it's coming. well, kind of. yeah, that's right we're closing in on summer what is that, june >> june, yeah. >> "squawk box" begins right now. ♪ breaking up is hard to do ♪ don't take your love >> live from new york where business never sleeps, this is "squawk box." >> good morning, everybody welcome to squawk bok here on cnbc we are live from the nasdaq market site in times square. i'm becky quick along with joe kernan and andrew ross sorkin. let's take a look at the u.s. equity futures i think they're indicated higher once again this morning with the dow futures up by almost 30 points nasdaq up by 12. the s&p 500 up by four this comes after a mixed day for the markets yesterday. both the s&p 500 and the dow ended higher yesterday the nasdaq was down by a little bit, but we now have six days in a row that both the dow and the s&p 500 have been higher the markets did close. both the s&p 500 and the dow at their highest levels in six months yesterday we'll continue to watch this today. we've got the jobs report coming

up, and thatco have an impact on the markets as well. in the meantime, though, overnight in asia. markets in hong kong and shanghai were closed for a public holiday the nikkei was open, and it was up by one-third of a percentage point. stocks were higher in south korea and a little lower in australia. actually, in australia stocks there down by .8%. check out what's happening in some of the early trading that's taking place in europe this morning. we will see that most of the -- for most of the markets, there are some green arrows. the dax is flat, but the cac, the ftse, and the ftse mib in italy are all indicated higher all trading higher spain is down just slightly. then take a look at what's been happening with treasury yields here you're going to see that the ten-year at this point is indicated 2.531% finally, pushing a little bit with a little bit of a cushion above 2.5% we're counting down to the 8:30 a.m. eastern because that's when you get the march employment report. remember, the february data show the job creation ground to a near halt with just 20,000 new

non-p nonfarm jobs the unemployment rate expected to hold steldy at 3.8% we will have a lot more on what to expect coming up at around 6:30 a.m. this morning also, boeing ceo acknowledging for the very first time that bad data played a role in two deadly crashes involving the 737 max planes in a video statement released late last night dennis mullenberg apologized for the tragedies in ethiopia and indonesia. also says that it is apparent in both cases the plane's anti-stall system activated in error. >> erroneous activation of the m cast function can add to what is already a high workload environment. it's our responsibility to eliminate this risk. we own it, and we know how to do it >> boeing is still working on a software fix, of course, for the 737 max which must be approved by the faa and other global

regulators shares of boeing this morning off just marginally, but they went up yesterday. >> they certainly did. was it, china -- >> i think it was china. boeing and caterpillar shares that both were higher yesterday. it was probably more of a larger trade talk >> a federal judge is giving tesla ceo elan musk and the sec two weeks to work out their differences over musk's use of twitter. the s.e.c. had asked the judge to hold musk in contempt for a tweet back in february about tesla's production targets the agency claims that musk violated that settlement the securities fraud settlement that they reached last year. phil lebeau caught up with elan musk as he was leaving the courthouse yesterday >> i was very impressed. judge nathan is an outstanding representative of the judicial system very impressed with him. excellent. >> do you think you can work this out with the s.e.c. over the next two weeks >> most likely

>> i think he asked him another question at one point, and he said how highly. on the way into the courthouse, he said ho highly he thought of the american judicial system and how he thinks they're incredibly competent and some things like that he laughed and walked away >> good job, phil. >> he has to negotiate with the s.e.c. for the next two weeks. >> yes he still can't bring himself to say anything nice about them >> interesting strategy. >> the shares that dropped more than 8% yesterday, but that was disappointing delivery numbers that we talked about all day right now the stock is bouncing back jp morgan ceo jaime dimon said he isn't running for president, and he is not going to change his mind here's what he said last night at an event at the council on foreign relations. >> no. i tell people i thought i should think about it, and actually i think about it seriously i never did any work or any polling or any of that i did think about it, and i decided not to

not to even think anymore about it basically, and i didn't do any real work. if i was going to really think about it, i would have spoken to 15 people. i am not going to rethink it i think if i do a really good job here, and i'm the chairman of business roundtable, i can help influence these things for the better, too. >> okay. kind of answers the question >> it was after there were reports that he had considered it very seriously. i think cnbc was part of that. >> there was a piece that suggested that he had thought about it quite seriously >> he can't -- >> is that what you were just mentioning i didn't see that. >> for howard, he did a town hall yesterday on a competing network. the status quo democratic party is just furious. >> why do you think poor howard? >> because he is getting a taste -- you know, he identifies as a very progressive individual, and he is getting the progressive backlash because he would be able to throw a

wrench in the works of the democratic party from taking -- he has gotten spanked by the people that he thought were on his side he is going to get nowhere i don't even think he is going to run >> mayor bloomberg -- >> see what happened to bloomberg? >> bloomberg did serious work, though bloomberg did have polls that had been taking place, and he did have a team organized looking at ait by a state by state basis. >> not going to win. i don't think jaime dimon did anything like that that was taking place >> i don't believe so either >> jaime is way too positive on capitalism to get the democratic nod. as we know, after that letter. >> in the meantime, amazon is making a dent in google's ad search dominance the "wall street journal" says that the world's largest ad buyer, wpp spent about $300 million on amazon search ads last year with 75% of that money shifting from google search budgets. that's interesting >> this is interesting >> me too.

>> i want to talk about the bezos thing. i read it. you can read it, but -- >> let me read it, and let's do this live. i don't know what you actually think. >> separately, the world estrichest man will stay that way even after completing his divorce. jeff bezos's ex-wife announced that he will be keeping 75% of the amazon stock and he will have voting control of the 25% that she gets. she's also giving him her interest in the washington post and in blue origin space the company that he founded to go into space and do research. jeff bezos tweet thad he is grateful to mckenzie for her support and kindness in the divorce process, and i think it was much more than that. through their relationship together the settlement works out well for both bezos mckenzie will be among the five richest women in the world with 35.6 billion dollars in am zbron stock. jeff will stay the world's richest person >> bhaets your take? >> you're getting 35.6 billion >> right >> i'm going to have you swroegt interest, so you don't have to

make any decisions about running the company anymore. >> the 35 billion and just go about your -- you don't have to worry about it >> give me 35 billion. run it take it. >> i don't want to run it either >> if someone said -- you have to be intimately involved with the -- >> no, but my question is i'm not going to argue >> it wasn't an elien wen kind of deal where she isn't allowed to sell. that was the difference. if this is -- i wouldn't want to run it either. my guess is -- >> you give me $35 billion, and i'm definitely not ever thinking about anything really that has big implications, except philanthropy >> the only question is whether she can sell >> nobody seems to know. >> so that is where the voting interest comes in. for me it's just like -- i have no responsibility and i have -- i have nothing to worry about and i have 35 billion? yes. no matter what to the company, you got your 35 billion. if the company was running into the ground -- >> you can't get the stock out when you need to.

