Skip to main content

tv   Bulls Bears  FOX Business  April 11, 2019 5:00pm-6:01pm EDT

5:00 pm
interesting angle and you guys talked about it earlier but it's the kind of deal you get and if you get a deal that makes it better, then obviously everybody is all for it. see you back in new york tomorrow. melissa: terrific show. great interview, connell. you were fantastic. see you back here tomorrow. "bulls & bears." david: we have breaking news. disney just about to unveil some very highly anticipated details about its new streaming service that some analysts say could be a netflix killer. deirdre bolton is following it all from our newsroom. what are you expecting to hear on the call? deirdre: so first and foremost, a lot of people want to know about price. how much is disney plus going to cost. disney has always intimated that it's going to be less than netflix which for the most popular membership is $13.99 per month. that gives you two log-ins, streaming simultaneously. we will see what disney will offer our viewers. you can see the price per month for amazon prime, netflix and hulu all side by side.
5:01 pm
this moment is, you know, 20 months in the making. some people even saying you could accuse disney of teasing the press and consumers and investors, but we also have to think okay, let's give them a break, they did of course purchase the fox entertainment asset, that just closed in march. we have heard the ceo, bob iger, say disney plus' launch is the singular focal point, most important for the company this year. the other big question many investors want to hear about is how is this content going to appear and when, so when a new movie comes out, just say lucas films "star wars" franfranchise does it go into theaters first, does it happen simultaneously as it happens on netflix and also, of course, net flick is the gorilla in the room. 140 million subscribers worldwide, clearly the most adapted streaming module. a lot of people saying disney will have to catch up. then the fans of disney say listen, the brand, so strong, people are going to take it.
5:02 pm
i will be with you all hour. i'm monitoring the call. back to you. david: competition is a good thing, right? makes the consumers happy. we will see you later. in the meantime, 2020 hopeful liz warren is waging war against corporate profits. unveiling a new tax plan today that targets the largest and most profitable companies in the u.s. she says her new profit tax is going to rake in a trillion dollars over ten years from the nation's wealthiest businesses. take a listen. >> when we force those who have made it really big in this country just to pay a fair share in taxes, the point is not punitive. the point is to say you had a great idea, you built a great business, good for you, but remember, you built that business using workers all of us paid to educate. you built that business using roads and bridges to get your goods to market, roads and bridges all of us helped pay to build. david: hi, everybody. this is "bulls & bears."
5:03 pm
i'm david asman. you can bet our panel has a lot to say about this. joining me, kristina partsinevelos, jonathan hoenig, john layfield who is laughing all the way from bermuda, and gary kaltbaum. senator warren claims her new 7% tax on profits above $100 million would increase corporate tax collections by about 30% over the next decade. that's on top of regular corporate taxes. listen. >> if you're telling me that the response to this would be that some of these giant corporations that monopolize their entire field would break apart, maybe that's something we ought to talk about. david: here with us is congressman dan kildee, who serves on the house tax writing committee. congressman, aren't you a little worried that senator warren's proposals could kill economic growth? >> well, i think the direction that she wants to go is something that i could have a conversation about. i mean, i for example believe that the tax cuts that were enacted last year were overly
5:04 pm
benefiting people at the top and really constrained our ability to make the necessary investments we would make. that does not mean that i think the approach she suggests is the place we ought to start. i think we have to find some sort of a middle ground here, a path forward that allows us particularly when it comes to infrastructure to make the big investments we need to make, but do it in a way that does not stunt innovation, does not penalize those who are investing in the economy. now, she makes a fair point. lots of really big corporations who are able to avoid taxation should pay something and part of what i know she's trying to get at is to ensure that all the other loopholes notwithstanding, that there would be some required tax that would be paid. i don't think that's what occurred in the 2017 reform. we are supposed to broaden the base and lower the rates. we lowered the rates, i'm not quite sure we broadened the base the way we should. i don't think i would be ready to endorse the proposal she put forward. i think we can probably find a few other paths.
