tv Bulls Bears FOX Business March 9, 2019 11:00am-12:00pm EST
you'd like to share with us? we'd love to hear it. send me an e-mail or go to our website, strangeinheritance.com. great weekend. >> taking a sledge hammer to silicon valley, presidential hopeful elizabeth warren unveiling her plan to break up the biggest names in american technology. hi, everybody, this is bulls and bear, so glad that you can join us, david asman, adam and gary b. smith, senator warren issuing a threat to the tech giants in a statement that reads in part, today's big-tech companies have too much power over economy, over society and democracy, they have bulldozed competition and used private information to profit and playing field against everyone else.
what she wants to do unwind big mergers like amazon's acquisition of whole foods and zappos and take instagram from facebook, is that a good idea? joining us now distinguishing fellow at carnie and harvard law, good to see you, been trying to get you for a while. do you agree with elizabeth warren that tech companies should be broken up? >> yes, i agree with her in principal. i don't agree with her in all details. amazon is not the problem. market against the people that are selling on it is a problem. facebook, whatsapp, instagram, big problem, look at it case by case and try to understand the technology by making blanket statements she's making, conception she's right on. >> really hard to argue against this if you're in favor of small businesses, i mean, if you look back in the 90's, microsoft
was actually sued had antitrust brought against them as the tech giant was really dominating in the operating space and web browsing and because of that suit it actually cleared the way, the conclusion of it, for companies like google. so is that what you're advocating in favor of, something like that? >> exactly. because of the restraints of microsoft, it couldn't -- therefore you had a whole new generation of companies coming out, google and the facebook, all the companies we are reading about, they would not have existed, allowed to have its way, everything in sight. tech companies kept buying everything up and killing the competition. >> it's adam, nice to see you, again, we should get together instead of being so close but so far. [laughter] >> i like -- i like the way you frame your answer, i happen to agree with you 100%, in principle she's right n
practicality she's wrong and the whole foods per se is not the problem, let me turn this become to you and say, it's a deep topic, but how would you begin this process that you think in principle warren is right about? >> you know, what india did was very smart, if you had a platform, you can't compete against them. wal-mart and amazon -- that's what we need over here as well, because amazon can start learning everything about the people who are selling and pick and choose which products to integrate, it has advantage and then it also own platform, puts them ahead of everyone else, so it's own customers and this is a lose lose, again, warren doesn't understand the technicalities and her solutions are wrong, conception that we need to have
wise legislation which prevents company from going crazy and in the case of unwinding facebook, whatsapp, instagram, should be on one, zuckerberg is now trying to -- latest announcement, it was crazy. he wants to bring stupid things. [laughter] >> we need to wisen up over here. >> professor i'm kind of curious, i'm going back through history and i'm looking at companies that were all considered manopolie and -- monopolies and i wonder what you thought should have been broken up, ibm, microsoft, you know, the list goes on and on and it can look outside of technology, standard oil, u.s. steel, what they all have in common is it didn't matter if the government intervened or not, they were all
eventually broken up by competition. at one time netscape was thought to rule the browser market and yet they were overcome by internet explorer who is overcome by google chrome. why do you think the government needs to intercede when the premarket does an even better job than the government? >> because we are talking about 100 years of development. the government had to control them. with microsoft a decade to rein them in. slowed them down and allowed the new small fish to become bigger fish. the trouble right now is any time small companies start gaining momentum, you have the facebooks and the googles and the amazons eating them up. facebook is the most ruthless of
all. that's why i bought instagram and that's why it bought whatsapp. technology has changed the equation. continue out of touch with technology, they are saying dumb things. >> let me jump in real quick before jonas goes, the same arguments were leveled against ibm that they ruled and yet along came dell, along came and in the mainframe market you didn't need to government to intervene, competitors got in there and eventually caused ibm -- >> you're not listening to him, gary. >> i am. he's saying technology -- >> it's moved just as fast for the last 50 years, adam. >> the computer platforms gain too much power.
