tv Forbes on FOX FOX Business February 9, 2014 2:00am-2:31am EST
>> what you're saying is, nice, but i'll see you at the finish line. gentlemen, i want to thank you both. the place for business, it's fox. no one, no one anywhere on the planet comes close. how is it the president of the united states -- they requested every facebook and twitter i ever posted there's lies upon lies in this ugly episode. >> i still have not been contacted by the fbi. >> h 1 witnesses haven't been interviewed including two here right now. >> are you going to let them get away with this? >> conservatives nothappy. they still don't have answers about the irs scandal and taxpayers may not be happy when they hear this. in the middle of all this scandal, the irs is standing out more than $60 million in bonuses to its workers, but should it? hi, everybody.
let's go to "forbes on fox." so, steve, should the irs be handing out these bonuses? >> david, no. talk about public be damned, talk about content for the public, here's an agency that's rogue. that's been swept under the rug. the president brazenly tells bill o'reilly there's not a smidgen of corruption and now they say they're going get bonuses because it will hurt morale if they don't get it? what about the morale of democracy? >> now the president said there is no smidgen. before there was a lit. . do you think these bonuses should be handed out to the boneheads? >> it's like a payout of 1%. if you're looking at a pay for
performance thing, i don't think it's a big deal. he said hi couldn't find a less deserving person to get a bonus. maybe they need to look in the mirror with congress and the way they've been performing. >> but two wrongs don't make a right, bruce, you know that. >> right. but i'm thinking if you're tithing government workers, it should go along with performance. >> fair enough. but the fact is rich carl guard when you look the lowelw lois lerner for example, what she's done, what she hasn't done, what she's pursued, didn't pursue, does she deserve it? she got $42,000 worth of bonuses in '10, '11, and '12.
>> steve is right. they do not. this is a very corrupt organization. to sympathize with bruce, this doesn't apply to the majority of people that work at the irs. i feel sorry that they're tainted by the people who have indulged in this corruption. the corruption i'm talking about, they say it's the little things that have been looked at. catholic organizations, the selected enforcement by the irs is just astonishing. >> we already have the inspector general's report that says that they screwed up big time, that they were targeting tea party groups, that this charge by the left that it was equal tea party or even a little bit progressive movements in there, that wasn't true. >> yeah, you know, but when you watch the hearings, davgsd when you see what these individuals
went through, you have to say to yourself, wow, this is really striking, there's something really wrong here that these people are being pun,ed for their views on reigning in governnt spending. i say give them bonuses in the form of government debt. short-term incentives pay 5-year bonds. >> i like that. lois lerner, she was getting bonuses for all of her work while she was holding up the tea party applications but at the same time she was sending right through some applications that didn't deserve it. there's one organization, a shady charity headed by the president's half brother, another obama, it was done illegally. once they pointed it out, they put in an application for a 501
c immediately. she fast tracts friends of the president but agency, not so. >> it's absurd that the obama administration is agreeing to these. it's really absurd. even if you're not against the irs or what they did, i think about this. how much more can they do? it continues to get more precedent. >> with all of the talk from the president and his allies that this was all a problem in the cincinnati office, today we saw an e-mail or this week, from the treasury department, a woman named ruth madrigal, keeping tabs, we mentioned potentially addressing them off-plan.
that means out of the public in 2013. i got my radar up and this seems interesting. ruth madrigal works at 1600 pennsylvania avenue, not anywhere near -- >> that's the irs headquarters, right? >> yes. >> i welcome your opportunity to give your political statements. what i find odd about it is you all seem to be saying but for this scandal if this had never happened, apparently you would favor giving bonuses to the irs. >> i'll ask the question. the question is should we be rewarding this kind of pave with bonuses. that's the question. >> we shouldn't be rewarding government employees with bonuses in any situation. had this scandal evenever happened i would still be here saying why are we giving bonuses to government employees. you know where the money comes
from? if they're auditors and leave and go into private practice and make a fortune because they know what they're doing. let's not con fume the two. if there had never been a scandal -- >> stevings we have to put the two together because people -- certain individuals have been rewarded for doing stuff or at least during the time at which they were doing stuff that most people find an hor rent. >> that you would support bonuses that -- >> steve, go ahead. >> it send as profoundly wrong message to the government, we do our own things our own way. yes, there may be good people in the irs but overall this agency has gone way off the track in a way it's never ne and it's had a very checkered history and to give bonuses and a spit in the public's eye like this is just so profoundly wrong, especially coming after the president who says there's not a smidgen of
corruption. know there is. who do they think we are? >> that's a good point. what about rick's point. you say if you're working for the irs after you've dub wore work and work in the private seng tore. that's where you get your bonus. >> certainly that's true but i don't think these were bonuses in the sense that jamie dimon would get at the bank. we're talking it was 1% of people's salaries. i mean i do agree with rick that you obviously have people that go into the private sector and make more money, but we started to frown a little bit on that because then people say that they're banning certain members of congress and certain government workers from going into the private sectors. >> hang on a second. the irs budget is up 52% since 2001. the total number of tax returns filed, corporate, individual, and others is only up 6%. they're getting a lot of money. basically,yes, they've got
congress neurotically fiddling with the tax code every year but it sends the wrong message. >> rick, incentives matter. when you give someone a reward for their bash, even if it's bad, doesn't that encourage you to give more of that became? >> sure, a wink an a nod. let me stand in defense of my friend rick. it's not either or both. if you had a business spending a 20% deficit, 20% more which striebs it. why not a bad time to give up bonuses. >> i think everybody would agree. coming up next, how the health care laws could smack th
1:00 p.m. eastern in america's news headquarters. here's another broken promise. the white house sd only the rich were going to pay more for obama care but now a new study saying middle class workers will see their income take a hit because of the law. so, steve, what's all this about? >> what it's about, david, is that under this -- the way obama care is actually being implemented is that the middle class is going to end up paying more as well.
