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.
Should sanctuary cities lose their federal funding?
RICH KARLGAARD: Yes they should, and this Republican bill that was just passed in the House may have a lot of laws in it, it was passed in the heat of the moment as we just saw. A justifiable heat in the moment. But you can’t have federal law flouted by sanctuary cities. Imagine if you had sanctuary cities for income tax evasion, or polygamy. It’s the same thing.
MIKE OZANIAN: You’re right about that David, but I would not stop funding this way. I think that if these people broke the law, in these sanctuary cities politicians should be prosecuted. I think it would have been much better if the Republicans had showed some backbone and used the power of the purse with the president’s budget. That was the time. Because then they could have made it tougher for these illegal immigrants to come into this country in the first place.
ELIZABETH MACDONALD: Listen, this is a disgrace, an absolute national disgrace on what these families are going through. Federal tax dollars go through this city to enforce and stop illegal immigration. They’re not doing what we pay them to do. So stop the funding, it’s as simple as that. We’ve got what, 43 states with sanctuary cities in them where more than 8,100 illegal immigrants are now in here, many of them committing crimes? Again and again? So enough is enough. No more, not one more family should have to go through what those families have endured.
SABRINA SCHAEFFER: No you’re absolutely right David, and it’s so disturbing on so many levels. Of course we have serious immigration challenges in this country. This particular story is disturbing and heart wrenching for any parent out there. And then we have the question, is our federalist society being undermined? So we have a lot of issues in play here. What worries me is what Rich even suggested, which is this knee-jerk politics and reaction to pass laws that I feel very much uncomfortable with. The underlying message is that immigration is bad, all immigrants are bad. I don’t think that’s the tone that Republicans want or that’s good for the country. We need to address some very serious challenges, and I don’t think this law is the way to do it.
JOHN TAMNY: Well I don’t think so. The Kate Steinle story is a tragedy. But one tragic story does not a statistic make. The facts are that immigrants are incarcerated at rates a fraction of what the American people are. So to turn this about immigrants is just statistically false. As for the Republicans, shame on them. They talk a big game about a constitutionally limited government, and then they use resources, taken from the American people, that are then smacked around countries and states they live in.
BRUCE JAPSEN: Well I think its knee-jerk politics and pandering… Quite frankly, if they’re going to do this, given all the reports about the undocumented immigrants that Trump has working for his companies, maybe they should extend this to sanctuary golf courses and resorts.
HACKERS REMOTELY TAKE CONTROL OF CAR IN MOTION
RICH KARLGAARD: We no, I think they’re actually out front on this issue, and that’s a good place to be. I agree totally with John, you don’t want the government. This is the government that can’t stop China from hacking the personnel records, and know they’re going to set the standard to stop people from hacking our cars?
MIKE OZANIAN: I don’t care what Rich says, he’s wrong, Obama is going to announce any day now David, that there’s going to be a computer car czar appointment. And I’m sure he’s going to recruit John Tamny because of how much he loves big government. He’s going to be the first car czar there.
ELIZABETH MACDONALD: Yeah some couch potato sitting on his couch did that wirelessly. Give me a ’68 Mustang, Ford Fastback Bullet any day with roll-down windows any day. I don’t need all the bells and whistles. This hacking through the entertainment console is really scary. You know, look at this. Now we have this French guy, who wants to have expresso makers in your car. Stop with the cocooning of your car, stop with the living room on wheels. Enough is enough.
SABRINA SCHAEFFER: Well no, not all regulation is bad, but also a lot of times there’s private incentivization because a lot of times there’s private demand for this now. Fiat is going back and they’re going to do everything they can to make sure they’re the safest on the road. I’m with John and Rich on this. The idea of being hacked while driving is terrifying, but the idea that is more terrifying is the federal government coming in and trying to fix it. I think we have to remember that innovation takes a lot of time and you don’t want to look at the individual level, you want to look at the macro level. The Wright brothers didn’t just build a plane one day in the back of their bike shop; there were a lot of innovators before them who had a lot of failed experiences.
JOHN TAMNY: Well leave the clowns in government out of it. Look the reality is innovation is about experimentation and with experimentation there’s going to be mistakes. That’s how you get to knowledge that gets to the innovation of the technology we want. We want cars that are more computerized, and because we do there are going to be a market incentive to create ways to deter hackers. Let’s keep the government out of this.
BRUCE JAPSEN: Yeah definitely. Some of these companies are going to open themselves up to federal regulation if they don’t start innovating. Some of them are even raising the white flag. The Blue Cross Association just released some information saying that ‘we’re going to offer you free credit checks if you’re hacked’ essentially is what they’re saying. We want to prevent hacks before they happen and I don’t think we’ve done a good job of that.
DONALD TRUMP: GOVERNMENT SHOULDN'T PROFIT FROM STUDENT LOANS
RICH KARLGAARD: Yeah among many reasons, way too many administrators per actual teachers is probably the major reason. But look, I think Donald Trump stumbled onto something here, and as an employer, he sees people spending massive amounts of money and coming out without any practical education that applies to the business market.
MIKE OZANIAN: They saw the private market, David, which was making money so you know they wanted to gouge it and sell it cheaply if you will, to people who wanted to go to college. The question for the government is really his own hypocrisy. Over the years, as the government role is loans have increased, so has the amount of debt that these college students graduate with. So by his own remarks, it’s really the government’s fault.
SABRINA SCHAEFFER: No absolutely not. Look, the government has gotten into the business of student loans, which has distorted the education market and driven up cost for consumers. In the past two years alone, direct government loans to students have risen by 44 percent. So colleges and universities have absolutely no reason to control and reduce costs, which is a real problem for students.
JOHN TAMNY: Well you know Trump is wrong, no insight there, but you know the federal government should not be in the business of fleecing the American people for their resources in order to give out cheap loans. Sabrina is right; the fed should be out of this all together.
BRUCE JAPSEN: Well this is not his idea actually, this is an idea from a Democratic Senator named Elizabeth Warren who’s been talking a lot about government profiting off of student loans. She takes it a step further by saying if you’re going to keep giving colleges all this federal money, they should have some skin in the game and start paying back these student loans if they don’t improve graduation rates.
MIKE OZANIAN: NEW GOLD (NGD)
ELIZABETH MACDONALD: Sequoia Fund (SEQUX)