5:05 pm
>> congressman, this is gary kaltbaum. thanks for being here. i want to ask you the same question i asked the republican side a couple of weeks ago. that is, this year, federal spending is going to be $4.4 trillion. the last year of bill clinton's white house was only $1.8 trillion. is there any cap to when spending stops in government? because every dime pretty much is being taken out of the economy into washington's hands and i'm just wondering, is there ever going to be a year where it doesn't go up? >> well, i think as the country continues to grow and population grows, obviously there are certain areas of spending that have to continue to increase, but i think it's impossible for us to make that judgment because we can't equate all spending equally. you know, there's often a lot of talk about how tax cuts are dynamic and have a dynamic effect on the economy. while they don't necessarily pay for themselves, i will concede the point that they do have a dynamic impact that has some
5:06 pm
positive consequence. but so does making sure that every child goes to a great school. so does 21st century infrastructure. so does the ability to avoid the high cost of big infrastructure failure like what i experienced in my hometown of flint. we have a growing economy, we have a growing country. that's a good thing. but we have to continue to make the investments to sustain that growth. so i wouldn't concede the point that spending is spending. there are certain aspects of spending that i think could be increased. if we increase pell grants, for example, we get paid back. if we increase investment in early childhood education, we get paid back. i would focus more attention on those areas where we know we are going to get a return on our investment. >> speaking of that, congressman, kristina partsinevelos here. if we talk about increasing the corporate tax rate, going back to warren's statement, it would put it on average with the rest of the globe, around 28%. you think there's an added pressure right now on democrats
5:07 pm
as a whole to really come up with various funding structures given these progressive suggestions with the climate change green new deal, universal health care, universal basic income? you think there's a lot of pressure right now to find various avenues? >> yeah. obviously there's pressure whenever we're trying to fund lots of what seems like competing priorities. i'm one who believes that the way to get there for all of us is to invest in those sorts of policies that spur growth. growth doesn't only help us shrink the deficit, growth also delivers us the resources we need to make further investments. this is not a zero sum game. so while a lot of the focus is just on spending, i think if we're going to make these big investments, for example, one way to have it both ways is to double or triple the amount of money we're putting into research into the cure for let's just say diabetes and alzheimer's. we crack the code, we crack the
5:08 pm
code on those two diseases, not only do we ease a lot of human suffering, but we reduce costs to the private sector and to government. so my view would be yeah, you're right, there is a lot of competing -- there are a lot of competing priorities here, but if we focus on those priorities that both investment people and result in growth and some of the differences we have in congress i think sometimes melt away. if we start looking longer term, i think we can come to common ground. >> congressman, i'm just -- thank you for being with us. i'm at somewhat of a loss how taxes, taxes on corporations, is growth-producing. i would posit that corporations don't pay taxes, those taxes are paid for by shareholders and by employees. my question to you is, if it's a well-known adage if you tax something, you get less of it, why would you want to tax corporate profits? >> well, the point of taxation is to give the government resources to make wise investments. we just can't have it both ways.
5:09 pm
you can't cut to zero and still have the resources you need to educate children and build roads. so the question is, where is the sweet spot. we have to have resources. you could argue that a business would be far more productive if they had zero taxes, because they would have virtually all of their resgoerource going to pro but they wouldn't have a road to ship their products on. we have to find the sweet spot. the argument now is where did we land. it is my view the adjustments that were made in the 2017 changes went too far in the sense it did provide necessary relief, which i support, but so far, as to limit our ability to make investments that 10 and 20 years from now are going to continue to deliver growth. i think it's short-sighted. >> switching gears, congressman, i will pivot a little bit. the democrat deadline for the treasury to release the president's tax returns has come
5:10 pm
and gone. we have the ranking member of your ways and means committee, kevin brady, was on stuart varney earlier today. listen to what he had to say. stuart: does he have a legal obligation to release those tax returns? >> no, he does not. it is an illegitimate request. this is politically motivated. it's unprecedented. congress has never, ever tried to seize the tax records of an individual for purely political purposes and in fact, the law they're using protects you and me and your viewers from congress doing exactly this thing. so -- this sort of thing. so i think the white house is actually -- or clearly on the right target and they have the law behind them. >> congressman, what do you think of his comments? >> i just think kevin's got it wrong. first of all, it is a legitimate area of policy inquiry. let's be clear, this is not about releasing the president's tax returns. if we were to gain access to these through 6103, absent a
5:11 pm
vote from the committee for very narrow purposes, these tax returns would never see the light of day. they are intended, this section of the law has been used routinely since 1924 and are intended to inform the committee on specific questions that it's deliberating over. we are deliberating over the question as to whether the irs is properly enforcing tax law on the president of the united states. what is unusual is that this step is necessary because for the first time in nearly half a century, the president has not -- the president of the united states has not made their tax returns public and so we can't make that assessment absent the narrow use of 6103 for the chairman to have access and make a judgment as to whether or not the laws are properly being enforced, which would guide our decision making on the policy questions that we're trying to answer. >> john layfield here. i want to go back to the spending for just a minute, sir. you do a good job of evading the