the brookings institute found that the bottom 20% will get an effective increase of 6% or 7% but the middle class is going to be 1% to 3% poorer for it because of the higher pay, they oar going have pay more premiums for what they get for insurance. it's not just the middle incomers but lower as well. >> we can be very specific when we say middle class about what we mean. $21,000 to $40,000 a year, they'll pay more, $40,000 to $60,000, i think that's solid middle class. >> yeah. it's a little disturbing. the study itself notes there is a whole lot more things left to come, a lot of shoes to drop. they qualified it. then when you take the results of the brookings study and you match it to some of the studies from the cbo study, it gets
really confusing because they're directly opposed. guys, like it or not and i know you don't. it's going to be three years until we really begin to know at worked and what didn't. >> the fact is we've already seen stuff happening and it's not good. a lot of people shoved off through medicaid and the president said they would not have to pay for it. in fact, he said the middle class will realize greater security, not higher taxes. but if you're paying more of fer your money, isn't that another nd of a tax? >> just another one of president obama's lies when it came to obama care. what we've known for a long time and is not subject to debate, the president tried to sell to the public that it was only going to be redistributed. now it's the top 4/5 that would
have money taken. that's a very, very bad thing on the overall economy. >> the bottom line is you can't ge something for nothing and that was what the president says. it says incoming fall as employers devote a larger share of their compensation payments to health benefits. that's why the middle class will suffer. >> well, i think you point out something interesting in the fact that this has become more a part of people's income and people's total package if you will, their total package. i think in the long term, i think it's going to improve people's income because they're going have flexibility with their jobs d so forth and we're having a period right now of health inflation that's at a 50-year hoe the last three years and i think anybody who has private insurance has seen their wages wiped out by double digit
health care cost increases. >> preess have come down in health care over a three-year period, but if you look at what's happened since october. people have seen their health prices go up. >> no question it's going hit middle class incomes and i will because obamacare is bigger. there's this nigh've perception that president obama can offer all these things for free. i think what they can realized is it's paid nr. >> sabrina, there's no such thing as a free lunch. >> that ice right. he's on to something. obamacare didn't tackle one of the mohs serious parts of our. health care. we have a macive new program. the other probm is we fear finding that people are finally
waking up to what is income. your income is more than your wages and when people see all of these parts on the table, they're going to be more willing of this and less of this. john's exactly right, that all of these benefits don't come out of thin air. >> steve, we only have ten seconds but bottom line, it ain't just the writ, is it. >> dave, the middle class is where they have the money. the rich don't have enough to pay for it all. >> last word, coming up -- >> we have not expanded the welfare state. that's just not true. >> be rt to hear what the tax say. they report, you decide. now binlt. these goodies are laced with marijuana. is it high time to ban them to
it's unregulated and they're selling like crazy. shouldn't something appealing to children be outlawed to protect our children. rick, what do you think? >> the two super bowl teams came from the pro-pot industry. i know i'm sounding unhip and uncool, but, no, this should not be legal. >> john, isn't this something even egalitarians would -- >> mann is no different. we can't expect the government be our mommy and daddy. this is something for our parents to watch over.
>> the law's the teach owner this. if you want to legalize marijuana on this, fine. but don't go ahead and lace it with candy or things like that. you don't do it for nike teen. you don't do it for booze. you're not allowed to get a nicotine patch without a doctor's primgs. so there should have to be prescriptions on it. it doesn't mean you should turn your back and legalize it. parenthave a hard enough job. they can't watch their kid 24/hours a day. >> sabrina, i was shocked to hear you agree with john on this. why? >> i agree with the restrictions. i go to the grocery store every week and there's candy bars masquerading as yogurt. it's my job as a parent to put the good things in the basket. as the kids get oater, they have to figure this out.
>> this schblt candy. philip seymour hoffman just died. he started with the small stuff. >> i think it's awful, i think it's hideous. i think it's wrong. what are we going to have next? vodka jell lowe shots? it's pathetic. philip seymour hoffman, it's such a terrible loss. will we continue to lower the bar and lower the bar and accept it? the thing with pot is it's a drug and can be a gateway drug where childrennd young teenagers turn to harder and rougher stuff. >> absolutely. and to start them on lollipops with this, i mean forget about it. >> yeah, and, you know, to my good friend john tamny, i would say a libertarian who has kids. >> i was given the wrap by t
our informers have stocks that are thriving in this up and down market. i'm doing this because you have volcan materials. >> i like this company because they're selling marketable businesses. >> how about you? >> i give it a volcan sign up. this is a broad based u.s. company like exxon, google, microsoft gpm. i'm liking this one. >> you like this one?
>> i like etfs in general. if you like big oil and big tech companies. >> that's it for "forbes fox." keep it right here. fox business continues with eric bolin and "cashin' in." >> more and more americans lean on the government for assistance. president obama told us this. >> we have the numbers and we' going to debate it. squaller in sochi, toilets and turmoil. water unhealthy to bathe in and who let the dogs out. why this shows america still has the biggest fight when it comes to super power status. and fast about your seat belts. the government's rollout plan to have the cars talk to each