tv Cavuto Coast to Coast FOX Business December 11, 2018 12:00pm-2:00pm EST
civilized. done a really good job for google today. stuart: what you're looking at on the screen, volatility, when we open the markets within a couple minutes we are up 350 points. 2 1/2 hours later, we're up just what is it, 80. neil, it is yours. neil: stuart, thank you very, very much we're following developments. what has buying back on corner of wall and broad, wiped out earlier gains of better than 300 points. a lot on confirmmation of speculation. i say, quasi-confirmmation of speculation, that the chinese are rolling back some tariffs on some, not all, u.s. cars. so there could be a lot of devil in the details here. but obviously as i, stressed, many, many times, nothing decides the course of this market like prospects for trade. better if it looks like we'll avoid a blowout with the chinese. worse if it doesn't look like we'll be able to, avoid an out right war. and that really decides the market fate.
optimism it will be avoided here is building. you know how that goes. it would be a one tweet or comment away seeing this all blown up in our faces here. for the time-being we're up 61 points on the dow. the big beneficiaries of those, big beneficiaries of expanded trade in china, those who would avoid a trade war in china. boeing, caterpillar, we'll get into that in a second. read from brandywine portfolio manager jack mcintyre. is trade ruling the roost or prospects thereof? >> neil, obviously trade is incredibly important. it is one of three factors. we've got to get clarity for the equity market to continue to rally. the other two are just we have to get the fed to tell us when they are going to paws. related to china, we need more trade with china and that is the trade situation. you can't just have stimulus. all three will have to happen
for the bullishness to come back into equities. trade is clearly, very, very important and the biggest uncertainty factor. neil: other factors we could see in the market, we'll get something from this meeting going on if there is such a thing, with the president and democratic leaders. they have hinted there is no wiggle room, nancy pelosi and chuck schumer hinted there is no room at all on negotiation for increasing funding on the wall beyond the 1.6 billion committed thus far. he is optimistic told that he will get funding and he will avoid a government shutdown. if either were to take place, then what, for the markets? >> so, the fact that we're having this conversation about whether the government will shut down or not does not give me a warm, fuzz did i feeling being an investor. if they make progress that i will was net positive. it just reinforces that political risks are still
elevated. so you know, that is just another sort of headwind for the market in general. neil: are the markets prepared to sacrifice a rally on the altar of a wall? >> that's a great question. you know, markets are, en masse. so the market vigilantes, they can send a very powerful message, you know. i think they are going, they certainly would, if the government shuts down they would send a clear message, get your act together in washington. neil: a pox on both houses because all they care about is green. >> yes. neil: republican bill cassidy is here. we're trying to glean what could happen at the white house with nancy pelosi and chuck schumer. they're wide apart on the wall funding issue. that is make-or-break on the president. talking about trying to avoid a
government shut down but also talking about wanting that wall. they would like to avoid a government shutdown but just as vehement saying they do not want more funding for that wall. what do you think will happen? >> i'm not quite sure but i can't imagine why democrats would shut down the government to preserve fleer flow of immigration and drugs into our country that blows my mind. i would like the american people to say, we don't want freer flow of drugs and other folks coming without per anything in our country so why don't we secure our border? the president is on winning side in terms of policy as well as politics. which is why, by the way, cosponsoring a bill that willfully fund the wall. neil: you know, there is a move afoot to try to get the criminal justice reform package voted on and deliberated in the senate. mitch mcconnell opening up the way for that, but hinting a lot of you guys might have to stay through the holidays to get it
done. how do you feel about that? >> i'm a doctor. i'm used to be on call. this is incredibly important issue. if we get this done and make our streets safer, it's a small price to pay. neil: it seemed to unite democrats and republicans. what do you think pushed the senate majority leader to do this when yesterday he said he wasn't? >> john cornyn had a couple things the national sheriffs' association had asked for. i'm told those provisions are incorporated in into the law. a amendment i care about is incorporated. i think the bill has gotten better through the amendment process. this is why mcconnell is bringing it up. neil: a lot of people are thinking we can avoid a shutdown but most shutdowns happen despite that kind of talk. what's your gut tell you right now? >> my gut tells me that the issue of securing our border to keep illegal drugs, to help prevent illegal drugs from
coming, hopefully prevent the debacles with the caravans getting worse in the future is both winning in terms of policy, it is winning in terms of politics. i have no reason why democrats, i just can't believe they would shut down the government to defend that. neil: senator, thank you very much for taking the time. now to this delayed pool spray from the white house. vice president and president meeting with nancy pelosi and chuck schumer. we understand this exchange was moving markets. >> a couple things happening, criminal justice reform, we heard word, got word that mitch mcconnell and the group, we're going to be putting it up for a vote. we have great democrat support. great republican support. so criminal justice reform, something people have been trying to get, how long, nancy,. >> long time. >> many, many years. looks like it will be passing hopefully. famous last words on a very bipartisan way. and it's really something.
we're all very proud of. and again tremendous support from republicans and tremendous support from democrats. and i think it is going to get a very good vote. we'll see soon enough. it will be up for a vote very shortly. a lot of years they're waiting for it. another thing, the farm bill is moving along nicely. they will be voting friday or so but pretty close. >> tuesday. >> we think the farm bill is in very good shape and a lot of things are happening with it. and farmers are well-taken care of. that will be quite bipartisan, it will happen pretty soon. and then we have the easy one, the wall. that will be the one that will be the easiest of all, chuck, maybe not? >> it is called funding the government, mr. president. >> we're going to see. i will see. the wall will get built. we'll see what happens. it is not an easy situation because the democrats have a different view. i think i can say than the republicans. we have great republican support. we don't have democrat support
the we'll talk about that now. we'll see, one thing that i do have to say is tremendous amounts of wall have already been built. and a lot of, a lot of wall, when you include the renovation of existing fences and walls, renovated tremendous amount. we have done a lot of work. in san diego we're building new walls right now. right next to san diego, we complete ad major section of wall and really worked well. so a lot of wall has been built. we don't talk about that but we might as well start because it is building, it is being built right now, big sections of wall. we will continue that. and, one way or the other it is going to get built. i would like not to see a government closing, the shutdown. we will see what happens over the next short period of time. but the wall is a very important thing to us. i might put it a different way. border security is extremely important. and we have to take care of
border security. you look what happened with the caravans with, the people, with a lot, we shut it down. we had no choice. we shut it down. but it could be a lot easier if we had real border security. i just want to pay my respects to the border patrol agents and officers. they have been incredible. the i.c.e. agents and officers, they have been incredible. and very importantly, our military. our military went in and they did an incredible job. they have been really, really spectacular. a lot of the people that wanted to come in to the country and really they were going to come in know matter how they wanted to come in, come in even a rough way, many of these people are leaving now. they're going back to their countries, honduras, guatemala, el salvador, other countries. they're leaving, you notice getting a lot less crowded in mexico. a lot of them will stay in mexico. the mexican government has been working with us very well. so we appreciate that. but they haven't been coming into our country.
