DISCLAIMER: THE FOLLOWING "Cost of Freedom Recap" CONTAINS STRONG OPINIONS WHICH ARE NOT A REFLECTION OF THE OPINIONS OF FOX NEWS AND SHOULD NOT BE RELIED UPON AS INVESTMENT ADVICE WHEN MAKING PERSONAL INVESTMENT DECISIONS. IT IS FOX NEWS' POLICY THAT CONTRIBUTORS DISCLOSE POSITIONS THEY HOLD IN STOCKS THEY DISCUSS, THOUGH POSITIONS MAY CHANGE. READERS OF "Cost of Freedom Recap" MUST TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR OWN INVESTMENT DECISIONS.
Bulls & Bears | Cavuto on Business | Forbes on Fox | Cashin' In
Bulls & Bears
On Saturday, January 23, Brenda Buttner was joined by Gary B. Smith, Tobin Smith, Pat Dorsey, Eric Bolling and Julia Piscitelli.
Some Democrats Now Pushing to Extend Bush Tax Cuts; Good for Jobs?
Gary B. Smith, TheChartman.com: I think we're finally beginning to see some sanity creep into the Democratic Party. Maybe the idea of keeping the tax cuts in place is creeping into the Obama administration. Tax cuts work! Throughout history, they have helped the country get out of recessions. You can look at the difference between states that raise their taxes versus those that lower them. The states that lower them are almost always in a better fiscal condition.
Julia Piscitelli, Democratic strategist: The Bush tax cuts are what helped get us into the problems we have now. We should not be focused on cutting taxes for the wealthiest people in the country. They can pay their fair share. The wealthiest Americans would be paying taxes at the rate they were under Clinton. There's no reason they can't pay those tax rates now so that money can be used by the government to create jobs. The money that can be raised by letting the Bush tax cuts expire should be used to fund President Obama's jobs bill.
Tobin Smith, NBT Media: Only about 40 percent of Americans pay federal income taxes, leaving about 60 percent of the country that pays little to no federal income tax. The top 5 percent of earners in this country pay about 95 percent of all federal income taxes. If the government literally took all the income of that top 5 percent, it would only raise another trillion dollars or so. Hitting rich people up just doesn't work long-term. If we really wanted to create jobs, the government would make a two-year moratorium on capital investment taxes.
Eric Bolling, Fox Business Network: So far, the stimulus money has spent $413,693 on average to create a job. Jobs are going to start going overseas. If individual and corporate tax rates start getting too high, then businesses have every reason to start looking abroad. There are plenty of countries that would love to have access to our workers.
Pat Dorsey, Morningstar.com: I don't think a government fiscal or tax policy does enough to help or hurt an economy. The U.S. economy is just too big. You have asset bubbles, like with the internet, credit, housing, etc. and suddenly there's a crisis in confidence that ends up hitting the economy as a whole. When businesses have the confidence to invest, and the capital to do so, they will invest. Unfortunately that takes time, and politicians don't have much patience. But the private sector will recover on its own from the recession.
Push to Steer Your 401(K) Money to the Government?
Tobin Smith: This is a sly, astute money grab. If you forced people to put say, 25 percent of their 401(K)s into government bonds that would effectively be there forever, people would be purchasing these bonds at one of the most expensive times they've been at in recent history. You'd be locked into extremely low yields. Meanwhile the government gets to acquire a huge load of money at a cheap borrowing rate.
Gary B. Smith: This is just a way for the government to dig further for more money from taxpayers. This is getting billed as a safe investment for people saving for retirement, where essentially consumers would be purchasing more U.S. debt. But it doesn't seem like the potential purchases of these Treasury bonds would keep up with inflation. You could be get a 2 percent or 3 percent return, but inflation could easily go higher than that and eat up any money you might be making.
Julia Piscitelli: This is just another option for people planning for retirement. There are a variety of ways retirement planners can invest their money. Allowing people to easily make Treasury bonds a part of their retirement plan isn't a bad thing. Having a safe investment as a part of your retirement portfolio isn't a bad idea, especially if you're not very market savvy.
