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.
This past week’s Bulls & Bears: Gary B. Smith, Exemplar Capital managing partner; Scott Bleier, HybridInvestors.com president; Tobin Smith, ChangeWave Research editor; Peter Schiff, Euro Pacific Capital president and author of "Crash Proof: How to Profit From the Coming Economic Collapse"; Bob Olstein, The Olstein Funds president.
Trading Pit: $uper Tuesday Could Be a $uper Day for Stocks
Super Tuesday: 24 states, 2000-plus delegates. A big day for the candidates indeed! But could Super Tuesday be a super day for the market?
Gary B. Smith: Super Tuesday will be a huge day for the market! We’ll finally find out who the nominees will be and that will give some certainty to investors. Ant I believe it’s going to be John McCain for the GOP and he could be a great leader for this country and terrific for the market and economy!
Tobin Smith: Super Tuesday won’t decide who the nominees will be, so we’ll still have uncertainty. We still need a few more months before we really have some answers.
Peter Schiff: The only certainty here is that one of these guys is going to be president! And not one of them will be good for the market.
Scott Bleier: Wall Street doesn’t care about the election yet. The market has plenty on its plate right now to worry about.
Bob Olstein: We will not see a big recession despite what some are saying on the campaign trail. The stars are perfectly aligned for the market right now!
Microsoft's $45B Bid for Yahoo: $ign of a Market Bottom?
A huge deal this week that could mean huge gains are on the way for your stocks. We're talking about Microsoft offering almost 45 billion dollars to buy Yahoo. Is this a great sign for Wall Street?
Gary B. Smith: Absolutely! When companies go shopping with big bucks like Microsoft is doing with Yahoo, this means they see good times ahead, or bargains at this point. And this isn’t the last buyout we see, which is great for the rest of the market.
Peter Schiff: This is terrible! It’s bad for the shareholders of all three companies. There is no silver lining here. We’re in a bear market and it’s going to go down even more!
Bob Olstein: This is a win-win for both Microsoft and Yahoo! This is the first indicator that deals aren’t dead and that’s a good sign for the stock market.
Get your game day gear on it’s the annual Bulls & Bears stock super bowl! The guys have winning stocks and the winning team in the Stock X-Change!
Gary B Smith: Boston Beer (SAM)
Peter Schiff: Market Vectors Gold Miners (GDX)
Tobin Smith: American Superconductor (AMSC)
Scott Bleier: Verizon (VZ)
Bob Olstein: Morgan Stanley (MS)
Bob Olstein’s Be$t Catche$
Legendary investor Bob Olstein has gone deep see fishing in some turbulent waters, and has returned with his three best catches right now in this shaky market.
Bob Olstein’s 1st Catch: Citigroup (C)
Bob Olstein’s 2nd Catch: Motorola (MOT)
Bob Olstein’s 3rd Catch: Collective Brands (PSS)
On Saturday, February 2, 2007, Neil Cavuto was joined by Charles Payne, wstreet.com; Tracy Byrnes, FOX Business Network; Adam Lashinsky, Fortune Magazine; Pat Powell, Powell Financial Group; Ben Ferguson, The Ben Ferguson Show; and Mark Lamont Hill, PhD, Temple University Professor.
Bottom Line: Washington Insiders v$ Outsiders: Which Does Wall Street Want?
Soundbite from Mitt Romney: “I'd go to Washington as an outsider — not owing favors, not with lobbyists on every elbow.”
Neil Cavuto: Mitt Romney declaring Washington needs an outsider. Barack Obama saying the same, even though he’s kind of an insider… he’s a Senator. But, what does Wall Street want? An inside player or an outsider to shake things up?
Ben Ferguson: Oh, an outsider. Mitt Romney for sure. Look at everything Mitt Romney did with the Olympics. Romney understands how to get people and businesses together and work well. I think with the economy the way it is right now, certainly Mitt Romney’s a guy who can understand what states and businesses, especially small businesses, need. I don’t think John McCain can bring that to the White House. One of Mitt Romney’s biggest selling points is he understands business. I think Wall Street would really, really like that.
