tv Bulls Bears FOX Business January 12, 2019 11:00am-12:00pm EST
foxnews.com/propertyman. i'll see you next week. [ woman vocalizing ] right now. connell: all right! david: the leader of the largest and richest city in america, now says the folks who built that wealth really don't deserve it as much as the government does. hi, everybody this is bulls & bears glad you could join us i'm david asman joining me on the panel today to debate this we got morgan ortega, deirdre bolton and john layfield and adam lashinsky. well new york mayor bill deblasio proposing a massive re distribution of wealth. >> working people have gotten more and more productive at the same time they've gotten smaller and smaller share of the wealth they create. here is the truth.
brothers and sisters there's plenty of money in the world. there's plenty of money in this city. it's just in the wrong hands. >> [applause] david: in the wrong hands so is the mayor right, what do you think, gang? >> absolutely not i think the mayor is nuts. they call him big bill for a reason. look, he's running for president is what he's doing and to do that as a democrat you have to make some crazy socialistic statement to get noticed these days. this doesn't work what he's talking about this re distribution. global extreme poverty has gone from 36% in 1990 to about 10% in 2015 because of access to people , because of opportunities that open up. you do that by breaking generational cycles when you work with education of incarceration of gang involvement not by throwing money at it just by taking money from the rich and throwing at a project to make yourself feel better doesn't help the
situation. >> well john before you said he was running for president my first comment was i was happy this fight has nothing to do with me since i'm in san francisco but david i want to start by picking on something you said. he's not suggesting the money should go to the government but suggesting this money should go to poor people so there's a slight difference there. david: hold on a second i've got to jump in. the fact is he said his own words it's just in the wrong hands and how do you think it's going to go from the people who made the money to the poor people? it goes through the government. that's always the way it works. >> through but know to. i just want to make one comment which is that progressive taxation is nothing new. bill deblasio did not invent it. its worked pretty well in the united states for a pretty long time. he's just suggesting stepping on the gas a little bit. >> stepping on the gas i've been covering some of the de details and some of what he has proposed so i'll go over the list. he actually wants to create a public retirement system for the 2 million new yorkers who don't have that in the state of oregon i know adam you say you're not
in new york but you are on the west coast state of oregon has already done it seattle is not far behind. it stalled actually here in new york i think about three years ago but he seems pretty determined to push this one through also going to be expanding a pre-k for three year olds to 20,000 kids by 2019 instead of 19,000 kids by 2021 and then free vision exams for kids and partnering with war b. parker to get kids free eye glasses and then also a little bit more local and perhaps bizarre for new york but if you are a bad landlord he is proposing that essential the city take over the property, turn it into a non-profit, and run it differently. i don't know how even if you thought that was a good idea i don't know how you do that. >> it seems like that would face a host of legal challenges because that's the essence of going against what we want as the government taking over businesses and property perhaps he should try venezuela or a few other countries i'm sure they would be open to him.
something he's going to have to really contend with in this next year is the fact he's proposing billions of dollars in new spending but because of the new tax bill, he's not going to have all of that money coming from washington, back to new york city, so in the new budget that he's proposed he has not made any effort to sort of even address what he will do to make up that gap from the money coming from washington. >> something that mayor bloomberg made the point on was essentially not alienating the upper middle class or rich people, let's just call them that, because once they leave new york city then the entire city system loses out on a lot of revenue. >> what i think is interesting is the difference between his comments from the clip that we played and the list of proposals that you read. i mean, let's debate the taking buildings away from bad landlords to other time. the rest of that list was hardly anything radical. it was your run of the mill social safety net do good projects for people who need help which we support all over
the place. david: but adam, the thing is that we have had a mayor, he's been mayor for five years already. he's increased the budget 20%. no mayor has increased the budget by the same amount that he has, and what's happened to the money? nobody knows, because the subways are broken. the streets are dirty. there are more homeless than ever. that's what's setting people off all over the world is the fact that we give politicians more money and what do they do with it? they grow their bureaucracy that doesn't help anybody. >> well, it's a philosophical point that you're making now. i understand. i mean, when i visit new york, as you know i do frequently, it seems to me like the city is thriving so but again, not my fight, so i get it. david: but it's happening all over. that's the point. >> it's not necessarily a philosophical point. i agree that the rich have an obligation to help the poor and that the government has an obligation to help the poor. what i'm arguing about is global