Eric Bolling: The government is trying to sell the American taxpayer on the same deal they gave to the Chinese government. The U.S. government keeps putting hundreds of billions into companies like AIG, GM, Chrysler, Fannie, Freddie, etc. and our tax dollars just evaporate. This is just a scheme so the government can get more money from Americans to spend recklessly.
Pat Dorsey: What's unfortunate is that people keep looking back with hindsight realizing the rate of return with bonds outpaced the rate of return of stocks over the past decade. So people are thinking bonds could be a safer investment that gets them more money. But that opportunity is over now. Stocks are currently relatively cheap right, meanwhile bonds are expensive.
Giving More Aid to Haiti by Taxing Wall St. Bonuses?
Gary B. Smith: I'm totally in favor of the humanitarian aid the U.S. is giving to Haiti in the name of charity. But going after specific industries to pay for aid just smacks of the latest populism. Why not go after the guys at Google, or Apple, or the Unions who are also flush with money. Or maybe go after George Clooney who had a great year. When you begin to target specific industries, that's absolutely the wrong thing to do, no matter what the cause. Wall Street is just the easy target right now.
Eric Bolling: Wall Street is a very easy target. We still haven't spent hundreds of billions of stimulus dollars. Why not devote some of that money to Haiti? I think you could get some pretty popular support for a move like that. Targeting and going after industries you just don't like isn't the way to do this. We should spend money we already have sitting around and ready to go.
Julia Piscitelli: Taxing Wall Street bonuses is a good idea. I don't see why you couldn't devote some of that money to long-term relief efforts in Haiti. The U.S. government and corporations have been extremely generous, but it's going to take more money than what's gone in so far. I don't see why you couldn't devote some of the money from this new tax on banks being proposed by the Obama administration, and use it for reconstruction efforts in Haiti.
Tobin Smith: If we're going after banks, why not go after lobbyists too? They've been raking in money over these past few years. If it's bad to be a Wall Street person, who's income largely depends on the success of their unit in the company, let's talk about that separately from Haiti. There will be other disasters down the road, and mixing in success taxes with relief efforts just wouldn't be a good idea long-term.
Pat Dorsey: Sending money to Haiti is the right thing to do morally. But I don't think we should be mixing Wall Street taxes with relief efforts in foreign countries. We have lots of money and they have very little, and we should absolutely be assisting in Haiti's reconstruction efforts. But don't mix two very different issues together like this—it could have bad consequences down the road.
Predictions
Gary B. Smith: Invest where President Obama isn't regulating! "QQQQ" climbs 15 percent by July
Pat Dorsey: Banks are still cheap! "JPM" cashes out 50 percent in 2 years
Tobin Smith: Keep your dog safe with a fence! "AMZN" builds 50 percent by 2011
Eric Bolling: Scott Brown makes used cars cool! “KMX” drives up 30 percent gain in 1 year
Bulls & Bears | Cavuto on Business | Forbes on Fox | Cashin' In
Cavuto on Business
On Saturday January 23, 2010 Neil Cavuto was joined by Charles Payne, Dagen McDowell, Adam Lashinsky and Dr. Bob Froehlich.
Scott Brown Is In; Dems' Big Government Agenda Is 'Not' Out?
Charles Payne, WStreet.com: The President is going to regroup, no doubt about that. What we saw this past week is just how much he hates business. We saw that wrath when he talked about Wall Street. He's determined to get this done. They're going to go back to the drawing board with these big government initiatives. But if anyone thinks they're dead, they're out of their minds. This agenda is not going to die.
Dagen McDowell, Fox Business Network: The administration wants to push ahead, but they realize they need to get Republicans on board in the Senate if they want to get anything done. They now have to worry about the threat of a filibuster. I don't think they'll try and ram through health care because there's just too much division within the Democratic ranks. On certain things, they might get enough votes to pass something. But Republicans really don't like what the Democrats have been cooking up behind these closed doors.