we can't let people come in that way. that is pretty much it. we're going to talk about the wall. i wanted to talk about criminal justice reform just to let you know how positive that is. i wanted to talk about the farm bill, how positive that is. i want to talk about the wall. i will tell you it's a tough issue because we're on very opposite sides of, i really think i can say border security but certainly the wall. the wall will get built. a lot of the wall is built. it has been very effective. i asked for a couple of notes on that. if you look at san diego, illegal traffic dropped 92% once the wall was up. el paso, illegal traffic dropped 72%. then ultimately 95%, once the wall was up. in tucson, arizona, illegal traffic dropped 92%. yuma, it dropped, illegal traffic dropped 95 to 96%. i mean, and, when i say dropped, the only reason we have any
percentage where people got through is because they walk and go around areas that aren't built. dropped virtually 100% in the areas where the wall is. it is very effective. if you really want to find out how effective a wall is, just ask israel. 99.9% effective. our wall will be every bit as good as that, if not better. so we have done a lot of work on the wall. a lot of wall is built. a lot of people don't know that. a lot of wall is renovated. we had walls in very bad condition that is now in a-1, tiptop and frankly some wall has been reinforced by our military. our military has done a fantastic job. so the wall will get built but we may not, we may not have an agreement today. we probably won't but we have an agreement on other things that are really good. nancy, would you like to say something? >> well, thank you, mr. president, for the opportunity to meet with you, so that which can work together in a bipartisan way to meet the
needs of the american people. i think the american people recognize that we must keep government open. that a shutdown is not worth anything. and that you should not have a trump shutdown -- >> did you say trump? >> you have a white house. you have the senate. you have the house of representatives. you have the votes. >> we don't have the votes nancy, we need 60 in the house. >> excuse me, but i can't get it passed in the house if it is not not going to pass in the senate. i don't want to waste time. >> you can get it started that way. >> the house we can get passed very easily. >> then do it. >> but the problem is the senate because we need 10 democrats to vote. >> that is not the point, mr. president. the point is, that is that there are equities to be weighed and we're here to have a conversation careful way. i don't think we should have a debate in front of the press on this. but the fact is, the house republican cost bring up this bill, if they had the votes
immediately and set the tone for what you want. >> we thought we were getting it passed in senate nancy would we be do it immediately. we get it passed very easily in the house. nancy i have it passed in two seconds. doesn't matter we can't get it passed in the senate because we need 10 democrat votes. >> let us have our conversation. then we meet with the press again. but the fact is that, legislating, which is what we do, you begin, you make your points, you state your case. that is what the house republicans could do. if they had the votes. but there are no votes in the house, majority of votes for a wall. no matter where you. >> if i needed votes for the wall in the house i would have them in one session. >> go do it? >> it doesn't help because we need 10 democrats. >> put it on negotiation. >> let me ask you this, we're doing this very friendly matter. it doesn't help for me to take a vote in the house where i will win easily with the republican. >> you won't win.
>> it doesn't help to take the vote because i will not get the vote in the senate. i need 10 senators. that is the problem. >> you have the white house, you have the senate -- >> i have the white house. the white house is done and the house would give me the vote if i wanted it. but i can't i need, nancy i need 10 votes from chuck. >> let me say something here. >> i want to say one thing. the fact you do not have the votes in the house. >> nancy i do. >> go find out. >> we need border security. >> of course we do. >> we need border security. people are pouring into our country including terrorists. we caught 10 terrorists over the last very short period of time. 10. these are very serious people. our border agents, all of our law enforcement is incredible what they have done. we caught 10 terrorists. these are people looking to do harm. we need the wall. we mead more than anything we need border security which the wall is just a piece. but it is important. chuck, did you want to say something? >> here is what i want to say. we have a lot of disagreements
here. "the washington post" gave you a whole lot of pinocchios you constantly how much of the wall is built and hough is there. that is not the point here. we have a disagreement about the wall. >> "washington post"? >> not on border security but on the wall. we do not want to shut down the government. you were called 20 times to shut down the government. you say i want to shut down the government. we don't. we want to come to an agreement. if we can't come to an agreement, we have solutions that will pass the house and senate, right now and will not shut down the government. that is what we're urging to you do. not threaten to shut down the government. >> you -- because you can't get your way. >> last time you shut it down -- >> mr. president, you say my way or we shot down the government. we have a proposal that democrats and republicans will support, to do a cr. that will not shut doesn't government. we urge you to take it. >> if it is not good border security. i won't take it. >> it is very good. >> fit is not good border security i won't take it. when you look at these numbers
of effectiveness of our border security, when you look at the job we're doing. >> you said -- >> can i tell you something. >> you just said it is effective. >> this is only areas where you have the wall. where you have walls chuck it i effective. where you don't have walls it is not effect five. >> call a halt to this. we come in here as first branch government. article i, the legislative branch. we're coming in good faith to negotiate with you about how we can keep the government open. >> open. >> we're going to keep it open if we have border security f we don't have border security. we're not going to keep it open. >> we have had border security. >> you're bragging about what has been done. >> by us. >> we want to do the same thing we did last year this year. that is our proposal. if it is good then. it is good now. it won't shut down the government. >> chuck we can build a much bigger section. >> let's debate in private. let's debate in private. >> that is void frankly of the
fact. >> we need border security. we all agree we need border security. >> we do. >> see, we get along. thank you, everybody. >> you say border security and the wall. can you have border security without the wall? >> you need the wall. the wall is part of border security. we need the border security. the wall is part of border security. you can't not have border security without the wall. >> that is not true. that is political promise. border security is way to effectively honor -- sneaks perts say you can do border security without a wall which is wasteful, doesn't solve the problem. >> totally solves the problem. >> this spiraling downward, where we came at a place to say how we meet the needs of american people, who have needs. the economy has, people are losing their jobs. our members are always -- >> we have the lowest unemployment in 50 years.
>> 50 people of the republican party, are losing their offices now because of the transition. people are not -- >> we gained in the senate. nancy we gained in the senate. excuse me, did we win the senate? >> when the president brags he won north dakota and indiana, he is in real trouble. >> i did. >> let say this. >> we win north dakota and indiana. >> we came in here in good faith. and, we are entering into this at this type of discussion in the public. >> it is not bad, nancy. it is called transparency. >> it is not transparency we're not stipulating to set of facts we want to have a debate saying we can fund some of this. >> you know what we knee border security. that is what we're talking about about. if we don't have border security, we'll shut down the government. this country needs border security. the wall is a part of border security. let's have a talk. we're going to get the wall built. we have done a lot of wall already. >> bigger part of border
security is the wall. >> big part of it. >> everything that you need? >> it's a big part of it. we need to have effective border security. we need a wall in certain parts, not in all parts but certain parts of a 2,000-mile border we need a wall. >> how much money? >> we are doing it much under budget. we're actually way under budget on the areas we renovated and areas that we built. i would say if we got $5 billion we could do a tremendous chunk of wall. [inaudible] >> we're going to see. we have to have the wall. this is not a question. this is national emergency. drugs are pouring into our country. people with tremendous medical difficulty and medical problems are pouring in in many cases it is contagious, they're pouring into our country. we have to have border security. we have to have a wall as part of border security. i don't think we really disagree so much. i also know that you know, nancy is in a situation where it is
not easy for her to talk right now. i understand that. i fully understand that. we'll have a good discussion and we're going to see what happens. but we have to have border security. >> mr. president, please don't characterize the strength i bring to this meeting as leader of house democrats who just won a big victory. >> elections have consequences mr. president. >> that is why the country is doing so well. >> but the question is representing -- over there are not factual. which have to have evidence-based conversation about what does work, what money has been spent and how effective it is. this isn't, this is about the security of our country, take an oath to protect and defend. we don't want to have that mischaracteristicsized by anyone. >> i agree with that. no, no i agree with that. >> so let us have a conversation where we don't have to contradict in public the statistics that you put forth but instead can have a conversation about what we're really work and what the
american people deserve from us at this uncertain time in their lives -- >> one thing i think we can agree on we shouldn't shut down the government over a dispute. you want to shut it down. you keep talking about it. >> the last time you shut it down. >> no, no. >> 20 times. >> i don't want to do what you did. >> 20 times you called for i will shut down the government if i don't get my wall. >> you want to know something? you. >> you said it. >> i'll take it. >> good. >> you know what i will say. yes if we don't get what we want, one way or the other, whether it is through you, through military, through anything you want to call, i will shut down the government. >> that is fair enough. >> i am proud. >> we disagree. >> i am proud to shut down the government for border security, chuck. because the people of this country don't want criminals and people that have lots of problems and drugs pouring into our country. so i will take the man tell. i will be the one to shut it down. i will not blame you for it. the last time you shut it down it doesn't work. i will take the man tell of
shutting it down, for border security. >> we think you shouldn't shut it down. >> thank you very much, everybody. [shouting questions] >> make your way out. thank you. [shouting questions] [inaudible]. >> a lot of people want the job. neil: go back to that guy. >> a lot of friends of mine want it. a lot of people chuck and nancy know very well. the people you like. we want a lot of people that want the job of chief of staff. we'll see what happens very soon. we're in no rush. we're in no rush. >> why, no rush, mr. president. >> why, abuse -- because we have wonderful chief of staff. we're in no rush, a period of week or two, or maybe less we'll announce who it will be. a lot of people want the position. thank you very much.
