tv Cavuto Coast to Coast FOX Business March 29, 2018 12:00pm-2:00pm EDT
these two pilots saw it. it flew above them at high rate, radar said, there is no one there. stuart: you're a believer? ashley: absolutely. why not in. stuart: what do you mean why not in. ashley: we can not be the only intelligent life and that is dubious. stuart: you are a dumbledore. >> i'm a dumbledore. >> who said we were intelligent life in the first place. thank you for the rally. i'm charles payne in for neil cavuto. bringing a rocky quarter to a close. on pace for the first down quarter since 2015. first where is this market heading, market watcher dan
shaffer and deirdre bolton and david asman. dan, you're the man when the market goes down. you're giving us cautionary warnings how inflated this market is. is this big one? >> no, this is the just the beginning. it is not the big one. i think the market could rally from here or early in april and make another top again. at that point, my target, june will be end of rally of last nine years. charles you're saying double top formation >> long term i'm saying sell the rallies. that is my opinion. charles: deirdre we have lot of reason for market under pressure. 10-year yield is near 3%. the 10-year yield is down too
much, what is going on in federal reserve will hike rates four times. almost every week or day there is a new reason de jure. >> i agree. seems if volatility has been cranked up, right? for last few years, you had data points every now and then could have given investors pause that didn't. since february, the two week brutal selloff we saw. you have worries creeping in. i've been watching tech as you know very closely. to early to say whether there is a shift in sentiment. the fact so many tech companies, ones we all know and follow may be prone to regulation. that is beginning to shift sentiment for a group that is really been the markets bright spot even in some of the past. charles: the problem no one grabs the rally baton, right? for a while everyone thought financials would take market higher if financials stumbled. you know, dave, january 26th, president
trump went to davos. threw down the gauntlet. that was the peak of the market. since then he dodd things and said things that have gone against traditional conservative orthodoxy, is that playing a big role here? >> i think it is in the temporary point. when history writes about this ear they will look at this as just the beginning. we had a jobless claim at 45-year low. jobless claim 45-year-old. you've been talking retail for months now. 4% increase in retail sales. we're in an economic boom period right now. and i think all these other things, we've seen how trump has changed language on tariffs. we have peter navarro in the 4:00 hour, i want to plug that. at first peter navarro said there would be no exceptions to the tariffs. we saw all the exceptions. now we have a south korean trade
deal without any tariffs. my point, all fears of the market there will be something are overridden, overshadowed that this is the most business-friendly administration we've had since ronald reagan. you can't ignore that i think it is just beginning. charles: i want to throw this in, today we had the final revision of sentiment number for march. current conditions hit all time record. people have never been this optimistic in the history of the report but expectations for six months down the road actually went down. that points to headline risk and people, anxiety, people feel amazingly freight right now. they're not sure. by the way, showing president trump, that is live right now. he is in ohio. he will be pitching infrastructure. the infrastructure stocks, by the way, having a very good session led by u.s. steel.
>> he has earpiece in, listening to fox business want to let the audience know. wave if you're listening to fox business. >> you got it. charles: dan, help us out here. >> i hear dave's points about all the great numbers. all the historic lows. look at numbers come out of europe, italy around the world. don't look so good. canada doesn't look so good. yet the market prediction the future. things are so rosy david, yield curve, 10-year treasury versus 30-year yield, two year are way out of whack. >> dan, you're sounding like an economist. not a business person. business people recognize -- but business people recognize we have so few regulations right now compared to what we had just a year-and-a-half ago that there is a clear road where there was one that was cluttered with all these regulations and all these taxes. yes we have problems with the tax code.
we have phase two of the tax code coming in. which means the overall rates will come down again. i just think we are seeing a very bright economic future and that right now is being underplayed by the fear in the market. >> i agree with you there is a great economic future but it is not the next two years. it will be later. right now we've got a lot to go through. >> which means now is the time to buy, right? >> depends what you're buying. if you look at commodity crops declined. >> if you hold for two or three years? >> if you hold two or three years you will have buying opportunities. if you think you will make money next two years i think it will be a rough crowd. i'm saying this seriously. the bond market is deepest market in the world. there is a lot of debt that has been issued. there is a reason why the 10-year and 30-year yields are not moving up. i believe by end of the year the 10-year yield could be below 2%. that is the way it is setting
up. that is very dangerous for the economy going forward. i think the u.s. dollar -- >> you buy short-term bond now. >> look at the bond today, why they rallied. i watched all morning since i came in here, there is very strong bid since 8:00 in the 30 year treasury market. i don't know why. charles: do they take their cues from the bond market or take their cues from corporate america and data keeps coming out that suggest is we are in an economic rally mode right now. of course occasionally you will have a hiccup here and there, but for the most part looks like everything points to higher wages. everything points to the economy growing really well. you mentioned gdp. >> jobless claims way down. charles: since 1973. deirdre, how does someone reconcile all this particularly as an investor? i'm always cautious about whipsawing people or having people take a loss to avoid a two-week dip regretting it a month later, or a year later in. >> i'm glad you bring that up. people with 401(k)s or
pensions, they set it and forget. they go into passive investors. they go into products more or less mimic the indices performance. i take your point. yes, if you don't need the money in next two or three years, keep buying, keep adding, close to retirement, maybe you have a conversation. >> even 401(k)s are dollar-cost averaging, even if it goes lower, you want it to go lower if you're investor in 401(k). >> other investor seem to get whipsawed, late to the game, once i buy, it goes down. i hear it all the time. other major big story is it amazon. those shares getting hit after tweet from president trump. they pay little or no taxes to state and local governments. use our postal system as their delivery boy, causing tremendous losses in the u.s. and putting numbers of retailers out of business. dave, amazon, what kind of crackdown do you think is coming? >> a good question. a lot of this might be
positioning. i got a tweet from december which basically he said the same thing. he has been saying it for a while. all stems i think the post office comments which is a good point, the post office has monopoly on letters. frankly i they have been doing a lousy job. a lot of us are complaining about letters getting delayed. they have daily service to 150 million americans on letters. very often they piggyback packages on letters. that is what he is talking about, when the president says the subsidy. city group said that sub is i did i amounts to a buck 46 for every package delivered. so he not just pulling this out of the air. there are studies that indicate but again i wish he would blame the post office for their problems as opposed to blaming amazon for providing a solution. >> would point out that postal service is suffering from the legacy programs, they have to pay workers pretty high wage. >> absolutely. >> paying into their future
health care and their pension. i feel that is really what hurts the postal service. the actual business of delivering packages, believe it or not they are pretty good. >> but the post office has monopoly and subsidize every losses. >> we have fedex and ups though. >> the losses that has, the post office has. therefore in a sense to the extent to which they are getting a free ride, that amazon is getting a free ride they're subsidizing amazon. >> the post office has a bigger problem than jeff bezos. charles: he just cuts good deals. i will say in the last quarter the post office lost over $500 million. a lot is associated with the costs you bring up. i will share with the audience. talked a little bit about stuart varney. people should learn the story of a and p. a lot of us know it as a supermarket chain. for 30 years they fought against the federal government they wanted to break them up in. in 1946 the ceo and his brother were found criminally guilty for
keeping prices too low. does that sound like amazon to you? the judge was republican. appointed by pro-harding, was most pro-business government president trump. they fought, they would be broken up into seven different companies until eisenhower elected. amazing cautionary tale. a&p is in bankruptcy. the market took its place. >> i have a big problem about amazon. i have got their financials right here from the last quarter. if you look at sales and costs of goods sold, the cost of goods sold cost more than sales. that is a big problem. there is an antitrust law been on the books 100 years the company can't sell at cost like that to put their competitors out of business. this is what trump is talking about. charles: right. to your point, the judge, i will say what he said in his ruling. equality of opportunity could not be secured if big firms were allowed to drive small ones out of business. that's your point. that is the point made defining these guys holding them liable. >> tax structure raised a lot of