Adam Lashinsky, editor-at-large, Fortune Magazine: I think politicians realize there's so much fear and uncertainty about health care legislation, constituents started to hate it. Voters may not know why they hate it specifically, but it's very clear many of them don't like it. But enough people do want reform of some sort. Congress is going to look at what's palatable for both parties to get behind, and I think that a good statement about our democracy.
Dr. Bob Froehlich, The Hartford: The initial knee-jerk reaction is that Democrats are going to try and cram through legislation anyway. But they really will get an ear full from their constituents if they do it, with major ramifications come the mid-term elections. The whole process Congress has approached the legislative process with has angered many voters. People are tired of all these back door deals taking place. And what we've seen in states like Massachusetts, Virginia, and New Jersey is that many voters are fed up with it.
D.C. Taking Risks With Our Money: Major Washington Hypocrisy?
Dagen McDowell: It's time for Washington to look in the mirror. These politicians and leaders in Washington need to look out the window and see Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—these government created monstrosities—that for some reason don't fall on Uncle Sam's balance sheet. These companies continue to take humungous losses, and American taxpayers are going to be stuck with the bill ultimately. So the government does something like this, the companies get a pass, and yet the government turns its sights on Wall Street. Meanwhile, the real bad guys eat, live, and sleep right in Washington, D.C.
Dr. Bob Froehlich: This is a very populous approach by the administration. Everyone loves to hate Wall Street. Part of me looks to the size of some of these banks, and it's risky for them to continue their growth as these massive entities. But it's very hypocritical for the government to be spiraling out of control in terms of size and spending, and then have it come out and tell financial institutions they can't get bigger. You know what they say, don't throw stones when you live in a glass house.
Charles Payne: We certainly know the populism side of this argument. But to imply these financial institutions betrayed America is wrong. Is you want to talk about betraying America, look to the president giving TARP funds to the auto companies, or more money to AIG. I don't think most Americans wanted that. He gave a blank check to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Most Americans didn't want that, but the president went ahead with it anyway. The White House has behaved far more recklessly than the financial companies recently.
Adam Lashinsky: I hate it when the president uses this populist language and crafts these suggestions in punitive terms. There's no need to punish anybody. What we need is new regulation of the banking and non-banking industry. We've desperately needed this for years. We saw a great check and balance among the government and voters this past week. Congress certainly has the ability to regulate the growth of government, and it needs a better ability to regulate the nation's financial system.
Anger Over Banker Pay, Why No Outrage Over $45M for Conan?
Dr. Bob Froehlich: More people should be outraged about this. Everybody loves to hate Wall Street, but something like this, with a celebrity involved, no one raises a single complaint. If a Wall Street executive got a payout like this, people would be up in arms. It's pretty outrageous what these entertainment personalities get paid to read a script someone else wrote.
Charles Payne: Conan is cool. Someone at AIG or Goldman Sachs raising money, working on financial deals, etc. is regarded as a villain or a crook. Gilbert Arenas makes $100 million a year playing for the Washington Wizards, and yet the President comes out this week and basically says people on Wall Street add no value to the economy. There's really a double standard here, and to just point the finger at Wall Street as if it's the one industry making outrageous amounts of money is wrong.
Dagen McDowell: There is a double standard on this issue. People forget GE Capital got tens of billions of dollars in debt backed up by taxpayer dollars in the event of a calamity with the company. If they didn't give debt out at the low rates they were able to with taxpayer backing, they might not be in business.
Adam Lashinsky: Let's play this out. Let's say GE goes bankrupt, and Conan is a creditor in bankruptcy court. Just because NBC is a subsidiary of GE doesn't mean the company shouldn't honor its contracts with employees. People who have predetermined contracts with a company should and deserve to get paid. Just as a bank who took TARP funds should be honoring the contracts it made with its employees. I'm against punitive measures.