[inaudible]. neil: report. i like to remind people, we don't leave until we're we're sure we can. the president of the united states says i will shut down this government if you don't get border security, i.e., the wall. nancy pelosi and chuck schumer are equally vehement arguing not getting the wall. risking same forcing that issue. the president of the united states hosting these two prominent democrats to let them know, this is important to me, i will risk shutting down the united states government to get it. without getting in the weeds who is to blame and who is or not, nancy pelosi was obviously grimacing at the possibility here this was all being played out, reality it was all played out on national television here. one thing i into body language, i'm far from an expert on such matters, chuck schumer rarely if ever looked at the president at all. so they had heated exchange number of times. president blaming chuck schumer
for the last threatened shutdown of the saying this time i feel, very, very strongly as do the american people, border security trumps all. that meeting by the way, this is pool spray from earlier on just 20 minutes ago. that is continuing in the white house right now of the press has been let out in the room, but they continue to discuss this. this was sort of a rattling the markets to put it mildly at worst level. we were down close to 100 points, after being up more than 300 points. blake burman at the white house now, on all this turned south so fast. reporter: neil, you can break this down into a micro issue and to a macroissue going forward. what we watched unfold inside the oval office for 16 minutes, what has been going on behind closed doors ever since then. on the micro level, it's a very serious issue as government funding, a portion of the government needs to be funded by december 21st or else there will be a government shut down.
that includes the department of homeland security in which wall funding, money for wall funding would come from. you saw the argument there unfold by president trump, the leader of the republican party and two leaders of the democratic party, chuck schumer and nancy pelosi. they all said in that room they want border security. however, the definition of border security or at least what each views border security as could not be any farther apart and that is where the discrepancies of both sides remain. earlier this year the government was shut down. who is to blame for that, we can debate that another day. what we herd from president trump was the following, he is willing to shut down the government if he doesn't get what he wants as it receipts to border security and if there is government shutdown, he said, quote, i am proud to shut down the government for border security. he went on to say, i will take the man tell. i won't blame you. the president wants $5 billion for ard bother wall, at least border security.
what the democrats are willing to give at this point is significantly less than that. that is sort of the micro issue. at least what they are talking about right now in the immediate future. it is very important. let's look even i don't know that, neil. i think what you just watched there is divided government, or at least what we are about to get potentially for the next two years. come the first week of january, democrats are going to take over control of the house of representatives as we all know. for the last two years it has been a republican in the white house, a republican control in the senate, republican control in the house. that entire dynamic is about to change. democrats will get a much louder voice in the room which is what we just saw. this is one argument, neil, government funding and the border wall. the border wall as we know is a major issue for the president but at the end of the day it is one argument and there is going to be two years down the line at least of what we just saw there, democrats and republicans trying
to hash it out, neil. neil: you know the irony of this, in a better than 1 1/2 trillion dollar budget, i'm leaving off some of the things on automatic recycle here -- reporter: right. neil: we are divided over $3.5 billion. 1.6 billion or so budgeted committed to the wall, what have you, versus the president requesting $5 billion. that will be a down payment on $25 billion, up to $30 billion for a wall. chuck schumer is saying, look, elections have consequences, mr. president. the president shooting back, yeah, essentially like mine did. but, man, they are not even remotely on the same page here. reporter: president trump arguing that you need the wall for security. he wants border security. the border wall, a continuing expansion of it is needed for security. you had nancy pelosi say you need it for quote a political promise. so the democrats think, some do as well.
the president need this is wall because go back to june 16th, june of 2015, one of the very first thing president talked about in trump tower, he would build a wall, mexico would pay for it. this is something he has been talking about now for better portion of 3 1/2 years. the president also called this a national emergency. they said we need border security. what is border security? that is a massive, massive divide. neil: that is putting it mildly. very good summation, my friend. thank you very much. blake burman. that was worthy after pay-per-view moment, my friends. you don't see that moment of genteel exchanges of opposing parties represented in the room at white house with the president of the united states. differences were laid bare. the scab was ripped off. you can see the ensuing trouble, why the markets are rattled, now a government shutdown didn't look like a possibility, looks like a distinct possibility.
how you feel about the president, whether you like him or dislike him or whether you like or dislike nancy pelosi and chuck schumer, each in their own way being obstinate. the president wanting to insist we have the wall, border security. the other side, for being equally, we don't need that. so, again, stubbornness, is in the eye of the beholder here. i talk about $3.5 billion gap, that could shut down a 1 1/2 trillion dollar government. having said that, let me go to charles payne, watching all of that as well, and market reaction. you and i often said, charles, at least my view is, markets aren't red or blue, they're green and they don't want to seic imperil that green. they don't like the uncertainty, they don't like the unknown, we just befored up the unknown, right? >> we have beefed up the unknown, got to tell you, take that uk. i've always been jealous parliamentary system how they go at it the way they do.
neil: hold on a second, my friend. they just left the white house right now. >> had a meeting which you saw the introduction to, but coming out of the meeting we can say, that, a i mentioned to the president, the president has the white house, he has the senate, he has the house of representatives all in republican control. he has the power to keep government open. instead he has admitted in this meeting that he will take responsibility. the trump shutdown is something that can be avoided, that the american people do not need at this time of economic uncertainty. people losing jobs. the market in a mood. and the rest, it's a luxury the trump shut down the luxury of the american people cannot afford. told the president, our leader, distinguished senate leader will talk about two proposals we made to the president, after he makes those proposals, i will tell you other statements i made to the
president about -- >> okay, the bottom line is simple. the president made clear that he want wants a shutdown. his position, if he sticks to his position for 5 billion-dollar wall, he will get no wall, and he will get a shutdown. the bottom line, is very, very simple. and that is, we want border security. we offered him border security. but americans know that the wall, not paid for by mexico anymore, is not the way to bored earth security. the and the experts say that we offered the president two ways to avoid a shutdown of the first, pass the six other appropriations bills that have been agreed to by democrats and republicans, do a one-year extension of the homeland security bill by what is called the cr, whichs the funds it the
same way it funds it last year. or do a one-year cr for all seven remaining appropriations bills. both of those ways, we gave the president two-way, each of which would get a majority of votes in the house and 60 votes in the senate and would avoid a shutdown. we hope he will take it. a shutdown hurts too many innocent people. this trump shutdown, this temper tantrum that he seems to throw will not get him his wall, and it will hurt a lot of people because he will cause a shutdown. he admitted he wanted a shutdown. it is hard to believe that he would want that. >> leader pelosi -- >> unfortunately, that the president choose to shut down the government, that we have a trump shutdown as a christmas present, a holiday present, to the american people. i told the president that the new house of representatives, when it convenience will pass
what mr., what mr. schumer suggested here, the distinguished senate leader suggested, in terms of passing the fix bill, the six appropriations bills agreed to in bipartisan way, have a continuing resolution, until september 30th for the homeland security bill. during which time we can discuss these issues further. told the president that would happen. we would send it to the senate. he says, we can pass it in the house, his bill right now in the house. he does not have the votes in the house to pass whatever his agenda is with that wall in it. we're telling him we'll keep government open with the proposal that mr. schumer suggested. why doesn't he just think about it? in fact i asked him to pray over it. >> one final point, no, no. stop. okay? one final point. the $1.3 billion, that we gave him last year for border security, no wall, but border
security, less than 6% of it has been spent. they haven't even spent last year's money. now they're demanding much, much more this year. go ahead. we'll just take questions on this subject only. >> madam speaker given what we saw in there, bickering back and forth what does it say about your ability to work with the president over next two years? >> well i told the president as i said over and over again, this new congress will be something different than the congress we have now. it will a congress of transparency, that the american people can see. not passing a tax bill with $7 trillion impact on the economy in the dark of night, speed of light. so nobody can see what it is without hearing or any expert opinions. it will be about transparency. it will be about reaching out, extending the hand of friendship to work in bipartisan way to find common ground where we can, stand our ground.