eyebrows. jeff bezos is no dope. he started out on wall street. when he was looking for a home for the company, seattle was not his first choice. the first choice was indian reservation in san francisco where he would have favorable tax -- you don't get to be richest man in the world by tripping into it. >> he is put be pressure on walmart. he putting pressure on macy's all the big box stores. >> someone at some point will specifically raise, for example, you have the european headquarters in luxembourg. that is -- >> can i stand up for the consumer. i don't want to pay more taxes on the internet. i love when zero taxes were out there. i don't like the malls were closed. i kind of liked it the internet is free of taxes. it is not 100%. charles: all capitalists celebrate creative destruction. tough to watch mom and pa stores. i've seen remarkable things from
omni channel if target, walmart, these guys do this the right way they will have advantage over amazon. i think they're trying to play catch-up. >> not when they're selling at cost. everybody is excited that they get it in the mail, buy it cheap but putting their friend and neighbors and family out of business. that is a big problem. >> for commoditized items. maybe not for the mom-and-pop shop that is in a community knows how to serve a community whether clothing and shoes. places get a lot of foot traffic. i will admit that is not the majority. >> reits, real estate investment trusts own the malls or shopping centers in, they're now struggling. charles: there was a major takeover in that space yesterday. some of the stocks are going pretty well. >> i don't know about the argument because i me guys who were making hours-drawn carriages went out of business when cars came along. >> that is technology. that is different. >> you could argue -- >> radio, television, newspapers had a difficult time. charles: don't underestimate the
capitalism working ultimately to level this quote, unquote unfair playing field. >> if you really look at amazon with cost of goods sold on that issue, breaking even, they're making money in the technology area. charles: all their profits are in the cloud. >> by the way we haven't begun to talk about the "washington post" and the president's problems with that. charles: by the way, those are legitimate problems. i actually think president trump tweeting about this hurts any antitrust actions they may want to take later. >> seems like he is biased. charles: will look biased. thank you all very much. north and south korea, it is official, they are going to meet. new signs that kim jong-un, people were saying he shouldn't be trusted. nevertheless he is making all the right moves right now. we'll be right back. whoooo.
when it comes to travel, i sweat the details. late checkout... ...down-alternative pillows... ...and of course, price. tripadvisor helps you book a... ...hotel without breaking a sweat. because we now instantly... ...search over 200 booking sites ...to find you the lowest price... ...on the hotel you want. don't sweat your booking. tripadvisor. the latest reviews. the lowest prices.
charles: kim jong-un agreeing to meet with south korea's president next month just south of the denuclearized border. as the white house is being what they call cautiously optimistic about the proposed summit. we have former bush 43 defense official peter brookes. i guess the answer we know we can't trust them but to what degree should we at least be optimistic maybe things are changing? >> yeah.
well, we don't really know, charles, why they decided they made this 180-degree turn where they were couple weeks ago when talking about making seas of fire out of washington and seoul with nuclear weapons and sending missiles towards guam. i think this first summit we'll have between north and south will give us an idea, better idea of the north's diplomatic intentions. what i mean by that, what is really motivating them? what are they willing to do? how do they define denuclearization. we will learn a lot that will support a potential summit between kim and president trump maybe in may or later. charles: peter we saw where kim jong-un went to beijing. >> yes. charles: they made some serious pledges there, again pledges have been made. his father, kim jong-un's father and grandfather and made a lot of pledges and took in a lot of money for promises they never meant to keep but nevertheless they are the hermit kingdom. they are isolated from the
world. could that and combination of things, you wonder how long they can stand isolated in world that keeps passing them by? >> not isolated anymore, charles. that trip to beijing was huge. the fact it rekindles the relationship between north korea and china. remember they're allies. they have been allies for a long time. they fought side by side against us in the korean war in 1950s. it sends signal to major powers in the united states that this big power in beijing has got my back. it may lead to sweeteners, we call in the diplomatic world, they might loosen chinese sanctions put on north korea and ease some of the tensions and pressure put on the regime. so that was really a master stroke on the part of north korea to go to china before their meeting with south korea. of course before their meeting with the united states? charles: they haven't had a missile launch since last november. they were having them very
quickly, successively and they were becoming even more and more successful. do we glean anything out of that? do we take anything out of that perhaps how serious they are boeing no these negotiations or anything else? >> i would expect there could be some modicum of good behavior as we move into the negotiations but you're right, there hasn't been a missile launch in quite some time. that could be technical issues or they saw their policy of thumping the united states in the chest was turning out to be counterproductive because of very tough sanctions, punitive economic sanctions put on them by the united states as well as china upped the sanctions as well. they may have decided it could be technical. they could be economic. charles: right. >> i imagine that their behavior will be pretty good as they move into these talks. we don't know exactly what they want, charles. what they could be asking for, the quid pro quo could be well beyond what we would consider to be reasonable. charles: yeah. that was my final question to you. i will just rephrase it then. if they did, kim jong-un did say
they would consider denuclearization what kind of guaranties would they get in return for that? i guess you never want to be deposed. he looks ad sadd add and others, say, hey, if they had a nuke there would never be invasion of those countries. what can we alternatively promise him to get rid of his nukes? >> that is why we're wondering why kim jong-un had this epiphany. think about the hostility two weeks ago. we will never give up the nukes. they wrote it into the constitution. look what happened to saddam hussein and moammar qaddafi. we're trying it figure that out. maybe all u.s. forces off the korean peninsula. remove our nuclear umbrella over japan and south korea. who knows what else may go. they will think we'll reduce our nuclear weapons but keep a minimum credible deterrent. there are a lot of possibilities
from the meeting at the end of next month between north and south. charles: peter, thank you very much. always appreciate your expertise. >> thank you. charles: the president in ohio will push a infrastructure plan. fox business will take you there live. i will break it down tonight 6:00 p.m. eastern. to make you money. i hope you're staying the course in this market and prepared to makerm even more money. ensated. our philosophy is one of service, not sales... that's why i'm independent. charles schwab is proud to support more independent financial advisors and their clients than anyone else. visit findyourindependentadvisor.com
charles: infrastructure stocks in big-time rally mode as president trump gets set to tout his $1.5 trillion plan in ohio. adam shapiro with the latest from the white house. reporter: the president has departed andrews air force base on his way to the north coast. he will be speaking in richfield, outside of cleveland, talking about infrastructure and his plan, roughly $200 billion in federal money, kind of seed money to motivate 1 1/2 trillion dollars in infrastructure spending at the local level over the next 10 years. now before he departed take a
look at this video. he brought out hope hicks. her last day here at the white house. she is leaving the white house this afternoon. but a little bit of a wave food bye and handshake with the president. back to infrastructure and potential to get $200 billion from this congress, not looking very good. even paul ryan speaker of the house says there will not be one single infrastructure bill but the push is on to do some kind of funding, but as the president says, to include local communities, governments at the table to make sure they pay up. here is what raj shah, deputy press secretary, had to say about it. >> funding can become a challenge but one thing very important when federal dollars pour into local communities they don't make as wise spending decisions. when it is their own money, their own tax dollars, they have to be accountable for it, they make smarter decisions, spend their money more wisely. charles: reporter: criticism of the president's infrastructure proposal from democrats.
