>> hi, everyone. welcome to "on the money." i'm becky quick. the new fed head speaks. the markets breath a sigh of relief. what does it mean to your mon sni horrible weather around the country. what does this mean? the new face of feminism. a controversial author that says women can't have it all and we need a men ace revolution. "on the money" starts right now. now, becky quick. here is a look at what's making news as we head into a new week "on the money."

the new federal reserve chair spoke out. the maurk kets like what they heard. in testimony before congress, jeanette yellen offered little, if any, departure from policy from ben bernanke. she said that interest rates will likely remain low for a low time. >> the committee has emphasized a highly accommodative policy will remain appropriate for a considerable time after asset purchases end. >> the major indexes rose more than 1% as she spoke. the fourth straight day of gains for stocks. by thursday, the s&p 500 was within a percent of the all-time high. the markets continued to climb on friday. a megadeal in media. comcast announced it will buy time warner cable for $45 million in an all stock deal. that would combine the nation's two largest cable providers and serve 30 million customers. the deal still has to be approved. comcast is the parent of the company that produces this program. disappointing retail sales for january. cold weather across the country

contributed to a drop of 0.4% with americans spending lesson cars, clothing and restaurants. that could be bad news for the gdp. consumer spending accounts for more than two-thirds have o the u.s. economy. so was it janet yellen who calmed the markets or something else? how should you be investing if you need income. joining us now, dan greenhaus and rick receieter. thanks for coming out. let's talk about what happened this week. dan, it sure seemed to me like when yellen spoke, the markets relaxed. do you think she is responsible for what happened? >> i'm in the minority in this camp. i think yellen didn't hurt things for sure. our view is that what happened this week was an extension of what happened the previous week, which was that concerns over emerging markets, which always seemed overblown, seemed to subside further. if you look at the action on thursday and friday, it was

quite robust to the up side. it was again just a continuation of what we saw the prior week. >> she could have spooked the markets if they said something more hawkish. >> she reiterated that tapering is on a pre-set course. she didn't deviate from what we already know. if you wanted to get argumentative, you could make the case that was somewhat hawkish. she didn't seem more dovish than the prepared text. >> i'll give you that point. rick, do you think the fed is doing the right thing by winding down q.e.? >> it is definitely the right thing. we have thought the efficacy of quan tay tiff easing is certainly quite low, relative to the cost. the distortion it cre nats markets is significant. when people point to what you think about when you think about what happened may, june last year, distorting interest rates, creating a problem that everybody knew was going to manifest its sechelf. markets are more in equilibrium.

you can invest with confidence knowing you are not distorted specially given there are other factors that are driving unemployment, not necessarily we need to print more money. >> it has been really weird watching the ten-year note and the yield. everybody thought this was going to be the year it started marching straight up. it has done anything but that. >> you go back to january and think about, what has happened? why are yields where they are? >> you have had the duress and slower u.s. growth. some is weather. it is slower. slower growth in china. a confluence of events that have created some concern relative to where we were last year. you think about what's happened. rates have moved down 20 or so basis points, 25 basis points. if we were in the same conditions as we were last year, rates would be drifting. we think after you get out of weather ex onlg jen shocks from weather and other influences, groet rates will start to drift up again i think you are reaching a point of more normalcy except for the fact that things like weather are

very different. >> as the fedex its the qe program, that has nothing to do with whether or not interest rates hikes are on the horizon. the fed is not going to raise interest rates for several more quarters, if not measured in years. they think, in terms of stimulating the economy, qe has lost some effectiveness, where as promising to keep rates low in perpetuity has a much more stim lay tiff effect. let's talk about what's happening with the economy. that's the other thing the market is trying to figure out. i am sure you guys had tough times trying to get to work. this is strarng weather that's affected massive parts of the country. that has to, at some point, start to add up. you can write it off and say, this impacts fourth quarter gdp. >> do you think the same thing? >> it is very, very difficult to separate out what is weather and what is not. you think about, the data for january alone. january alone, there were as many flight cancellations as the four prior years combined.

>> i think it has been 10,000 flight cancellations in the last two months. >> you think about you have entire cities being closed. there is a velocity to this commerce. weather has a big effect. the other thing i think is hard to figure out. we were going through third and fourth quarter, some pretty strong growth momentum. you had to come off the boil from where we were. how much is it coming off the boil? how much is real slowing? how much is weather? our sense is, the growth is pretty good in the economy. >> there was a huge collapse in manufacturing output, directly attributed to what was going on in the weather. conversely, utilities went up. i am with rick. pretty clearly, weather is going to weigh a couple of tenths on gdp. the first quarter will not be as strong. by the end of this year, you will be printed gdp somewhere around 3%. the full year won't. by the fourth quarter, somewhere around 3%, which in the current environment, not so bad.