5:12 pm
question when you bring up kids and roads and tug on the heartstrings. to me, it evades the problem that we have. under president bush, the debt doubled. under president obama, the debt doubled. 2009, ten years ago, treasury revenue was $2.1 trillion. it's now $3.44 trillion. 65% higher. i understand there are certain things we have to sfepend on bu sir, you guys are bankrupting the country because you're not willing to rein in fiscal spending. we are at $22 trillion. this is unsustainable. i get the fact that some spending has to be done, sir, but at any point, are you guys ever going to bring in fiscal sanity? >> well, i don't think it's fiscal sanity to borrow $2.3 trillion and not do the responsible thing by being honest with the american people and say that this tax cut is not going to pay for itself. so i understand your point, except where i come from, i don't think it's tugging on the heartstrings. you can have your point of view but i take exception to the
5:13 pm
notion that i'm trying to tug on heartstrings, when i represent -- >> you are. you are evading the question. sir, that's just wrong. sir, you are just wrong on this. the tax revenue is up this year. it's up from the tax cuts. you can't blame the tax cuts on $22 trillion. you are shifting the chairs here on the titanic, trying to evade the question of you yourself and your colleagues up there are the ones that are bankrupting the country. yes, it's tugging on the heartstrings because you are evading the question. everybody believes we should help kids and build roads but that is not the problem with our spending. our problem with spending, sir, is you. >> well, i don't even know who you are so i kind of -- i don't think i can accept -- >> john layfield. i introduced myself at the very beginning, sir. >> i guess i don't know if you and i have ever met. i won't characterize your point of view as being insincere and i prefer that you not characterize mine as being insincere. i feel very strongly about this. i feel very strongly about the
5:14 pm
fact that there are, as you may have heard if you were listening to me earlier, i don't know if you were, that we have to make judgments about the kind of critical investments that we ought to be making. i'm willing to make those judgments. i'm happy to make those judgments. i don't see it happening and certainly, you can't say that the president's budget was a step in the right direction in that regard. when the president actually suggests critical cuts in those areas where we know economic growth clearly would result, taking for example, great lakes or taking, for example, infrastructure, the president's infrastructure plan that he presented just a little over a year ago put 80% of the burden on state and local governments. if they had 80% of the money to rebuild roads and bridges, they would be doing it right now. we can have an honest debate about budget priorities. but what you just defaulted to is what's wrong with this place. i don't question the motives of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who have different spending priorities. we can have a healthy debate about that. but i don't think it's
5:15 pm
helping -- >> you are evading the question. don't put words in my mouth. your motives may be very pure. i admire you are talking about taking care of or roads and infrastructure. that's something that should be done. i'm talking about overall spending. it's not all on you, sir. david: john, hold on a second. we've gone two minutes over already. i'm going to give the congressman the last word because he's our guest. go ahead, congressman. quickly. >> i just think we all ought to be careful about how we characterize one another's positions. one of the reasons we can't reach across the aisle is the kind of characterization that i just heard. look, you don't know me well enough to know how well i work with my partners on the other side of the aisle. i suggest you talk to some of them. david: congressman kildee, we thank you very much for coming on. we really do. we appreciate it. we hope you do come back and see us, all right? thank you very much. appreciate it. democrats are now firing back at attorney general william barr's claim the fbi actively spied on the trump campaign. we will hear from a key member
5:16 pm
of the trump campaign next. first, here is some of president trump's response earlier today. >> i think what he said was absolutely true. there was absolutely spying into my campaign. i'll go a step further. in my opinion it was illegal spying, unprecedented spying, and something that should never be allowed to happen in our country again. i'm working to keep the fire going
5:17 pm
for another 150 years. ♪ to inspire confidence through style. ♪ i'm working to make connections of a different kind. ♪ i'm working for beauty that begins with nature. ♪ to treat every car like i treat mine. ♪ at adp we're designing a better way to work, so you can achieve what you're working for. ♪ shouldn't mean going back to the doctoro just for a shot. with neulasta onpro patients get their day back... to be with family, or just to sleep in. strong chemo can put you at risk of serious infection. in a key study neulasta reduced the risk of infection from 17% to 1%, a 94% decrease. neulasta onpro is designed to deliver neulasta the day after chemo and is used by most patients today. neulasta is for certain cancer patients receiving strong chemotherapy. do not take neulasta if you're allergic to it
5:18 pm
or neupogen (filgrastim). an incomplete dose could increase infection risk. ruptured spleen, sometimes fatal as well as serious lung problems, allergic reactions, kidney injuries and capillary leak syndrome have occurred. report abdominal or shoulder tip pain, trouble breathing or allergic reactions to your doctor right away. in patients with sickle cell disorders, serious, sometimes fatal crises can occur. the most common side effect is bone and muscle ache. ask your doctor about neulasta onpro. pay no more than $5 per dose with copay card. not to worry about changing their minds in retirement. you may have always imagined your dream car as something fast. then one day you decide it just needs to be safe enough to get her to college and back. principal. we can help you plan for that.