extreme poverty has decreased because they found ways to break generational cycles and that's what mayor bill deblasio is not doing. he's just throwing money at the problem saying the wrong people have the money let's give it to the poor instead of going into these inner cities where education and job training is not there, where you have incarceration rate that is to the rest of society there's things you can fix to fix these generational cycles but until you do that, throwing money is not going to help. >> then of course there is the point as well about him being hypocritical and offering amazon basically $3 billion of tax breaks so there are critics locally who support philosophically some of the efforts but then say okay why am i supporting this multi-billion dollar company which clearly could pay for its own. >> listen we've lost so much of the middle and american politics and what john said at the beginning is exactly what's going on here is that he is running for the president and the energy in the democrat party is with people like alexandria
ocasio-cortez it is a very extreme not even progressive socialism is the new in vogue thing among the people, and politically he's actually in step with where the base of his party is, going out and doing this tour is a way for him to separate himself. >> smart if you're running for the democrat primary. >> if i might since we're having such a high level substantive philosophical conversation, what she's suggesting and what he's suggesting is socialism in the form of northern europe, sweden, you know, we heard her say this on 60 minutes i'm sorry i say her and she because i can't say her entire name. >> i was just going to say say aoc. >> and john you talked about alleviating global poverty. most of that is what the chinese did by using market reforms over the last 30 years. we'll see what the chinese do 50 years from now when they've got our problems. right now we're looking at what the northern europeans did it
worked pretty well for them. >> well except by most estimate s when you look at actually doing business in sweden and some of these nordic countries they actually get high marks for economic freedom so the comparison isn't always appropriate there and it's nice to aim to be norway but you end up being cuba. david: also we have tried so much of this stuff before adam to no a vail. there are housing projects that have had to be torn down because they not only haven't worked, not only been much more in efficient and dirtier than anything the private sector put up but they became crime dens and just had to be torn down like cabrini green in chicago, places in los angeles and now he wants to expand public housing it's crazy. >> i think it's also a numbers game as well. northern europe is admirable but we have hundreds of millions in our population. obviously now speaking beyond new york, but those are smaller countries i think that can manage a bit differently. david: well great reporting today, congratulations on that. the ongoing government shutdown is now the longest in u.s. history, so are we any
to one-touch conference calls. beyond traditional tv. to tv on any device. beyond low-res surveillance video. to crystal clear hd video monitoring from anywhere. gig-fueled apps that exceed expectations. comcast business. beyond fast. the doctor just for a shot. with neulasta onpro patients get their day back... to be with family, or just to sleep in. strong chemo can put you at risk of serious infection. in a key study neulasta reduced the risk of infection from 17% to 1%, a 94% decrease. neulasta onpro is designed to deliver neulasta the day after chemo and is used by most patients today. neulasta is for certain cancer patients receiving strong chemotherapy. do not take neulasta if you're allergic to it or neupogen (filgrastim). an incomplete dose could increase infection risk. ruptured spleen, sometimes fatal as well as serious lung problems, allergic reactions, kidney injuries and capillary leak syndrome have occurred.
report abdominal or shoulder tip pain, trouble breathing or allergic reactions to your doctor right away. in patients with sickle cell disorders, serious, sometimes fatal crises can occur. the most common side effect is bone and muscle ache. ask your doctor about neulasta onpro. pay no more than $5 per dose with copay card. ask your doctor about neulasta onpro. but some give their clients cookie cutter portfolios. fisher investments tailors portfolios to your goals and needs. some only call when they have something to sell. fisher calls regularly so you stay informed. and while some advisors are happy to earn commissions whether you do well or not. fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management. unstopand it's strengthenedting place, the by xfi pods,gateway. which plug in to extend the wifi even farther,
congress gone for the weekend, edward lawrence is on capitol hill so edward, hundreds of thousand of government employees just missed their first paycheck as a result of the stalemate but there are votes to assure that they'll get paid, right? >> exactly, right. the house or the house here decided to pass that bill the president says he's going to sign it to make sure that those folks get their backpay. it's quiet on capitol hill right now, i can hear myself which is unusual for this live shot location, the house and senate are both out as you mentioned, democrats still trying to blame the president for all of this, as they passed another bill that would fund another agency, trying to do it one at a time. >> the government is shut down. there's no excuse for that but the president wants his way and he's taking 800,000 people hostage and the ransom he demands is his wall. >> still the impacts starting to affect mortgages.
