saturday night they saw a great battle between paquiao and
horne for free. neil: if mcgregor does well, or even okay, or even two the -- go the distance, ultimate fighter guy took him out? >> well, that's like if, if in my opinion. [laughter] >> mcgregor won't hit him in the behind. neil: you can believe one thing and you'll see something new in this fight, he's talking about his son. he he's going to show you something. is that a sign that maybe mayweather is going to do ultimate fighting stuff, he can't? >> mayweather is going to knock him out. mayweather is a defensive fighter who doesn't throw a lot of punches. he defends himself, extremely great athlete but mayweather is
going to show superiority and knock mcgregor out. neil: expectations like that, it had been so many years when muhammad ali fought japanese wrestler, didn't that go the full distance and end up kicking ali for the 15th rounds but could have been a disaster. >> neil, it was a disaster. i promoted that crazy event and there were no rules, flop on his behind as soon as the bell rang. neil: why did ali agree to it? >> from -- for the money, he got a lot of money from the japanese. they asked me if i would promote the fight because i was ali's promotor and i was scheduled to promote the third fight with ken norton and i undertook the
stupid task of promoting this ali fight. neil: i think mcgregor is that kind of fight today. >> well, it may very well be. i don't like to really talk badly about somebody else's fight but i can talk about my fight, ali, it was a disgrace. neil: i do know when ali passed away that encounter was not one of the highlights they went over. let me ask you about the state of boxing today. we chat about this before. i think what confuses boxing today we have so many champions in each division and we have a lot of divisions and, you know, we have so many -- there's not one guy anymore like there used to be and hurt the sport that the people lost interest, what do you say?
>> neil, to some extent that is correct but to a greater extent, boxing has been shown virtually completely in the united states in premium television whether it's hbo, showtime and that by very nature gives boxing a very limited audience. now with espn coming on board, boxing will be shown to the public on a basis that everybody will be able to see it, they'll be an appropriate build-up before the event, they'll be talk about it on sports center, after the event, it will be packaged by espn the way they package fcc football. i think the best is yet to come. neil, our ratings among the desired economic demographic group 18 to 49 on saturday night
was immense. almost half or a little bit more than half of the people watching were in that demographic group. neil: that's good. you know my prediction, i play one on tv and read prompter, i think mcgregor is going to beat mayweather and i'm only saying that could be a problem for boxing because an ultimate fighter beats a fighter at his game even though this boxer is 40 year's old, that could be a real bad moment for boxing, what do you think? >> there is no way that mcgregor can beat a floyd mayweather. neil: oh, really? we will see. >> we will see. yeah. that's what makes -- a lot of people didn't think that jeff horne was competitive with manny paquiao and they saw something different. neil: doing it in australia was
the first tipoff. big hoopla they are making over president trump video that has cnn logo over a wrestler's face, what did you think of that? >> i thought it was inappropriate for a president to do something like that but i'm not a trump fan. i know i'm on fox business and i respect your political views and the people -- neil: no. he's not a fan of mine. he doesn't do this show. you didn't like it? >> all right. i didn't like it, no. neil: you should hear what he says about you. >> he doesn't say very good things about me but i take that as a complement. neil: that's a whole other interview at a whole other time. >> thank you very much, thank you.
leaders were chuckling here that very few of them pay minimum of 2% and sure enough, at least half of dozen additional countries have managed to pony up that dose since he last said that, so something must be working. jim mattis saying at the pentagon that he does not look at this latest north korean icbm launch as bringing us closer to war in and of itself. the read on all page developments with former u.s. spokesperson rick and former deputy assistant to president bush blake berman -- i will get it right. i apologize for that, brad. it's been one of those days. >> i've never been so insulted. neil: i cannot blame you. one of the things that i look at
when i get the response, they want to detensefy situation with north korea, agree on appropriate response, and last certainly not least with china on the same thing. behind the scenes it seems to be fairly frantic efforts, what do you say about that? >> we all have to have hang together and have to talk to friends and let them know that there are problems. they weren't ponying up contributions like they agreed to. donald trump called them out on it and they appear to be acting in a better way than even obama -- neil: not all of them. >> in addition, he's talking to them about climate change and we got out of the paris accord, why? because it wasn't in the interest of the united states and certainly was not in the
interest of the alliance. fact that donald trump is willing to take them on friend and foe alike is important, big difference than the apology and appeasement that went on in the last eight years. neil: do you think that the president, he's relaying, happy to start the tour in poland where he's very popular, a country that's in sync with us and i get the feeling he doesn't care what the german leader things, con -- that might be the difference right there, what do you think? >> i don't know. i think he does care. i think there's a difference
neil: brad, where do you see this going? this trip wrapping up. the outside noise, a very real noise. what's going on in north korea? obviously, there's growing trade tension. how do you see it wrapping up? >> well, what i see is president trump making a new start with the russians, and this is a first meeting. nothing dramatic is going to
come from it. but if a relationship starts by which we can have a cooperative relationship. we're not going to be friends any time soon. but there are a lot of things of mutual interest like syria. we need a two-state solution to syria, not meaning division, necessarily within the country, but russia and the united states being cooperative. we need russia's help with china in the situation in north korea. neil: do you think china will help? will budge? because, you know, obviously patience is running thin that they're not moving fast enough. do you think they will make progress there? >> yes. i think that we will because the chinese are going to be brought up short by this president. there's a lot of things we can do to put pressure on china. >> but you're confident that something can be done. rick, you share that? >> i'm a big fan of international sanctions, however, in this particular situation, we don't need international sanctions as much as we need unilateral