as thomas jefferson said, like a rock where we can't. honoring guidance of our founders, for many one. we didn't come here to divide. we came here to unify. we extend that hand of friendship to him, which he seemed to like that course of action. he does not accept that hand of friendship, we still who we are, dignified, respectful of the institutions that we represent in the congress and honoring the vision of our founders. [shouting questions] >> madam speaker, was it more productive -- >> say this, you want to know it was more productive behind the scenes. i hear some of the reporterses saying, fox reporters, why do we not want transparency in this discussion? we don't want to contradict the president putting forth figures that had no reality to them, no basis in fact. we're going to proceed in all of
this, have evidence-based, factual truthful information about what works and what doesn't. i didn't want to in front of those people say, you don't know what you're talking about. >> one other thing here. the president, the president said things are working quite well at the border. we want to give him the same thing he had last year. if they worked well last year. they should work well this year. he shouldn't shut down the government. thank you, everybody. [shouting questions] neil: that tells everything about where we are right now. just to get away from the politics about all of this, just get to the facts, the president was wrong to say he has the votes in house on border security measure and enough republican support alone to get it approved in the house. for time being even in a republican controlled house, remember in the waning weeks before democrats take over as new majority, the votes weren't there. there were a lot of fiscal hawks, in the house, republicans
among them do not want to blast through the deficit and blow spending. there are 22 of them. you would need at a minimum, some say even more democrats than, there is separate issue of the senate were you to do something like this you need 60 votes. even in the newly configured senate, and pickup that republicans enjoyed 52-48 republican senate, they need to pick up at least eight votes, assuming all republicans vote for president's border security. at least three of those republicans in the senate are not fond of what he wants to do in that front. there is a bit of truth and playing games on both sides with this. for nancy pelosi to argue that they offered a middle ground measure, that is not quite middle ground here. the idea, to try to avoid a government shutdown really goes over the 1 1/2 trillion dollars in discretionary spending over which is some control. overall, federal budget for
fiscal year 18 will be in the vicinity of $4 trillion plus. so that is really what is at stake here. not just the 1 1/2 trillion in discretionary spending there is some margin of control of either of both parties. but the other 2 1/2 trillion on automatic pilot. that is what is at stake here. the uncertainty, fate of that is what is been rattling markets although not to the degree you think. maybe this was more kabuki theater or drama added to this here. obstinance is always played in the political light here. we try not to do that here. i said many, many times we're not red or blue but green. each side can be stubborn. you can argue the president is being stubborn i get the border wall or hell to pay. the democrats say won't push for border wall. we don't think it is necessary. we'll stand on principle, risk a
government shutdown if you are arguing in counter to that you have got to have it. each side can be just as stubborn as other arguing for respective positions. nancy pelosi and chuck schumer will not bend on this someone will have to bend on this. back to my buddy, charles payne. therein lies the mess? >> therein lies the dilemma. it is woe saw both sides setting up for blame game. you know what? this will be on me. i will accept it. i will take the political risk i accept because nancy pelosi pointed out, this is a key promise that he made. moreover, you know, when i heard chuck schumer talk about innocent people, there are innocent americans who will die today because of opioids coming through our southern border. it is a real difficult situation. neil: does it make you wonder how they're going to make progress on anything? it is off to a bad start. >> although, off to a bad start,
i saw people very familiar with each other arguing. not complete strangers. they know each other very well, particularly president trump and chuck schumer. they wonder if they have these kind of arguments, the way you may have an argument with a good friend of yours. neil: like you and i do. >> every now and then. neil: group hugs. >> i actually loved what i saw. neil: i did too. i like honesty of it. it wasn't fake. it was pretty heated. they got mad at each other, they still continue talking. the president tried to keep it calm in the beginning just to indicate i will shepherd this process along. got of off the rails a little bit. >> they had disadvantage. they had good cop, bad cop. pelosi offering prayers for the president. extending hand of friendship. schumer was the bad cop. neil: viscerally, schumer never
looked at the president or rarely looked at him. there might be bad blood there. the back and forth, it could be a little bit of professional wrestling there. >> they always say we don't want to see how the sausage is made. neil: i think it was cool to see how the sausage was made. my uncle used to make sausage. >> one of my first jobs 14 years old, worked in butcher shop. mr. hoover. learned how to make sausage. it was wonderful. neil: you're not taking the leap they can't get along and do anything on anything? in fact invariably cooler heads do prevail. whether a shutdown, temporary or not happens in the interim. we hope that is the case? >> yeah. ultimately, sometimes we have divided government. sometimes very little gets done. you know, there could be a short-term shutdown. the world won't come to an end because we had so many of them. we'll get another continuing resolution. we had a gazillion of those. first temporary ones came in
1962. i'm joking a little bit. meanwhile the market is meandering. neil: when s&p, standard & poor's downgraded u.s. debt. first time we weren't aaa, it wasn't based on a shutdown. it was based on the comical, almost circus-like atmosphere where they were debating these huge points. the folks at s&p, said a pox on both your houses, we're downgrading united states debt. that rattle ad lot of folks. but what they were saying is, a shutdown didn't create that drama. or that downgrade. it was theatrics around it. >> right. and i think these theatrics are, we're already in no-man's land. can be refreshing. we'll see what happens. i think a lot of this stuff, has to come to a head. president trump promised the wall. he has got to your point, got good arguments for it. i'm not sure there is
alternative per se, it is a small amount of money grand scheme of things. missing throughout is prison reform will be passed with huge bipartisanship. neil: huge point. that has huge bipartisan support. prompted mitch mcconnell, didn't want to have a vote this year on it to rush one through. >> there are some interesting good signs out there. by the way, the market was already down before that started. and you got to wonder, you give up a 360 point dow rally. are there other things going on around the world even more worrisome than this. the "brexit" situation. neil: right. >> there is this group called european research group out of the uk, they have enough votes to dethrone theresa may. that worrying the markets. a lot of political drama. in part, western nations, united states included wonder how much longer they will be preeminent. there is underlying fear amongst all of us, how we keep going. neil: this president has higher
poll ratings than any european leader. >> could stack a couple of them together, angela merkel and macron together, i'm glad you didn't mention the italian leader. >> those guys are rockin'. neil: they are rockin'. thank you, charles. thanks for working in my absence last week on fox news. i always try to step back, try to keep calm here. obstinance is always in the eye of the beholder here. we had last threatened shutdown, republicans were blamed for being insist cutting and can you say the other side is just as obstinate leading to a government shutdown? poll ticks is in the eye of the beholder. ai agree with charles payne. that played out in the oval office, that is good thing to see. a productive thing to see. he doesn't know nearly as much as i do, italian sausage how it is made i will just say -- take
enough credit. let's go to "daily caller" editor vince collagnse. >> i love italian sausage nancy pelosi and chuck schumer havep incredible poker faces in general. this is sign what president trump routinely capable of doing, putt traditional washington denizens on heels. bringing cameras into the negotiation, nancy pelosi look disjarred. she didn't understand why cameras here in negotiation. to say that out loud, most voters including that might sympathize, easy there, we want to see what the conversation looks like. neil: it was revealing. i didn't know the press would eavesdrop on us here. president blasted a lot with dicey relationship with the press. that revealed a big fly in the ointment there. i always see things, not always, but a lot of times through the prism of the markets here.