5:19 pm
5:20 pm
david: democrats outraged and speaking out after attorney general bill barr made the shocking admission he believed members of the fbi did spy on president trump's 2016 campaign. listen. >> the chief law enforcement officer of our country is going off the rails. >> it's clear for mr. barr the title he holds is far less important than the boss he serves. >> i believe the attorney general of the united states of america believes he needs to protect the president of the united states, and i think that's unfortunate. >> this is an attempt to take the attention off that very serious -- these very serious crimes and divert people's attention. that's conspirator yial nonsens. david: joining us, president trump's 2020 strategic communications director, marc lotter.
5:21 pm
you were with the 2016 campaign. what do you make of barr's words and the democratic reaction? >> i think the democrats are scared by the truth. everyone knows the president has been saying it for awhile that the federal government spied on the 2016 presidential campaign. it was directed by the justice department and the fbi at the highest levels. they were listening in on an american citizen's phone calls. they were following this person and that to me is pretty textbook spying. >> sir, thanks for being with us. jonathan hoenig. so much of this to me is a little bit in the weeds, political espionage. you mentioned the truth. quick question. how can someone looking for the truth square the president's statements a couple years ago that he loved wikileaks and then just today, that he didn't know wikileaks? communications is your game. if you are looking for the truth, how do you square that for the voter? >> i think it's pretty easy. the president said he wasn't aware of the inner workings of wikileaks. he was talking about the release of public information back on the 2016 campaign. i think there's a very different
5:22 pm
aspect when he was asked today about the ininner workings and w that was going down. that will be handled through the justice department. that's how the president was reacting to it. >> john layfield here. i promise to be nice the rest of the show. look, the fbi can do certain things as far as surveillance that are not illegal. at some point it crosses that line. when does this become criminality and is this, you think, a criminal charge that could happen? >> well, i think that's what the attorney general said he wants to get into. because even when he used the word spying, he clarified by saying we need to find out if it was justified, if there was the proper procedures, the proper information that would warrant that kind of thing. he said that, but of course, the democrats don't want to hear that. they just want to be outraged. they want to demand for retraction and while they are busy calling for bill barr to retract the word spying, they are absolutely quiet on having ilhan omar retract her abhorrent statements that equated 9/11 to
5:23 pm
some people did some things. >> since you are great with communication, isn't this just all wordplay at the moment? spying? it's been over 24 hours and most cable news networks are talking about it, even though barr did say i have no evidence and you just said and i quote, scared by the truth, yet we don't really have any truth just yet. so what do you think of this as a choice of words when it comes to spying? >> well, i think when you are talking about the federal government listening in on the conversations of phone calls and monitoring the communications of someone of -- an opponent political campaign, you need to make sure that all of the safety procedures, all the protocols, were followed and they were justified. we know that is what has been released already that fisa court did not get all the information, they were not given the full picture of things and that's what i think bob barr is going to -- or bill barr is going to try to get to, is were the proper procedures, was the information that should have been provided to those groups like the fisa court, was that
5:24 pm
followed. >> gary kaltbaum. i know this is probably a loaded question. i watched the media for the last day. i have watched them for two years accuse the president of everything under the sun, including being an agent of russia, and all they did for two years was cite unnamed sources. now you have the a.g. come out, makes a statement and all of a sudden, they are worried about all kinds of evidence, where's the evidence, when for two years it was all unnamed sources. what's your take on all that? >> well, i think it's just hypocrisy by the democrats. to your point, they basically called the president of the united states an agent, a spy, you could use that word, for russia with no evidence, and it went unchallenged for two years. it's now been completely exposed as a hoax but god forbid we actually call what was being done to the trump campaign spying, and then they are going
5:25 pm
to turn on their full outrage machine. david: marc, very quickly, jonathan kind of jumped the gun talking about julian assange. we got a tweet from democrat tulsi gabbard. the arrest of julian assange is meant to send a message to all americans and journalists, be quiet, behave, toe the line or you will pay the price. that's what she says the message is. what do you say? >> i completely disagree with that. i think if it's sending a message, it's sending that if you are going to steal classified information from the united states of america, you are committing a federal crime. we are going to look into it and we are going to fully prosecute it. that's the essence of this case. let's remember, it deals with the theft and breaking in and hacking of classified information of the united states government. it's against the law. so now the people who are responsible for that are being held to bear. david: according to the defense department, some of the people
5:26 pm
whose lives were put at risk include our allies in afghanistan, some of whom were likely killed by the taliban as a result of that information getting released. marc lotter, great to see you. thank you for being here. appreciate it. larry kudlow sending a strong warning about the economic impact of progressive proposals. how much he says the green new deal and medicare for all could shave off our gdp. that's next. how do you determine the durable value of a business in the transportation industry without knowing firsthand the unique challenges in that sector. coming out here, seeing the infrastructure firsthand, talking with the people behind the numbers creates a different picture. once i know what a business is truly worth, we can make better informed investment decisions. that's why i go beyond the numbers. ♪
5:27 pm
2,000 fence posts. 900 acres. 48 bales. all before lunch, which we caught last saturday. we earn our scars. we wear our work ethic. we work until the work's done. and when it is, a few hours of shuteye to rest up for tomorrow, the day we'll finally get something done. ( ♪ ) when it comes to type 2 diabetes, are you thinking about your heart? well, i'm managing my a1c, so i should be all set. actually, you're still at risk for a fatal heart attack or stroke. that's where jardiance comes in. it reduces the risk of dying from a cardiovascular event
5:28 pm
for adults who have type 2 diabetes and known heart diseas. that's why the american diabetes association recommends the active ingredient in jardiance. and it lowers a1c? with diet and exercise. jardiance can cause serious side effects including dehydration, genital yeast or urinary tract infections, and sudden kidney problems. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may be fatal. a rare, but life-threatening, bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this bacterial infection, ketoacidosis, or an allergic reaction. do not take jardiance if you are on dialysis or have severe kidney problems. taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. so, what do you think? now i feel i can do more to go beyond lowering a1c. ask your doctor about jardiance today.