the treasury department is out of money that is the irs and the income verification statements that mortgages need are starting to back up now the commerce department also out of money, the federal reserve is concerned that they won't get all of the data that they would like to see , setting monetary policy we're talking about gdp reports and retail sales reports if this continues, the white house economic advisors are saying it might show up in the jobs report , also, because they will show some 800,000 employees without a job, even though they will get the job back, along with backpay when this is over. republicans say the democrats could end this easily if they would just engage. >> in 2006 when there was a bill to put $50 billion in place over 25 years, for border security, this democrat in the senate said, "it will authorize some badly-needed funding and the democrat who said that was then senator barack obama." >> again no end in sight as
both sides digging into their positions back to you guys. >> hi, ed this is morgan. so as you just said, all we're doing is see seeing mud being thrown at each other, republican s blaming democrats vice versa. is there any option or any discussion around perhaps maybe going to this nuclear option where mitch mcconnell could invoke this and then you don't have to get to the 60 votes in the senate or is that still dead >> at this point, that has not been discussed. what has been discussed is that declaring a national emergency. it seems at this point it's more likely that that would happen, as opposed to using the nuclear option with senator mitch mcconnell. they've not heard a lot of discussion or any discussion about that actually going forward. >> edward, i'm just curious about the tone, i know that a lawsuit was filed today, right, by some transient workers, to what extent are you hearing concern on capitol hill from either party about more and more groups of workers doing this, we know 800,000 federal workers are
not paid today. >> yeah, we have four lawsuits now that have been filed one of them the air traffic controllers saying that this violates their fifth amendment that the president is depriving them of due process while taking away their money so a number of lawsuits that will be filed and continue to be filed i'm sure next week, it'll be interesting to see the fallout. at the moment lawmakers on both sides feel like they have the american people behind them. the president is saying and republicans saying that the folks understand they agree that there should be some border security including a wall here, so they will take a little bit of a hardship knowing that they will get paid once this is all over with. democrats saying that the president is holding these folks hostage so at this point no one is really feeling the pressure from the people. we'll have to see what happens tomorrow and over the weekend, now that those workers have not seen their paychecks. >> edward, john layfield here. i think they're being held hostage i don't think there's any doubt about that. whose to blame though i think is up in the air. it seems to me like we are in
d.c. with pelosi, schumer and the president. i think they are all to blame and it's a disgrace what they're doing to our country because they can't simply get along. the question i have is the president could declare a national emergency but could not get funding because congress has to prove the funding. is that what you're hearing in washington d.c. that one of the reasons maybe the president backed off of this? >> that's not what we're hearing. the president does believe he could divert money from specifically the emergency funding to help the humanitarian relief that happened in puerto rico, also the california wildfires that's one avenue. another avenue the president believes that he has is he could go to the military have the army corps of engineers also work on this so there's a number of avenues of money that the president believes from his lawyers from the white house that he does have the legal right to do this and divert funds if he wants to. he does know though it will be filed, there will be a number of court challenges filed that if he does declare a national emergency, plus i think they're
concerned about the precedent that this sets in terms of, you know, could a democratic president if and when one comes down the road say oh, climate change is a national emergency and start diverting funds so i think there's a little concern about the precedent being set, but no i haven't heard anything about the president not being willing to do this. >> you know, gang i'm going to make a prediction i'd love to know what everybody thinks about it. things look incredibly bleak right now nobody is budging that's exactly the time where both sides come together and make a deal. president trump before all of this was saying these nice things about how much he admired or liked it's not or agreed with nancy pelosi. i'm willing to bet this weekend he picks up the phone and calls her and they go into negotiations early in the week. david: i don't know i don't have a crystal ball but the point is it does seem, i tend to agree with you, adam. it does seem as though are reaching a point frankly what i've heard and i don't know if you've heard about this edward but that in fact a lot of democrats who already had joe
manchin on our air say if the president declared a national emergency then they'd immediately open the government and it would go to court and both sides would say look, we did everything we could do, so they wouldn't lose face even though there still wouldn't be an agreement on all. >> and that could be the out there. yeah, i don't think nancy pelosi is going to back off her position. this is something she said even before any of the president's meetings with the leadership on the democratic side she did interviews saying absolutely no money for a wall. this is looking forward to 2020. the president is going to run on promises made, promises kept, which we've already heard that statement from the white house. >> edward and she called it immoral. it's going to be incredibly hard once you start calling things immoralities really hard to fund something despite the fact that everyone is being a hypocrite here they've funded and voted for all of these fences and things in the past but the rhetoric on this has reached sort of biblical proportions. >> what surprises me is the