>> if that's the case, what happens to stocks? was this dip we saw just a dip and we go up from here. >> it was certainly not going to be 2013, not going to make any headlines by making that proclamation. given how we see the economy and the prospects for earnings, very simply, the buy store stock prices has to be to the up side. >> you would be telling people, any time you see a dip, buy in. even without a dip, keep buying. >> i don't know what it means. >> if you are an investor with a horizon more than three months, if you have a six, 12, 18 month time horizon. simply, yes. >> dan, rick, it is great to see you both. >> thank you so much. >> when we come back, we are on the money. snow in the south, drought in the west and cold everywhere else. the economic impact of this wild weather, we will be talking about the agriculture secretary, tom vilsack. women are blazing new trails. it often comes as a new cost. the professor that says women

still can't have it all. take a look at how the stock market ended the week.

from historic snowfalls to the south to drought in the west. our wild winter weather could be costing our economy billions of dollars in lost growth, lost jobs and impacting your bottom line. tom vilsack is the u.s. secretary of agriculture. secretary vilsack, thank you for being with us today. >> you bet. happy to be with you. >> you are coming to us from california. that state has been entering its third straight year of drought. things have been really difficult until the recent rainstorms. this is a situation that's probably costing billions of

dollars. seeing record snowfall in the south and northeast, what do you think the economic impact of all this crazy weather is? >> the bottom line is, it is going to impact and effect producer income which has a rippling effect in the communities that farmers, ranchers and producers live and raise their families in. the great thing about american agriculture, it is extraordinary pli diverse. it is extraordinarily resilient and i would expect and anticipate we are still going to see good crop production and hopefully strong income. >> i had read that by some estimates, half a million acres of the land in san joaquin would be lying fallow during this next season because they weren't able to plant in time, there wasn't enough rain there. do you have any worries that's going to impact crop production overall or the amount of food we are able to produce that we need here in the united states? >> well, it is not going to impact the amount of food we are able to produce in this country because we are fortunate in this country because of the diversity

of american agriculture to be able to meet our needs and export our surplus around the world. we have had record exports recently. obviously, the concern is for the individual producer, the person that has his life savings basically at risk because they can't put a crop in the ground. that's why it was so important for the president to get the farm bill signed so we would be in a position to provide assistance and help. in an emergency situation like this, people want to know that government is paying attention. they want to know that government has immediate help and assistance. we didn't have those tools until the farm bill was signed. now, we do. >> one of the other xoe ents of the farm bill, $41 billion in crop insurance for farmers. that replaces some of the money that had been there constantly given every year to farmers. how is that going to impact or change what happens in the farming business? >> this is a reformed bill that the president signed. it basically does away with the direct payments that were essentially payments made to commodity producers regardless of whether or not they had a good year or bad year.

it is to replace, with a strong emphasis on crop insurance. the reality is that for far too long, it has not been much help to special crop producers. this encourages us to expand crop insurance protection to some specialty crop producers, which we have been doing in the last couple of years and then to essentially improve the other programs that will essentially surround crop insurance. our producers will be in the best possible shape to survive a difficult time. california, the state we've talked about, has a great deal of dairy as well. this new farm bill creates a new dairy support system which will hope dpli be providing better help over the future. the $1 trillion in the farm bill, a huge chunk of that, more than $700 billion is for the supplemental assistance program, known as snap. those benefits are being reduced for some household. that has been a point of contention. it will affect $1.7 million

americans. what's are take on outlook of this assistance? >> when it was finally all said and done, essentially, what the congress did was tighten up the eligibility standards for snap in 17 states that are currently using a mechanism to make it administratively ease why i to administer the snap program by suggesting if people get low income heating assistance, they automatically qualify for snap. they in the past had to just get $1 of assistance in the past. the threat is going to be $20. that's going to put the onus on us to make sure we continue to do the outreach we have been doing, to make sure those entitled to the program get the program. i don't anticipate there is going to be a significant difference in terms of the overall impact across the country because of these changes, specially if we do a good job of outreach. what i am excited about is the reform that was contained in the bill that allows us to pilot with states to do a better job of connecting able-bodied snap resistance with work that might be out there. we need the states to do a

better job of making the connection between jobs and those seeking jobs and we are going to help them do that. >> i know you said that we will have plenty to eat. we won't have a problem finding food. do you expect to see commodity prices rise. >> there may be individual commodities, fruits or vegetables that may be impacted and the cost go up because supplies are constrained. i would suspect isolated increases but overall food costs are not likely to increase by more than the norm, 2%, 3%. >> secretary vilsack, thank you very much for joining us today. up next, we are "on the money." it may look like women have broken through the glass ceiling in corporate america but they still have far to go. the controversial author that says, we need a men's revolution in the work place. you can find us on facebook. facebook.com/otm.

make it happen with fidelity active trader pro. it's one more innovative reason serious investors are choosing fidelity. call or click to open your fidelity account today.