Neil Cavuto: Traditionally, Charles, we do pick outsiders or those not steeped in Washington, whether it’s a former governor like President Bush or the ultimate outsiders, Jimmy Carter. What is it about an outsider?
Charles Payne: I think people always seem to be fed up with the incumbent!
Charles Payne: But, ironically, the incumbents tend to do well. There’s no doubt Wall Street wants a Wall Street insider and a Washington outsider. I think Wall Street would want one Party in charge of the White House and the other Party in charge of Congress. That way, there would be a gridlock and they can’t mess things up.
Neil Cavuto: The best years for the markets were when Clinton was in the White House and the Republicans controlled Congress.
Charles Payne: That’s right. No Party had a whole lot of power and they neutralized themselves.
Tracy Byrnes: Well, I agree with Charles, but I don’t think we’re going to get that. That being said, I think an insider would actually help things. Wall Street knows you gotta know people to get things done. If we get someone down in DC who knows how to handle things and push things through, I don’t think that’s such a bad thing. You become my best friend when I can get you into the hottest restaurant in town.
Charles Payne: Who’s the insider then?
Tracy Byrnes: Unfortunately, I think it’s McCain.
Neil Cavuto: Do you need help getting into restaurants??
Neil Cavuto: Here’s what I’m thinking: All this is a moot point if whoever wins in November wins by a landslide. That person is going to have enormous oomph behind ‘em.
Pat Powell: It doesn’t matter if they win by a landslide or not; they’re going to say they have a mandate to do what they want to do.
Neil Cavuto: Ronald Reagan did, right? Even though he came in to a lot of resistance, he could always say, “Hey guys, landslide. Hello!”
Pat Powell: Absolutely. I think what Wall Street is most interested in is what’s good for business, what’s good for the economy. And if you look back at insider versus outsider, you’ll find good and bad examples in history. I don’t think Wall Street cares about insider or outsider, but they do care about business and the economy. That means Wall Street’s guy is Mitt Romney.
Neil Cavuto: I tend to think Washington is neither red nor blue, but green. It likes green. The more it has a chance to get green, the more it’ll support a candidate who can make it happen. Is it fair to say they have better odds with someone not steeped in Washington politics to get the green?
Adam Lashinsky: No, I don’t think so. Stock trading is often referred to as a sport. But, the people on Wall Street know the capital markets are not a sporting event. They’re a little bit bigger than running the Olympics. If you we want to make Wall Street into a person and that person looks into whom it wants as president, Wall Street is not all that impressed that Mitt Romney was a management consultant then did private equity. Wall Street knows that someone like that will tell them what they want to hear all the time. I don’t find Romney persuasive at all when he says he won’t listen to lobbyists. Of course he will! So to answer your question, Wall Street wants someone who will get the job done. You’re going to look at a leader like John McCain and say, “This is someone who knows how to make thing work.”
Charles Payne: Adam, hold on a second. I can’t believe you’re dissing the accomplishments of Romney. This guy is like a Wall Street legend! Bain Capital. Are you kidding?! I would love to have a fraction of the money he made. Maybe Washington doesn’t care, but Wall Street does. I think Wall Street wants Romney to win this thing.
Adam Lashinsky: Charles, I am not dissing his accomplishments as a businessman. I am dissing, if you will, what that means to him as a politician and his opportunities as a president. This is guy who behaves like a management consultant in that you don’t know what he really thinks. You know he’s looking at the polls.
Pat Powell: But, you know he’s effective. And that’s very important. He went into those Olympics when they were a disaster. No one knew if we were going to be able to pull it off, but he did it. If you work in the Senate, what do you know about being effective? I don’t think anyone can argue that our Congress is effective.