'Underdog' Stocks
Adam Lashinsky: Western Digital (WDC)
Charles Payne: Xerox (XRX)
Dr. Bob Froehlich: Citigroup (C)
Bulls & Bears | Cavuto on Business | Forbes on Fox | Cashin' In
Forbes on Fox
On Saturday, January 23, 2010, David Asman was joined by Steve Forbes, Rich Karlgaard, Bill Baldwin, Neil Weinberg, Mike Ozanian, Quentin Hardy, Victoria Barret, and Elizabeth MacDonald.
In Focus: Does Scott Brown's Win Revive Job Market by Killing Health Care?
David Asman: A massacre in Massachusetts! Mass confusion in the beltway. A lifesaver for jobs? Hi, I'm David Asman. Let's go In Focus with Steve Forbes, Elizabeth MacDonald, and Rich Karlgaard, along with Bill Baldwin, Neil Weinberg, and Quentin Hardy. Steve, how is Scott Brown's victory good for jobs?
Steve Forbes: [Killing health care] is good for jobs because it removes a sword over the economy, especially small businesses which will get slammed with taxes. That's where most new jobs come from. It removes a burden on the economy itself, but it's just a first step. Going from socialist health care to capitalist job creation is good, but we have to deal with taxes and a stable dollar. But it's a good first step.
Quentin Hardy: I completely agree with Steve that small businesses, entrepreneurs, and risk-takers are the engine of job growth in this country. I think this was the worst week for entrepreneurs in memory. The activist Supreme Court said corporations and unions can absolutely paper and drown out any political campaigns. That means the forces of healthy economic change are gone. In health care, you're not going to be able to leave corporations because you've got to fight to retain the health care only a big corporation can provide. There are 30 million uninsured running scared in this country. They'll run to big companies, not small risk-takers.
Elizabeth Macdonald: This is good for jobs. If health care was so great, why did everybody want to be exempt from it and why did the President fail to mention this version of health care reform at all in his stump speech for Martha Coakley? And this is a good week for entrepreneurs. Steve is right; this posed an onerous burden on small businesses. But we do need health reform in this country. Small businesses need health reform. Health care costs are going up. The problem is interstate competition. The states have a vapor-lock on insurance markets. That's a key issue. Even the former head of the AMA is for interstate competition in health care.
Bill Baldwin: Let's get away from the word reform. What happened here is a good thing. It's a good thing that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and the other Chavistas in Washington suddenly have a road block on their plan to nationalize a chunk of the economy. However, I don't think that the death of that legislation is necessarily going to create a pop in the jobs market. The job numbers are heavily influenced by what big employers like Walmart or Wendy's do in hiring unskilled workers. Those particular employers wouldn't have been hurt by a scheme to tax the whole economy and subsidize lower-paid health insurance.
Rich Karlgaard: Well it's good for jobs. Over the past year small business owners have been on strike. They've not invested in capital equipment to the degree they usually would coming out of recession, and they've not hired to the degree they usually would because they're afraid. What are they afraid of? Health care costs, cap and trade costs, union card check. This removes a huge obstacle. The path for small business recovery now gets a little bit clearer.
Neil Weinberg: I think the American people said here, we don't like the idea. They're more worried about joblessness and taxes than about health care. If you're a small employer and it costs $14,000 instead of $12,000 to cover a family of someone you employ, it's on the margin. It isn't going to affect the big, major hiring decisions that much.
As President's Poll Numbers Drop, Stock Market Pops; Any Connection?
David Asman: Just one year after taking office, President Obama's approval rating is near an all-time low, stuck below 50 percent. Someone says that's good for investors. Over the past year, as the president's numbers plummeted, stocks went the other direction: they were soaring! Rich, you see a direct correlation, why?
Rich Karlgaard: Of course there's a direct correlation because investors now realize that Obama probably is not going to get everything that he wanted: union card check, cap and trade, and health care—things that have been ruinous to the market. The past couple of days in the market have been exceptions because Obama came out attacking the banks. It's funny that President Obama seems to spend more bile on Americans than on terrorists. What investors want is Obama to lead from the center.