silicon valley, monopolies are wonder. and invading all the rules they can. we don't have no way of controlling facebook right now, google right now. things are moving much too fast. you need to have -- not necessarily regulate everything but have consistent regulations which dictates what can be done and modernize the antitrust laws. they were built in different century. everything has changed. the antitrust laws need to be updated. >> he heard there's a party in town, go ahead, jonas. [laughter] >> knives the neighborhood, professor i'm assuming you're not just dropping because they -- angry because they dropped out and premise that there's too much power in tech space, they want to break them up as opposed what we talked on the show, maybe if they stopped the acquisition it wouldn't be this
bad. the tech companies are allowed to buy competitors, the point where they dominated all of the industries. it's really just stopping the acquisitions, small companies start up and compete with them and lead to what gary b. is talking about where you would have competition again or are we letting them not have competition because they acquired the competition? >> well, see right now we need to do some retro fixing over here. they are now abusing the power. zuckerberg is desperately trying to get products before anyone can stop them. then amazon, the fact that it can compete people on own platform, that fix needs to be made as soon as possible. minor tweaks and update antitrust laws and then get sec to wake up and do its job properly, everything could be okay. we don't want china shop that we had with warren but we want
sensible, thoughtful surgery here and -- >> you make a great point, professor, in terms of describing why this instance of facebook and amazon, for example, is different from what happened in centuries past with regard to what breaking up monopolies because now they have an entire platform. you say it's like -- if a company, one company owned every single store in a mall, this is a mall, that's what a platform is with one company owning everyone and that doesn't give consumers a choice, however, i share gary's concern. i don't want to government -- government comes in, they make a mess of it. doesn't that concern you? >> it does concern me. this is why i'm not supporting elizabeth warren's proposal. what i'm saying she's making good point that we need to do surgery over here and we need to have people going, this needs to be fixed.
that needs to be fixed. laws and regulations haven't kept pace with technology. right now there's too much power, too few. >> gary, i think, a lot of the observations you've made, you've made good observations, competitors did arrive to compete against microsoft and ibm and even standard oil was broken up by the way, i think the most important word was nuance, there are laws on antitrust, there are laws on anticompetitive behavior, enforcing them when we need to e enforced. that's different from saying break up every company. >> let me give you to that, the nuance approach as -- as you say, we need to do surgery, i'm curious where the great smart surgeons are going to come from because certainly i don't see
them in congress. second of all, to david's point, we talk about we are all one platform, that's what we thought when we had at&t landlines, oh, my god, monopoly that needs to be broken up, no one saw out there that there could be wireless, we didn't even need to break up at&t which brought us slow cost just like standard oil did. so every time congress intervenes these smart surgeons, if you will, they tend to screw things up and they are so far behind the curve that they are not needed. >> that was your point, david, i remember now, i know you used -- [laughter] >> my point is that google had a monopoly or has a monopoly in search engine world and you said no, you use bing, if it's not anticompetitive, no, you don't want government involved. but if there's no alternative and if there is a monopoly at tend of the day, i don't know what kind of surgeon you're going to get.
david: the one thing that we proved is that we have to have you back, terrific guest, please come back and see us. i'm afraid we ran the clock. thanks a million for being here. preerkt it. >> absolutely, any time. david: the u.s. economy only added 2,000 jobs last month, they were expecting 80,000 but the white house says there's a lot of the report to cheer about. we will put it to the panel people. >> that's great for the american worker. i don't know if they ever i don't know if they ever expected to see i can't believe it. that we're playing "four on four" with a barbershop quartet? [quartet singing] bum bum bum bum... pass the ball... pass the rock.. ...we're open just pass the ball! no, i can't believe how easy it was to save hundreds of dollars on my car insurance with geico. yea.
[quartet singing] shoot the j! shoot, shoot, shoot the jaaaaaay... believe it! geico could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. with expedia, i saved when i added a hotel to our flight. so even when she grows up, she'll never outgrow the memory of our adventure. unlock savings when you add select hotels to your existing trip. only with expedia.