5:29 pm
now i feel i can do more to go beyond lowering a1c. tthis is where i trades. and manage my portfolio. since i added futures, i have access to the oil markets. and gold markets. ok.
5:30 pm
i'm plugged into equities. trade confirmed. and i have global access 24/7. meaning, i can do what i need to do. then i can focus on what i want to do. visit your online broker today, to learn more. senator sanders put out his health care plan, universal medicare. 180 million people with private health complarare plans would l. i believe it would be catastrophic. the green new deal and the idea of, again, financing anybody who
5:31 pm
doesn't want to work, no regulations, all of that would decimate the economy. i think you would lose 15% of gdp inside of ten years. that would destroy this country's economy. david: president trump's top economic adviser larry kudlow sounding the alarm on democrat proposals like medicare for all, the green new deal. so do you guys agree with kudlow? could these initiatives actually destroy the economy? >> yeah. look, if you think health care is expensive now, wait until it's free. this whole idea of, you know, health care for all, they forget a couple of things. nothing's free. there's going to be major taxes and he says there's not going to be any premiums, no deductibles. know what that means? everybody will run to the emergency rooms and hospitals for catching cold. you will have wait times. we will turn into the nhs in the united kingdom who themselves are saying they're in big, big
5:32 pm
trouble because people are waiting six months for surgery. same thing's happening in da canada. green new deal, have you noticed the democrats have stopped really talking about it in the last couple weeks because they realize d.o.a. on that bad boy. >> i think it's because now the conversation has switched back to universal health care. i think it's just what is the topic du jour. what we are seeing, if i'm looking at this from a political science perspective and not going into universal health care, these are radical ideas that worked very well in primaries. i think the democrats are actually taking a page of trump's book in how he did it in 2016. you had a right wing agenda, that brought out the core supporters so why not do the same thing from the left side. that's what we are seeing with the green new deal, financially, how are we going the pay for it. there's no money. universal health care, $36 trillion. clearly costs a lot but it's starting that conversation and it's getting people excited. incremental and moderation is not working with voters.
5:33 pm
it doesn't get us to talk about it. >> you say it works really well in primaries. the problem is it doesn't work in reality. the democratic vision of a controlled economy, of an entitlement economy, of a nanny state of government control over every element of our lives including energy with the green new deal, look, we know what makes an economy prosperous. it's not government taxation and control. it's just the opposite. it's a for-profit private profit-seeking economy. >> really. then what about the price of insulin, if we are going to talk about making it a private sector and drug manufacturers, there's no policies to stop them from charging whatever they want when it comes to drugs, or pbms get a percentage of the rebates? >> you are parroting aoc's talking points. >> no, i'm not. i'm looking at the numbers and listening to the hearing the other day on capitol hill. >> health care is probably the best example, the more government has gotten involved in health care, this is going back to the '50s and '60s, the more expensive not only medication, of course, first
5:34 pm
george bush passed medicare part d but all elements of health care. you want to see prices go down, get government oushtt, not put government in. david: i don't know if we would have insulin if we put government in charge of health care. that was one suggestion by liz warren. go ahead. john? >> i'm sorry. i was confused because you guys were arguing on the show and i just don't ever do that. david: yeah. mr. clean. mr. clean. all right. we are going to move on, as a matter of fact. disney shareholders meeting is now under way. let's go back to deirdre in the newsroom for this breaking news. deirdre: well, as you know, disney of course does know how to construct a narrative and build a story, and they are certainly doing that. you are looking at one of the gentlemen here who is speaking right now, we are hearing from their business heads, their direct-to-consumer businesses, their directors of overseas. we did hear from the ceo bob iger introducing the entire
5:35 pm
meeting and he said, this is where we are right now in the meeting, the first 15 minutes is going to be information about hulu, espn plus and then towards the end, in about 15, 20 minutes time, we will hear what everyone is waiting for which is about disney plus, of course. in the meantime, they are just talking about the strength of their international range and the strength of direct-to-consumer and how important this is for the company to move forward, go into the next generation of media. bob iger spoke a lot about walt disney as a creator and pioneer, really, so he's saying he's continuing that tradition. essentially, what we are waiting to hear about is how much disney plus is going to cost and whether or not if you have young children, if you can just keep watching these disney movies on repeat as you would with a dvd because we know for little kids, that is important. we are waiting for pricing and we are also waiting to just figure out can we watch the new movies right away on disney plus or we have to go to the theater first, then to the service. i will keep you posted.