snoo i have a different question >> a trainer >> which is there are -- i don't know what you were reading about yesterday with this. there are people that say you can get enough >> she said she didn't get enough >> she started -- she was there with him at the same time. >> by the way, those people who were quoted were all divorce lawyers. i get it they're all saying i could have gotten you a better deal this does not talk about what happens with the child custody my guess is she's very happy got everything she wanted. my guess would be as a mother walking into that, what she's most concerned about is what happens with her children. my guess is because this was sounded ammicable enough that

she's going to be able to do whatever she wants on that front, and that's probably her most important issue >> it's a sad -- just in terms of we got to split up our assets, i'm going to get 35 billion, and i understand, it could be down the middle just made me happy thinking that is wealth. >> it's a more positive outlook. >> coming up, a lot more on squawk this morning. president trump says we could have a trade deal with china he says within weeks we'll take you live to washington for the latest on those trade talks. with and what a deal would mean for the markets. programming note underarmour ceo kevin plank will join squawk on the street. two final four teams auburn and text technical tech are outfitted by underarmour

don't miss that. as we head to a break, here's a look at the biggest premarket winners and losers in the dow. the biggest week in television is almost here.

xfinity watchathon week. starting april 8th, enjoy free access to the best shows and movies from hbo, showtime, epix and more. what! whether it's more jaw droppers, standing o's upon standing o's or tv's biggest show stoppers. get more into what you're into. get ready to watch with xfinity x1 or the xfinity stream app. xfinity watchathon week. free starting april 8th. boop!

president trump says there's major progress with china on a new trade agreement, and we could have a deal within weeks >> the presses was bullish yesterday on the idea of a china trade deal it could be four weeks until we know whether these negotiations that are ongoing here in washington this week are bearing fruit. the president said ultimately there could be a summit meeting in washington between himself and xi jing ping i was in the oval office yesterday with the president and the chinese vice premier who has been here loading the chinese delegation, and i asked the president what the sticking points are that still remain to be solved. here's what he said. >> well, we have things. we have things we're talking intellectual property protection and theft. talking about certain tariffs that's very important at certain elements of the tariff that is in discussion right now.

the praez suggesting intellectual property issues are at the core there and certain tariffs at the core. if you remember, guys, that is sort of where this debate started. with intellectual property, theft by the chinese as the u.s. alleges being the core of the debate and also the tariffs being at the core of the debate. two fundamental issues the president suggesting they are still unresolved as the negotiations are ongoing the president, though, saying about four weeks until he thinks they'll know whether the negotiations have born fruit and maybe another two weeks until they can paper it, he said that is get something in writing. they are going line by line through all of this making sure all the translations match up and the chinese to english mach matches up and all parties have signed off so there's no real

wiggle room here and no chance of a backfire if they do get to the point where they feel like they can schedule a sunl mmit negotiations ongoing throughout the day today. we're told the chinese delegation will be meeting with the ustr staff throughout the day today, guys. >> thought we might see a pullback this morning in futures because we were expecting them to announce that was the rumor there was going to be an announcement of the summit late yesterday. the market ran up in the last hour on that, but it didn't happen we reported we were not getting any guidance from people at the white house, that there was a deal in place. >> the president was set to announce a deal and a summit, a summit date. we couldn't get any indication that that announcement was coming, and in the end i was in the oval office yesterday wauf

you have watching very carefully what he was going to say, and he did not do it. >> just happened to be in the oval office yesterday. you were hanging out in the oval office >> did i mention where i was yesterday? >> bhfs your first hit this morning? was it on worldwide exchange >> 5:30. let me sleep in. >> when will i get that tweet today. >> that tweet should come about 3:00 >> some of us have to work all day, joel. >> you get time and a half >> no, man we do not. >> i got to talk to your guy if you are getting time and a half and i'm not, it's like -- it's a problem for me. zhoo that isn't time and a half. if you do the math, i'm here until, like, 9:00. >> really quickly we've heard all of this that the president is saying that most of it's been done, but there was also other things going around yesterday that there's still about 25% left that is the really tough stuff like you mentioned, the tariffs, the ip, but also if there is a

dispute in the future, the united states can retaliate against china without having a situation where it spirals out of control into a series of retaliations and retaliations back they don't seem to have a resolution for that right now. if you look at it, tariffs are a stick point. that's the core of the deal. >> the deal will be looking at this, but the other thing we heard is this is all things that they will promise to do by 2025, and that's after president trump is out of office even if he wins a second term. >> that's the next guy's term. you know, that's a problem for the next president, whoever that might be >> i just happen to see so cohen doesn't want to go to jail he is, like, i have 14 million of the files here.

i thought it was, like -- >> 14 million. >> it's 14 million pages worth of files can you give me -- wouldn't it >> the question is how many of those files are audio files? i don't know why if he had these files, he wouldn't have turned them over a year ago or six months ago >> found some more -- >> he never fully cooperated, right? he got this sort of -- he didn't get a full cooperation deal. he sort of, like, tried to straddle that, and that might be coming this won't move any marks, but i thought it was funny zplu know, you guys need some help with this i don't know just 14 million. wow. that's a lot >> even those white collar prisons that people go to, the federal prison camps, they're not, you know -- this isn't oz,

right? this isn't hard time these people are doing, but it is miserable, right i have interviewed a lot of people in these federal prison camps over the years it's not -- >> remember paul sorvino -- >> it's not as good as that. >> i interviewed a guy one time, and the humiliation for this big wealthy powerful guy in this federal prison camp was we were in the comisary area, and he wasn't allowed to hold money in your hand. i have to go over the vending machine and buy him a coke and a candy bar so we could chat during our conversation. he wasn't -- >> that was him or you go get my stuff. >> it humiliated him this is a powerful, rich guy he couldn't even touch a buck to buy a candy bar with it is a humbling experience to be in these prisons. even if it's not.

we got to the prison, and the warden -- they were clearing us in, and the warden says no audio or visual recording equipment. i said, well, what do you think we're doing here what's the purpose of this this is a television interview we need audio and video. >> thank you coming up, cracking down on big tech we're going to have new survey data on whether americans support senator elizabeth warren's proposal to break up companies like google and facebook that is coming up next stay with us

how do you determine the durable value of a business in the transportation industry without knowing firsthand the unique challenges in that sector. coming out here, seeing the infrastructure firsthand, talking with the people behind the numbers creates a different picture. once i know what a business is truly worth,

we can make better informed investment decisions. that's why i go beyond the numbers. ♪ most americans don't want to break up the big tech companies. that's according to the results of a new nbc news wall street journal poll they asked about the proposal by senator elizabeth warren 50% of respondents said they disagreed that companies like apple, amazon, facebook, and google should be split into smaller companies. 47% agreed with senator warren that they should be split up, so it's kind of -- >> they asked senator warren