peter defazio, ranking member from the transportation committee from oregon, says this plan supports selling off our roads, bridges, transits water systems, paving way for new tolls and fees. there is widespread partisan opposition to the president's proposal. the first hurdle is finding $200 billion from this congress. that will take quite a bit. this congress is not in a spending mood right now. back to you. charles: adam shapiro thank you very much. democratic house leader nancy pelosi urging her party to hit the gop tax scam. polls show that republicans are closing the gap with democrats for the midterms. to independent women's forum director of policy, hadley heath manning, and "washington free beacon" writer liz harrington if there are signs that voters are liking the tax plan. liz, what are your thoughts? i felt from the very beginning that nancy pelosi made a major miscalculation dissing the tax plan and benefits for average
workers? >> right. pelosi certainly knows how to come up with winning strategies to help from republicans. it went from crumbs. now it's a scam. i love how pelosi and democrats think it's a scam with when he get to keep our hard-earned money. for voters the scam is the money once it gets to washington. you see closing of the gap not only because of tax cuts but positive signs in the economy. you also see voters reacting postively to trump's latest news on trade. i think republicans are closing the gap but it remains to be seen in november where the economy will be. democrats have to decide if they want the pelosi resistance further to the left playbook or go with more moderate veteran type, conor lamb who are pro-trump democrats that will be a decisive factor in november. charles: pro-tax cut. hadley, feels like nancy pelosi is trying to adjust her crumbs
comment which was a disaster. we have all know that. going back to the old playbook of politics of envy. yeah, you're getting more but someone getting more than you. >> she will attempt to tie tax cuts to cuts in medicare. voters are smarter than that. they are separate issues. washington needs spending reforms, spending reforms will largely center around medicare and social security if we want to address the long-term deficits and debts. she has a point, those things need addressing there. is not political will on either side of the aisle to tackle that at this moment. candidates consider two things in every election. how they will respond and what are the issues going to be, what are issues top of mind for voters. i agree with you, charles, it would be a miscalculation for democrats to center around tax reform package which grows in popularity as voters see positive headline, positive headline.
raises, expanded benefits and maternity leave as employers respond to having extra resources in house. charles: starbucks, admitting we were able to speed up our programs from paid maternity leave to even sick leave. hadley, let me can you, why aren't republicans, individual republicans around the country touting this even more? i haven't heard this message with full-throated optimism i think, they should be using? >> well, some of them are touting it, charles, and i think they're hoping that the economy will speak for itself and you discussed with some other guests earlier in the show just what a great rally period the economy is in right now. yes, voters will take that into account. it is hard to be upset with republicans or upset with president trump when it seems like things are going well in terms of jobless claims, in terms of the economy broadly and in terms of the stock market, absolutely. republicans are concerned if there is a chance they lose their majorities and lose their opportunity to effect change, that they have a very short
window for passing some other policy priorities. so they're focused on thinks at this point. they're looking at infrastructure, priorities they want to get through this november, so they have more than one talking point and not just about tax reform but about the economy as a whole. charles: to what degree the republicans shoot themselves in the foot with the $1.3 trillion omnibus, it was gargantuan bill that looked more like authored by democrats than republican. >> exactly. that is the problem for republicans here. banking on tax cuts which are helping the economy is one thing but they will not have anything else on the agenda are if the rest of the year, that is what they did was spend $1.3 trillion? makes them look completely hypocritical after years of protesting president obama's trillion dollar deficits. it's a bad look. they didn't even get any funding for trump's wall or any
immigration reform either. so it's a bad look and it is hard to see how it is not going to help their voters to be energized when they spend just as much as the democrats do. charles: yeah. ladies, to your point though we have record number of jobs out there. anecdotally, the person getting in the car go to the mall, see help-wanted signs, checks are bigger. certainly numbers starting to tick in their direction. ladies, appreciate your expertise on the show. >> thank you. charles: well stocks right now in rally mode but we're on the pace for the first quarterly loss since 2016. where is this market heading? we'll discuss it next. ♪
you're trying to lower your very hwith a healthy diet... and exercise. and maybe even, unproven fish oil supplements. not all omega-3s are clinically proven or the same. discover prescription omega-3 vascepa. the one that's this pure... and fda approved. look. vascepa looks different... because it is different. it's pure epa. vascepa, along with diet, is clinically proven to lower very high triglycerides by 33% in adults, without raising bad cholesterol. that's pure power. proven to work. vascepa is not right for everyone. do not take vascepa if you are allergic to icosapent ethyl or any inactive ingredient in vascepa. tell your doctor if you are allergic to fish, have liver problems... or other medical conditions and about any medications you take,
especially those that may affect blood clotting. 2.3% of patients reported joint pain. it's clear. there's only one vascepa. ask your doctor about pure epa prescription vascepa. ♪ but i'm not standing still... and with godaddy, i've made my ideas real. ♪ ♪ i made my own way, now it's time to make yours. ♪ ♪ everything is working, working, just like it should ♪
on this news and other news. meanwhile on the topic of amazon, robotics are coming to the tech titan. jeff flock is at a fulfillment center in illinois with latest. robot taking charge there, huh, jeff? reporter: to some degree although there is a lot of people. this is a rare behind-the-scenes look. this was set up a while ago before the president started tweeting today. look at the robots. those are orange ones there. they do a lot of heavy lifting there. in addition to the robots, by the way this is the first plant in illinois has the robots. not all fulfillment centers have them. they have 100,000 fulfillment centers around the country. to the president's tweet, he said today, i stated my concerns with amazon long before the election. unlike others they pay little or no taxes to state and local governments. they use the postal system to the delivery boy, tremendous loss to the u.s. they're putting many thousands of retailers out of business.
you know, know, don't know. they pay a lot of taxes. talked to the folks who are in local government. ran to the general manager, u.s. naval academy. >> that's right. reporter: jeff, you employ a lot of people here. >> that's right. in this fulfillment center we have 2,000 full-time employees. reporter: 10,000 across. >> full benefit, medical, vision, dental, 401(k) start on day one. reporter: even though you have the robots they do a lot of heavy lifting. >> they do a lot of heavy lifting to make our jobs more efficient and give our associates a helping hand. reporter: appreciate the time. appreciate the access, charles. we planned this before the president started tweeting today. i think they make their case pretty well for, you know, for the fact they're pretty good corporate citizens out here in the hinterlands of illinois. charles? charles: jeff flock, love when you do the segments.
appreciate it. thanks a lot. at&t and time warner, the trial is underway. companies like amazon could be targeted by the government. connell mcshane at u.s. district court with the latest. connell? reporter: you know, its interesting, charles, there is certain irony which will explain in a moment explaining comments about amazon to the past comments about cnn and how that might affect this trial. first the latest developments where the u.s. district court judge richard leon who will decide this case in many ways has become the story himself. judge leon is getting quite frustrated with the lawyers trying the case, he told them they need to pick up their pace, need to start moving faster. at&t and time warner have set a june 21st deadline when the deal needs to be closed by. this is at most an eight-week trial. should give them plenty of time. the judge doesn't like the way it started off. they need to start moving faster. his quote, my tolerate for
redundancy has been recently high but will be lowered. they need about their witness lists and think about shorting them. on the witness stand, a witness from mit testified before the government, john houser who did a survey, found if there was blackout of turner network, 12% of their subscribers would jump ship to another cable provider. essentially making the government's case, that turner and networks are must-have programing used down the line by at&t's directv as leverage in a negotiation. that brings us to a certain irony this case with the president going after amazon as you say in a tweet, a lot of people are thinking, boy, how does cnn relate to this case? he has certainly gone after that network many times in the past. at&t ceo randall stevenson said before the trial that was the he will haven't in the room. i can tell you being in the room for better than a week, that elephant has not entered the room yet.