they are kind of nonplussed by this. things could change in three hours. they're more focused on trade. trade will dictate future of these markets whether we strike a deal with china or we don't. i think closer to a potential government shutdown that might change but what are your thoughts? >> i think that is probably true. a couple reasons. we history to judge, both markets and nancy pelosi and chuck schumer. the president earlier this year, both in march and september, floated the idea of a government shutdown in order to get government border wall. both times he signed the spending bill without getting border funding he wanted. he expressed regret in both those fights. here we are again. i wonder if nancy pelosi and chuck schumer are wondering recent past will be again. i wonder if they think they will roll the president. chuck schumer was 1.$6 billion in funding for fencing. now the democrats are coming in with $1.3 billion. in other words they're getting further away from the president,
there being cocky about it. you know what i will do? i will disarm you. i don't care if i get blamed for shutdown fight. i'm ready to shut it down. we'll see if he sticks to his guns. neil: well-put. good catching up with you even talking about a little italian sausage. you know one guy probably delighted all this is going down the way it is right now? the google ceo. it has taken attention off of him, very heated, sometimes nasty exchange before the house judiciary committee. just google the term, relief. after this.
♪ neil: all right. you missed a little drama at the white house today. nancy pelosi and chuck schumer having it out with the president over this funding for a wall. the president says, it's a deal breaker. he said he would even risk shutting down the government if he didn't get it. they would argue they would entertain the same if he does. obstinence can be read either way. the we corrected the president, when he talks about the votes he has in the house for that type of thing. he doesn't have the votes. that is just a fact. nancy pelosi talking about a transparent government during the push for national health
care, obamacare as it later became to be known, affordable care act she was famous for saying we have vote on it before we read to know what is in it. you heard that many, many times, transparency works in the eye of the beholder. democrats got low marks what was in that passage. second-guessing the republicans and president what he is proposing here. with very little effort you can find both sides playing the game. we cite it, give you facts what is going on. without any political agenda. people say you're a never-trumper or never pelosi, i don't know if there are such terms. i'm trying to get this factually right, guys, the up shot of deteriorating meeting, it was welcome, it was good to have this, that they are no closer to solving this impasse than they were going into that meeting. maybe they're further apart. both sides stake the out their position and that could potentially mean a government
shutdown. no telling where these things end up. one guy probably relieved of all the attention this is getting google ceos on the hot seat before the house judiciary committee. edward lawrence withfallout from that, edward? reporter: neil, fireworks at white house, fireworks on capitol hill. we call that tuesday in washington, d.c. the ceo of google, sundar pichai, defended his company saying they do not manipulate searches. from the moment he stepped foot on capitol hill, got questions about possible bias. started in the hallway to the hearing room. once in the hearing room began with chairman bob goodlatte, the bias becomes sinister when the company manipulates searches. the sentiment was excod by other republican members of the committee. >> the google attitude, the algorithm made us do it. >> i understand the frustration. what is important here, we use
all this methodology to reflect what is being said about any given topic at any particular time. we try to do it objectively. reporter: democratic representative zoe lofgren wanted to know exactly how google came up with their algorithms. >> if you google, the word idiot, under images, a picture of donald trump comes up. how does search work so that that would occur? >> things like relevance, freshness, popularity, how other people are using it, and based on that, at any given time, we try to rank and find best issues for the query. >> interesting the google ceo said they had no plans right now to have a search engine in china. those questioning still going on. back to you, neil. neil: edward, thank you very
much. hop across the pond right now. what is going on with the whole "brexit" deal in england. ashley webster out of london. what is hopping now, bud? ashley: what is the time, neil? going after 6:00. we have a large group of pro-europe, anti-"brexit" supporters, they have been here probably the for two years since the vote happened. they have been in a fight with the pro-"brexit" levers. it is jovial. whale this is happening here, theresa may is hopscotching around europe for diplomacy trying to get concessions on "brexit" deal. she met with the dutch prime minister. with angela merkel, and there was embarrassing moment she couldn't get out of the car. we won't go there. the advice from european leaders, nothing is going to change. the president of the european
counsel, jean-claude juncker said earlier today, you will not get any new terms. take a listen. >> the deal we have achieved is the best deal possible. it is the only deal possible. no room whatsoever for renegotiation. reporter: there you have it. no real words of encouragement from jean-claude juncker. certainly questions, neil, about the future of theresa may. the pound -- on concerns of voter confidence will be called on her leadership of the uk party. back to you, neil. neil: ashley webster in london. the thing that will change this entire day's posture for trade has nothing to do with the tit-for-tat going on in the oval office today but everything to do with some promising developments on the trade front we're learning about from halfway across the globe. we'll have more after this. mage
that water could do. we called usaa. and they greeted me as they always do. sergeant baker, how are you? they were on it. it was unbelievable. having insurance is something everyone needs, but having usaa- now that's a privilege. we're the baker's and we're usaa members for life. usaa. get your insurance quote today. ..
>> if we don't really want,, one way or the other, whether it's real, military anything you want to call, i will shut down the government. and i am proud. and i'll tell you why. i am proud to shut down the government for border security, chuck beard is the people of this country don't want criminals and people that have lots of problems in drugs pouring into our country. so i will take the mantle. neil: all right, and that was the moment a lot of people sort
of just the row up their arms and said this is going nowhere fast. the idea of avoiding a government shutdown over a dispute about coming to think about it reported by billy dollars between what democrats are proposed on a portable and what the president wants to advance at $5 billion. and a trillion dollars federal budget. people who don't like the president drill him on it and republicans equally feeling nancy pelosi and chuck schumer are being equally stubborn by not being open to looking up order funding in the wall funding and essentially printing the same government shutdown president was on a not tuesday as a possibility if he doesn't get his way. we are trying to stick to the facts here and that is why love having chad pergamon come our capitol hill producer because a couple issues are at stake here. first off, good to have you my friend. the idea that the president said he had to vote, he never did on
something like this, right? >> that's right. there were two different bills that they tried to move through the house of representatives are granted they are called authorization bills come in on appropriations bills. appropriations bills are real money players with aml that failed in the house of representatives. i've done a deep dive on this the past couple of weeks, neil, and they are not the votes in the house on the republican side of the aisle to pass a bill with border wall funding or without border wall funding. they need democrats in some way, shape or form otherwise they would have done it already. as they reiterated they need 60 votes in the senate so there has to be by in there. i talk to house minority leader nancy pelosi as she returned to the capital a moment or two ago i said have you ever been part of a meeting like that and she said we had to keep correct in the president. some of the things he were saying were just not accurate.
because of the two proposals they put forward. one is a shorthand here on capitol hill for a continuing resolution. the remaining seven spending bills every of them for the rest of the fiscal year. the other option is the other six bills which are not the department of homeland security and the regular bills and then just do a cr, this band-aid approach for the department of homeland security. she also commented she does not think the meeting is indicative of how things are going to be over the next two years of president trump. here's the key for nancy pelosi. politics is a lot of theater and helps nancy pelosi have a little bit of a skirmish especially a televised permission when she is still sure for votes to become speaker of the house in january and also flexed her muscles and establish your bona fides with moderate democrats and liberal democrats who are skeptical of her returning to the speakership tree into this provided that moment to your point, chad.
the support that isn't there among republicans, at least all republicans in the house goes back to what, that it's among conservatives, a budget buster? >> is just the right mix of though. some oppose to the wall think is a bad idea. and if you flip the equation around the other way and don't put the wall money in there, you lose the members who say we have to have a wall. they can get it to work and that is why late june i think it was june 27, which are very indicative precursor for the fights are having right now. i should point out one thing. we are about a week and a half from when the government prospectively would shut down and again is to be a partial shutdown. 12 annual spending bills that fund the government. five bills of arguments and into last we are dealing with the remaining seven. the deadline by design is december 21st 11:59 p.m.
things work out a christmas. sometimes things are darkest before the dawn and not not to say we've had a lot of big fistfights appeared over government spending and fiscal cliff. we could be in for that right again. a lot of times they go right up to the edge and then they pull back. we are about a week and a half away. it's almost like this between the president and the two democratic leaders almost had to happen. i talk about theater that had to happen. the not to say they are steadfast in their positions however. shy until i welcome it. i know i sound crazy when i see discord like this. you see these arguments in parliament were there yelling at each other. my good honorable colleague is flying and i think that's great. it's very constructive.