president already actually did back down once in his speech tuesday night, he said this isn't a concrete wall after all, even though by the way, i said that a thousand times. if he backs down a little bit more, we want fencing in certain places. nancy pelosi can say in certain places, we're done here, thank you let's move on. david: well talk about backing down how many times the democrat s who are now against the wall were for the wall before they were against the wall so there's enough hipocracy here to go around. edward i think you're on call all weekend sorry for you my friend thank you very much for being with us so could we be nearing a trade deal with china amid the shutdown, our next guest thinks china is more desperate for a deal than we are , former ceo of cke restaurants will explain, he's next. my experience with usaa
has been excellent. they really appreciate the military family and it really shows. with all that usaa offers why go with anybody else? we know their rates are good, we know that they're always going to take care of us. it was an instant savings and i should have changed a long time ago. it was funny because when we would call another insurance company, hey would say "oh we can't beat usaa" we're the webber family. we're the tenney's we're the hayles, and we're usaa members for life. ♪ get your usaa auto insurance quote today. david: so are we nearing a trade deal with china? the market seems to think so that's why its been up the past couple of weeks. president xi's top trade aid is
set to visit the u.s. in weeks ahead. fox business has now been told by officials that the shutdown won't affect negotiations. this is u.s. companies like starbucks are being downgraded now because of their exposure to china, let's bring in former cke restaurant ceo, recently wrote an op-ed in the wall street journal entitled behind the bluster is a vulnerable china, so andy, we are feeling the pain particularly companies with direct exposure to china. is it worth it is our pressure paying off? >> well for some companies, there is pain. if you've got a lot of business in china, if you manufacture products in china you're selling to that market you're going to suffer some but the federal reserve bank just said in september if we implemented all of the tariffs we're talking about, the aggregate affect on our economy would be minimal and if you look at the amount of trade we do with china, we sell them about $130 billion worth of goods a year. that's like 6-tenths of a
percent of our total economy. if it was down a little it would be a rounding error whereas we buy from them about 506 billion in goods, which is a significant portion, it's about 2.4% of our economy, but it's a significant or greater percentage of their economy so i think that there are risks here, we will get a good deal out of this, we can't let him continue to steal our intellectual property, and then sell it back to us by state subsidized entities in china. it's not fair. it's not right and unfair trade is not free-trade. >> andy, john layfield here, thank you very much for coming on the show we appreciate it and i loved the op-ed that you wrote >> thank you. >> i have a question about chairman powell. thank you and you know, we have a global supply chain that have been disrupted, we have a $12 billion bailout to our farmers so we are feeling pain more than chairman powell is saying, maybe the overall economy aggregate but there is problems that can not be quantified as easy as the global supply chain. it seems to me though that the chinese with reading with what they're looking at they see the
government shutdown. they see the house go to the dems in the mid-terms. they believe in my opinion from what i've read that they have a winning hand here that america is falling apart and they don't want to give in. that leads itself to not having an off ramp to this. what do you think about that from the chinese point of view? >> i think normally the chinese perspective is very long term. that's the way they look at things and they don't have the kind of they don't have an election every two years for the house of representatives or every four years for the president. >> they have kind of a longer term perspective than we do; however they are suffering economically right now. they've got literally hundreds of thousands if not millions of people moving from the country sides into the cities every day, or every year looking for jobs and you've got a $10,000 per capita gpa in china, that's after 15 years of some years double-digit gdp growth huge gdp growth, there's still only $10,000 here in the united states we're at $62,000. they need that dynamic economic
growth to keep things under control in their country economically. those people are expecting economic benefits and they're not getting them. >> andy this is adam lashinsky with fortune magazine. i'm going to take issue with one thing that you said. you said we're going to get a good deal. see i think we're going to get a deal. i think it is inconceivable that we'll get a good deal by march, because these problems are too big to work out ways that the chinese will actually honor something so significant as not stealing intellectual property any more so i think they want a deal president trump absolutely wants a deal, we'll get that. we'll go on our marry way but it will not, it will not be what everyone's after because they play long ball so much. they are going to rope a dope this one. >> you might be right about that, but i'll tell you, if there's one president we've had in my lifetime who is willing to put himself on the line, willing to take the risks, has the courage to face down somebody at the other side of the negotiat ing table, it's