the ironic part the government is making the case cnn is great, terrific. because they have to say the turner networks, cnn included are must-have programing. how is that for irony. back to you. charles: that is ironic. what about a play for amazon? maybe we'll see that one day. connell, thank you very much. meanwhile we're awaiting a decision whether apple face as class-action lawsuit over manipulating speed of older iphones and how big of a deal this is. to two attorneys. david, let me start with you here, big uproar about that. enough people said it happened, we know that it did. the big question, was it deliberate and how liable is apple going to be if so? >> at class action cases only ones that make money is trial lawyers. how many got notices in the mail with two point font or check for
a dollar? it become as ridiculous this is war between trial lawyers and big corporations. apple has issues they admitted in 2017 their new isos was slowing down phones. they felt their market was worth one this dollars. the question begs was it deliberate and did they know about it? it put brand hurting on apple which is the dominant force in cell phone industry. barclays said it will cost the stock or the company at least $10 million. but at the end of the day consumers really shouldn't expect much other than apple will be a little more cognizant of the effects of their new ios in the future slowing down, cell phones, hurting their consumers. charles: debra, there is no doubt a negative outcome for this probably would do a lot more damage to the stock than any sort of fine or penalty. nevertheless though you do wonder, you know, a company as
big as apple, what is going on currently with facebook and amazon, this is not the time to be in front of a judge about deliberately harming your customers? >> i agree with what david was saying. at the end of the day, as a result of the last lawsuit, the people involved in the lawsuit got about $15 each. this is a question of transparency. did apple warn its customers in the disclaimer that their phone would be, slowed down? did they say, you know, is this masking a defect? was it done secretly? those are the questions i think will be at the focus of the lawsuit. today in atlanta members of these lawsuits are meeting to determine which state is going to take the lead and which lawyer is going to take the lead. apple itself might be in trouble with the sec and the justice department and that could be an even bigger issue. charles: you know, david, of course in the meantime tim cook taking the sort of high road in the midst of this facebook fiasco saying they could
certainly leverage their user data. they could make a lot of money by exploiting that and they haven't. are those deliberate also to counter these sort of claims and others? because customers have been frustrated with apple for a long time? >> that is like saying we didn't do a lot of bad things, we only did one bad thing. that doesn't bode very well when you're supposed to act ethically as a big multinational corporation. i think apple did the right thing by offering a new battery for a lower price but it still begs the question, to consumers when they're going to buy an apple, not every consumer a consumer buy as new phone every single year. charles: sure. >> some people, older people might like to keep it two or three years. maybe they will get a google phone or another kind of phone because they know down the road this phone won't slow down when the new phone every year comes out. charles: yeah. >> so it's really a question of ethics of the corporation and doing the right thing is
expected, not, you know, we did, only one wrong thing and we could have done a lot worse. charles: debra, that gets back to your point there could be other bigger woes for apple resulting from this than just a class-action lawsuit. thank you both very much, really appreciate it. >> thank you. charles: coming up is the united states and south korea, this trade deal proof that tough talks including talks of use of tariffs that they can actually work? we're going to discuss that next.
♪ there's nothing more important than your health. so if you're on medicare or will be soon, you may want more than parts a and b here's why. medicare only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. you might want to consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like any medicare supplement insurance plan, these help pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and, these plans let you choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. you could stay with the doctor or specialist you trust... or go with someone new. you're not stuck in a network...
because there aren't any. so don't wait. call now to request your free decision guide and find the aarp medicare supplement plan that works for you. there's a range to choose from, depending on your needs and your budget. rates are competitive. and they're the only plans of their kind endorsed by aarp. like any of these types of plans, they let you apply whenever you want. there's no enrollment window... no waiting to apply. so call now. remember, medicare supplement plans help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. you'll be able to choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. whether you're on medicare now or turning 65 soon, it's a good time to get your ducks in a row.
duck: quack! call to request your free decision guide now. because the time to think about tomorrow is today. charles: stocks in rally mode. this as some say trade war fears are being eased a little bit. white house national trade council director peter navarro telling fbn that the president is actively engaged in trade negotiations. charlie gasparino who is benefiting from the stocks. >> i thought i was going to see a picture of peter. charles: he is making the rounds. >> he is making the rounds. i spoke with him yesterday myself. i think, if it is "art of the deal" and peter is explains it is "art of the deal," it is to threaten, carry a big stick, threaten and get stuff in return, the markets are going up because we're not going into a trade war.
the koreans obviously capitulated. charles: right. >> the one thing i will say is this. and this is what you get from investors, the numbers here are pretty small. they don't move the dial much on the trade deficit. it is better than nothing but you get what i'm saying. does trump keep the pressure on? does he go for eliminating the trade deficit 100%? does he keep doing this in the face, because tax cuts are just about kicking in apparently. charles: i think when it comes to china the answer is no. they're smart enough, even in their biggest demand, saying over a period of time we want to reduce the deficit, our trade deficit by 100 billion, it was 375 billion, adds relevant of realism it will never be parity, to make it quote, unquote, a little more fair. if we get better on nafta, we're looking better on nafta and get with china not unlike what we
get from south korea, it should be great for the markets. >> is it should be off the charts. if we get from nafta that is not, here is the bottom line. why did we create nafta? we created nafta because we were facing competition from china. we wanted to create a barrier in north america to get some degrief trade. it was done obviously, in '94? obviously it needs to be updated. the question does trump go back to the rhetoric to get rid of it because there have been some positive things or does he just tweak it and make it better. i will say this, and this is sort of interesting and where i think, i think navarro has got to know this, and kudlow, his new chief is knows this factories in the u.s. are not completely but largely automated. i was a conference with people from e-commerce and factories, bragging how automated it is to
the minute the product gets on assembly line, to the minute it is made. it is done by computers. that is done with steel. you're not going to bring that level of jobs back. so what you are really doing is you're hurting industries adapted to the automation. charles: to your point in 1979, there were 19 million manufacturing jobs. it dropped down to 12 million. it was remarkable in president trump's first year we created a almost a quarter of a million new manufacturing jobs. there are niches. >> manufacturing. charles: smart manufacturing is something that we i think have a chance to get back into the game. >> but manufacturing is such a broad thing. look at it this way. steel manufacturing is completely automated, we know that. you just know that, anybody, i know congressman have steel plants in their districts they will tell you, that the steel plants are still there make money but they have 1/3 or 1/8. charles: a lot more with a lot less. >> cars are not totally automated. the problem if you raise
terrorisms on steel that could mean less car manufacturing because you priced them out -- tariffs. if you bring back the old industrial midwest the way it was, it ain't happening. if you to to new economies, tweak around the edges, guess what, "the art of the deal" will win. the markets have to go up. i don't know how they won't. charles: i think they will. i think concessions have been made on nafta, they haven't been talked a lot. the automotive part was the biggest part with parts going back and forth with the supply chain. america said we'll not touch that. that is the hugest part of that. i think we'll get a deal real soon. i think there are jobs that can be created folks in the heartland will feel a lot better. we won't go to 19 million, what if we created another million over next three years which is possible. >> all the heavy-duty factories automating at a fast clip.
