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.
President-elect Trump Eyeing Tax Reform as Part of Economic Agenda
Emily Jashinsky: Where I work Young Americans foundation, we saved the Reagan ranch in 1998 in part because that's the site where Reagan signed the greatest tax cut in history about 25% across the board, lifted a lot of people, created an era of prosperity in this country. Now the trump administration says they're going to improve upon that. I'm looking forward to seeing what they're able to do with it.
Gary B. Smith: Absolutely, Dagen. Look, the reason you do tax cuts is as Emily said, that historically whether it's been John F. Kennedy or Ronald Reagan who have gone and even bill Clinton ended up lowering taxes, it has gone to increase the productivity, the GDP, jobs and all that. But even beyond that if you do it the right way, it's simple and it's fair. And it does the one most important thing, it takes money back out of the government, which we've talked about a million times, spends it totally inefficiently. In fact, if anyone -- Julie for example can name a program that the government spends effectively and efficiently, I will applaud, but I don't think she can.
Julie Roginsky: Because I’m old enough to remember the bush tax cuts and the exactly kind of shot in the arm they provided, we had net job loss across the board with George Bush.
John Layfield: Yeah. And look at how much taxes have been raised. You had $2.1 Trillion the treasury bringing in when President Obama came into power and you have now about $3.3 Trillion. You have $1.2 Trillion that have been added in tax increases since President Obama first took office. And we're still running a $500 billion deficit. These goofs in D.C. Can't balance the budget no matter what kind of revenue you have and we're at 19% of GDP according to tax revenue right now which is a historic high. So if you're going to do it, right now is the time to do it. That's not true about Ronald Reagan. 1986 tax reform GDP went to 4.2% -- no, he cut taxes in 1986, the Tax Reform Act. That's why they call it the Tax Reform Act.
Jonas Max Ferris: There's a difference between tax reform and lowering taxes.
President-elect: We Will Pursue Energy Independence
John Layfield: Yeah, look what happens in west Texas. You talk about not needing a minimum wage, you can't hire anybody for $15 an hour out in the middle of Texas right now because of the shale oil bloom because jobs are so scarce out there. That's what energy creates. Look at the Monterey shale in California, that would wipe out California’s debt by itself. We need a president-elect trump to go out and figure out with the EPA what is safe. If fracking is safe, they need to go in there and frack that oil and take California out of debt. If it's not safe, you shouldn't be doing it anyway and this cartel in OPEC, every country is a liar. Look at the production that they have compared to the quotas historically; they never adhere to these quotas. They're all petrol rates companies. They have to have that oil revenue to stay in power. They are going to bust these quotas completely. None of them can be trusted.
Emily Jashinsky: Absolutely. And not only that, the Americans in this country who need jobs and need relief will benefit from this. I mean, look, we have resources from coast to coast in this country. We have resources off the coast of this country. And it's about time we start using them. I think this serves as sort of this jolt reminder of what it's like not necessarily long term sustainable to rely so heavily on an external source of oil and I think this provides a big boost for Trump's "America first" energy policy going into the administration.
Julie Roginsky: Well, first and foremost, we're on our way to being energy independent already. We're fracking the heck out of natural gas, out of oil, it's not like we haven't been doing any of that and we have under Obama tremendously. Secondly, everybody knows oil is a global commodity. So even if we frack to death here in the united states, we drill, baby drill, off the coast and wherever else we want to drill, the reality is if Saudi or any of these other OPEC countries decide they want to cut production, it affects us because oil is a global commodity. Demand in places like India or China that seems to spiral, that's going to spike the price of oil here at home. If you understand macroeconomics, that's basically how it works. There's not much we can do on our own to effectuate this.
Jonas Max Ferris: You can say about food but we're not food independent. First of all, we're at near 50-year production highs in the United States even with the decline of 140 -- it's not like we haven't produced more oil.
Gary B. Smith: Well, I think it stimulates it. You know, I’m going to go back and argue, you know, we like to beat up on Julie because she's on the left. But she really did make a lot of very good points there.
Mark Wahlberg on Politics: 'Hollywood Is Living in a Bubble'
Gary B. Smith: I don't think they're living in fantasy land as much as living in hypocrisy land. I mean, Dagen, look at Hollywood, it's one of the most competitive, capitalistic, greedy, discriminatory industries. I mean, women obviously make less than men there. You all look at all the salaries per movies there. Everything is based on appearance and looks. My gosh, they should -- Wahlberg and his company should be railing against Hollywood. So I think he's right in there. They shouldn't say anything about politics because they don't know anything.
Julie Roginsky : First of all, I really don't care what any celebrity says about politics one way or the other, but let's be frank, nobody on this panel is living the average life of the average person in the Midwest either. May have come from there or those circumstances, I didn't lose my first amendment rights to talk about that. I don't think mark Wahlberg or any other celebrity has, frankly I don't care what they have to say.
Emily Jashinsky: I'm conservative. I like when Clint Eastwood speaks up or someone like Mark Wahlberg, but I’m okay with celebrities speak about politics and that is only okay if they acknowledge how out of touch they are with the average American. I have to disagree; they are living in hypocrisy land but also living in fantasy land. Life resembles nothing like the average American.
Jonas Max Ferris: I can't think of a better time to talk, president-elect is a celebrity who vented his political opinions and now he's going to the white house. Might as well have George Clooney as president in 8 years
John Layfield: I'm with Wahlberg. Look, these Hollywood bozos have a guy designed to bring them a cup of coffee every day, how can they possibly be in touch? They're not. If it has to do with civil rights like Jim Brown spoke about in the '60s, just shut up. All it does is kill your brand and no one wants to hear it.
Stock Picks
Gary B. Smith: (MCD)
John Layfield: (UA)
Jonas Max Ferris: (LUX)
Get all the stories you need-to-know from the most powerful name in news delivered first thing every morning to your inbox