president trump. >> you say that, but i'm sorry to interrupt you but where has he done that as president? he faced down the dictator of north korea and didn't get anything. he faced down the canadians and the mexicans and got it tweaked to nafta. so where is the evidence for this so far? >> well let me take north korea there hasn't been a missile guard in north korea since the president and kim jong-un started having talks so this is, people in journalism and people that, you know, in the media seem to think that business deals happen overnight. they don't. this is a process of negotiation he's negotiating with kim jong-un. he's negotiating and it's not going to happen overnight. hopefully it can happen within four years so the people in this country can see results by the next election but it's not going to happen rapidly and he's facing down nancy pelosi and chuck schumer as we talk, like no president republican president has, and in an attempt to get border security which everybody supported until
president trump was elected. >> well and according to the chinese, according to the president it's easier to negotiate with the chinese than with speaker pelosi and mr. schumer. andy this is morgan it's so good to see you again from across the camera. something that i'm curious about that i harp on quite a bit here is the national security angle to these negotiations. right now, correct me if i'm wrong, it looks like all of the trade people are involved but do you know if any of these really important things are on the table like cyber hacking like the continued expansion in the south china sea just to name a few? >> look, everything is on the table. the people that are negotiating these deals are very sophisticated people. they're people that are involved in all of these issues. whatever problems we have with the chinese, i feel very confident that they're being discussed in these meetings in china whether we'll get all of them resolved or not, we won't. you never get that. you never get that in any negotiation. the best negotiation is when everybody walks away from the table dissatisfied.
that means it was probably a fair deal so you're not going to get everything you want but look the situation can't stay like it is. it's grossly unfair. it's unfair not only to the united states, but to countries around the world. china takes advantage of their economic power in ways that the united states never has, so this has got to stop and i think we're on a path to get past china's worse offences. >> andy, somebody whose been responsible for employees, been responsible for revenue, how would you advise let's say starbucks, or yum brands some of the consumer brands nike is another one that really are affected and you said it, the ip is anywhere between 200 and 600 billion stolen per year depending on how you count it but sort of the 600 billion is an all-in. what else could be done at this juncture? >> well if you're asking what these people could do, these companies could do that are facing difficulties in china, look, you're just going to have to tough this out and i think when we're done with this, you will find that you are better
off than you were before we went in, but there are companies who also were getting very severely hurt because of our trade relationship with china, so no matter if we did nothing people were getting hurt. if we did something different people were getting hurt and the fact that different people are getting hurt doesn't mean we should dessert the approach we're taking to resolve these problems. everybody could end up better off if we give the president time and we allow these negotiations to go forward, and there isn't some politically motivated pressure by the resistance generally to try and hurt president trump when he's actually trying to help the country. increasingly, i feel like the president is out there fighting for america and the democrats are out there fighting the president. it's time that we supported him when he's doing the right things david: and the chinese are out there supporting the communists. one thing that you make clear in your article is that it's still a communist country. the hard liners are behind president xi who adam mentioned wants to be president for life.
we have to be aware of the fact and the fact there was an article in the new york times suggesting that a lot of chinese who want to open the government, who don't want to keep living under a communist dictatorship are hoping president trump succeeds because the more china 's forced to play by the rules and epidemic o up its economy, break up some of these state companies the better off it is for the private sector in china. >> yeah, these state companies are really a problem in china. they're why the everybody was a billionaire. the reason they were a billionaire are these state-run companies from which they get the benefits and you've got literally a billion people in that country that get no benefit from any of these state-run companies, so there's terrible oppression in china, they call it red capitalism and their attempt to open up markets, they ought to call it blue socialism because they are still a socialistic country and i think their economy is suffering because they haven't followed their free market inclinations
of 20 years ago. they've gone back to a totalitarian state. david: thank you very much for being with us. well alexandria ocasio-cortez could be headed to one of the most powerful committees in the house. the impact she could have on wall street and big banks coming next. as someone in witness protection, i can't tell you anything about myself. but believe me... i'm not your average consumer. that's why i switched to liberty mutual. they customized my car insurance, so i only pay for what i need. and as a man... uh... or a woman... with very specific needs that i can't tell you about- say cheese. mr. landry? oh no. hi mr. landry! liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪
we're finally going on the trip i've been promising. because with expedia, i saved when i added a hotel to our flight. ♪ so even when she outgrows her costume, we'll never outgrow the memory of our adventure together. unlock savings when you add select hotels to your existing trip. only when you book with expedia.