charles: jeff flock was in ultimate automated factory. they have a whole lot of human beings there too. >> the point is this, the thing i picked up at the meeting, this was cfos and ceos, two dozen from mid-cap companies, market cap of 300 to $3 billion and less. they say they're facing incredibly big major wage pressure not in those manufacturing, in service and manufacturing that includes some technology skills. that's where the money is. charles: that is called the new economy, blue-collar jobs. thanks a lot. stocks in rally mode on the last day of month of trading but it has been a rough quarter. what will happen in the next quarter? we'll be right back. more and more people have discovered something stronger...
more dependable... : . years overall. current competitive owners can get a total value of over eleven thousand dollars on this silverado all star when you finance with gm financial. find new roads at your local chevy dealer. ♪ with expedia you could book a flight, hotel, car and activity all in one place. ♪
charles: welcome back. i'm charles payne. the markets are ending a rocky quarter and month with the rally, for now. we gave up 200-point rallies in the past two sessions. despite these gains they are still on track for their first down quarter. the coal has the winners and losers. >> you saw the dow and s&p 500 were negative for this year. the nasdaq is in the green. we've had so much volatility. let's look at the big movers.
it's worth noting five names on the dow jones industrial average accounts for about two thirds. 3m, mcdonald's, home depot, johnson & johnson and procter & gamble. mcdonald's is down seven and half percent. home depot is down six and a half percent. procter & gamble is down 13% but we do have winners to speak of. boeing has been doing very well this year. there up over 10%. intel, cisco, those are some the winners. tech has had volatility lately but has been the driver of the market since the election in 2016. this group has done so well. now we are looking at volatility. the market is the first down quarter that stocks have had to deal with so much volatility, trade wars, legislation, spending and now regulation on some of the big tech companies. the dow is up 252 points right now.
yesterday. [inaudible] the volatility appears it will be here for a while. >> it ain't a lot of fun anymore. >> it's just tough for now. charles: thank you so much. meanwhile, president trump is hitting amazon in the tweet thing they pay little or no taxes to state and local governments and are putting thousands of traditional retailers out of business. amazon stock is getting hammered today. it's down over 1%. the sector also weighed down by privacy concerns, this is related to the whole facebook fiasco. reaction from our panel. carol, technology led the way last year emma led the way until mid-january, and it's been under a lot of pressure. the market has been under pressure because no other sector has been able to step into the void. >> you have sort of a confluence of events. you have concerns about trade
and the fed moving away from a common engine accommodative monetary policy and concerns around tech with legislation and privacy issues. charles, if you can look ahead to a couple weeks from now when we start to get into the next earnings season and you still look at the overall economy and the fact that we are likely to not only get organic growth but a lot of these companies will be talking about what they will do with the extra money they're getting from the tax break, that will have a very positive impact not only on earnings for the next quarter, but on future quarters. if you look on a valuation basis where the s&p is right now and understand that will come down when earnings come up, i think once we get past the next couple weeks, hopefully that sentiment will shift. >> what's frustrating for a lot of people is that the fundamentals look great, we just came through one of the best earning times ever. sometimes with nothing to do with financials or the economy
can drive stocks down so quickly and it makes people frustrated and leery of investing. >> exactly, charles. i'm worried about what you just talked about, trump, the latest headline bashing amazon. first of all, yes they pay very little in federal income tax, but they don't make a lot of money. you have a lot of revenue but they're not that profitable compared to walmart. the other part is, by the way they do pay state and local taxes to a tune of almost half a billion dollars last year. the other part that bothered me about the president's remark is that we just had eight years of an antibusiness president. we don't need another one. yes, have they cost small retailers jobs, yes. so did walmart. so the department stores when they came to be in business. i view amazons is one of the great wealth creators that we
have. why start target amazon. that's a horrible precedent for this president. >> too that point, today stock is up one 100% from the 52 week low, macy's, a lot of these names that have been victimized by amazon are learning how to adjust that's what capitalism is and ironically, it's actually creating some opportunities for investors. >> charles, i agree with that. these department stores have to provide an experience, not just a product and i agree with gary that look, amazon provides a great service and trump said he was going to reduce taxes and reduce regulation and with the amazon he wants to do the exact opposite. increase the taxes and regulation. it makes no sense from a capitalist point of view and it seems like he's not draining the swamp, he's filling it up. free markets will work this thing out. when ford invented the car, no
one weeps over people who were creating buggy whips. this is capitalism. this is evolution. investors and consumers when long-term. leave amazon alone. >> charles, the other thing i was gonna say, one thing people don't realize about amazon's business model is about half of the goods sold on amazon are sold by 2 million third-party retailers, most of those are small businesses. this narrative that they're putting small business out of business, there actually creating a platform for small businesses to come into the market. they will have a very difficult time proving there's anything anticompetitive about that. you want to be careful they don't have to price their products more than amazon prices there is. how do you articulate the spirit he's also president of
the united states, not just president of the stock market. to people who do feel something is wrong, whether it's facebook and our privacy, there is something changing major in this country and it's unsettling to a lot of folks. >> you're absolutely right. here's the thing, going back to the amazon issue, if you have a problem with amazon paying taxes, then make a pledge to have some sort of fair tax revolution. don't target a single company. it's the same thing, if you want to change privacy with facebook, change privacy laws. it really should be in congress his hands, not the president. he should be picking on, nor should congress be picking on anyone company. if you don't like the law change the law but don't pick on one sector or play favorites. that's horrible. that's what the past president
did much to almost everyone's chagrin. >> what you make of this market. we have a 240-point rally yesterday and the day before both fizzled. last week we saw sales kicking around 2:00 o'clock. what you think of a market that can't sustain these rallies and falls apart at the close. >> the market is down about 2% and volatility is a friend of long-term investors. i don't know where the next 20% upper down is going but i know historically the next 100% is u up. of this market comes down, quarterly it's a good time to rebalance your portfolio. if you're down in your portfolio sell the fixed income and by the stock when their low. if they keep going got down, keep buying them. they will come back up. i try to train my ambassadors to think about it as an opportunity when the market goes down, not something to be
afraid of. if you're only in the market for a year or two, you shouldn't be in there at all. you gotta be in there for ten, 20, 30 years and then you don't have to predict and speculate. if anyone really knew where the market was going in the next day or months, they would be richer than bill gates. nobody knows that. >> 20% to the downside, i know it's easy for us to talk about but it is tough for someone who might be 45 or 50 years old, maybe didn't get in the market until recently because they feel like we have a pro- president in office now and now they're losing. now there's saying i waited, i waited and i jumped in and 20% is a lot of pain. >> that is the challenge with the retail investor. we've seen this story so many times. the reality is volatility is a real and normal thing and
we've been in this fantasy land for so many years but this is what the expectation is of being in the market. i agree, if you let people believe there's a recession coming, potentially it's a good time to make some purchases and rebalance your portfolio, but you have to have a long-term view and you cannot play these ups and down. if you're a long-term investor, focus on the long-term. if you believe in the long-term growth, there's your answer. >> what could the catalyst be that could get us up to an upside as to the market. is a one or two things that needs to be answered? >> i think it's a number of things that are catalyst that i think we've known them all along but i still think we haven't felt the effect of the trump tax cut, i think inflation is low. the underpinnings on the economy are good.