Tracy Byrnes: To Adam’s point, that’s not how Washington works and everybody knows that. Washington and Wall Street are two very different birds. You can’t go to Washington and say “Hey, I ran Wall Street. I’m a hero.” And expect to walk in and pass laws. Everybody knows that!
Ben Ferguson: Tracy, what does everybody want from Wall Street? Predictability. And if you have a guy like Mitt Romney…
Tracy Byrnes: He is very predictable.
Ben Ferguson: Tracy, hang on a second. I gave you a chance. He’s predictable in that he’s not willing to bail out Wall Street when they need help. I think American consumers and investors want to know, realistically, that there’s going to be a guy who’s not going to put up with the BS of Wall Street when they say “Please bail us out.” John McCain has been amazing at bailing people out. He loves giving money away.
Adam Lashinsky: You’re right about one thing… that Mitt Romney is predictable. It’s predictable that he will change his mind when the polls show he needs to. Even though he’s an extremely impressive guy, and even though he has a lot of money that he’s spending on his own campaign, I think that’s why he hasn’t had success on the campaign trail.
Neil Cavuto: I’m not here as a Mitt Romney apologist. A lot of people make a big deal of him spending a lot of money. Keep in mind, he’s the least known of all the candidates. For a guy who’s not well-known, he’s got to spend a lot of money to get his name out there. Charles Payne, to your issue, about the businessman skills: I think there’s something to be said about someone who has a proven track record of turning companies around. Certainly it registered for Romney in Michigan, a state that sorely wanted to see that kind of talent…
Charles Payne: Romney’s got some issues, and Adam’s brought some of them up. The bottom line is Wall Street clearly wants to see Romney in the White House. We had some issues with McCain: He did not vote for the Bush tax cut. He was one of only two Republicans who did not. And even though he’s said the right things since then, it’s only been recently that he’s given the mea culpas. So, Wall Street’s worried about that and it’s worried about the rest of the candidates.
Head to Head: Wal-Mart Cuts Prices by 30 percent; Proof We Don't Need Stimulus?
Neil Cavuto: Wal-Mart to the rescue! The retail king cutting prices by up to 30 percent to help customers save money this Super Bowl weekend. But, did Wal-Mart do more than that? How ‘bout save our economy? Let’s go “Head to Head.”
Charles Payne: The fact of the matter is that we have to rely on the free markets to work this thing out. Giving out handouts may be altruistic, who knows, but it always backfires. We’ve seen it with welfare… If we just let businesses be businesses, if we let the Wal-Marts of the world do what they have to do to fill a void, we’ll see long-term prosperity.
Marc Lamont Hill: I think that’s borderline absurd. The fact of the matter is government interventions over the last 50, 60, 70 years have been crucial for supporting the nation’s most vulnerable citizens. With regards to Wal-Mart in particular, you cannot rely on a corporation to provide prosperity for American people because at the very same moment Wal-Mart is cutting its prices, it’s also causing much of the economic pain and frustration people need relief from! Wal-Mart has historically caused all kinds of problems with workers’ rights, low wages…
Neil Cavuto: So the average American saves what? About $2500 a year shopping at Wal-Mart… what is that?
Marc Lamont Hill: That $2500 savings is done on the backs of 1.39 million workers who work at Wal-Mart.
Neil Cavuto: So all those 1.39 million workers are chained to the shelves and cash registers, they’re indentured servants, and we’re taking advantage of them by saving money?
Marc Lamont Hill: They’re not indentured servants. What happens is Wal-Mart goes into areas and eats up other businesses. You look at what happens to revenues of other business after Wal-Mart moves in…
Charles Payne: I disagree.
Neil Cavuto: Towns are begging for them, Marc.
Charles Payne: I know I had my turn, but let me just sneak in for a second, guys. I’m sorry. When you go anywhere there’s a Wal-Mart, thousands of people line up for those jobs. It’s like a God-send. I can’t believe you’re saying something this crazy! Also, if you want to talk about government intervention… here’s the real deal: When you take away someone’s initiative and innate ability to strive and survive, you take everything away from them!