>> i believe it was put more in the context of just the straight-up the question >> a bigger marjin -- >> 68% to 28 periods said those decision shbz left to the free market rather than government. doesn't bother me one iota. cited by -- i lot of the guardian buy the guardian the proposal would empower an independent regulator to assess fines and hold executives from companies like facebook and google personally liable for breaches that harm public safety we're going to ask the co-founder of redit about the crackdown. alexis will be our guest host starting at 7:00 a.m when we return, did you have something? were you going to say -- >> no, alexis -- there's a lot to talk about with him because

if you really look at what happened with the video that, for example, of the terrible tragedy in new zealand, he was taken down with nine minutes on facebook guess where it popped up everywhere redit. it's a very interesting issue as to sort of thinking about. >> there are other things you could do if you wanted to punish people for reposting it. you could take away their privileges from being on the site for a while if you repost videos like that >> that's after it already happened >> it's after it will are happened, and also from the facebook perspective, it would hurt you because you would have fewer users where. >> you need eyes on it before. i don't know how you do it i would want the government to do it, too >> you would have artificial intelligence

it's probably better than. >> i think the very -- we can talk about this. we probably don't have time to do it. the easiest way to do it, the idea that you can broadcast -- >> live without -- >> live to as people as you want without any delay or anything, i think there's a question mark about it the count dourn is on. expert predictions after this break. as we head to that break, let's take a look at yesterday's 500 winners and losers the cloud i need? it has to keep up with sales, supply chain, inventory - ♪ ♪ it needs to track it all, from cincinnati to singapore. ooo! ♪ ♪ and protect it all. customer records, our financials, they better be secured. but i also need easy access, to manage data across my clouds -

no matter where it lives. ♪ ♪ so if an auditor shows up, i can be a step ahead. that's the cloud i want. is that to much to ask? expect more from your cloud. ibm cloud. verizon got us vip tickets three feet away from justin timberlake. and to say vip is an understatement, because i sawww justin timberlake. so he literally looked into the phone and started dancing-- well, he was already dancing-- locked eyes and continued dancing. i still have to like pinch myself and make sure i'm not dreaming. every now and then, i'm like, "wait, did that happen?" (gasps) i've got photos of it, it must have. (vo) get more music on us with vip tickets to the best shows, like shawn mendes and camila cabello. plus, save big when you switch. only on verizon. val, vern... i'm off to college and i'm not gonna be around... i'm worried about my parents' retirement. oh, don't worry. voya helps them to and through retirement... ...dealing with today's expenses... ...like college... ...while helping plan, invest and protect for the future. so they'll be okay... without me? um... and when we knock out this wall imagine the closet space?

yes! oh hey, son. yeah, i think they'll be fine. voya. helping you to and through retirement.

good morning welcome back here on cnbc. take a look at u.s. equity futures at this hour ahead of the open. boy, could this change because at 8:30 we will get the jobs numbers which could change

everything dow looks like it would open up right about now. about 30 points. our nasdaq opening would look to open about 12 points higher. s&p 500 up to four points higher the main event today is i just mentioned the jobs report, remember, the february data showed job creation ground do a near halt with just 20,000 new nonfarm jobs this month forecasters are expecting to increase 175,000 jobs that's the number to beat. the unemployment rate expected to hold steady 3.8% is the number there. snoogry emd herman cain. he is a friend of mine i have recommended him highly for the fed. i have told my folks that that's the man, and we'll -- he is doing some prechecking now, and

would i imagine he would be in great shape. >> cain previously served as chairman of the kansas city fed back in the mid 1990s. he has been critical of the fed in recent years, and he has advocated returning to the gold standard that kind of advice is always good to have on the fed. he also was a chairman and worked inside the board ef directors of the kansas city federal reserve. those guys don't do any monetary policy so to speak, but he knows the system the other side is the gold bug thing. i think we've been there and done that on the gold standard i know i'll get some emails now from the gold bugs out there you generally discredit it he had called, by the way, for higher rates in 2017 i'm not clear where he stands on that the other thing i think is that

he is, you know, sort of a politician maybe in the first rung here. how about a whole lot of any sort of people who they all have their political bents, but they're economy people first snoo you heard what romney said? >> he would want to set rates at 999. from his presidential -- >> yeah. >> you think the fed could i guess so some more monday taer experts. >> i initially thought post-mueller and maybe it's not post because we're still going to get it, but, i mean, trump is doing stuff that -- this guy has sexual harassment baggage from 2011 immediately it energizes the opposition before the guy is even there >> aof all the processes that are going on inside the administration, you know there's

been all these books about how things were chaotic inside the administration the process of vetting and choosing fed officials was very well done. i happen to -- >> look what happened in trump's eyes where. >> that's a great point. >> mnuchin for that. >> in terms of how the market looked at it, it was seen as an excellent process that yielded people who could be confirmed and were sort of milgd of the road it was a unique thing where the president was not appointing people to an agency who didn't agree with the agency's basic mission. that was different this is different. he seems to have called these people more and -- >> it's probably because -- my guess, not only getting to the background on this my guess would be if he is unhappy with jay powell and jay powell says he is not going to resign, and they've come to the conclusion that they can't fire him. >> in case i'm stuck with you. >> stack around around you >> even reagan, even though kept volcker, reagan kept volcker, but then it's kwoegts the

journal here then he stacked -- packed the board with governors who outvoted him for a rate increase in 1986. even reagan tried to stack the deck or packed up whatever you want to call it. >> can i just talk about what we're messing with here. we're messing with the bank that's in charge of the world's reserve currency >> we are speculating what's happening behind the scenes. we don't know that >> i know. america is in a yup evening kpepgal position in part because we have a bank with a lot of credibility that backs up the world's most important reserve currency, and i would be very careful about who i picked and who i chose for it >> we are just two hours away from the release of the march jobs report. steve liesman has a preview on that real quick one on this >> i'll be very quick. a lot of -- a choice between

three numbers here, folks. 311, that was january. ho 20, that was february >> my number is hire than that go to the next screen, and then i'll be done, guys this is what economists did. they picked a number around the three-month average, and they said, you know what, we're not as strong as january not as weak as february. the stakes today i think are very high. i think they're high because you could submit the fear of weakness in the economy or you could think that maybe the markets on the wrong side of the fed trade here and bet in too much for a rate cut. i think that's why the stakes are very high today. >> all right let's talk more about the expectations for the jobs report state of the economy joining us now jim o'sullivan, chief u.s. economist at high frequency economics. michelle myer, head of u.s. economics at bank of america, merrill lynch. we've alluded to your number,

michelle, 190. it's about kind of in line with what's being talked about. that's only three above the 1 87 that we just heard >> as the 20,000 last month does not make sense above 300,000 is not right either if you look at the early indicators, the claims weren't strong the ism survey measures were strong the employment series. even within consumer confidence measures still consumers confident about the labor market it seems like the labor market is still coming along in a very solid pace how about wage gains >> so wages we're looking for .3% month-over-month, and that's 3.4% year-over-year, and that's actually one area i'm becoming more and more convinced we will see a real trend higher in wages throughout the year.