the mainstream media always likes to focus on the negative. there's so much good out there. we have so many other things out there, artificial intelligence, self driving cars, it's exciting things like that that i think will be at the forefront in the next two years. i love the market. is it rocky, absolutely. i think the economy is strong. >> i do feel bad for folks who watch the mainstream media and are missing out on this because news that has zero, absolutely zero to do with the economy, even current day real news. thank you all for your words of wisdom. have a great holiday and we will see you soon. >> north and south korean presidents will meet next month but could trumps tough talk on trade impact these nuclear talks going forward? that's next.
retail. under pressure like never before. and it's connected technology that's moving companies forward fast. e-commerce. real time inventory. virtual changing rooms. that's why retailers rely on comcast business to deliver consistent network speed across multiple locations. every corporate office, warehouse and store near or far covered.
harry, there are two schools of thought. one is that president trumps tough and public position and his renewed trade deal with south korea has forced kim jong-un to go to beijing, visit china and it will perhaps force concessions that make everyone feel a lot better not just economically but with the world initiative on peace. >> i think we have to look at it from a chinese perspective. i've checked in with quite a few chinese colleagues of mine and i posed the question, is there any situation where if u.s. china trade talks got bad, would you turn north korea loose on the world. their answer is absolutely not. they do put conditions on
there, if the united states launched tough trade actions in the next few months, if beijing wasn't able to find a good deal or get to a combination, maybe they'd change the mind but if there is a war between the united states and north korea were talking about millions of people dying and millions of chinese dying because radioactive clouds are very notorious for traveling lots of distances. >> could that be a war against china? america knows this, china knows that, would they say this is a deliberate action and with that caused hostility between us. >> that is absolutely possible. a war with north korea is not going to stay in the conventional sense for very long. if the united states decided to launch preemptive strike or something like that, the north koreans are going to see the bomb start falling and they will launch everything they have. that doesn't mean just nuclear weapons but chemical and biological weapons. that spreads very quickly and it would impact the chinese.
i think they would feel emboldened and get involved very fast. >> president trump is in cleveland ohio to promote infrastructure, it's something that both parties talk about all the time, it looks like, it always seems like it should be low hanging fruit. he has a plan to take 200 billion in federal spending and find a way to bring a public-private partnership along with state and local government to create a 1.5 joined our plan. still it's met with resistance in washington d.c. nevertheless the president is taking his case to the american public. >> harry, as we await president trump to the board the plane, where does this go? the stakes are high for everyone involved. you think about north korea's position, you mentioned china but north korea, their only currency in the world were the only place they really get any sort of form of respect are from these nuclear weapons. so how do they give them a? what they give up for this in
return, economically and from their own perspective of national security. >> charles, i think that's the ultimate question. we all have this false security that they will do nuclear eyes. they will want, at a minimum, hundreds of billions of dollars of economic assistance from china, japan, south korea and the united states. diplomatic recognition, the end of the korean war, their laundry list will be huge. if washington doesn't give in, i think we will be back on the brink of war. for the trump administration is only to choices. either contain north korea or war. it's only a binary choice for the father is to this. >> without a last launch in november, with the work clock, we thought it was only moments away of striking midnight. their capabilities are getting better to get these missiles anywhere in the world and also
to be able to carry nuclear warheads. if these talks fail, do you believe war will be in evitable. >> yes because we have to remember there's no diplomatic room (there's no road to go down. if the talks fail when they don't happen, the north koreans will start testing missiles and nuclear weapons again. that will force the u.s. to up the pressure. we could talking about a naval blockade. if that happens the north koreans will do in atmospheric nuclear test in the united states would consider military action and were essentially at war. >> thank you very much. tim cook blasting facebook's privacy misuse, but is this misuse really a surprise? more on the troubled tech giant troubles tonight on making mone money, 6:00 p.m. tonight right here on foxbusiness.
how much money do you think you'll need in retirement? then we found out how many years that money would last them. how long do you think we'll keep -- oooooohhh! you stopped! you're gonna leave me back here at year 9? how did this happen? it turned out, a lot of people fell short, of even the average length of retirement. we have to think about not when we expect to live to, but when we could live to.
let's plan for income that lasts all our years in retirement. prudential. bring your challenges. racing isn't the only and with godaddy, i'm making my ideas real. with godaddy you can get a website to sell online. and it will look good. i made my own way. now it's time to make yours. ♪ everything is working just like it should ♪ charles: we care about the
user experience. we are not going to traffic your personal life. i think it's an invasion of privacy. privacy to us is a human right. it is a civil liberty. >> that is apple ceo tim cook slamming facebook over their privacy controls, but should we really be surprised that facebook has misused this privacy and all the information that we voluntarily have given them. scott mcneely says if you don't like what facebook is doing with your data, you can leave it. is it easier said than done if all your buddies and friends are on facebook? >> i don't know, i don't really use facebook. i use my phone and e-mail so it depends on how you have to
get in touch with people. i think the important thing about facebook to remember is if the product is free, and there are lots of free services out there, you're not a customer, you are the product. your data, your information, your profile is the product. if facebook can't use that data, what do they have? and have no revenue they have to charge a fee or subscription. if we regulate away, there will be no free network social services out there and that's a regressive tax on people who want to use the service. >> there's no doubt that the element of it being free is attractive. whatsapp spent a lot of money on that product. another free product that connect people all around the world, and yet there's a feeling that when the company goes before congress that something will come out of this with more regulations or the company who somehow wants
to be more transparent. is it okay if there more transparent with her information and is there room for us as consumers to benefit as well. can we get a piece of the action from our information? >> you can get a piece of the action, the company and chairman of come away in is putting together social expenses out there where you get rewarded for sharing what your intends are, what your attitudes are, that sort of thing and there's a reward system for giving that up as opposed to something that secret. someone, long time ago said you have no privacy, get over it. apparently they didn't listen to me back then. i tell my boys come anything on the internet, you just have to assume it's a digital tattoo that could go viral at any moment and forget me is a fantasy, i just on a higher forget. i also say, if you click
through on the license that's more than a paragraph long and not in english or if it's in legalese, assume that whatever you're doing on that service is going to be available but i just don't know how you operate in any other way. if it's free, people are going to user data because they have to monetize the service. it's not free to give you that service so they have to charge for it. who got hurt and how? let's prioritize the risks and threats. is there a risk that facebook is going to do something bad to me compared to, let's just pick my government who is in voluntary conference getting about two thirds of my income every year end giving it too things i don't necessarily support like moaning to students who won't pay back are going to tenured professors and union teachers in the school system or putting me in the same insurance pool has people who overeat, ride motorcycles without helmets and get stoned all day.