Marc Lamont Hill: I don’t disagree with that.
Adam Lashinsky: Look, the subject here is can the free market do a better job with stimulus than the government can? Charles, let me just try to say what you’re saying a little differently. When Wal-Mart cut prices, that’s a form of innovation. Innovation is why drives this economy. Innovation is what keeps the economy healthy over a long period of time. These other things we’re discussing are interesting and they need to be discussed, but Wal-Mart’s innovation is a metaphor for the way the free markets work. I don’t think Wal-Mart will be successful with these price cuts.
Neil Cavuto: Adam, I just want to be very clear on this point. Wal-Mart cuts prices. That’s an instant stimulus to their buyers, no?
Adam Lashinsky: Absolutely, Neil. That is a form of stimulus.
Tracy Byrnes: To Adam’s point, we have been slamming Wal-Mart for years. I don’t get it. Say what you want about their balance sheets and their profit margins, that’s their issue. But, what they’re doing is constantly being innovative, which is what Adam’s saying. They’re trying to get into banking… but, then we get back to their employees don’t have healthcare. Well, half of their employees are part time! Wal-Mart’s price cuts are a good thing for our economy.
Pat Powell: Kudos to Wal-Mart, but that’s not what this is all about. And, I hate to be in agreement with Marc…
Neil Cavuto: That’s not nice! Marc is a wonderful man.
Marc Lamont Hill: Thank you, Neil.
Pat Powell: He is! But, he’s right for all the wrong reasons. And the fact is a government stimulus is going to be fast. The free markets, in this instance, are too slow.
Charles Payne: The checks haven’t even gone out yet!
Tracy Byrnes: The Super Bowl is Sunday!
Pat Powell: You put $100 billion into the hands of the consumers… economically there’s a multiplier effect. If it comes in as it did in the past, maybe it’s 5 times as much…
Neil Cavuto: So you agree with Marc?
Pat Powell: Yes.
Marc Lamont Hill: She’s right for the wrong reasons.
Marc Lamont Hill: For me, it’s not the quickness of this, it’s the fact again that relying on a major corporation like Wal-Mart to rescue American citizens is dangerous because at the very same time it’s stimulating the economy, it’s doing it on the backs of the people who need the most help. That’s a fundamental issue.
Neil Cavuto: Marc, when people get these checks, isn’t a given that a lot of them are going to go to Wal-Mart?
Marc Lamont Hill: Absolutely.
Neil Cavuto: Alright. So, play this out. They go to Wal-Mart with the few hundred bucks the government’s given them, Wal-Mart’s already discounted a few items across the board, double-jeopardy, no?
Marc Lamont Hill: Indeed. My issue is the stimulus package doesn’t address the fundamental issues. It’s a Band-Aid.
Neil Cavuto: Well, on that we agree. You and Charles agree.
Charles Payne: Absolutely. Part of the problem is people go in over their heads… whether they bought a house they couldn’t afford or something else they couldn’t afford. Giving people $600 and they spend $2,000 is actually going to make them worse off in 6 months than they are right now.
Marc Lamont Hill: I totally agree. But, I’m deathly scared that we’ll begin to look to Wal-Mart to rescue us, when it’s just going to create more danger.
More for Your Money: $uper $tocks!
Neil Cavuto: Super Tuesday winners! The candidate and the stock our crew says will get you “More for Your Money.”
Pat Powell: Tyson (TSN)
Hillary Clinton will do well on Super Tuesday.
Charles Payne: First Solar (FSLR)
* Charles owns shares of this stock
Hillary Clinton and John McCain will do well on Super Tuesday.
Adam Lashinsky: Apple (AAPL)
Barack Obama will do well on Super Tuesday.
FOX on the Spot!
Pat Powell: Dow 14K by End of Summer; Buy the DIAMONDS (DIA)!
Adam Lashinsky: Dow Loses this Year, But Giants Win this Sunday!