Victoria Barret: I think Rich is misguided. This administration is still going after the successful American industries: banks, pharmaceuticals, and insurance, and still doing a wealth transfer from successful industries to less successful industries like the auto industry. The market would be even higher if you didn't have the threat of heavy regulation and taxation from the administration. The real reason the market is up so
high over the past year is that companies cut cost. They slashed inventories and they cut jobs, so profits are up.
Elizabeth MacDonald: Yes, but I think they need some of the guardrails put back up around Wall Street because they did go berserk. Nobody on Wall Street, or in the government—the Federal Reserve or the Treasury—thought there would be a nationwide housing-market collapse. Everybody thought we could live into our golden years by selling each other our inflated houses, which is similar to selling annuities on the Titanic, as one Wall Street analyst put it. As for what caused the market's recent downturn, I'd say the China bubble possibly popping is hurting commodity trading.
Mike Ozanian: It's not in direct competition to what Obama has been doing. He created another bubble. He basically inflated the stock market, which is why gold prices went through the roof with all his excessive borrowing and all his excessive spending. The market crashed when Brown won in Massachusetts because they know Obama's spending is finished. He's not going to be able to inflate his way out of this. That's why the dollar went up. This is going to hurt stocks short term but help them long term.
Steve Forbes: The answer is yes, and Rich is right about the destructiveness of Obama's program. But what turned the market around came not from the White House, but from Congress putting pressure to get rid of the mark-to-market accounting which was artificially destroying bank capital. When that happened in March and April, the market went up. However, even though the market has gone up, when you look at the value of the dollar, and that's why gold went up even faster than the S&P, we haven't done as well as the markets around the world. We have a long ways to go.
Quentin Hardy: Well, he inherited the failed economic policies of his lunatic predecessor, and his approval is below 50 percent. I speak of course of Ronald Reagan at the end of his first year. Turning this around takes a while. David, you're wrong, the market hasn't gone up in the past six months. It went up between March and September when Obama had a lot of momentum, and it had to do with fixing the financial system.
Flipside: Obama Says: No Taxes? No Government Work! Fair or Foul?
David Asman: President Obama wants to crack down on tax cheats as
thousands of businesses owe tens of billions in taxes. The president is making a new rule: if your company is behind on taxes, your company can't get government work. Seems logical, but Victoria says you should be hiring these folks.
Victoria Barret: I don't like cheaters any more than anyone else, but this is how we get our money back. We say okay, you can do this contract but then we prorate the tax bill that's due over the life of the contract. So we're taking money out of what they're making on the government contract to get our taxes, what we're owed, back. It's the only way to get the money back. It only works for first time offenders. If you do it twice, you don't get the contract.
Neil Weinberg: It is big money. What are we going to do, give a half trillion dollars to a bunch of tax cheats? I don't think that will work. What Ross Perot said is right. He used to say to the people who would work for him, if the woman you trusted your life to can't trust you, than how can I trust you? I think that's true. We can't hand all this money over to a bunch of crooked contractors.
Bill Baldwin: I think Neil should put down his self-righteousness and think in practical terms. (LAUGHTER) You want to get money back from a tax deadbeat? The last thing you want to do is take away their livelihood. There are a lot of sad stories about angry ex-wives turning in their husbands as tax cheats, and they have this moment of glee when he's carried off to jail in handcuffs. And then they say, wait a minute, if he's not employed, how do I get my alimony?
Quentin Hardy: I think they should work it off in a federal prison. Look, we talk about government waste. It's individuals ripping off the government. Medicare is doctors ripping off the government. I pay my taxes. If you don't, I'm paying for your services that you're consuming. I sure don't want to hear you talking about deficits ever and I don't want you getting contracts from the government.
Steve Forbes: Well, the real cheats you find in Congress but that's another subject for another time. But you have to distinguish between real tax cheats, people who just are not paying what they owe, and the normal contract disputes you have with the government when you have long-term contracts. How do you allocate costs? When do you recognize revenue, inventories, depreciation, things like that? Those kinds of battles, especially with defense contractors, go on all the time. That's legitimate. How do you interpret this horrible tax code?