are you seeing across the board. lower pay now or as well retail trade, leisure and hospitality, and in the middle construction, business services with the exception of the goods or yepted parts of the labor market, which have global forces and technology wages are picking up >> that's the message of the im numbers. i think there's foebl for the march number to be above trend it overshot on the low side in level terms, not just as pay back for january because of weather effects. >> i saw the president tweeted about how great the economy was yesterday. >> i saw that. >> despite the fed >> despite the fed >> despite the fed

>> no, people like -- other people work towards saying he was front running. >> for q1, 1.5 as well the numbers were adding up weaker than that a few weeks ago, but they've been coming back there's a lot of data still to come i think whatever q1 is, q2 should be better there's probably a 2 hand here, but it may be weaker than that >> what about the full year, jim? >> basic lit a 2.2 2.24 >> it's slowing. i mean, obviously, last year was 3% i mean, there are reasons to think that growth is slowing here again, the broad message is that there's not a collapse >> michelle, the joke would be are you orthodox reform or conservative jewish? >> so jim and i actually are in

very much agreement. we're also at 2.2% also for the year. >> my view is that q1 is probably going to come in at one handle we're tracking close to 2% i think it's going to end up coming softer, and then you got a nice pop up in q2. for q2, the numbers that i think are most important to look for is marie tail sales are going to be so important. whether or not the consumer has a rebound. auto sales for march were strong then i think the housing data is going to be really important because we had a beg drop in mortgage rates >> here come these applications back in. >> it's coming up, right i think you're going to start to see that in housing turnover pick up, renovations pick up skroo imagine if housing safz the economy.

>> right >> jim o'sullivan, thank you >> jill mahr, thanks >> thanks. >> when we return, joseph, conversation -- >> it says that -- >> just telling you. >> it says -- i already said this we know this >> not what he is saying now ray dalio out with a warning >> did he say, like -- >> on inequality in neck america. i just read what jaime dimon said yesterday in a usa titled why and how capitalism needs to be reformed. >> this isthe entire report. >> completely inaccurate, joseph give you the details right after the break. later, our guest host starting at 7:00 is initialized capital in coke and founder of redit alexkxus will be joining us tech regular skplarks a lot re stay tuned you're watching squawk on cnbc

we see homes staying cooler without the planet getting warmer. at emerson, when issues become inspiration, creating a better world isn't just a result, it's a responsibility. emerson. consider it solved. a cfp professional is trained, knowledgeable, and committed to financial planning in your best interest. find your certified financial planner™ professional at letsmakeaplan.org.

>> ray dalio out with a new warning on the linkedn post that said widening income eae equality and -- a risk to the united states. it's part of an essay he published on linkedn saying why and how capitalism needs to be reformed to part one part two, i believe, is coming

later today. dalio said the widening wealth gap in the u.s. is linked to lower high school graduation rates, greater disparity in test scores and lower teacher pay says the inequality problem will be couple pounded by increasing automation to replace workers and the wealth effect of lower interest rate policies >> he wants to strengthen to capitalist system. >> by investing in education, talks about or intimates that he wants higher taxes on individuals which i think is what you are going to be -- >> later today >> here's without giving away too much since we both can pick and choose, you know, exactly what bolsters our own position with what people say no one is saying we shouldn't vince in education, number one number two, he talked about the wealth effect of lowering interest rates and people talk about the eight years of obama where we tried to do all the

redistribution one way of character icing it by people that didn't agree with him is that he had his boot on the throat of the private sector that causes the fed so stay at zero, which caused the wealth effect, with the people that he supposedly was trying to help were the people that didn't have any assets that didn't have -- >> i know you are religious about this the issue is that -- i just -- >> strengthening the capitalist system >> he is suggesting that it's not working perfectly and could be fixed i just want to read you two facts that to me are the most persuasive about where we are in america today. this is from his report. he says the percentage of children the capitalist system was working so brilliantly, the percentage of children who grow up to earn more than their parents, joseph, has fallen from 90% in 1970. 90% of children, 1970, grew up to do better than their parents to 50% today that's for the population as a

whole. for most of those in the lower 60%, the prospects are worse okay this is about mobility in mirk this is about achieving the american dream this is about the frayed american dream that jaime dimon talked about yesterday here's where it gets worse, joseph the bottom quintile, the odds declined they didn't go up. they haven't gotten better in the last years they got worse this is just in the last 25 years. to 14% as of 201 1. we can talk about capitalism i am all for trying to make captainism to look at where we are today, to say it's working or working perfectly, i think without any adjustments along the edges, i think it's misguided

it is hifrt of the world and the benefits of free markets like rick was talking about yesterday, market-based policies, the problem with a lot of -- of a lot of this is not that the free market of capitalism doesn't work. it's that government intervention around the edges of a lot of these things has actually been self-defeating and if you just had pure free-market economics, we'd probably be in a better place, and nobody knows, when you work around the edges and what governments do governments don't always come in, decide to do something, and it helps their cause a lot of times it hurts their cause. and redistribution in general will shrink the pie. so, if you have a good way of taking the money that you're going to tax the wealthy, if you have good plans on what to do with it -- >> there's been less regulation over the last 50 years, not more regulation there has been more free market rather than less free market, if you will, over the last 50 years. >> and we've gotten a y--ndou bring up -- >> and those are the results what are we going to do about

sn at&t provides edge-to-edge intelligence, covering virtually evet of your healthcare business. so that if she has a heart problem & the staff needs to know, they will & they'll drop everything can you take a look at her vitals? & share the data with other specialists yeah, i'm looking at them now. & they'll drop everything hey. & take care of this baby yeah, that procedure seems right. & that one too. at&t provides edge to edge intelligence. it can do so much for your business, the list goes on and on. that's the power of &. & when your patient's tests come back... dso should the way you bank.. virtual wallet from pnc bank. just one way pnc is modernizing banking to help make things easier. pnc bank. make today the day.