Charles Payne: Global Economy Booming; Diana Shipping (DSX) Up 30 percent in ‘08
Tracy Byrnes: Wrong! Patriots Win! And We Go into a Recession
Ben Ferguson: Only Barack Can Save Britney's Career
Neil Cavuto: Wall Street Keeps it Clean & Simple in '08
In Focus: Now That Rudy Giuliani Is Out of fhe Race, Who’s Left to Stand Up for Taxpayers Now?
Steve Forbes, Editor-in-Chief: Amazingly, Senator John McCain. Even though he opposed the Bush tax cuts of 2001, 2003, he has seen the error of his ways. He’s got Arthur Laffer on board, the inventor of supply side economics. He’s got Jack Kemp. He also wants to cut the corporate tax rate from 35 to 25. So this guy gets it, and I think he could get it through.
Victoria Barret, Associate Editor: McCain’s strength will certainly be his advisors because his track record on this is mixed, but Romney is really strong, too. If you look at his proposed policies, it’s getting rid of the estate tax, reducing corporate taxes, reducing taxes on the middle class. This is a businessman who wants to lower taxes!
Mike Ozanian, National Editor: It is McCain but I think so for a different reason than Steve. It’s because of McCain’s amnesty plan for illegal immigrants. That will go through congress. The democrats will try to stop any tax cuts, but they agree with McCain on amnesty for illegal immigration. Illegal immigrants provide a huge stimulus for our economy, so it will sort of be a backdoor tax cut that will go through.
Neil Weinberg, Senior Editor: We are splitting hairs here because remember Hillary and Barack will raise your taxes and McCain and Romney will cut them. But, if you want to say ‘Who is the real tax cutter?’ I would have to say McCain failed Reagan 101. He opposed tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, so I wouldn’t really go with him Romney wants to eliminate the capital gains tax which is good for investors, it’s good for the economy. He’s your man.
Josh Lipton, Forbes.com Staff Writer: I side with Steve and Mike on this one. I think an added strength in McCain is he’s not just a tax cutter, he’s a budget cutter. He talks just as tough on spending, on all that pork and waste. I think that gives him an added edge of credibility in talking about this issue with voters.
Quentin Hardy, Silicon Valley Bureau Chief: I say it warms my heart the way my more conservative friends three months ago treated John McCain like he had a really bad rash on his lip, and now they love him. We have to think about why Rudy flat lined in the end, and the fact is he really didn’t back up the tax cutting stuff. He pandered that national insurance catastrophe stuff, it just looked like to the voters like more wild deficits coming their way. They care more about deficits than tax cutting, and frankly Obama is discussing more substantive policies than anyone out there followed by Hillary. McCain and Romney just keep saying “I am Reagan. Trust me.” Why do you trust them? I think that McCain has a better record on keeping the deficits down, but I don’t trust either of those guys until they show me some policies.
Debate: The Left Wing Endorses Obama: Good News for the GOP and the Economy?
Josh Lipton: Look who is endorsing Obama -- Ted Kennedy. Can you think of a more doctrinaire, antique, liberal? I think it hurts Obama in the general election because he’s painting himself in this hyper-liberal corner. It’s going to alienate moderates and independents. Wall Street wants a tax cutting, pro-growth policy maker. That is not Senator Barack Obama.
Lea Goldman, Senior Editor: You know, I think we’re missing the point here. It’s not about these hardcore lefties who are endorsing either Obama or Clinton because you knew they were going to go one way or another. It’s about who’s attached with Ted. Caroline Kennedy, I know she’s not the super left, but she validates the comparison between JFK and Obama. That’s a huge score for baby boomers who are looking for that.
Victoria Barret: Obama’s appeal has been his freshness, his newness, and Ted Kennedy is the opposite of that. Antiquated is the right word, and he’s kind of attached with yet another Washington dynasty. His real differentiator was not being attached to a dynasty, being the new guy with new ideas, so I think this is a negative thing for him.