>> it's a number, i think you have timing issues, government shutdown issues, seasonal issues, so the household survey was up 255,000, it's a big number and as you know, unemployment fell from 4 to 3.8, that's terrific and the wage story is very promising, up 4 tenths of a percent. i think the top line payroll this month is fluky, i think you have to go bell toe hood -- below the hood and when you do you see a positive story. >> i don't know that everyone agrees. [laughter] >> for 20 years -- [laughter] >> every time the job's report comes out i feel like i'm on twitter feed, everything must be
responded to at every second. i think there's a couple of macro things, we are definitely cooling off a little bit. i think the economy is slowing. april and may, this number is going to be revised again and again, the point is are we adding jobs, yes, is the economy strong, yes, by almost any metric, we have low unemployment rate and wages are growing. i think that's the take away not whether it's 20,000 or 100,000 or 5,000, the macro -- >> i'm enjoying this. [laughter] >> okay. >> i want to retweet what gary said with a comment. great report for the workers, if you're working, this is what you want to hear, they are running out of people to hire and wages are going up at highest rate in 10 years, hard to get wages up. the problem is representing investors and management it's not ideal, they don't want to
pay more to get people to do the job. it cuts into profits, it's not ideal situation, it looks like a very late stage boom cycle that finally this is why recessions ultimately happens no matter who is president and all of a sudden you can't hire anybody. the federal reserve will go back into being too aggressive and we need to get ahead of inflation and then think raise rates and stock market crash and recession, that's why investors are worried about support. if you're a worker, investor is starting to get worried. >> i'm ready for you to go to counteract the point. i didn't want to be 3 in a row on positive news here. >> okay, i mean u it's a little bit amusing, i respect the guy, he's got a job to do, when you
have a 20,000 job gain and you're the chief, economic adviser to the administration you say, this one is a fluke, yes, gary, it'll be revise but not revised for 270,000 and by the way, having said that, i agree with both of you, it's probably not a terrible report. it reminds me of the argument that i made after 7 years of economic expansion in the obama administration when i said, of course, there's problems but things have been pretty good and you all have said there's been no job creation, the economy isn't growing except that there was job creation and the economy was growing. >> in february there are some industries that can be tied to the weather, for example, you look at retail and construction, so this is the seasonal adjustment but at tend of the day what matters to people is can i pay my bills and wages are going up. that's the most positive factor, the underlying data, 3.4% number. look at the household surveys, those were all extraordinarily
high. recent small business confidence is up the charts, so wow we live and die by the headline number, yes, 20,000 is a very ugly number, i think this is still a good report when you dig a little bit deeper. david: you look at what happened to the markets, folks, huge drop as soon as the numbers came down premarket and then it ended up okay, it was almost flat line at the end it was down 240 early on, the point is where else are you going to put your money, you the europeans now with negative interest rates, they charge you if you want to park some money there, you're not going to invest in china where their market going down, where else are you going to put the money? >> ecb and china are embarking, that's a very good point and the fed is on pause. so powell did not -- chair powell did not want the economy to overheat and that's what he's getting. this is what he wanted. it's perfect. >> i think, david, the smartest comment i've heard so far is
jonas saying does this reflect, you know, the late stages of a very long expansion. that would explain why the market is not going to have a -- it's not going to vomit on something that maybe suggest we are getting closer to the end of the expansion, but if that is true, that's a very serious -- i should say important observation. david: all right, but once again, the only gain in town is the one we are living right now, you don't want to put in uk, europe, thank you, gang. christmas in september for federal agents, lavish use it or lose it spending spree, billions tax dollars wasted. details coming up
lobster according to new report the federal government went on a use it or lose it spending spree last year with a whopping $97 billion of our taxpayer money being used. spending nearly 5 million bucks on lobster tail and crab, more than a million on standing desks and the list goes on and on and on, federal agencies scrambled to use what's left in annual budget by september, that's the end of their fiscal year, their goal, of course, to ensure that congress doesn't appropriate less money in the next year. here is adam, founder of ceo open the books.com, the watch group responsible for the report. adam, few things in the plan that the navy is mad and it is getting worse. >> we look -- took a look at year-ends, $62 billion, in 2016 it went to 73 billion, and 2017
to 83 billion and finally last year it went to $97 billion in the last month and actually more than half of it was in the last week, incredibly every one of 10 contracts during the entire year was spent in the last week. david: wow. >> $53 billion. >> jonas here, the lists have been going back as long as i can remember. is it across the board, social security deposit, what is it about defense where they get ridiculous? >> so, i think, you know, the department of defense, our data show that is every single year on contracts they spend about $250 billion. in the final month of the fiscal year they spent $63 billion.