5:36 pm
back to you. david: thank you very much for watching it for us. appreciate it. they are mad as heck and not going to take it anymore. why 6200 amazon employees are tearing into their ceo jeff bezos. details coming up. fact is, every insurance company hopes you drive safely. but allstate actually helps you drive safely... with drivewise. it lets you know when you go too fast... ...and brake too hard. with feedback to help you drive safer. giving you the power to actually lower your cost. unfortunately, it can't do anything about that. now that you know the truth... are you in good hands?
5:37 pm
and i recently had hi, ia heart attack. it changed my life. but i'm a survivor. after my heart attack, my doctor prescribed brilinta. it's for people who have been hospitalized for a heart attack. brilinta is taken with a low-dose aspirin. no more than 100 milligrams as it affects how well brilinta works. brilinta helps keep platelets from sticking together and forming a clot. in a clinical study, brilinta worked better than plavix. brilinta reduced the chance of having another heart attack... ...or dying from one. don't stop taking brilinta without talking to your doctor, since stopping it too soon increases your risk of clots in your stent, heart attack, stroke, and even death. brilinta may cause bruising or bleeding more easily, or serious, sometimes fatal bleeding. don't take brilinta if you have bleeding, like stomach ulcers, a history of bleeding in the brain, or severe liver problems. slow heart rhythm has been reported.
5:38 pm
tell your doctor about bleeding new or unexpected shortness of breath any planned surgery, and all medicines you take. if you recently had a heart attack, ask your doctor if brilinta is right for you. my heart is worth brilinta. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help.
5:39 pm
but some give their clients cookie cutter portfolios. fisher investments tailors portfolios to your goals and needs. some only call when they have something to sell. fisher calls regularly so you stay informed.
5:40 pm
and while some advisors are happy to earn commissions whether you do well or not. fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management. david: amazon ceo jeff bezos facing heat from more than 5200 of his employees in an open letter for not taking enough action on climate change. here's a piece of it. quote, amazon has the resources and scale to spark the world's imagination and redefine what is possible and necessary to address the climate crisis. we believe this is an historic opportunity for amazon to stand with employees and signal to the world that we're ready to be a cli climate leader. they are asking the ceo to stop working with oil and gas companies even though the company just ordered 20,000 diesel vans. joining us now is anchor, fox
5:41 pm
news anchor, brett larson. what do you make of this? >> 20,000 diesel vans, not the place you want to start when you want to move into that green movement. unless you are using renewable fuel sources for diesel, because diesel engines can be altered to run on peanut oil or reused cooking oil. still, you are burning stuff and stuff's coming out the back end of that car. it's a valid point. how do you become this carbon-neutral massive worldwide retail operation without -- david: when you are a delivery service. >> sure, you could argue well, we can use electric vehicles. around the city sometimes you see electric vehicles from coca-cola making deliveries. that electricity has to come from somewhere to get transferred to the battery. you could have couriers and that would be great in the wintertime, especially in chicago. but it's an interesting -- it's interesting that the company employees are pushing for this. we saw what happened at google when their company employees pushed and said we don't want the make a search engine for
5:42 pm
china. you can look at apple and see, they have actually made great strides in becoming a completely carbon-neutral company. they were just saying earlier today, their foxconn factory is going to become completely green. as long as you are feeding people, they can still make your phones. that doesn't take a lot of electricity. they are right in that jeff bezos could do something. i know i saw their initiative about they want to do by a certain time, they want to be shipment zero. so okay, how are you going to work on that? are you going to push tesla to make electric delivery vehicles for you? are you going to put in massive solar plants, where you can charge these batteries? there are so many things they could do. >> brett, you said about the electric car, the electric vehicle is just a coal-powered delivery vehicle. that's the irony of all this. the energy has to come from somewhere. it just seems the me like this environmental movement, it's almost like the environment is for millenials almost what the vietnam war was for baby boomers. it's almost this obsession.