welcome back to "squawk box. it's been a week now since lyft went public, publicly trading. it had some twists and turns along the way after some positive sessions the last few days the stock now trading right at its ipo price, but there's of course been massive short selling interest as well so where does the stock go from here john elton is partner at graycroft partners good morning to you. >> good morning! thanks for having me. >> it has been a wild roller coaster. day one, people thought it was priced perfectly, and you know,

by monday, lyft had crashed, as all of the different phrases were used, and now we're back to the price. so, priced perfectly or not? >> well, joe asked the question when it was going public, like, what's the perfect pricing for a public offering? and if you're an efficient mark theory person like myself, you'd say what the listing price is, which is $72, and we're back at $72, so i feel vindicated on my initial comments on it. >> where do you think it goes from here? >> i brought my matador app. i'd buy it here. if you believe that they will benefit from the ipo, as i do -- it's a consumer company. a lot of people are talking about it i've been a.b. testing uber and lyft since i was on, and the reality is, is lyft is doing really well. and again, if you look at that earnest data around market share where they have doubled their market share from 15% to 30% vis-a-vis uber since 2017, they're winning right now.

>> right what does it say about the rest of the ipo market? monday, tuesday, this short-term thinking was, oh, my god, every other ipo's going to have a problem, look at what happened to lyft. do you have a different view a week later >> you know, i think when people say broadly that the ipo market, it's company by company. there's no good comp to any individual company, and i think great companies will trade well and do well. there is a sentiment amongst large institutional investors of, hey, we need a healthy ipo market there is certainly that sentiment in investor land, in my world, and i think people want to see great companies. you know, there's like 286 on file right now we could be in the golden age of ipos where a lot of great companies, the amazons, facebooks, apples of the future, come out in this period, and you know, really diversify our technology public-market investing. >> john elton, not to confuse you with elton john, but nice to

see you. >> you bet. when we come back, our next guest more the next hour is alexis ohanian, co-founder of initialized capital. we'll talk to him about tech regulation, data privacy and much more.

big tech backlash. politicians in the u.s. and europe calling for new measures to regulate companies like facebook and google. we will talk privacy and tech investment with guest host alexis ohanian, the co-founder of reddit and initialized capital. elon musk and the s.e.c. have two weeks to reach an agreement. we're going to talk about the potential consequences if they fail to come to terms. and a new campaign is getting ready to hit the early primary states with one key message -- tax the rich. we'll debate the merits of taxing the wealthy as the second hour of "squawk box" begins right now. ♪ lifestyles of the rich and th famous ♪ >> announcer: live from the beating heart of business, new york, this is "squawk box. ♪

good morning, and welcome back to "squawk box" here on cnbc i'm joe kernen along with becky quick and andrew ross sorkin in studio to talk tech, privacy, the ipo market and more, alexis ohanian. he is co-founder of initialized capital, and he was already pretty well known before that, before you put your initials on that u.s. equity futures at this hour up again i think that be, what, five out of six days if we were to close higher >> six sessions in a row for the s&p 500, the dow, nasdaq broke a five-day winning streak yesterday. here's the headlines march unemployment report is less than 90 minutes away. forecast calls for 175,000 new nonfarm jobs last month after just 20,000 new jobs were created in february. of course, we'll be looking at revisions for february, too. the unemployment rate is expected to remain at 3.8% a tokyo court has approved a request by prosecutors to detain former nissan ceo carlos ghosn for ten days ghosn was rearrested earlier

this week after spending months in jail before being released on bail he's accused of enriching himself at nissan's expense. ghosn says all the charges and accusations against him with groundless. oklahoma's attorney general has dropped all but one claim against johnson & johnson and teva pharmaceutical in a widely watched opioid case. the two companies have been accused of helping fuel the u.s. opioid crisis. this case will still go to trial on may 28th. the first result from about 2,000 opioid-related lawsuits. the dropped charges include fraud, deceit and unjust enrichment the remaining charge is public nuisance. okay, the latest now in the saga between elon musk and the s.e.c. a judge giving the two sides more time to work things out phil lebeau joins us with the details as he caught up with mr. musk coming in and out of that courtroom phil >> it was a fun day yesterday at federal court in new york, andrew, and this probably went about as well as could be expected for elon musk short of the judge outright dismissing the complaint from

the s.e.c., it was clear almost from the beginning that the judge was not happy that the s.e.c. had immediately gone to a request for contempt of court as opposed to trying to work things out between tesla, elon musk's attorneys and the s.e.c. in terms of what he should be doing with his financial communications and the settlement that they had reached previously so, here's what judge nathan said to elon musk, his attorney, as well as to the attorney for the s.e.c., basically three words -- work this out it was pretty straightforward. not a whole lot of drama other than that. she said that the s.e.c. attorneys as well as the attorneys for tesla and elon musk's attorneys must meet for at least one hour over the next two weeks and then issue a joint letter to the court saying this is where we are, this is how we think we can modify the previous agreement between the s.e.c. and elon musk, basically clarify that agreement is what she was looking for. here's elon musk talking with us

as he left court yesterday >> very impressed with judge nathan judge nathan's just i think an outstanding representative of the judiciary system >> do you think you can work this out with the s.e.c. over the next two weeks >> most likely >> "most likely" is what he said guys, you could tell from the smirk on elon musk's face both when he left court as well as when we caught up with him as he was walking into court, he would like to say a whole lot more about how he feels about the s.e.c. we know how he feels he has made it clear over the last year, two years, he has no respect for the organization and yesterday in court, it was clear the judge was not going to go down that contempt of court route, even as the s.e.c. tried to lay out their case. >> phil, thank you great job yesterday, watching all of that and the stuff you were asking on the way in, too for more on elon musk's battle with the s.e.c., we welcome former s.e.c. chairman harvey

pitt of course, our guest host alexis ohanian is here as well. harvey, what did you think this is not the outcome the s.e.c. was looking for. >> i think the judge was very cautious before holding musk in contempt and appropriately directed that both sides try to work out an arrangement that would obviate the need for getting the court involved, but i don't think this by any means suggests that the s.e.c.'s run into court was ill-advised at all. i think what they did was very prudent, and i think what the judge did was prudent. and now the question is whether musk's attorneys will be allowed by mr. musk to actually work reasonably with the s.e.c. >> i mean, that's not exactly the interpretation i got obviously, i'm an outsider watching this. but when i saw it, i thought,

wow, she did not do what the s.e.c. was hoping here elon musk walked out feeling like he was vindicated almost in this what makes you think that the next two weeks there's going to be any sort of movement that the s.e.c. can say, hey, we won this round? >> i think the s.e.c. will, as it has throughout this matter, attempt to reconcile the nature of mr. musk's impetuous behavior with the needs of public investors for fair disclosure. in my view, the question will be whether musk's attorneys are permitted in good faith to negotiate with the s.e.c to me, that's a big issue. i don't have any doubt that the s.e.c.'s attorneys will negotiate in good faith with mr. musk's attorneys >> now, i really appreciated the judge talking about everyone putting on their reasonableness pants -- >> your big-boy pants.