each portion of their spend was in that last month to spend down that budget so they at least get as much or more next year. now we found troubling transactions, $9,300 spent on a club leather chair. we talked about nearly $5 million worth of lobster tail and smoked crabs. we looked at the year, it was $22 million spent by the pentagon on lobster tail alone, it was nearly $55 million. >> that's not going to the troops. >> yeah, i think this is an example of having gone wild. with regard to defense spending, i look back only one time in 1980, they came in $50,000 under budget. so it has been done in terms of defense spending and coming in under budget. how do we fix this going forward? >> so we can fix it through some
reform. they need to get back to regular order where you have public transparency and every line item of the budget, public vote, public debate. committee and subcommittee hearings, that fixed faster than anything else. >> adam, i like having other adams on the show, welcome. two questions to help me understand what it is that you're doing, number one, how do you know expenditure that happens in last week or month or however you define it, how do you know that's blow-off expenditure and secondly, how does this government behavior compare with corporate sector behavior, say, fortune 500 companies with large budgets who also have money to spend at the end of the fiscal period? >> those are great questions, i think we feel a lot better of the use it or lose it spending specifically at the pentagon if they could simply pass their audit, as you know, adam for the past couple of decades they are
required years for audit. the president did force the audit, 1200 auditors, $400 million on audit of pentagon and they flunked. >> any idea on how to compare to the corporate world? >> so the corporate world is budgeting, they started at the ground up, every expense has to be justified. in the end every expense is audited. that's what we advocate for the federal government as well. >> adam, this is gary b. smith, going back to adam's remarks, of course, he would not be that skeptical he eats lobster every day. [laughter] >> people eating lobster at the end of the year, he's like, hey, whatever. here is my question -- [laughter] >> look, if i am in one of those departments that sends treasury
state, i'm just going to do what my boss says and my boss is eventual think cabinet secretary, no one out there is going to say, you know, let's tighten up because they know that eventually they keep doing that, people are going to say, hey, why do we need such a big state department, why do we need such a big department of commerce, i understand your point about there needs to be congressional oversight but don't we have the same problems there? it doesn't matter left or right, keeps approving the bloated budgets that we can't match in revenue, don't we need something along more along the lines of balanced budget amendment to -- to kind of clamp down on the spending? >> we have urged the president in open letters published at the wall street journal and petition signed by 103,000 regular americans as commander in chief the president should wage war, specifically 100 outrageous example of taxpayer abuse, one of those was at the pentagon.
they were actually paying 1,002 -- 1,200 hours per coffee cup and senator grassley wrote them oversight letter from senate judiciary committee, the pentagon admit today spending $350,000 on expensive coffee cups, so the president needs to get engaged on down spending, messaging to the reelection campaign in 2020, he's going to run it against socialism and democrats draining the treasury from the left, republicans need credibility on spending, they cannot be seen as draining the treasury from the right. >> adam, one thing i have to make absolutely clear, the lobster and lobster tails, crab, it's not going to the troops, these are going to pentagon officials, bureaucrats, the fat cats, contractors, et cetera, that's what's obscene, when the troops need protective armor instead it's going to coffee cups, it's awful. thank you for bringing it to our attention, come back and see us,
appreciate it. >> thank you, david, for the interest in our work. >> great stop, china signaling that president xi may cancel trip in mar-a-lago, latest details from dc and what it means for the trade deal next. >> i've heard these stories, the united states wants to make a quick deal to help the stock market, that's just nonsense, if the deal doesn't work for america's long-term interest, america's long-term interest, then it's not our 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: fox business is has now learned that chinese have canceled a trip by president xi to mar-a-lago this month. edward lawrence with details. hi, edward. >> they have blocked off the last week of march for the trip but now canceled. chinese officials concerned that president trump would walk away from trade deal while face to face with chinese president causing him to lose faith.