david: freshman congresswoman alexandria ocasio-cortez reportedly has a "strong chance" of winning a seat on the powerful house financial services committee. this group holds power over commercial banks, savings and loans, a whole sloo of financial businesses it can impact business regulation, also overseas the housing industry, so if she's granted a seat here, should wall street big banks be
worried she will use her position to go on a crusade against corporations what do you think? >> i do think there's a basic worry and this comes off with lawmakers but these are complicated systems and i personally have nothing against it. every party can have every representative they feel is appropriate for their voice and their agenda but i'm just concerned especially as we head into choppy waters with trading does a 29 year old who didn't come from banking or financial services, whose not an economist is that the right pick? >> well i think that's a fair point, but i want to channel my inner neil cavuto and just look at this analytically of what is likely to happen. she will try to introduce things that are very left in the spirit of elizabeth warren. those won't, anything that the democrats were able to pass in the house that might answer that would not have a prayer of getting passed in the senate so i don't think the banks should be too concerned about her today
being on that committee. >> but isn't that sort of a waste of time in many ways? maybe there are reforms, maybe there are ways actually to make the system a little bit more equal or at least more cognizant somehow of smaller businesses, bigger businesses. >> that's fair. >> i'd say no more waste of time than anything else that happened in the congress, but also, remember, she also has a pragmatic streak which we saw when she voted for nancy pelosi for speaker, so i'm sorry? >> one vote. >> well it's a start, right? >> i guess so. what i'm really looking forward to is if she does get on this committee that means people like jpmorgan ceo jamie dimon will be coming before her and watch the two of them go at it. and we talk about television, that will be better than whatever michael cohen does next month at the oversight committee something else one thing that she has been consistent about i'll give her this on her messaging is there was a freshman welcoming freshman
congress members sponsored by goldman sachs and she did a series of tweets saying wait a minute why is this a welcome to the freshman members of congress and why is this being sponsored by goldman sachs so it may not be policy but as it relates to these things that she can do over twitter that the president has effectively done over twitter she might be calling on companies in a way that they may not like from a public relations standpoint not necessarily a policy standpoint. >> yeah, i agree with you about the fact that this is going to be very small. depending on what committee, she could be one of 60 people and i also agree that this could be a complete waste of time if you're processing things that are definitely not going to happen but the trend though is to break up the pitchforks and torches and storm the castle. that's what ocasio-cortez represents it's the same any time you have a dissatisfaction in the leadership of your party a movement starts it started in 2009 with the tea party starting with the socialistic movement with the democratic party. where this leads is probably going after the big banks or tech companies or going after
the oil companies they will go after somebody because they can't govern, they can't do anything about the debt, they can't do anything about the education system so they get their pitchforks and lanterns and storm the castle. david: and frankly it scares a lot of democrats as well as republicans. the chairman of that committee, maxine waters, she's a fire brand, but her husband was on a bank, he was on a bank board that was bailed out by her, i mean, she was part of the reason he was bailed out. it was a terrible bank, run very badly but she helped bail it out , so you have these establishment democrats who have been working with financial services and you have somebody like ocasio-cortez to morgan's point i think she scares a lot of them. >> you know, david, she's also just playing good for the marketplace of ideas and i don't say that naively at all. to have her out there advocating the positions that she will on these sorts of topics, how great is that for our democracy?
david: well it's a lot more than just about climate change. it's this massive redistribution of wealth, trillions of dollars from the private sector to the government so i don't know how healthy that is. >> all debate is healthy david that's what we're all about, man >> [laughter] >> well, i was just going to say, to all of your points but i like what you said about goldman , morgan because i'm pretty sure all of the investment banks they are the ones with the most alumni in d.c. >> right, right. >> and the biggest donors. david: thank you, gang well cell phone companies renewing their pledge to stop selling customer data to third parties, but can we trust their promises now, or does the government need to step in? that's next.