Informer: Filibuster Stocks
David Asman: We're back with the stocks ready to fly now that the Senate is no longer filibuster-proof:
Neil Weinberg: Goldman Sachs (GS)
Mike Ozanian: CareFusion (CFN)
Bill Baldwin: Pfizer (PFE)
Bulls & Bears | Cavuto on Business | Forbes on Fox | Cashin' In
Cashin' In
Brown's Win in Massachusetts: Loss for Union Power in D.C.; Win for Jobs in America?
John Layfield, www.nutritionmarket.com, CEO/Owner: You better believe it's good for jobs. This is great for America. Scott Brown getting elected is a direct blow to Obama's open agenda to take care of unions and let the rest of the taxpayers in America pay fortunes. Look, observe — Obama wants his money back. America in Massachusetts said we want our country back. This bogus health care plan and stimulus plan and putting our country on the verge of bankruptcy, America said enough. If you're an incumbent, get ready. I wish something worse could happen to those guys.
Mike Papantonio, Gannett columnist: What an overstatement of Massachusetts. The unions aren't losing power. This is a wake-up call to the unions, the same unions that put $80 million in Republican campaigns, showed up in a voting block of 85 percent for progressives. The best thing to happen is a wakeup call them there's so much over statement of the importance of Massachusetts. That's exactly my point. The unions got complacent because of the last cycle. All that happened is the Democrats need to remember that the only way they're going to succeed politically is to have that union base motivated. This is going to do it. It's the worst thing that could happen to the Republicans if you want to know the truth about Massachusetts.
Jonathan Hoenig, CapitalistPig Asset Management: Certainly people have every right to unionize but as unions they don't have a right to special privileges and that's what you're talking about, Democrats giving special privileges to unions. The President has been about this since day one. The first bill signed was a gift to the unions. The labor secretary is pro unions. Cash for clunkers was pro union. The $100 billion bailout to the automakers.
Jonas Max Ferris, MaxFunds.com: It depends what you define as good for the job market. It's good, for the market. The unemployment rate would drop. If you want to see unemployment go down, removing the union power is good. It's declining because it's easier to move jobs abroad. They're not going to magically come back without the unions. Wages without unions will not fall to a level profitable. Massachusetts people already have a basically health care plan in place. They don't need a national one and Cadillac health care plans are tax-free.
Wayne Rogers, Wayne Rogers & Co: The Republicans represent 20 percent of the voting public in Massachusetts. This had nothing to do with unions or non-unions. It had to do with a health care about bill and national security. That's why I won. It has nothing to do with unions. It's a stretch to say. You're going to — you can say the result of this is yes, if he gets a vote in the senate, yes, if you are going to have card check, he'll vote against it. I understand that but it's a stretch to say it's a cause and result.
Best Bet for Haiti's Future: Let Private Business Prosper
Tracy Byrnes: Look, we've given a trillion dollars to Haiti since 1992 and what do we have to show for it? The country is exactly where it was in '92 today. We need to help them sustain themselves going forward. We need private industry to come in so this economy can turn around and they can get on their own two feet. They can't continue to rely on donations.
Mike Papantonio: But corporations like Royal Caribbean, they don't build new roads or sewer systems, they don't bring running water or electricity. What is lacking in Haiti is an infrastructure. Why is Haiti so different than Nassau, Turks and Caicos? Royal Caribbean, private business doesn't solve the problem. You need an infrastructure.
Wayne Rogers: Mike touches on that problem. It's anarchy. They have a history of totalitarianism and the death squads. The people there — unless you have a stable government, you can not have a growth in the economy. I don't care who goes in there. You can put all the corporations in the world there to create jobs. It's not going to work unless you have a stable government there to base this on and they don't have that.