5:43 pm
it's this religion. do we know anything about these young people who -- these people who actually signed this letter? my sense is these are these young, idealistic west coast tech people who for them, have just grown up with environmentalism, as almost a god. >> when you live in seattle, it's a very beautiful place, it's very green, you are very close with nature there. we were in chicago. chicago is not really known for being progressive in terms of the environment and neither is new york city, for that matter. for as progressive as new york city is, we do fall behind a lot. but you bring up a very valid point. in many states throughout the country, our electricity supply comes from coal. no matter how many times we say we are going to make cleaner burning coal, it is the dirtiest thing that you can burn. it's also not very efficient in terms of the cost versus what you get back in terms of producing electricity. nuclear power, it's a dirty word, a dangerous thing, we all think of three mile island and chernobyl but it is the safest form of renewable energy. not renewable, excuse me. nuclear is not renewable. >> no, no.
5:44 pm
>> there are ways to provide nuclear power that are safe. >> jonathan often brings up burning coal and how it helps our civilization. i agree with you on the point that amazon could be making the steps because coal, regardless of if it can help for the next years, is a finite resource. why not have the wealthiest company on the globe try to work on avenues to mitigate that in the future to find other avenues to get electricity. it's a little hypocritical because they are working for a company that burns a lot and has a large carbon footprint -- >> not to mention the boxes. >> on the case of climate change, we are seeing this discussed right now, the climate change report coming out, the pentagon issuing more concerns. so it is something that we need to pay attention to. >> by the way, when you say finite resource, remember, we thought oil was a finite resource until we heard about fr frakking and gas. what today is finite tomorrow is
5:45 pm
infinite. >> optimism. >> it will run out eventually. i don't see anything wrong with taking care of the world we live in. i don't like the extremes of either side. i don't like the fossil fuel guys that say no renewable energy, or the renewable guys who say no cow flatulence. there's got to be a middle ground somewhere. i come from the oil fields of west texas, i'm hardly a tree hugger. what is the road map they have? do they have a road map that can get us to that point? are they just putting targets that are arbitrary saying we need to be a carbon-neutral company? >> they are putting targets saying we need to do that. that is sort of what the employees are pointing out saying we need hard and fast numbers. i would also be curious to know if apple's green initiatives, they have been very progressive on this for more than a decade, going back to when steve jobs was still alive there. i'm curious if consumers are impacted by that. if that's a decision when they are buying a product, i'm going to do this. david: i'm afraid we have to go. that's the end of the segment. thank you, guys. the number of americans filing for unemployment dropping
5:46 pm
to a nearly 50-year low but economists warning that one policy democrats favor could reverse the trend. we will debate that, next. so with xfinity mobile
5:47 pm
i can customize each line for each family member? yup. and since it comes with your internet, you can switch wireless carriers, and save hundreds of dollars a year. are you pullin' my leg? nope.
5:48 pm
you sure you're not pullin' my leg? i think it's your dog. oh it's him. good call. get the data options you need and still save hundreds of dollars... do you guys sell other dogs? now that's simple, easy, awesome. customize each line by paying for data by the gig or get unlimited. and now get $100 back when you buy a new lg. click, call, or visit a store today.
5:49 pm
david: as we have been saying, the disney shareholder meeting is now under way. deirdre has been following all
5:50 pm
the details. what do you have for us? deirdre: a few key headlines. the head of the direct-to-consumer business, kevin mayer, i'm going to quote him directly, saying disney is likely, that's his word, likely to bundle espn plus, disney plus and hulu, so still waiting for that pricing information. another kind of headline here that's coming out is that disney plus is really going to focus on family-friendly content. so "star wars," think marvel, think nat-geo. the other big headline i wanted to bring you from this investor meeting is that espn plus is going to latin america. so disney also underlining the fact they really want to grow overseas and in international markets. they also had one of the gentlemen who is responsible for the revenue at hotstar, which is in india, speaking earlier. so the main headline here, though, is that disney is likely to bundle espn plus, disney plus and hulu. we are still waiting for the pricing. david: i know.