we haven't had any sort of benefit plans and we're trying to figure that out now. if i had had a little advice back then, i'd be in a different boat today, for sure. plan your financial life with prudential. bring your challenges. amazon prime video so when you say words like... show me best of prime video into this... you'll see awesome stuff like this. discover prime originals like the emmy-winning the marvelous mrs. maisel... tom clancy's jack ryan... and the man in the high castle. all in the same place as your live tv. its all included with your amazon prime membership. that's how xfinity makes tv... simple. easy. awesome. in honor of my dad, who was alzheimer's. i decided to make shirts for the walk with custom ink,
david: you heard it here first on wednesday, when we told you about a new report showing that at&t, sprint and t-mobile were still selling users location data to third parties who were then actually pedaling the details of this on a black market. even though they promise, they had stopped the practice. well now some of those wireless carriers are pledging again to stop all location data sharing, but do these companies apparent violation of past promises prove it's time to crack down on them
with new regulations what do you think, gang? >> absolutely not. whose going to regulate them? have you seen the dinosaurs that are in our congress? most of these guys have been around since before the telephone and the airplane and they're going to regulate data coming over the internet? it's definitely possible. they can't even keep the government open right now. i think that the public scrutiny alone is enough of these companies and the marketplace is going to take over these companies and tell them that you've got to at least let people know what data is being shared and public scrutiny is enough we don't need government intervention. >> i do think john is right on that point but we do have to keep up the public scrutiny on this. i know that the ceo of t-mobile for example, has tweeted and said he's promising at this time , but listen this discussion that we're having with at&t, t-mobile, all of the telecom companies is actually part of this larger discussion we're having with social media and the big tech companies about privacy data and i think as a society and certainly as a congress, we haven't figured out and perhaps as john said, the people just
don't understand the technology but we haven't figured out as a society how to really balance this privacy, balance regulation , balance the need for corporations to protect this data, and so that's really all of this stuff that i see just comes back to the fundamental argument. i would say one thing, camilla harris, i agree with her she made a great point when she said this was a national security issue because when you think about the number of high profile people in government and elsewhere whose data could be tracked via this dark web search , that really isn't a legitimate national security problem. so i actually completely disagree with you too. john, i wouldn't confuse the obvious ignorance that we see for members of congress when they conduct these hearings of people like mark zuckerberg on the one hand, with the work that their staffs and then professional bureaucrats can do in writing regulations and i mean that quite seriously if you think about regulating drugs, regulating food, regulating workplace issues.
they can do it, it's not easy, but they won't be ignorant when they set themselves to it and this is important. we should do it. i like what morgan said though about we have to make a decision and maybe that does come help us all through hearings where you did have europe for example, say okay, here is our guidelines. if you break these guidelines companies, you will literally pay. you're going to pay either a fixed sum of your revenue or a fixed amount, whichever is greater so i do think it is possible to reach agreement. i do think this is a national security, as they had reported they track down a reporter they released that data, so that's obviously one level but i'm with you. you could have any number of very sensitive profiles being sold. david: by the kay kudos to mother board that's a part of vice media and they came out with this report. isn't that enough though, adam? we have you are a journalist for a reason. you want to expose bad stuff, hold people's feet to the fire. isn't that enough to get them?
clearly, it looks like at&t and t-mobile they are embarrassed by all of this. they clearly seem to want to change isn't that enough? >> i mean, david, the short answer is no, sinclair writes a book about the meat packing industry and then we pass meat packing regulations governing the meat packing industry. it's not enough just to shine the bright lights sometimes. >> adam i don't have no problem with you regulating this you're a very smart guy but i think you give way too much credit to bureaucrats and politicians. i don't want government involved in anything. you could if you wanted to be simple about it no selling third party data, if you choose to do that you'll get fined not that that won't stop it. >> well and i'd rather say, you know, no let's have a long involved serious conversation about selling third party data, and design rules of the road. it's, you know, it's complicated but we can do it. david: you say we can do do it look what's happening in
washington right now theophano can't do anything. >> i can't argue with you. david: well ever crack open a beer and wondered how much fat and protein you were getting? i haven't, but one major brewer has you covered if you do care about those things. details you don't want to miss, coming next. why bother mastering something? because when you want to create an entirely new feeling, the difference between excellence and mastery, is all the difference in the world. introducing the all-new lexus es. a product of mastery. experience amazing at your lexus dealer. a product of mastery. there's brushing...and there's oral-b power brushing. oral-b just cleans better. even my hygienist said going electric could lead to way cleaner teeth. and unlike sonicare, oral-b is the first electric toothbrush brand accepted by the ada. oral-b. brush like a pro.