>> they actually take the mesa way. in the house of commons yesterday. i don't know that will quite get that point here on capitol hill. that is the key that when you talk to democrats, especially those that represent border districts, who represents the border. there's no way we are going to vote for any bill that has wall money and appeared tree into a gap, but they'll find a peer may be late, but they'll find it. nancy pelosi has to fight for little bit of time. but she can't let this drag on too long. in other words if he gets to be a shutdown over the first of the year and a thirst to hamstring her come the third of january, maybe they're still a government shutdown as they're trying to move their agenda when they controlled the house of representatives in january. to have a little fight right before christmas, maybe a little bit of a shutdown is okay but it can drag on too long.
tree until you don't want to be at a not a list. does not end well. you're the best my friend. thank you for taking the time. is there middle ground here? who would know better than former budget deputy director under president bush 41, bob grady. good to have you. what you think happened now? >> i think people in business are like rodney king of the l.a. riots can't we just get along. i think is your producer said part of this was theater. give president trump some credit for having that in the open. a lot of presidents have had those meetings behind closed doors. they are the offered one point x billion in border security funding, which is the budget request. so there's a middle ground there somewhere. is your producer was saying, one of the problems with speaker pelosi as she is not out of the woods yet on getting elected speaker so she can be seen as
competing anything here because she's got to get elected speaker and she can't lose the progressive and the far left end of her caucus. i think they said that they had to say in front of the camera so hopefully they'll be meeting beyond not without the cameras there. 75% of the funding of the federal government in a given year has already been approved. neil: nothing these guys do is going to change that. that represents about three and a quarter trillion of the budget. let me start acting get your take on what that middle ground might be. but the president is insisting on additional five day for a while that could cause 25 billion democrats are staking their ground here, they don't want to give them an inch because the keep asking for more and they'll have to revisit this. what is their middle ground? >> there's two pieces. one is the amount of the second
thing is what you call it. nobody wants to be against border security so democrats are happy to call border security. the president is calling the law because its to delivery wall. you might have a solution for it for the department of homeland security and both sides claim it is for what they say it's for. it's like anything. the president started with a big number if you wanted to get 25 so i suspect the numbers probably somewhere between the five president is demanding than the 1.6 already offered. there's a middle ground in there somewhere. maybe it's 1.9 or two, 2.5. neil: you know, you'd make a very good talent agent. thank you very, very much. i appreciate it. market watchers on what this could mean for the markets.
you know, jim i'll begin with you. far bigger concern in the market is where we stand on this china trade back and forth. if forth. if they got a deal or even the semblance of a deal and it looks like we have the chinese agreed to lower tariffs on american cars or what have you, that will make this a distant memory for the time being, but what you think? >> i agree with you. i don't think it's a key investment issue. it's transitory, political, we've been through this many times before and we will get through it. the china thing is much more important. the problem is it's going to take some time. there's a lot of noise back and forth in the first 90 days of next year. i am confident that the entrant is running for reelection. he watches the stock are good. he'll make a deal, declared three and say we are great friends and that he did this for america and i don't think the trade negotiations will be a key investment issue beyond the first quarter.
there are other things we can talk about but i don't think either the budget, the law for china will be the key investment issues of next year. tree into whether this is a preview of coming attractions that the two sides and they cannot handle anything, i can now work with each other on anything. it is a two-year stalemate. i know mark is kind of like something like that, but i argue with a little different this go around. there's a lot of pressing issues this go around and that may be a cavalier attitude to what you think? >> with the markets i'm seeing a change. last week of a business journalist were looking at this fear of the day and trying to determine why it was taking the market down. and now, especially over the weekend as people were reflecting on what happened, you're starting to see business journalist look at each one of
these issues and say hey, this is an effect than the underlying u.s. economy and they're pointing out going back to economics 101 that the market always, always tracks the underlying trend of the u.s. economy in the u.s. economy is doing spectacularly well. we are going to have 3.1% gdp growth. 25% earnings growth according the facts will have historic christmas season and consumers representing 90% of the economy. so these things are the things investors have to start focusing on. and also, the market right now is the most undervalued by a couple of measures that we've seen since 2008. right now if you look at the forward price earnings ratio come you can't look at the trailing because that doesn't include all the tax cuts. the forward p.e. of 15.6.
the long-term trend in 16.4. the market is trading under its long-term trend and you've got to remember which her grandmother told you when you were a little boy was by low, sell high. buy low, sell high. neil: let me ask you this. i'm far more worried. i may -- i know i'm a bit of a deficit hawk because i don't like taking money away here. i don't think -- we are looking on a budget deficit and no one has come up with a way to address that. i know that's not an immediate concern, but it's going to show up eventually and be an issue for the bond market. eventually for the stock market if they willy-nilly keep adding
priorities and spending whatever their value and merit. we are financially. >> in the long run you're definitely right. we have a political system here and i suspect through some combination of growth enhancing measures which will grow revenues, maybe a little bit more in taxes and curbing certain spending areas that we will chip away at it. when you talk about credit i'm more worried about the other and all the money that's gone to below investment grade companies and tripled the investment-grade companies at a time when the economy is likely to slow. i think it's going to be okay but i'm more worried about that the federal deficit. trade to the federal reserve
chairing and no one is talking about. 5 billion here and a $4 trillion budget. i get that. but you know, pretty soon it adds up. >> it adds up to the dirty little secret in washington that no one wants to talk about is completely politically incorrect is that historically we've paid off a lot of our debt by devaluing the american dollar. we did that during jammer carter sarah. that's how we do it. neil: good read on all this going on here. google ceo just said they spent months in china, for china. that's apparently wrapped up. speaking before the house judiciary there's no plans to launch a search engine in china
>> confident we don't approach our work with any political bias. it's important to me we always look at outcomes and the access to make sure there's no evidence of bias. train to google's ceo still hill testifying before the house judiciary committee again on abuses going on at google, whether they stick around too much, whether they're biased against conservatives, all that. charlie gasparino has been monitoring closely other developments i'm not. >> this is a dry one for what's going happen when the dems take over control of congress. republicans will push them on whether to buy a shadow binning conservatives and he'll come out and give these had a facebook then you name it. sort of broad explanations of why shadow binning our certain
things happen to look like social media companies have an anti-conservative bent. the real rubber meets the road junior is heard dems take control of congress whose sources are saying on capitol hill it is going to be at two prong attack. on the democratic side, while republicans worry about the anti-conservative, the base is really worried about big tech becoming on privacy issues. they are worried about the very same that big tech to make a lot of money. how they use and misuse privacy data, how they sell it. the companies in the crossfire when the democrats take over is going to be google, amazon to a certain extent. apple to a certain extent it's going to be facebook. the second prong in broader
mandate these tech companies are involved in telecommunications issues. holding hearings on the sec oversight whether it's been good enough. the head of the fcc is like we to call him repeatedly from what we understand and they are bracing for that. why do we care about this story? if you're an investor, think about this. tech companies in the tech regulator has been somewhat hands-off on net neutrality in issues like that are taking a much more -- the regulatory side and how the democrats want to approach this. we have certain congressmen on the record. a producer and i wrote about this on friday.