>> i thought that was well put how much of this, though, is a reflection of a change in media? we're not talking about a press release that went out that was incorrect. we're talking about a tweet that was wrong and corrected a day later. to me, this feels like what could have been ten years ago a mistake on live television is today a mistweet with a correction how much of this is a change in technology and the attitudes that are evolving to catch up around it? >> i don't think the change in technology is what's at issue here what mr. musk did was basically tweet out that they would sell 500,000 cars by the end of the year a day later, he corrected it the difficulty was the tweet -- the original tweet was wrong and as we now see in the news

today, tesla's having huge difficulties meeting all of its delivery commitments so, the materiality of this issue seems to be clear, and all mr. musk had to do was run the tweet by his attorneys the way the consent decree required, but he didn't do that, and he then bragged about not having to do that, and that is why his conduct was potentially contemptible >> harvey, you're talking about the "60 minutes" interview first of all, his tweet right after the settlement was reach where he calls them the short sellers exchange commission. then he goes on "60 minutes" and talks about how even if i wasn't in that title, i'm still going to be running things, which by the way as majority shareholder, that is kind of how it's going to be happening. harvey, what's the take for the s.e.c. i can understand them being really frustrated by this. what is their venue that they have to actually do something with this now? >> well, i think what they have

to do now is create an environment where the potential difficulties facing mr. musk for continuing to be irresponsible are so clear that even he gets a dose of responsibility and decides to clear his tweets. i think whatever comes of these two weeks, the s.e.c. will have scored an important message to mr. musk, and hopefully, his behavior will improve, if that is humanly possible. >> but harvey, just real quick, can you give us -- what are the possibility permutations here at this point in the ball game, in terms of are we talking about a fine are we talking about simply just a new program in which, you know, he's allowed to tweet but everything goes in a certain -- you know, goes to the lawyer first? what are we talking about specifically, you think? >> i think the permutations are,

first, escalating fines that hit him personally he has to feel this in his own pocketbook it can't be tesla that is made to pay for this. it has to be musk who understands there's a terrific downside to being irresponsible. if that doesn't work, then i think steps would have to be taken to cabin his ability to sort of push his agenda without complying with the court's order. for example, putting his shares in a voting trust to vote -- to be voted in the same direction as unaffiliated shareholders with their stock once he feels real pain, i think he will start to adhere to the court's order. >> alexis, what is this feeling like >> to me, this feels like asking a ceo when they come on "squawk" to live tv to have a pr person

with them and whispering in their ear before they're about to comment. >> that's a really interesting take on things. >> and i think there is a risk to this dangerous precedent. because we live in 2019. the twitter as a platform did not exist a decade ago or decades before that, but the idea of a flub on live television is the kind of thing where we would not expect punitive measures from the s.e.c. a day later if the company issued a correction -- >> you know what, let me take that back, though. i think that this -- when i saw the tweet that he did that he got in trouble for this, i thought, oh, it's unfortunate, but he fixed it. he didn't mean to do it, it was an accident. however, i think it was his thumbing his nose at the s.e.c. beforehand that got him in hot water. >> yes. >> you don't thumb your nose at a regulator, tell them you don't care what they think you don't go on national television and tell them you don't care what they think i don't think the tweet was the big problem. i think his behavior before was. >> yes and while i can't condone the sort of teasing of and the

lampooning of -- like, that unprofessionalism is not a good look but the principle we're talking about here of expecting ceos in the age of twitter to be checking everything with a pr person is as ludicrous as -- >> however, this is a consent decree that he agreed to and he signed off on. this is not like somebody saying this to you, that you can't be doing this this is a guy who's already fallen in hot water a lot of times, has actually agreed to this with the s.e.c. as a way of getting out of bigger trouble. >> i understand. >> that's -- i mean, it's -- that's the first take that i've heard that i actually thought, okay, that makes sense but then when i think about it a little more, he's not your average ceo. he's already in big trouble over this. >> i understand that, but i think this is interesting territory, because we'll see more and more ceos taking companies public that have grown up in the age of twitter, where we do not think of our pr team as the actual press release team our twitter account is that. >> i appreciate ceos like that i like them not speaking lawyered up. i like to hear what they're really thinking. >> what do you think of the original tweet that got him in

hot water? >> the 4/20 tweet? you're talking about taking a company public and setting a stock price -- >> people lost or made money depending on that tweet. >> i'm not going to defend that tweet. that was clearly a mistake and measures need to be taken. those measures also need to take into account the sort of changing world we live in. >> may i suggest, if you made a material misstatement on our air, i believe that you could be held accountable that -- by the way, there have been numerous cases where either fraud's been involved or all sorts of things, where video of ceos and public statements that they made are then presented to prove the case so whether it's on television, whether it's on twitter, whether it's at a press conference, whether it's in front of investors, i'm not sure. >> i think what we've seen if we look across the media spectrum is that the standards have shifted a bit, and i think it's more important than ever now because we're entering an age

where we're beyond the press release as a means of communicating this, that whatever decisions are made -- and i agree with the judge in her reasonableness pants -- >> can i -- >> they need to be -- >> harvey, jump in, please. >> i just want to make one observation, and that is, i think twitter is a very poor device for making serious corporate announcements. it's a great communications vehicle for individuals, but so much in the way of corporate disclosure is nuanced. and when you have an individual who doesn't get the nuances, or at least won't take the time to address them, you get bad tweets, and that's part of the problem here it's not that the s.e.c. isn't recognizing twitter. they've allowed these kinds of communications it's that mr. musk has to be more responsible in how he uses

that mechanism >> harvey, we want to thank you for being with us today. and alexis, that's great insight to kind of understand the other perspective from a ceo point of view as well alexis is our guest host he's going to be with us for the arrest of the hour. coming up, today's biggest movers, including a rally in a stock that joe and i love. yep, there it is, bed bath & beyond we like to go on sunday afternoons when it's raining outside. "stocks to watch," next. then later, we'll tell you why voters in the early primary states are about to be bombarded with one message, which is tax the rich we'll talk about that. stay tuned you're watching "squawk" on cnbc moving is hard.

no kidding. but moving your internet and tv? that's easy. easy?! easy? easy. because now xfinity lets you transfer your service online in just about a minute with a few simple steps. really? really. that was easy. yup. plus, with two-hour appointment windows, it's all on your schedule. awesome.