the doctor's office just for a shot. but why go back there... when you can stay home with neulasta onpro? strong chemo can put you at risk of serious infection. in a key study neulasta reduced the risk of infection from 17% to 1%, a 94% decrease. neulasta onpro is designed to deliver neulasta the day after chemo and is used by most patients today. neulasta is for certain cancer patients receiving strong chemotherapy. do not take neulasta if you're allergic to it or neupogen (filgrastim). an incomplete dose could increase infection risk. ruptured spleen, sometimes fatal as well as serious lung problems, allergic reactions, kidney injuries and capillary leak syndrome have occurred. report abdominal or shoulder tip pain, trouble breathing or allergic reactions to your doctor right away. in patients with sickle cell disorders, serious, sometimes fatal crises can occur. the most common side effect is bone and muscle ache.
is coming out with new larger nutrition labels take a look. >> what are you doing? >> well the king believes people should know what ingredients are in their beer. >> he ordered us to tell everybody. >> but did he order you to shoot arrows blindly into the kingdom? wouldn't it be better to just put the ingredients label on the packageing? david: well that's what they say they're going to be doing next month but do we really need more detailed nutritional information for beer? even if we like the commercials, gang? >> well, as a proud beer drinker, david, and i live about a mile from the anchor brewing company in san francisco, and i visit when i can, you know, this is complete silliness. no beer drinker cares about the nutritional value of what goes into the beer that they're drinking, but by the way there's a serious business issue here is which is that bud light is
having trouble getting people to drink their beer, all of the beer is moving toward craft beers in the united states, so they've succeeded with this sort of nonsense in the past and they're trying to revive it, tastes great, less filling and i know that wasn't them. >> [laughter] well i agree with adam. in a day that has a government shutdown that could become the longest of all-time this is the dumbest thing i've heard today. you don't order a pizza and a diet coke because you're watching your calories. david: good point. next you'll have to put on there that beer may make you inebriat ed if you have enough. this is absolutely insane to me. >> i think it's a smart pr move and good commercial, it's very funny commercial, because the problem is millennials actually, millennials someone alluded adam said are buying craft beer but not only that they want to know what's in their drink so i think bud light should just put barley in it or something, then they will start buying bud light. >> that would be funny i think it's a great idea, yeah. >> there we go.
>> [laughter] >> but i mean, they are part of the study like if you order beer and you're looking at the label on the beer you're probably paying more attention to your nutrition overall, and ordering lower advertisers, i mean i'm kind of with john. i don't know too many people who sit down with wings or a pizza and say like oh. david: and they've actually done studies and it turns out that you guys are exactly right. it doesn't change consumers minds. this is, to me, i mean yes it's funny and we can laugh about it but it is kind of an extension of the nanny state, again, the nanny state is telling you what you have to, what you can do or what you can't do. we had it in new york. except for the fact that this is anheuser-busch doing this, david not uncle sam, right? david: i understand right. it's true. >> one can actually save us against millennials. we need to tell all of these millennials grab the beer tomorrow, go watch the nfl playoffs and have fun and quit being wimps in life and this
could actually save america. david: you're a big bud light fan aren't you or do you like coors? >> coors light. it was the cowboy champaign they used to call it in west texas. >> well i'm going to watch the eagles win sunday and drink a bud light and coors light in your honor, john. david: by the way i think you can put the label back up on the screen. there's no trans fat, no saturated fat, no extra sugar, put it up on the screen maybe you can see it there. the only thing they have is carb s and protein. john i think you're the healthiest guy around drinking this stuff. >> absolutely it makes for great athletes. i would drink rocky mountain water and coors light. it's perfect for you. >> i could say david i wish i could go out for a beer with all of you right now. david: i wish i could with you too but i don't want somebody telling me what i can and can't drink. all right well everybody will be watching the football games it's going to be a great weekend thank you all for joining us i appreciate it. thank you for watching us, we hope you have a great weekend. that does it for bulls & bears.
we hope to see you back here next time. take care. (announcer) the following is a paid presentation for prostagenix, brought to you by prostatereport.com. (upbeat music) ♪ hi, this is larry king. over 30 million men in america have prostrate problems. i know, i was one of them. and all these natural prostate supplements like the ones i have here in front of me are everywhere. drugstores, health food stores, on the internet, and all over tv, selling millions of bottles every year.