they are really planning the sector which has been getting hammered lately. neil: plenty in the democratic heard it, has been coming in now, the tax money. >> .the funny thing about it. it's the base. we should point out nancy pelosi whenever the story last week somebody told me that nancy pelosi, maybe her husband call options on facebook, options to buy because they think the price is going to go up. that's kind of an interesting view if you're going to crack down on these companies from a regulatory standpoint. i would just say that the base is now different. yes, silicon valley, huge donor to progressive causes, and that the base worries about their power in ways that wasn't there before. the problem is nancy pelosi, she may not want to do this.
she got in as speaker by the skin of her teeth. she's not there yet. they're going to want these hearings. neil: they are very pragmatic bunch, ceos. i don't really care who's president. i'm paraphrasing here. just as long as he's not always my you know what. i am wondering if the environment will change now. you will have politicians on your you know what. >> as they become more powerful, particularly social media companies that use a lot of customer data. listen, i'm not saying i agree with the notion that they're bad. i don't care if i get a targeted ad. if you want to send me through doubts, weightlifting and, as for bikinis, i don't care. you want to do that, that's fine. neil: i just get nervous.
i'm from the government. i'm here to help. are they in any position given their own fiscal record to be policing or telling anyone what to do? now were at that point. >> and again, they have not a lot of friends on the republican side even though they take a more free-market approach and they have the dems now gunning for them. neil: thank you, but a very, very much. this is a fight were going to have. referring to the president to dig in the liberal arrogance, taken on. stare down. more after this.
hi.i just wanted to tell you that chevy won a j.d.power dependability award for its midsize car-the chevy malibu. i forgot. chevy also won a j.d. power dependability award for its light-duty truck the chevy silverado. oh, and since the chevy equinox and traverse also won chevy is the only brand to earn the j.d. power dependability award across cars, trucks and suvs-three years in a row. phew. third time's the charm...
but when i started seeing things, i didn't know what was happening... so i kept it in. he started believing things that weren't true. i knew something was wrong... but i didn't say a word. during the course of their disease around 50% of people with parkinson's may experience hallucinations or delusions. but now, doctors are prescribing nuplazid. the only fda approved medicine... proven to significantly reduce hallucinations and delusions related to parkinson's. don't take nuplazid if you are allergic to its ingredients. nuplazid can increase the risk of death in elderly people with dementia-related psychosis and is not for treating symptoms unrelated to parkinson's disease. nuplazid can cause changes in heart rhythm and should not be taken if you have certain abnormal heart rhythms or take other drugs that are known to cause changes in heart rhythm. tell your doctor about any changes in medicines you're taking. the most common side effects are
swelling of the arms and legs and confusion. we spoke up and it made all the difference. ask your parkinson's specialist about nuplazid. >> and gerri willis life in the floor of the new york stock exchange. welcome back to "cavuto: coast-to-coast." the stock market find about 100 points, 96 points on the president, nancy pelosi and chuck schumer that happened just moments ago.
on the floor of the new stock exchange, mixed reaction to that. an embarrassment, show, that's what they call the. in trying to negotiate. with the democrats in the house here. this coming season as "the wall street journal" reporting china will be cutting tariffs on autos to 15% from 40%. back to you. neil: thank you very much. let's get a read on all of this and how this looks for the president right now. would you like him, dislike and, what if i told you that this same crowd in europe that was snickering at him a little more than a few months ago is in a world of hurt. all of these leaders, emmanuel macron to angela merkel have lower poll rating. in fact, i hasten to add if you're adding that the approval ratings they'd still be lower
than the president so i exaggerate. to make the point they are in a world of hurt, the president and a lot better shape. that could change. volatile and it sticks up in a narrow range averaging from the mid-40s to the high 40s was just a real clear politics average of these polls. the head of european trade, alec radisson with us now. would you make over the president stands among global leaders that this point? >> i think if you look at how particularly in france and the u.k., and we are an absolute crisis at the moment when you talk about a constitutional crisis in the u.k. has made work towards the e.u. at that paris for about 50 years. depending on how you look at it, and they might be on par in terms of volatility, but i think in terms of the p. crisis moment come in the u.k. and france are certainly between a point far more quickly than the u.s. at
this stage. neil: that's like a big oversight on my part. you do wonder what the problem: france. that makes a mockery of the fiscal discipline or something they touted going on in italy they are and what's happening in germany as potentially worse. you could make a good argument that england should sort of sort that out because of the club you don't want to be in. >> it's interesting people talk about what is the status quo if we decided to the whole process we don't know what the status quo would actually look like although i would say in terms of the ability to have a negative impact on the economy, leaving the e.u. with a deal is up there in terms of crisis moments. neil: well put, ally. sorry for all the breaking news here. still trying to discern the middle ground may be found here. i'm not talking about nancy pelosi and chuck schumer and the president. i'm talking about back-and-forth
>> you do not have the vote in the house. we need border security. we have a proposal. democrats and republicans will support to do vcr that will not shut down the government. >> and if it's not border security i won't take it. the wall is the border security. neil: not exactly lives. played to all its back-and-forth professional wrestling excitement, which immediately brings me to john vessey.
great writer, great thinker. wouldn't you think think of the whole thing? >> well, they were kind of talking to their own bases. you didn't hear anything that there's disagreement and this is how the funding to a certain extent this was the editor and it was played out again to the constituencies that matter for those political parties in the room. neil: you know come i just wonder, no one talks about where the money is frowned that 5 billion or 1.36 billion. i know we've run large deficit. no one gets into the weeds about that, which is why we have trillion dollars deficit. >> the democrats say it not getting lost in the sauce. you have a deficit that's rising. tax cut with less revenue coming into the government and that's
why the deficit is rising. that's what the president would say if you cut spending caused by the democrats that is in excess of what can be budgeted reasonably and that you need the wall for a whole bunch of other reasons including reducing the cost of contending with immigrant across the border. that was open theater for consumption. neil: i'm wondering for the market. i i think they know a shutdown is a possibility. sadly or not depending on your point of view we've gotten used to these kabuki theater moments. i'm wondering of more pressing concern right now is the china trade thing. i suspect i will rule the roost of the market one way or the other. what do you think? >> i think you're right. the shutdown kind of has been
baked in. we always go to the precipice. we seem to step back usually. usually this setback and the presumption the market that will happen again this time. trade is a different story in the administration looking at what happened to the market this week and last week probably very concerned about the fact there doesn't seem to be a lot of buy-in by the market that progress was made in buenos aires by fiji 20 with the chinese. that is why you hear this discussion last night while this could be new talks. talks are underway. on the phone along with some sects of the chinese trade negotiator few hours ago. now the chinese negotiator is coming to washington sometime early in the year and progress is being made here we are still at the very front of this what progress is going to be made really remains to be seen. are they just going to buy some are agricultural goods and talk for the next three months. that's what the markets concerned about.
you're absolutely right. interpreting this as a shallow deal. they just haven't seen enough specificity. is china really going to engage with the u.s. about changing the way he runs the country. that is a big, big ask of the chinese. neil: in history indicates to really examine closely. thank you as always. google ceo sundar pichai offended his testimony before the house judiciary committee. so that's over with. he might be one of the few relieved with nancy pelosi and chuck schumer arguing with the president of the united states because it took the heat off him and the attention off of that hearing. a little more aftert' this. nt t? exactly. sounds like a case of analysis paralysis. is there a cure? td ameritrade's trade desk.