now all you have to do is move...that thing. [ sigh ] introducing an easier way to move with xfinity. it's just another way we're working to make your life simple, easy, awesome. go to xfinity.com/moving to get started. ♪ it's friday, i'm in love ♪ monday you can fall apart ♪ tuesday, wednesday, break my heart ♪ welcome back to "squawk box. futures right now -- you didn't hear it, did you >> i did >> didn't register -- >> it didn't register at first because it doesn't bother me the way it does you. >> anyway, we're desensitized. >> we play this every friday joe hates this song. we play it because he hates it it makes it much more enjoyable. >> i like that. >> we get desensitized just a quick -- >> you don't -- >> it reminds me of "cats.

did you see the latest on scientific research on cats? they know their names. >> of course they do. >> don't you know what that means? that means they're deliberately ignoring you that means they're deliberately -- >> did you just figure that out? >> -- not doing what you want. >> did you read the book, the ways your cat is scheming to kill you at any point? >> i just thought, they're not as smart as dogs. >> oh, no. >> when you call them, say give me some love, some attention -- >> they're like women. >> they do that thing with their back -- >> playing hard to get. >> yeah, exactly that was very -- >> cats are women, dogs are men. >> oh, now, i'm going to read. a few stocks on the move this morning bed bath & beyond was upgraded to equal weight from underweight at morgan stanley. the firm says that activist intervention at the housewares retailer improves the stock's prospects. we don't just go on weekends when it's raining, andrew. in new york city, it's like -- you know, in new jersey, we have something called outside, where you don't have to, like, get in an uber and go 19 blocks in

traffic to get there so, there are places other than -- >> you walk from your home to bed bath & beyond? >> no, i can walk outside. there is something called outside. there's trees, there's grass, there's -- you don't have to get in a car to get there. you don't have to sit in traffic. >> i see so it's very convenient, you can just walk outside -- >> i can walk outside and it's right there, the grass is there. >> the grass is, but the bed bath and beyond isn't -- >> no, no. >> that's the great thing about new york, you can walk to bath, you can walk to a restaurant, walk to the dry cleaner -- >> museum of natural history when's the last time you've been to a museum? >> is this really a debate between the city and the burbs >> we know where you stand, you're a millennial. >> where do i stand? >> urban >> yes, but big trend, get ready for it you'll hear me talk about it at some point -- carless suburban communities designed for millennials who want to live the life with the ride-sharing and want the extra space for nature -- >> why don't they want to be near the takeout food and --

>> for the section of the generation that can afford it, they want to be living in cities, but supply and demand, these major cities, the costs keep going up. and then for ones who can't, we're seeing alternative communities want to get built on basically rethinking -- >> this is an idea of the earth. this is like a few years away, though. >> keeping busy. there's one project in the southwest that's under way, but not ready to talk about it yet. >> oh! that's a good tease. lots more to come -- >> will you be ready with this at 9:30? be ready in nine minutes. america's teachers are facing tough challenges from low salaries to student debt, but one start-up is looking to help teachers get home loans and it's getting support from our guest host, alexis ohanian the company's co-founder will join us next it's a cool company. as we head to break, take a look at shares of boston beer. the sam adams brewer was downgraded to sell from neutral at goldman, reflecting sales growth concerns. we'll be right back and maybe we'll take a drink back in in ma

verizon got us vip tickets three feet away from justin timberlake. and to say vip is an understatement, because i sawww justin timberlake. so he literally looked into the phone and started dancing-- well, he was already dancing-- locked eyes and continued dancing. i still have to like pinch myself and make sure i'm not dreaming. every now and then, i'm like, "wait, did that happen?" (gasps) i've got photos of it, it must have. (vo) get more music on us with vip tickets to the best shows, like shawn mendes and camila cabello. plus, save big when you switch. only on verizon. welcome back to "squawk box.

america's teachers are under financial pressure with student loan debt and low salaries, but one start-up is attempting to help our educators generate wealth through home ownership. a cool idea. alex lofton is co-founder and head of growth at landon, a company offering down payment support and financial coaching to educators in the market for a home and alexis, you're an investor in this company as well. >> yes, indeed. >> good morning. tell us about this, how you came up with the idea and what's happening here. >> great so, we're on a mission to help essential professionals build financial security closer to where they serve we start with educators, focused on helping them buy homes with down payment assistance. and the whole way we got started was looking at how institutions like stanford university would try to recruit and retain their own staff, in a place as expensive as the san francisco bay area they offer a shared equity down payment assistance product they provide half a down payment and then you're able to get the home you want and pay it back in

the future when you sell your home or refinance out. >> in terms of the economic model, though, for you, stanford, i always thought that stanford, though, when they were doing that, there was a subsidization issue, meaning they were helping subsidize some of this, no? >> so, for our model, there are two parts to landed. one is a brokerage we help individuals buy a home and every time they do, we partner with real estate agents that pay us a referral fee, a lot like how redfin got started. then there is funds that we actually manage that outside entities invested like the zuckerberg initiative, that offer the down payment support and then that gets put back into that fund when the home buyer sells or refinances. and they share part of the upside with the home when the home goes up in value. >> in terms of measuring, using fico scores on teachers and the like or is there a different metric with which this is all done? >> underwriting is all done by the bank we are offering the down payment to help get them to the 20%. they're still partnering with

the bank to get their mortgage so the bank looks at all that stuff. the same stuff you look at if you brought the 20% yourself the reality is teachers are not making enough to get that 20%. so if you can get that 20%, they can avoid the private mortgage insurance, they're able to just afford home ownership on a month-by-month basis that's what we're helping them get to. >> how did you get involved in this >> you spend enough time in the bay area, you take enough pictures, and you're looking for something that feels both transformative and really scaleable through software, and this solution, right, it starts today with these professionals like teachers. you can imagine, we all want a world where the people who serve our community live in it, right? we want our firefighters, we want our police officers, we want our nurses, we want our teachers to be able to buy and own homes in the communities they serve, because it helps all of us, and it turns out these are also really, really good people to have invested in the platform as well as the community because they are paying back. and the sense of home ownership is real. we know what that can do to a

person and how it can change their life. >> how scaleable ultimately is this what are the grand plans >> grand plans here, part of the reason we're excited to partner with initialize is being able to take what we've done in the bay area and bring it to the most expensive places in the u.s. so we're going from the half dozen markets we are in on the west coast and now bringing it to the east coast. as long as we can show this is an opportunity to both help educators get into homes but also sustainable, investable product, it's kind of limitless as far as how many people we can actually serve. >> and in terms of, you were talking about like the zuckerberg-chan initiative being involved in this how much sort of outside capital from not for profits or others do you need to make this work? >> right now philanthropy's been crucial in getting us started, proving that this model can work assuming that this continues to work the way it does, then other types of investors in the future, you can imagine, being interested in this -- teacher pension funds and others, who say this makes sense for me to grow my pension money as part of my portfolio, i'm going to