Quentin Hardy: America, my head is exploding! We’ve got this guy, a gray haired 30-year, 40-year senate veteran, and you’re treating him like he’s a bomb throwing far left guy. Meanwhile, you have candidates on the Republican side who say they don’t believe in evolution and never saw a war choice they didn’t love. What a conservative country we have become! This guy is not far left. He’s worked in the senate for working people, that’s going to bring in Edwards type voters. Caroline Kennedy has worked in New York City schools. These are the interests of these people. Meanwhile Hillary, on her side, is saying “I have my Kennedy, he has his.” It’s a 1960’s legacy that they are fighting for. This is not some far-left thing.
Steve Forbes: If Barack Obama does get the nomination, which I don’t think he will, I think he would be more formidable in November than Hillary Clinton, precisely because people see him as young and new maybe he’ll offer new directions. They know what they’re going to get with Hillary and Bill. They want something different. I’d take Obama very seriously if he gets the nomination, and it won’t be good for Wall Street.
Mike Ozanian: Of all the democrats’ ideas when it comes to the economy and healthcare, they’re all proven to be complete failures throughout history. There’s nothing new here. But, I think Ted’s a brilliant public relations guy. This is a brilliant PR move for Obama because of Latin voters. They’re very fearful of very strict rules on illegal immigrants, they don’t want to see massive deportations. The Latin vote really helped McCain in Florida and I think it could really help Obama with Ted’s endorsement.
Flipside: The Best Way to Boost the Economy: More Government Regulation!
Neil Weinberg: We need more intelligent regulation. We’ve got a lot of stupid regulation. When we go to the grocery store we’d like to have some confidence that what we eat is not going to kill us because there’s a certain amount of regulation from the FDA. It tells us on the package what’s in there. Likewise, we’ve had a lot of stupid regulation in the financial industry, after the last bust, all kinds of rules. I’m saying don’t micromanage the economy, but have good disclosure, make companies honest about commissions they’re getting in, and the reason they’re selling certain products.
Steve Forbes: The fact of the matter is, in terms of regulations, you’re not going to prevent booms and busts. Bad government policies can make booms and busts worse, but it’s part of creativity. Remember in the early 80’s PC makers Commodore and Atari? They saw an opportunity they all jumped in, and then you get a shake out. It’s inevitable.
Lea Goldman: What’s happening now is overexposure to excessive risk. It’s a bad bet, it’s not a crime. On the flipside, I do think there should be tougher penalties for people who have committed fraud, and that includes homeowners who overstated their income on those mortgage applications. That is fraud. That should be punishable.
Victoria Barret: Yeah, everyone was wishy-washy, and there was no concept of real risk here, but the problem with regulation is that it looks backwards. It solves yesterday’s problems. We’re not going to see another mortgage crisis like we have seen this time. Investors aren’t going to buy bundles of mortgage debt without knowing what’s inside. Home buyers are not going to buy the line that house values are always going up. That’s often the problem with regulation – it solves yesterday’s problems, and it often causes unintended consequences.
Super Bowl Super Stocks: The Stocks That Will Win Big For You!
Mike Ozanian: Kraft Foods (KFT)
Victoria Barret: Nike (NKE)
Neil Weinberg: Anheuser-Busch (BUD)
Lea Goldman: Google (GOOG)
Our Cashin’ In crew this week: Wayne Rogers, Wayne Rogers & Co; Jonathan Hoenig, CapitalistPig Asset Management; Jonas Max Ferris, MaxFunds.com; Dagen McDowell, Fox Business Network; Jim Fisher, M&T Investment Group; Andrew Wilkow, Sirius Satellite Radio; Michael Karolchyk, The Anti-Gym.
McCain’s Military Leadership vs. Romney’s Business Leadership
In Wednesday’s GOP debate, John McCain, a decorated military leader, took a swipe at Mitt Romney, a successful business leader. When touting his experience, McCain said be was motivated by “patriotism, not for profit.” But does making money mean you're not fit to lead the nation?