i think the government is a far greater risk of having privacy access. look at the fisa warrant issue. where the judges ever held responsible for giving up fisa warrants based on false, fake news? there's so much more great and horrible risks when governments, i'm worried about government officials inside the u.s. government screwing around with our elections and i am what the russians and yet we keep prioritizing all the stuff that i just find lots of people in the government running around yelling criminal, criminal when they ought to be looking in the mirror. i just get very nervous when the government wants to get involved. i don't think zuckerberg should go there and say i need to be regulated. no. there's the invisible hand. that is far more effective at regulation and far less corrupt than the swamped doing it. >> having said all those things, there's a curiosity
factor that this is sort of a known practice, whether you call it harvesting or you try, you get this information to try to manipulate people to buy a product and take a certain action, and yet when it was done by barack obama, and not get too political, but apparently his campaign had five times information cambridge analytic i had and they bragged about it and started facebook. >> eric schmidt and his team were brilliant at getting obama elected using big data. big data is personal data. it's all about personal preferences. there's a huge hypocrisy there but i don't get into that. what are they teaching? one of the parents teaching their children and what are the schools teaching us about getting online. it's plainly obvious and nobody can read these click through licenses that are 50 pages long. tim cook, look at your own
licenses before you start chucking rocks. you have to have 12 years of graduate legal degrees to read those things and its security through obscurity for the company. what i tell my four boys, everything in the digital tattoo. you can't forget. as long as the government is overreaching, they are the only ones you need to worry about having data on you. >> also, let's face it, the government does have a certain amount of power and control and they can make life miserable or more miserable for facebook and probably that's why zuckerberg is going there and trying to fall on the sword enough to mitigate their intrusion into this business. >> i think free is a wonderful service, but it is never totally free. there is no free lunch out there. again, like i said, if the services is free, your data is
the product. if there's a fee then you can say i paid you not to share my data. >> how do you deal with this issue of transparency, the language that you used to let people know how the information will be used, shared or sold. >> we allow brands to have a one-on-one relationship and that's a clear and focused experience, interactive experience for the customer knows who they're talking two and its personalized a as opposed to anonymous or global experience that just happens anywhere and everywhere like on a social network. we have a very explicit as opposed to implicit conversation and sharing of information and we reward you, like on hgtv we run a sweepstakes where you share data and you might win a
house. there's a very clear award in give-and-take transaction that's happening. there's an implicit transaction happening on facebook or twitter snapshot or instagram are all those others and i think that's fair, but it seems obvious to me that there is an implicit transaction going on when i use a free service. >> it's always a pleasure to hear you speak about these things. i appreciate you taking the time with us. thank you. >> president trump in the battleground state of ohio. could a big win on infrastructure help push republicans over the top come november. there he is coming off air force one. we will debate that next. quite a lot of colleges to pay for though. a lot of colleges. you get any financial advice? yeah, but i'm pretty sure it's the same plan they sold me before. well your situation's totally changed now. right, right. how 'bout a plan that works for 5 kids, 2 dogs and jake over here? that would be great.
that would be great. that okay with you, jake? get a portfolio that works for you now and as your needs change from td ameritrade investment management. about type 2 diabetes.with some surprising facts so you have type 2 diabetes, right? yeah. yes i do. okay so you diet, you exercise, you manage your a1c? that's the plan. what about your heart? what do you mean my heart? the truth is, type 2 diabetes can make you twice as likely to die from a cardiovascular event, like a heart attack or stroke. and with heart disease, your risk is even higher. but wait, there's good news for adults who have
type 2 diabetes and heart disease. jardiance is the only type 2 diabetes pill with a lifesaving cardiovascular benefit. jardiance is proven to both significantly reduce the chance of dying from a cardiovascular event in adults who have type 2 diabetes and heart disease alower your a1c. jardiance can cause serious side effects including dehydration. this may cause you to feel dizzy, faint, or lightheaded, or weak upon standing. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may be fatal. symptoms include nausea, vomiting, stomach pain, tiredness, and trouble breathing. stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of ketoacidosis or an allergic reaction. symptoms of an allergic reaction include rash, swelling, and difficulty breathing or swallowing. do not take jardiance if you are on dialysis or have severe kidney problems. other side effects are sudden kidney problems, genital yeast infections, increased bad cholesterol, and urinary tract infections, which may be serious. taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you have any medical conditions. so-you still just thinking about your a1c? well no, i'm also thinking about my heart.
now it's your turn to ask the serious questions. ask your doctor about jardiance. and get to the heart of what matters. when it comes to travel, i sweat the details. late checkout... ...down-alternative pillows... ...and of course, price. tripadvisor helps you book a... ...hotel without breaking a sweat. because we now instantly... ...search over 200 booking sites ...to find you the lowest price... ...on the hotel you want. don't sweat your booking. tripadvisor. the latest reviews. the lowest prices.
pants is here with us. mark, i will start with you. president trump, i kinda feel it's frustrating that he still has to go out on the road and pitch infrastructure. both parties always say they wanted and supported all the time. >> you're absolutely right part here's another example where president trump is sticking with the people, doing things to benefit the people and democrats are locked down in opposition say nothing but no. this will be a great speech by the president. the people across america no roads, bridges, airports, that means jobs and that's what this president is talking about. we've got to do better. he has a plan to do it. >> here's the thing, he has a plan but will it ever get put through? it does seem amazing because everyone hates potholes, everyone agrees we need infrastructure, we know were $2 trillion behind in just the
upkeep, why doesn't get done. >> the heavy left. >> for who. >> for all of congress. not just democrats but republicans as well. were talking about a $200 billion expenditure at a time where we literally signed an omnibus spending bill that people are uncomfortable with. there are elements about how the money will be allocated which makes conservatives nervous. for example spending money on bold innovative ideas that for whatever reason just haven't found private capital. that raises red flags for me. i think there are some elements that are really great , but i think it will be a tough political blow. >> by the same token, a big part of this plan is getting rid of some of these regulatory hurdles that might stop the private sector from wanting to do any solar projects and also leveraging that 200,000,000,001.5 trillion.
while. [inaudible] i look at it as more of an investment if it's done right. >> of course. it will have tremendous economic repercussions and make the country competitive and foster growth. this is one of the issues on which republicans are so bad at messaging it makes my eyes bleed. they cannot make people explain why the private sector should take a role. by the way, in europe which is way more last wing, there's much more private investment in infrastructure spending than here. it's ridiculous. we have a lot of blue state governors who have espoused this kind of process, get in the private sector involved, leveraging federal dollars, this should and can be happening. honestly, congress is where good ideas go to die. i agree with you, regulatory reform is important. that's what elaine chao spent much of them last year on. >> although, we do know when these things are touted and
promoted it's one thing, the execution always seems different than major stimulus plan on president obama. no one wear knows where the money went, they just know it didn't go to infrastructure. >> i think that's a key point in why the president is talking about using $200 billion to leverage 1.5 trillion in state, federal and private-sector money. in this case, it's not all the federal government's money. we will actually bring in partners and not have to prove they have a plan and the financing to cover their share. and it's a great way to leverage and get your bang out of the buck. >> rolfing for the most part there's good opportunities here and president trump must think there's still a chance to get this done, going to the heartland in making this midterm issue. i see the entrenched establishment not moving on this. >> i see this trip as a
political move. were talking about ohio where there's a lot of blue-collar workers. it's going to meet a lot of union jobs and you saw that with the report coming out estimating as many as 400,000 jobs created by this. i think that's his pitch to the people in the middle america, the blue-collar constituents that have made up his court. whether or not congress can get the lift through, especially with the problems we've had with previous infrastructure spending, that's the big question. >> we just did 1.3 trillion and republicans started talking about no more frivolous spendin spending, but we know they're always going to do it, i think. that sort of the epiphany, if you didn't have it before you have it now and that's the way the swamp works. sometimes, some good has to be done down there and it's hard to imagine why this is having, i still don't get why this is and being pushed through with the different opportunities out there. by the way, it is an economic
issue. we want better roads and jobs and products moving from here to there. >> we have mined the tax bill for a lot of goodwill and were seeing that work. it has definitely improved and the generic ballot, republican versus democratic, the gap has narrowed because the economy jobs in the tax bill and now we need another issue going into the midterm elections. infrastructure is clearly something republicans should be running on. that's why i'm so frustrated with republican leadership. they should be backing. they should find another 1. $1.3 trillion spending bill the $200 trillion to fund this program. it doesn't seem that impossible. >> there was some infrastructure in the tunnel between new jersey and new york cannot start encouraging for fiscal conservatives. if you look at the new york city subway, the report that came out a few months ago that
they had a hundred workers on the clock getting thousand dollars a day and no one could say what they were actually doing, that's the waste and inefficiency that people are really concerned about. >> we did see today, mark, the final read for consumer sentiment for the month of march, and what stood out to me was current conditions hit a record high. it's never been this high before so people feel amazing but the red flag was expectation six months down the road it actually dropped month over month. people are feeling amazing. what is the anxiety right now? does it go beyond economics? >> i think there's always the question of can you keep it going. there is so much optimism out there, you are right and we are seeing it in record low, historically low gdp growth. almost meeting the goal of 3%
growth. there's so much going on right now. republicans have a great record to run on. i think that will be holdbacks of the optimism long-term as people know were in an election year. it's important to get to the polls and keep this going. >> let me ask another thing that could be a big midterm issue. trade. i think were going to get a deal in nafta. some good things have gone on that were underreported. >> i'm concerned about the tariffs right now. this is small metal fabricators, american locker builders, they're saying their prices are going up substantially.