John Layfield: Like millions of Americans I've donated to the Haiti relief and I believe we should help but unless you have a demand for the infrastructure like Mike said – look everybody's correct. Unless you have demand, though, you're not going to help the people long term. Look at Katrina. We gave them money to go away and created generational poverty. We have to break that poverty cycle with those people in the Caribbean and help them get a better life. It's not just the money. Teach them how to fish, not just a fish for the day.
Jonas Max Ferris: That would be the result of their being jobs and business. In the short run, charity is the best thing for Haiti from us. We're the richest people and it needs to be business, probably tourism. It doesn't need a wonderful democracy like America. But it does need to be a place to go and spend money, which is Royal Caribbean is doing, bringing people to spend money. In the long term I'm optimistic about Haiti because it's close to America and labor is cheap. There will be a day Chinese workers will demand more money and cost of fuel to ship junk to Walmart will be too expensive and we'll look to countries like Haiti. It will be a success story but it has to be a safe place to do business.
Jonathan Hoenig: Bravo to Royal Caribbean. They own their own private resort and employ hundreds of Haitians and are bringing food there to assist. Once again, that trade is beneficial. Commerce, profit seeking individuals are beneficial. They create wealth for themselves but also with whom they trade. Wayne is right; no one can make any money with a government that doesn't protect your rights. But this notion we have to be involved in the program of building schools and roads, a charity isn't charity if it's done from the government. If people want to donate, fine but they can't have a blank credit card from the United States.
Bill to Cut Lawmakers' Pay if They Run a Deficit: Good or Bad Idea?
Jonathan Hoenig: It's idiotic. Honestly. The congressman who came up with this... Congressman Nathan Deal has had a lot of them. He wanted to eliminate the 14th amendment. Politics is not based on merit pay. 30 percent Unemployment, would he vote himself a raise? This is a page out of the Alan Grayson race son school of politics. It doesn't protect individual rights and it's a stupid idea.
Wayne Rogers: The idea might be good but Jonathan has a point. Listen, the biggest problem is not the salaries. They've got to cut out the other stuff. Why are they better than us and get a separate pension plan. A separate health plan. Why are they not ordinary citizens and servants of the public? Why are they elitists? That's the problem.
Tracy Byrnes: They're wealthy already, getting paid left and right. We need accountability. I get that it's far-fetched, but the point is we need the guys to be accountable for what they do. They're not. They take their paychecks home, get free health care and private jets.
Jonas Max Ferris: First of all you cut Nancy Pelosi's pay, and the gardener won't get a tip. What government workers in general need is incentive. You give bonuses for success, you don't dock pay for a ridiculous thing. There should be incentive to succeed in congress. You say I'll give you a raise and the budget is neutral.
Mike Papantonio: Congressman Nathan Deal, look at his record. He's a bumpkin. This is not about substance. He's never come up with anything about substance. His deals are a dime a dozen on the hill. We have wars and the economy to worry about and Nathan Deal who did nothing as a Georgia politician is a federal politician now. It's insane.
What Do I Need to Know?
Tracy Byrnes: Climate scams continue, climate-gate is dead. We've heard the Himalayas are not going away in 2035. Little known scientists said it and it's not a fact. Climate-gate is gone.
Jonas Max Ferris: The health care stock because health care stocks, health care stocks have done well because the health care debate is becoming more and more government spending and no public option, no government takeover health care it's just another government pork barrel things and they are with the taxpayer paying the bill. Buy (XLV).
John Layfield: The complete disregard for any fiscal responsibility by this administration, unfortunately is going to come home to roost this year. I'm short the DOW because I hate what these guys are doing to our country, on the edge of bankruptcy. (DOG) is the way to play that.
Jonathan Hoenig: Whoever keeps telling me the president loves the banks and free markets and finance, the past week his announcement about wanting to basically rewrite the entire rules of banking in this country with new regulations really sent stocks in a tailspin. Take a look at (FXY), the Japanese yen.
Wayne Rogers: Well, if you're worried about inflation and you're worried about them printing too much money, look at (BVR). Safe bet.
Get all the stories you need-to-know from the most powerful name in news delivered first thing every morning to your inbox