Wayne: I do not know how anybody can confuse patriotism with making a profit. For McCain to have done that, it is a little left-handed. To bring out the way you start waving the flag when you're talking about the economy. I do not get that. I served three years myself in the Navy, and I’m proud of it. But does that have anything to do in the economy? Nothing.
Jim: I do not 100 percent agree with the statement and in normal circumstances I would not say that is the first thing I look for, the military experience. But we' re not normal circumstances. I hate to be cliché, but these are dangerous times, and they are going to get worse. We have not been dealing with terrorism for 30 years, and everything came to a head in 9/11. We' re not going back to pre-9/11 days. We need someone in the White House who can lead under fire, literally under fire. Romney is too smooth for me. I do not see him doing anything. The economy is only one part of the picture. Terrorism is a major, major issue.
Jonathan: Whom do you want running the economy? The businessmen and soldier are both very patriotic. But I would probably rather have a businessman running the economy.
Dagen: I get what John McCain was trying to say, but it came across as anti-business, and if he wants to win the nomination and win the election, he has to get fiscal conservatives in the party on board. He cannot get past the devoted against the Bush tax cuts, even though now he is in favor of them.
Jonas: McCain is right. There is more patriotism being in the Army then in business. Starting a business is great for America, but it is not patriotism. When I was in business school some students left to be in the Army because they were already enlisted. That’s more patriotic that all those business school kids looking to make money. However, at this point, I think the economy is more important right now and I think it is more important to have a business leader right now than someone in the Army.
Do Democrats Need a Recession to Win in November?
Andrew: Absolutely. If you're a defense attorney, you need someone to commit a crime. You need something bad to happen in order for you to go to work. If you’re a dentist, you aren’t in the business of eradicating tooth decay; you are in the business of managing tooth decay. Think about it: These people are in love with raising taxes. They will look for any excuse to raise taxes.
Jonas: There' s enough negative stuff coming out about the economy for Democrats to get elected. They are probably going to win anyway.
Wayne: The Democrats don’t need a recession. They are going to win anyway. We’re in a slowdown. The Republicans are going to be blamed for what has already happened.
Jonathan: It seems to me that when Barack Obama can run against the Republicans as a fiscal conservative, the Democrats really have something going on here. And I think that’s the problem: it’s easy for the Democrats to point to the Republicans and say “these people have not been fiscal conservatives.” The sad thing is they’re right.
Tax TVs and Video Games to Fight Childhood Obesity?
A New Mexico lawmaker has proposed taxing TVs and video games in an effort to help keep kids slim. Is that fair?
Michael: The bottom line is that girls who sit on their big butt watching the screen will never be lean. So we need something to start this war on obesity. The kids are sitting in front of the screens and boys are playing video games. Guys, you are never going to get a fox to drop the Xbox. That is the simple truth.
Jonathan: It is not the role of government to be a spin instructor. Michael, people hire you to put them in shape, but they have the right to be sedentary. To tax video games, to tax TVs is discrimination.
Jonas: I used to live in New Mexico. There are a lot of heavy people in New Mexico. The problem here is New Mexico has lower physical educations requirement in high school than in many other states. Video gamers are around 30 on average. You want to fix the problem: force more physical education in public schools.
Wayne: There’s an on and off button on these things. If you cannot control your kids, you should not be having them in the first place. To tax somebody because of obesity is insane. You might as well tax mahjong, tax football or some other game. It doesn’t have anything to do with obesity. That’s the problem.
Super Tuesday Winners
Our money experts pick who they think will come out on top on Super Tuesday and the stocks which will take a victory lap with them.
Jonathan: Barack Obama/CurrencyShares Euro (FXE)
Jim: John McCain/United Technologies (UTX)
Jonas: Hillary Clinton/Coldwater Creek (CWTR)
Wayne: Barack Obama/Pall Corp (PLL)