>> they have come down but the concerned about the philosophy behind it, what we will see in terms of policy and whether this is the new status quo and they're also concerned about domestic market taking advantage of that protectionism. i think this is the kind of thing that could go either way but i'm really concerned about the small businesses. >> in the meantime, south korea will reduce their steel imports and it will be 70% what they normally turn in. they will also make it easier for u.s. drug companies to sell drugs. if we use that as a model and we can extrapolate the same sort of concessions from china, i think this will be a huge victory just for the american public for once, standing up for the american
workers. >> and having an american president stand up for american workers. what we've seen is, the media going completely crazy over these tariffs in one day after another, there has been a win for the trump administration in terms of renegotiating deals are making progress, as you have set up nafta. i thought the most stunning thing that came out of the today's consumer sentiment release is lower income americans that are driving that gain and consumer sentiment. guess what those are trump voters happy with the tariffs. they're not sure at the top level what the impact will be, but they have a president standing up for them and they are cheering. >> they will also be hit hardest. >> we will see. the jury is out in terms of what the impact will be because what we've seen so far is a lot of companies excluded. >> the we also underestimate what they are prepared to take in terms of short-term pain for long-term gain, at least in their minds. we are looking at in ohio where a lot of folks are
gathered thinking the president is doing the right thing, he's going to take the stage in a moment. he's talking about american jobs, american infrastructure and companies like caterpillar. we'll be right back. ♪ most people come to la with big dreams. ♪ we came with big appetites. with expedia, you could book a flight, hotel, car, and activity all in one place. ♪
the rest is up to you. you might want to consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like any medicare supplement insurance plan, these help pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and, these plans let you choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. you could stay with the doctor or specialist you trust... or go with someone new. you're not stuck in a network... because there aren't any. so don't wait. call now to request your free decision guide and find the aarp medicare supplement plan that works for you. there's a range to choose from, depending on your needs and your budget. rates are competitive. and they're the only plans of their kind endorsed by aarp.
like any of these types of plans, they let you apply whenever you want. there's no enrollment window... no waiting to apply. so call now. remember, medicare supplement plans help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. you'll be able to choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. whether you're on medicare now or turning 65 soon, it's a good time to get your ducks in a row. duck: quack! call to request your free decision guide now. because the time to think about tomorrow is today. charles: i'm in a take a little credit. why not.
the doubt jones is hitting 340 points on the upside. president trump is hitting amazon with a tweet that the stock is turning positive. it was down $40 and it has taken it on the chin since president trump. [inaudible] let's go to our analyst. do these tweets make it less likely that any action could be taken. >> yes, to answer your questionsecond question first, the president tweeted notoriously about cnn and that has not come in to the at&t cnn or time warner litigation. the federal judge specifically excluded that rejecting the white house contention that tweets our official government policy. the more the president tweets, the more he appears to have a personal vendetta against something he doesn't like or is jealous of or doesn't understand, the las less
stable is any government argument against amazon. this morning, the word was that the president wants to go after amazon. i don't know what that means. he can't tell the justice to go after them, there are a lot of formulas and standards the d.o.j. would have to meet before they could claim amazon was a monopoly. they say they don't pay state sales taxes. the federal government has nothing to do with that and in some states they do pay sales tax before one thing that does resonate with folks is that the competition for small business, they're putting a lot of them out of business. even target, kroger, these furniture makers, their shares get walloped as soon as amazon hits they're going to come into their area, everyone takes a huge hit so if kroger, which was once the largest supermarket and is still the largest in america and target can't compete, how can mom and
pop compete. >> during the break we were talking about some old antitrust decisions but there is a phrase from justice cardoza of all people, for the nonlawyers among us is the most quoted and quotable american supreme court justice. he said no monopolist metabolizes unconsciously, meaning you can't say the free market helped you get that big. if you got that big you were trying to become a monopoly. there is a theory of law and a body of law that supports that argument. what would happen if the justice department sued it was odd to try to break it up. after about 25 years and hundreds of millions in legal bills, i don't know what would happen. you might have a president come along like eisenhower dead and just drop the case. a president can't go after a
company because he's jealous of its growth. there has to be a valid. >> and of the is jealous of their wealth more so than owning the washington post which it's extraordinarily on their to this president. >> if that is the case, which is what cnn or time warner once argued was the reason the justice department objected to the merger of time warner and at&t, if that's the case government will lose. >> real quick, the president does have a role in trying to create fair trade, it's sort of the international, the interstate of commerce clause, i know that's been applied in a lot of different ways but doesn't that also suggests that the white house should help. >> the president appoints the attorney general. the president appoints a senior member of the d.o.j. and the person who runs the
antitrust division of the d.o.j. and presumably that person thanks along the same lines as the president. if the d.o.j. wants to argue that breaking up amazon makes prices better for all of us, a jury might find that a serious argument. >> thank you. president trump is just moments away from taking the stage in ohio. will bring it to you live when it happens. . . . . .
let's talk about thisd when we meet next week. edward jones came to manage a trillion dollars in assets under care by focusing our mind on whatever's on yours. ♪ charles: president trump set to deliver remarks on infrastructure and his big grand plan. that is in ohio. be sure tonight to tune into my
show, "making money," at 6:00 p.m. we'll break down the volatility and where we go from here. there are a lot of major investment opportunities. i can't wait to share them with you. now here is trish regan i don't thank you, charles. richfield, ohio, where any moment the president will take to that stage. the president vowing from day one he wanted to fix our broken infrastructure system here in the u.s., while getting the economy going again and creating hundreds of thousands of new jobs. can he get it done? that is the question. trish: tell you what is not a question, that is the rally on wall street. you see the dow just off the highs of the session, up triple digits. nice to see for a change. we have most of the dow trading higher. i'm trish regan. welcome, everyone, to "the intelligence report." the president is expected to call on congress to work together, good luck to, get some kind of infrastructure plan bill on his