women are clearly making strides in the work place. the federal reserve is now chaired by janet yellen. the gm ceo is mary berra. only 15% of fortune 500s are women. this number is stagnant for the last 14 years. why has women's progress stalled. joining us right now on the state of women's leadership is ann marie slaughter, best known for her "atlantic" article why women still can't have it all. ann marie, thank you very much

for being here today. >> my pleasure. >> why don't we start with what's happening. why do you think the number of women who have obtained leadership roles has stagnated in recent years? >> well, it has stagnated even longer than that if you look at the overall number of women in leadership positions. it hasn't moved very much even for the last two decades. i think the simple reason is still that although there is a percentage, about 15%, at most, of women who through a combination of good fortune, unbelievable drive, being in the right place at the right time, can make it work with kids and a really high-powered job, there are many other women that simply can't. we haven't changed the conditions for those women. >> it was so interesting when your article came out, it really changed the conversation, because you were somebody who had such a high position at the state department. for you to come out and say that women can't have it all, what happened to make you realize that?

you had been working full time as a mother for a long time. what kind of changed your opinion on all that? >> well, i had always been able to have it all. by that i meant have a high-powered career and a family i loved. i had been able to do that because i had been my own boss. i was in control of my own time. vers first as a professor and then as a dean. when i went to washington, even though i had the world's greatest boss. i would walk through fire for hillary clinton. she was fabulous. suddenly, i realized what it was like to be on someone else's schedule when you had family issues that were demanding your attention. i realized that for the vast majority of women, who couldn't control their own time, this tension was so much greater than i had ever fully understood. i realize that we had to come out and face it and insist on a whole other raft of changes. >> you said you want to change

the world. what are some of those changes? what would make it easier for women to be able to succeed? >> well, there are a number. the first is really to elongate how we thing about careers. a 22--year-old woman has a life expectancy of 86. that means many young women today will live to 100. so they should be assuming they will work till almost 80. that mean we need to think about careers so you can get going. take time for your child-bearing years and have another 20 years on the other end where you are still eligible for leadership positions. that's the first change. the second change is we really have to get men far more involved. getting men to think about how to elongate their careers so that when you have a partner one of you can be the lead caregiver

and one of you can be the lead breadwinner and it can't always be the woman who is in the leading caregiver position. >> there is no way to change the world to have it figured out but you have to figure out who is going to be the primary caregiver and who is going to be the primary breadwinner. >> at least over time, yes. i think it is not possible for the majority of women who are also caregivers. a woman who is not a caregiver, that's a different situation but who are also caregivers. the demands of raising a family or taking care of aging parents and the demands of a really high-powered job, a leadership job where you have to travel all the time, be on all the time, they are sort of an ir reducible tension. >> do you think what you just said explains why there is this gap in pay between the genders in the work place, because women do take on more of the nurturing and the care-giving.

is it justified that employers are paying women less? >> i think it is not justified unless women are delivering lower quality results. we should be focusing on results rather than -- results that are delivered rather than time in the office. i think one of the reasons women are paid so much less is they ask for flexibility. whether that's part-time, whether that's flex-time, and we still have stigma around flexibility. if you ask for those flexible policies, even if they are on the books, you are stigmatized, paid less and not considered for leadership positions. >> it almost seems like it is the employers themselves that have to make the changes. the only way to do that is to convince them that they are missing out on something by not putting women in these positions, by not paying women the same and by not looking at them the same. is there a way to change the way employers look at this? >> well, yes.

in the first place, we have much more research on having a diverse workforce and what that does for you in terms of energy, innovation, decision-making. the other, of course, is they are just missing out on half the talent pool. if you look at how many women are now more educated than men, doing better in university than men. to shut those women out is to really tie one hand behind your back. >> ann-marie, we want to thank you very much for joining us today. we would love to have you back soon up next, a look at the news that will have an impact on the money. one of baseball's biggest names announces his retirement. we will crunch a few numbers on the captain calling it quits.

for more on our show, go to otmcnbc.com and follow us on twitter. @onthemoney is the handle we will be getting earnings from coca-cola, walmart and hp. on monday, the market will be closed for presidents' day. on tuesday, they will announce e-commerce trade. on wednesday, housing starts for the month of january are due. the fomc minutes for january's meeting will be released. wednesday, the president will be attending the north american leaders summit in next co. >> on friday, existing home

sales for the month of january. >> sd finally, the numbers you need to know for derrick jeet terse retirement. 250, the nest egg he has built for his retirement. the second number, $1,153. within a few hours of his facebook announcement wednesday that he would be retiring at the end of the 2014 season, that was the average price of one ticket to the captain's last home game in the bronx, barring a trip to the postseason. these numbers were all on resale sites. the yankees will put single game tickets on sale on tuesday. that's the show for today. i'm becky quick. thank you so much for joining me. each week, you can keep it right here. we are "on the money." i'll see you next weekend.

>> narrator: in this episode of "american greed"... solomon dwek is an expert flimflammer. >> here was a guy that ran a $400 million real-estate ponzi scheme in his head and on the back of a napkin. >> narrator: dwek then commits a $50 million bank fraud and becomes an informant in the biggest case of corruption and greed in new jersey history. >> dwek was starring in a movie that only he knew was being shot. it sounds like a guy channeling "goodfellas." >> whatever the script is for ponzi schemes, frauds, cooperation, rip it up and throw it out. this one's different.