5:51 pm
i know. deirdre: i will bring it to you. david: hopefully we get it before the end of the hour. thank you very much. we need to raise the minimum wage again in the united states so that people get a living wage. >> raise the minimum wage. >> raise the minimum wage. >> radical idea, raising the minimum wage to a living wage. david: there's a new survey by the "wall street journal" finding most economists believe even a small boost to the federal minimum wage would lead to higher unemployment. yet 13 2020 democrats support raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour. this coming as the department of labor saying unemployment claims are at a nearly 50-year low. who do we believe, the economists or the politicians? >> well, look, tell aunt mary and uncle bob who have been working their tail off all their live, risking their capital, and ended up with two mcdonald's with 30 employees that they have to pay $50,000 more a year or
5:52 pm
else. they are going to choose or else and instead of having 25 to 30 employees, they may go down to 20 and the other side of the coin, somebody who may get hired at $11 or $10 per hour may not get hired at $15 an hour because they are not deemed, you know, at that point. so just ridiculous. stop mandating to businesses, leave them the hell alone and let them decide for themselves what's best for them. >> i think it's simple economics that if you raise wages, it's going to hurt earnings. when does that come up to the point that you start cutting jobs? that's tough to say. but national wage doesn't make a lot of sense for a lot of reasons, because what you pay somebody in mississippi and alabama and parts of tennessee, memphis, is completely different than what a minimum wage should be probably in silicon valley or new york city. so the states should probably handle this. to me, i don't know why they have chosen 15. it looks good on a bumper sticker, only reason i've seen, because there's not an economic reason behind it. it's $31,200 a year, is that really a living wage?
5:53 pm
there's not a reason that they are going after 15 except for it's a round number. perhaps it is the right number but i don't think they have verification for it, behind it. >> wages are not arbitrary. people don't make a wage because they don't pick a number out of the hat. it actually has an economic basis to your point. john, the real minimum wage should be zero. any minimum wage violates the rights of an employee to work for what they want and employer to work -- to offer what they want. the real travesty here is who this hurts, the minimum wage hurts those, look, i worked for minimum wage. i worked at starbucks. hurts the people just starting out on the economic ladder from moving up and getting their first job. >> there is a study that goes with what john layfield said, if you increase the minimum wage, restaurants increase their prices 100%. on the flipside, we can pick whatever studies we want. there was a study from the center for american progress that said if you increase minimum wages, there will be a reduction in government spending because people don't need the snap program as much. maybe we can look at it from that point of view. david: we love our cousins at
5:54 pm
the "wall street journal" so we will take them -- by the way, a third of the economists agreed with what jonathan just said, that we shouldn't have any minimum wage at all. but that's for another day, that argument. meanwhile, alexa, stop eavesdropping. forget about the government spying on you. now a new report says amazon's alexa could be snooping on you. details coming next. the lexus es. every curve, every innovation, every feeling. a product of mastery. lease the 2019 es 350 for $389 a month for 36 months. experience amazing at your lexus dealer. i had no idea why my mouth was constantly dry. it gave me bad breath. it was so embarrassing. now i take new biotene dry mouth lozenges whenever i'm on the go, which is all the time.
5:55 pm
new biotene dry mouth lozenges. freshen breath anytime, anywhere. new biotene dry mouth lozenges. the ai i want? well, insurance it's all about trust and speed. i need it to guide this analyst to customize flood coverage for this house. so that this team, can inform this couple, that their payment will arrive faster than this guy. hey. ♪ ♪ so whether i'm processing claims due to this fine gentleman... (car engine starting) or suggesting premiums for this young lady... ai can help change everything at this company. expect more from ai. ibm watson.
5:56 pm
5:57 pm
david: not only is elections -
5:58 pm
elections -- alexa listening but also keeping notes. most customers have not known about it until now, will it hurt sales of echo? amazon's listening device? >> i doubt it. they tell us it is for the customer experience. that is c the is -- that is whyo it. bottom line, amazon, stalkers, facebook stalkers, get used to it. they are behind you walking while you are walking. >> you are so right. >> of course i am. >> are we willing to give up that convenience? no. i would like to point out for viewers there is a way to turn goggle off, go on alexa app, there is a -- too not use a recording score feature. >> there is always a fear with
5:59 pm
big technology. remember, the big fear was i don't want to put my credit card on the world wide web? this is a microphone. not for me. >> they are recording you. if you have a robot that records new your house, you deserve to be pie spied -- david: gary, did you buy one for your kids. >> my kids bought one for me, the light would go on what you say alexa, but would go on when you don't say anything, dishwasher within on, my wife said, enough, done. it is in the closet. >> you don't do the dishes stop it. >> am zo amazon said only if yoy is a lexa it goes on. >> that a lie. it comes on in my house.
6:00 pm
jim: david.david: i tell you this thg that we carry with us, listens to everything. >> and watches us. david: that is it for "bulls and bears" see you next time. >> democrat in media fires back at attorney general william barr for testifying he thinks there was spying on trump campaign. tonight we break down the story with former top fbi official. all that unauthorized surveillance not no collusion. to war to get president trump's tax returns in full swing, president not giving in. socialist bernie sanders said he is ready to drop his tax returns monday. we'll ask, will the real bernie sanders please stand up. >> is he really the altruistic guy who will fix the government and world? or a millionaire 1%

43 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on