- when i was young, into my teens and when i went into college and played college tennis, i could play all day long and never get tired. as i got older, i started noticing a change in energy. - [narrator] scientist have discovered that after you reach age 40, your body produces less vital nitric oxide than it did when you were in your 20s. with less nitric oxide you have less energy. so how do you get your energy back? take one atom of nitrogen and bond it with one atom of oxygen. boom. you just created nitric oxide, the miracle molecule your body needs to help support
heart health and help give you more energy. now you can jumpstart your nitric oxide levels with the circulation superfood of superbeets by humann. based on nobel prize award-winning research recognizing nitric oxide as an important signaling molecule for heart health, superbeets uses the dietary nitrates found in nutrient-rich beets to help your body generate more vital nitric oxide, fueling your energy and supporting healthy blood pressure. - it really has dramatic effects, not only on the athlete, but the average individual that's just trying to get through the day. you just feel better, you feel more alert and you have more energy. - it's not the type of energy that you feel great for about 30 minutes and then you take a nose dive. i mean, this is sustained energy that gets you through the rest of your day. - [narrator] you would have to eat over 90 fresh beets to get the functional benefits found in one canister of superbeets. - [narrator] call now to find out how you can get a 30-day supply of superbeets free with your first order. call the number on your screen
now to take advantage of this limited-time offer. - what you've just put in your body is actually going to help you sitting at your desk for eight hours. it's this long-lasting battery life. - [narrator] for a free 30-day supply of superbeets with your first order, call the number on your screen. that's the number on your screen now. neil: already come in the dow right now down 170 points. a lot of this on the back-and-forth of what's going on out of canada right now. hearing that canada is just notifying the canadian citizen has been detained in china. you might remember canada how the rest of the cso of huawei on allegations she was gathering intelligence and spying on
people and of course they wanted to have her arrested. they did and then there was a hearing today for the chinese are responding by arresting a canadian citizen to chinese have also taken and talk to ambassadors from canada and china and our abbasid or to china. this appears to be escalating the only thing i can say that would suddenly add to volatility here. one way or the other works to my next guest advantage because in the world is volatile and you want to protect yourself from it, and the chairman and ceo of the acosta institution. i was just saying, most people are familiar with the fear index, volatility index and that's been all over the map. that sort of speaks to is going on in the world. >> it does indeed. the change in the level of volatility and looking at volatility over time is very telling and really should inform your viewers on the market's
perception overtime. very important point. neil: when you have a lot of developments today. the google ceo leaving capitol hill today. people protect themselves from wild swings. in your exchange addresses those. is it more fanatic on a day like this? >> i don't think a day like this has been more tickled her -- typical since september than normal. if we look at the year ago, with a couple spikes during the market really led by unknowns in the marketplace. we have things for an extended period of time but there is china talks amid the ebb and flow of the progress they are. whether it is brexit on faux, off though, the likelihood of passing something that's
reasonable. what it is is still uncertain. it is more uncertain than it has been. there's an average average level of volatility in the market place, what traders are pricing in insurance for poor folio the s&p 500 here there is an average there. we are way above the average ended as a sustained high-level overtime. very unusual. neil: i'm wondering is -- it speaks to maybe the complications of the markets that despite underlying stocks, there's new dimensions to it in no way to play through all of this volatility, but it can get mind numbingly. >> you can, but simple protect strategies are not complicated. that's the first thing that's taught. how do you ensure a portfolio.
any scenario that you and i can discuss in anything that's concerning you in the market going forward, there is a strategy to minimize that risk. they can be very subtle. neil: ipad and s&p 500 and i'm suddenly concerned now that my underlying investment is in trouble. >> simply to ensure all the way to complex strategies using volatility contracts to hedge out the rest. neil: seems like by the second getting in and out of volatility , how is that because it can be so. >> the volatility of volatility is very. there's a high volatility to volatility. even if we put that aside, the dedicated liquidity providers, participants in the market all day long are pricing the insurance overtime. what they're telling you is very transparent. i'm really, really unsure of what's going to happen in any of
the three to five major global drivers in the u.s. market i'm really uncertain. i'm really uncomfortable. it elevated, more expensive than it would've been almost any point in 2017. neil: when did things pick up? i would imagine the activity, the more interesting products you offer. we've seen certainly over the last couple of months all about pickup. >> october was a record month overall. february was basically the same 10% correction in the market. neil: people forget that. >> it happened in a really short period of time. in the beginning of october through today we had a longer and sustain -- neil: worthier market scene right now? >> the price that the market is selling insurance for the 500 is
cheaper than what we're realizing each and every day. let me give you an example. if an historic level of volatility is 17. it's an example of volatility. that's implying a 1% move in the underlying. move volatility up to 24 the markets expecting most of the time a one-point 5% in the market. that's a big, big change on expert nation and that's priced in the marketplace and we see options elevated in the price. neil: but it's also indicative of a scarier market. >> is a scarier market. the big drivers to major change there is no certainty. neil: how if they played out how to look at what's going on with brexit, what's going on in france, germany to slow down, china, god only knows. >> they're all in the category of no unknowns. we know they're out there, but there's still major, potentially
disruptive moves to the overall market. that's what the impact is and what would just cannot see through yet. >> of the government shut down a stairway to played out? >> there's various degrees of shutting down in the early stages. we've seen that before. i really think that the market is as concentrated on more trade talks. the rate of change of our own interest rates have many more macroeconomic drivers that i think we can see through a shutdown. the mixer was the first thing you look at every morning? >> i look at the level of the vx in the future prices. neil: had tilly, chairman and ceo. this speaks of our time in the environment we are written that people get nervous about the market. there is a way to deal with that. there are all sorts of
mechanisms with which you can. in the meantime we're getting more details. talk about volatility. this is building here because the chinese have rounded up one of their top officials and have not indicated that as the chinese what they want and do what the person. here we go, after this. comcast business built the nation's largest gig-speed network. then went beyond. beyond chasing down network problems. to knowing when and where there's an issue.
>> we have undertaken internal effort. >> did you create a prototype? there was a report in the intercept, a report for the prototype of censored search engine was designed. >> we have -- what search could look like if it were to be launched in a country like china. that is what the explode and -- >> how many months was that project on going? >> we have had the project underway for a while. neil: that was google's ceo, back and forth there, that did intimate they had built something like a search engine for the chinese market. never really utilized it. didn't get that far. not looking to do something like that in china right now, i stress now, that was emphasized on the part of of mr. pichai. author of inside apple, adam lashinsky. what do you make of that? he was kind of coy, i don't know if he a lawyer?
>> no, he is not. neil: what did you make of that? >> that was one instance where he answered the question directly. yes, we develop ad prototype. i could play both side. they develop prototypes and work on things for years on what-if basis. on the other hand they are absolutely looking at that market and would love to get into that market. who could blame them you want to get into a market with 1.5 billion people. he wasn't going to elaborate more than i did. neil: he was only half joking he was probably relieved much of the washington media attention turned to the oval office and shout fest with nancy pelosi and chuck schumer. it took some of the spotlight off him. >> yeah, i think he has gotten more than one break. he is no mark zuckerberg. that works to his advantage in this regard. he is an engineer, a very competent business person.
google, while they do many similar things that fates book and twitter did, they haven't been caught red-handed doing anything as stupid as facebook has. and so they already were not in the spotlight that the way facebook was. members of congress are almost completely, incapable of having a substantive conversation on the kind of topics that they would want to grill him on, because it is really complicated stuff. so he is going to succeed there. because they can't really ask the questions, correctly. i think he absolutely succeeded with the glare being elsewhere today. neil: thank you very much. before i go to charles payne. huawei ceo was going to a bail hearing today in canada. i don't know the status of that. the canadians are upset because they heard an unnamed canadian official detained by chinese government.
others say it is tit-for-tat. others pouncing on that are sellers. i know that charles payne will be looking into this. the dow down about 186 points. wish i could leave you with a better market. actually i like to see what you do with it. charles: that will be a heck of a test. we have so much to cover, neil. neil: all right, buddy. charles: i'm charles payne. this is "making money." stocks giving up big-time gains. we had 500 point reversal yesterday. the same thing but to the downside today. this as the president and democrats clash over the president's border wall, giving up hope to prevent the government shutdown. >> i will shut down the government. i am proud -- >> we disagree. >> i am proud to shut down the government for border security. charles: it was the most incredible gaggle in the history of gaggles. it was absolutely amazing. i say to the uk parliament, take that we can do it