chinese looked at recent action walking away from north korea deal. also calls to send fewer delegation to they -- taiwan, bottom line, trade delegation one more time to finish the deal and then possibly having a signing ceremony, not a face to face negotiation at g20 submit, might not be finished in march, chinese experts predicted this. >> talks are still going on, telephone conversations, meetings, in other words the deal is with us not final 2 weeks ago, many people thought it was a final deal, it's not, it's still going on. >> the chinese did take one very important step towards a trade deal, today the chinese national people's congress introduced a law barring government agencies and employees from demanding company secrets, it also set up legal system in accordance with international rules according to chinese to enforce the new law
and the new foreign investment law formerly introduced expected to be passed next week. >> if the deal doesn't work for the united states and our long-term interest, whether it's technology, ip, theft, enforcement, commodities, tariffs, if the deal doesn't work for long-term interest, then it's not our deal. >> what has economic adviser larry kudlow, he says for the next 7 days scheduled teleconference calls to work on a deal. the talks are continuing and hope they eventually have a deal. david: edward, thank you very much. guys, that looks like progress but xi is not coming, that looks like a step back, what do we do, are we going forward or backward? >> well, let me give you --ly step back for a second, david, i will throw it out to the panel
and can react to what they just said. i don't really care and here is why. we have had sanctions in place for a few months. they've not made a ripple in our economy even if all of the sanctions were put in place, the total combined theft as i stated many times, tariffs, thank you, .2% on gdp, second, intellectual property, you're not going to solve that government to government, that's been, you know, security experts have said that is company by company basis. third, cybersecurity, again, dido, that's a company by company basis. governments cannot solve that problem. even if everything is done or nothing is done, it's not going make one iota of a difference. they are passed moved from economy, if it gets on, great, if it doesn't, then you won't even know. >> david, if neil cavuto he
would chastise gary, when we decide to do a segment of topic -- >> you don't poo-poo. [laughter] >> first off, it's a great deal. >> having fun with you, my friend. >> ly shock all of you and i say i give president trump for raising exactly the right issues. this is not a 3-month issue, this problems dates back to 1990-91 and then were add committed to wco and permitted to cheat. it's a very important topic. it show it is downside of trump's behavior that the chinese president is terrified correctly, i mean, justifiably for being embarrassed in florida shows you that this sort of behavior of the president gets him in trouble as much as it helps him initiate things.
>> so adam is right to point out that there is bipartisan support in pushing on china. president obama filed 23 grievances with the wto against unfair trading practices with china. i think it's evident that whether you support them or not that they are working. they have worked and tariffs are working and for the market, s&p 500, it might not go up on news of trade deal but if we don't have one, it will definite i will go down. 40% of -- of the s&p 500, exports go to foreign countries. so it does matter. >> well, how does it matter? hold on one second. i will ask the question real quick. numerically, how does it matter? emotionally it matters. >> if there's no deal and continue to have tariffs and tariffs go up to 25%, hurts agricultural sector. >> combined economies of
35 trillion is nothing. that's my point. >> gary b. -- >> the impact to the united states has -- we are winning this trade war so far, pretty minimal. we look at the size of our economy. gary, they're getting pummeled. sent the stock market down 5%. it was really bad. if we had done decline, people would be freaking out. their exports are collapsing and the president is possibly right to worry about being embarrassed in mar-a-lago like the north korean leader was recently but at the end of the day he needs to push country ahead of embarrassment and fix the situation, they are the one losing hard right now and they will have a bad recession if they don't get tariffs. they cannot get through it. it is completely export driven. they are getting punished and they are in a bad situation right now.
david: tough nut to crack and we will not crack it here, thank you, gang, slicing up the empire state, one republican's dramatic plan to try to take on liberal leadership in new york, that's coming next. as the one who is always trapped beneath the duvet i'm begging you... take gas-x. your tossing and turning isn't restlessness, it's gas! gas-x relieves pressure, bloating and discomfort... fast! so we can all sleep easier tonight.
largest gig-speed network. then went beyond. beyond chasing down network problems. to knowing when and where there's an issue. beyond network complexity. to a zero-touch, one-box world. optimizing performance and budget. beyond having questions. to getting answers. "activecore, how's my network?" "all sites are green." all of which helps you do more than your customers thought possible. comcast business. beyond fast.