approaching medicare eligibility? you may think you can put off checking out your medicare options until you're sixty-five, but now is a good time to get the ball rolling. keep in mind, medicare only covers about eighty percent of part b medical costs. the rest is up to you. that's where aarp medicare supplement insurance plans insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company come in. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, they could help pay some of what medicare doesn't, saving you in out-of-pocket medical costs. you've learned that taking informed steps along the way really makes a difference later. that's what it means to go long™. call now and request this free decision guide. it's full of information on medicare and the range of aarp medicare supplement plans
to choose from based on your needs and budget. all plans like these let you choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients, and there are no network restrictions. unitedhealthcare insurance company has over thirty years experience and the commitment to roll along with you, keeping you on course. so call now and discover how an aarp medicare supplement plan could go long™ for you. these are the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations. plus, nine out of ten plan members surveyed say they would recommend their plan to a friend. remember, medicare doesn't cover everything. the rest is up to you. call now, request your free decision guide and start gathering the information you need to help you keep rolling with confidence. go long™. ♪
neil: cobble together this budget and all of this other stuff, and they don't get one reward for it, at least for the financial community. jeff flock in chicago with the latest on that. jeff, what's going on here? >> well, the moodies, a lot of republicans were saying we're going to vote for this anyway and defy the governor because if we don't, moodies and other agencies say they will downgrade our debt. well, they may downgrade it anyway. take a look at a message yesterday. review process is going to kick in, and they're going to address the likelihood of further deterioration in illinois' most pressing credit challenges. the severely underfunded pension in a backlog of bills, which has doubled in the past year. they say also moody's tax collection in 2017 may bring
in much less revenue than anticipated in the coming months. curiously, governor yesterday said don't listening to the generating agencies. don't listening to wall street, if that's what's making you vote for the budget. today, he might have a different tune. listen to what he said yesterday. >> what we've got to do is what's right for the people of illinois. we've got to have families, homeowners, small business owners have got to be first. we have to listen to them. listen to them. don't listen to some wall street firm. that's not what matters. don't listen to wall street. >> today, maybe listen to wall street. he doesn't want his budget to be overwritten, his veto to be overwritten. but take a look at the numbers, neil. here's how it went down in the house last time they voted. republicans, 15 of them voted for the budget, along with the democrats. if they all hold together, his veto will be overridden. they have to get to 70 votes.
i leave you with a quote from somebody's facebook page, republican legislatures in some ways even being threatened out there. you're selling your soul to the devil, one guy. i'm coming for you. another person said you're going to be hanging from a tree if you vote for this budget. they reconvened in about half an hour, and we'll see who was with the governor, who's not, and whether they get the budget or not. neil: incredible. everyone has to calm down. jeff, thank you very, very much. jeff flock. meanwhile, no calming down on the pylon for google parent alphabet here. now we're going above # .7 billion. >> maybe doubling it. maybe more. i mean, imagine. google drawing yet another fine from the european commission at issue here more antitrust concerns and specifically, does the company limit access to what we call google play? so that's where people go to buy the apps, buy the games, they say that handset makers should have access to that, even though they're not using
the google search tool on their phones. they want that -- the company wants it passed into the package. so you've seen this before. microsoft had to unbundle in europe and now another 3 billion, you know, small change for this company. neil: where did they get the demand for doubling it, though? >> that's a great question i can't answer. maybe they set the standard. it was 2.7 before, maybe we can get more now. neil: gerri, i have you here on these health care-related issues but because you're an expert on these. ted cruz has a plan that people should pay based on the insurance they need or want. you wouldn't have to pay one-size-fits-all. a young person who has been through what you've been through would be happy to pay bear bones coverage, in other words, recognize the fact that one size doesn't fit all. some people see that as a middle ground. what do you think? >> well, okay. the downside to that is older, sicker people would have to pay more. the upside of that is you
would get younger people into the marketplace. and let's face it, preobamacare, that's what we had; right? there were options in states. they typically had offerings on tap that people could go to get some kind of coverage. and typically it wasn't a laundry list of potential things to buy for. so at the end of the day, i think you're going to have to start offering some sort of options to get younger people in. i just don't really see a way around it. neil: interesting. gerri, you feeling well? >> feeling good. neil: incredible. she has not whined, she has not complained one day. i hate that quality. we'll have more after this
neil: all right. well, world summits tend to bring on the protesters, and this g20 gathering doing just that to the left of your screen right now. that is a live shot of what's happening. a lot of protesters converging on that, and a lot of them talking about the things that the global community has not done enough to fight for the rights of the poor. you know this drill. this is something that typically happens at these venues. but it got pretty violent a few moments ago and on the right of your screen, as the police took the baton to try to get them out of the way of where these leaders are converging. now, this we're told is not immediately in front of the venue that donald trump is using when he had his meeting with angela merkel and will be gathering with other world leaders, but it is close enough. this has happened at a number of events. the world bank events, imf
events, g20 events like this where there is a global stage, there are global protesters. some of this is getting pretty rocky. we hope it just stays relatively calm. trish regan to take you through that with a market that's kind of going nowhere fast. trish: thanks so much, neil. yes, it would not be a g20 meeting without these protesters; right? these, however, have turned a bit violent, and we have video coming into us moments ago. you see protesters clashing with police there as president trump with leaders in japan and protesters of course it was a similar protest that they have at a lot of these summits and that they are protesting globalism. i can remember being at g8 in germany, actually, when you had a lot of these protests breaking out. the difference, however, in most of these is that they don't turn quite as violent. the concern here with this one is that the pictures have just come into us from hamburg, germany is that protesters are more violent than what you would typically see, so you see the police trying to get them to back off, and they're