david: taking a page from california, now a plan to divide new york state, one republican lawmaker introducing the bill motivated by what he says democratic leadership consistently passing law that is help new york city area but hurt the rest of the state. the plan would split new york into 3 distinct parts within the state, long island and westchester and surrounding would remain and north would become a place called new amsterdam. different segments to have state. we are joined by the man behind it, david. why put the state into 3 parts? >> basically because the rest of the state is no longer buying what new york city is selling. with the senate flipping the last election new york state is now run entirely by new york city, there's not one piece of legislation, not one resolution,
not one law that's passed that isn't vetted by new york city. if new york city says no, it's done. so there's no representation throughout the west of the state except in new york city and it's got -- with the left taking control of new york city, what we are seeing is a meltdown and the rest of the state is done with it. >> so redistricting is a very political -- politically sensitive subject and i can only think of one time in history, 1864, west virginia in the civil war, prounion splait from virginia, otherwise it's very difficult to do, i mean, is this even constitutional, something that the state senate want for new york? >> this is something that's going to be needed, this is going to split into 3 autonomous regions and as soon as we do, i with tell you, that other two
regions would become texas overnight, the economies will start flying in the rest of the state. >> do you think they will start flying without the economic engine of new york city? that'll be a good thing in your opinion? >> economic driver in new york city does not help us. the unfunded mandate that is they put on the rest of the state, burden us, the taxation burden us, we have -- i'm 25 miles and number one power generator in the country literally and we pay more for electric than all the electric they ship out and sell to other parts of the country. if we could control our electric, the entire western new york region would watch their electric bills be cut by more than 50% residential and business, that's just one economic driver. >> david, jonas, forgive my political inexperience, the tax part i kind of understand, would this mean you can still tap into
the tri state area, cash machine, aren't they living on tax revenue, very high tax revenue paid by metro new york city, it has to be 80% of the state budget, right, where is it coming from? >> western state, i would be willing to get out of their control. this is -- >> tax money goes to buffalo -- >> you have the billion for buffalo that the governor gave us a couple of years ago and has gone to dark hole which has gone nowhere. we have approximately 150 jobs out of a billion dollars. >> to be clear, you are saying the other parts of new york pay more in taxes than they receive in benefits, is that what you're saying? >> no, what i'm saying is as soon as we get rid of the unfunded mandate and the control of new york city, the rest of
the state with new tax laws, all new legislation which would make them -- you go to southern pier of new york, one to have largest, we can't crack that because of the governor. we have unbelievable economic growth in this state but we can't do it. >> have you talked -- have you talked to people in other states? i know here in florida it's almost the same thing. we almost elected for the first time and i don't know how long a democratic governor that wanted to put a state income tax in because basically the major metropolitan areas, orlando, tallahassee, miami are all blue and the rest of the state is bright red. seems like we have the same issues here, i'm wondering if you have talk today counterparts across the country. >> yes, i got a phone call from a couple of days ago and want to
see how this does. they want to get rid of chicago. i hope this does go across because we are starting to see regions of the country so far left that most people mainstream people are scratching their heads. you have to look back a couple of years ago, the governor, $2.2 billion, that's a b, surplus in the workers' comp and i was on the floor and i'm a small business person, swept that and put in general to balance the budget and then 3 months later, i got a notice that my workers' comp rates were going up. this is what they do. david: we love innovations particularly when it comes to bankrupt governments and new york is getting closer and closer to being that. please come back and let us know how it works out, appreciate it. >> i will. you're welcome. david: wait till you hear tesla's latest plan and the sales goal, what that means for
david: tesla reportedly encouraging their employees to trade in their vacation days for cars. >> closing down their showrooms. it's going to be a wild show for a long time. >> one way to get them out is to cover these discounts. this is how you get the cars out of the stores. >> they have to think of something to get the super fans
who already bought the cars to buy them cheap and i'm not sure it's going to work. >> it's a nail in the coffin. - [announcer] the following is a paid advertisement for the hoover smartwash. when your throw rugs need cleaning, you toss them in the washing machine, easy! if only you could do the same for your carpet. instead, here's what carpet cleaning looks like for many of us, hauling around heavy, bulky rental machines. they're a hassle. and do you really want to bring someone else's dirt into your home? and then there's all the mixing, soaking, waiting forever for your carpet to dry. no wonder we sometimes give up and call in a pro, but that's a whole other level of pain! they're all over your house, you're left with a damp carpet, and it costs a fortune! sometimes you just want to give up. now there's an entirely new way