invest in shared equity in real estate, in communities that are in the long run growing in value. so, seattles of the world, the san franciscos of the world. and investing in teachers we think alongside them is a great idea my mom was a school teacher, fourth grade, dad a social worker so you know, i know the power that happens when you get a home and are able to stay in that it wasn't until my grandmother passed away and passed along her home did we get to experience home ownership and it shouldn't be just waiting for a grandmother to die or mom to pass away to be able to buy a home people want to be able to stair-step into ownership sooner than that, and that's what we think is needed across the country and we see that once you help people do this, they're able to stay and commit to their community. >> it's a very cool idea >> cool. >> appreciate you coming in this morning. >> appreciate it thanks all right, coming up, can social media companies be trusted to protect your privacy? the ceo of facebook wants the government to take a bigger role our guest host, reddit

co-founder alexis co-hainan is going to weigh in. as we take a break, look at equities futures oh, wow. you two are going to have such a great trip. thanks to you, we will. this is why voya helps reach today's goals... ...all while helping you to and through retirement. can you help with these? we're more of the plan, invest and protect kind of help... voya. helping you to and through retirement.

♪ still to come on "squawk box," one big tech crackdown takes effect on privacy. alexis ohanian is here and will be weighing in on the new standards for social media and how much the government should get involved two -- we're going to tell you about a new group that's getting ready to flood early primary states with one message -- tax the rich we'll talk about it. and then three, it is jobs friday we'll assemble our panel of experts for predictions. it will happen at 8:00 a.m., and bring you the data and instant market reaction at 8:30. you don't want to miss it. you should be mad at people whos forget they're in public.

and you should be mad at simple things that are unnecessarily complicated. but you're not mad, because you're trading with e*trade, which isn't complicated. their app makes trading quick and simple so you can strike when the time is right. don't get mad, get e*trade and start trading today.

has been excellent. they really appreciate the military family and it really shows. with all that usaa offers why go with anybody else? we know their rates are good, we know that they're always going to take care of us. it was an instant savings and i should have changed a long time ago. it was funny because when we would call another insurance company, hey would say "oh we can't beat usaa" we're the webber family. we're the tenney's we're the hayles, and we're usaa members for life. ♪ get your usaa auto insurance quote today.

welcome back to "squawk box. the futures this morning indicated up 18 on the dow at this point they were higher earlier, a little bit, but they've been green most of the morning, but nothing too substantial, but we've had a lot of up days, a lot more than down days recently the s&p's indicated up about 2 and change, closing in on 2,900, for anybody who's counting, and the nasdaq's been strong relative to both of those indices all year long. the united kingdom is

reportedly working on legislation that will hold social media executives liable for harmful content shared on their platforms. that's according to a leaked document cited by "the guardian." the proposal would have an independent regulator assess fines and hold executives from companies like facebook and goggle personally liable for breaches that harm public safety our guest host this morning is alexis ohanian initialized calico founder and also the co-founder of reddit. and alexis, when we talked about this earlier, we said we wanted to get your take on it obviously, this comes after the videos that were posted on facebook in new zealand after the terrorist incidents there. what do you think, though, as somebody who's got one of these platforms and is trying to do what you can to push the envelope but also trying to be respectful >> i think this in a lot of ways feels inevitable you know, zuck recently posted that op ed in the "washington post," which was a very different tone than what we

heard from the past. it seems like it took too long to get there, and i think we are still now navigating a world where live-streamed video is now a distribution channel to millions of people, basically in realtime and there still are not yet tools good enough, even with all the resources of facebook, both human and software, to moderate live video in realtime, and then once it gets out in the world to try to stop it. >> let me ask you a question do you believe that there -- to me, one of the things facebook could do and all of these services could do -- goes against their business model of as many pages as possible. but i think, for example, if i wanted to live stream something, maybe it should only be to people who actually follow me, right? so, now -- and most people don't have, you know, hundreds of thousands of followers maybe they have -- and maybe they're verified people who can actually broadcast maybe there's some who run on a delay, you know. the bank -- you have a lot of money -- you might have a lot of

money in your bank account your bank only allows you to take a certain amount out from the atm, you know. people put limits on what is possible to try to protect the system >> yes. >> those protections don't seem to be in place >> yes and it's not because they can't be >> it's because they run against the model. >> yes they have not prioritized it -- >> meaning they're expensive, too. if you start taking down stuff, you are not building the biggest audience and you can't sell ads to the biggest audience. >> and ultimately either you're building these products as software or you're staffing the teams with humans -- >> it's probably both. >> should be a combination of both you're taking resources away from the things that have always been prioritized, which are growth and revenue and so, i think now the tenor has shifted. i think now it is getting the investment did it take too long yes. the reality is even if you were to have streaming just to a specific group of people, that content will eventually get out, right? it will -- >> but here's the question so -- and then it's a question of how fast you respond. >> the murder that took place in

new zealand was taken down, the actual live stream, within nine minutes -- >> but the clips -- >> right which was somewhat admirable it was the clips -- >> yes. >> -- that ended up, by the way, often on reddit oftentimes, that ended up proliferating so the question is where that piece of the control is supposed to be. >> yeah. and so, i think we're going to see a shift from the major platforms to develop the tools and the teams to respond to that way faster there is still the broader sort of bulkenization of the internet where there are other jurisdictions basically saying we don't care. so the reality we also need to prepare for is while we should be holding these platforms more accountable, the content is still going to proliferate elsewhere. >> i thought you would make an argument about actually being able to publish those videos. >> no. >> because if you really see -- well, it's interesting, though what would it do to the dialogue -- >> he's a decent person. >> no, no, but what would it do to the dialogue -- because what reddit's done over the years, which is fascinating to me, is

oftentimes the reddit community is trying to break down these videos to figure out who is responsible. they look at different clues i mean, there's been some very interesting things on a positive side that have happened at reddit, so i was actually curious to see where you'd land on something like that. >> where the line is drawn to me is around the violence and the gore and the clear -- like, there is no journalistic value in it -- there is no redeeming value to having that on the platform so, for me, that is a clear decision i agree there is value in having the conversation around it, and i think having hard conversations is something that reddit, i'm not full time with the company anymore, but as a board member, that is something we want to have more of. we want more dialogue, especially complex and sometimes painful, but content like that has no place -- >> do you have technology that could flag stuff like that >> it's -- i've spent the last six months incubating a company of brilliant artificial intelligence engineers to try to build the moderation tools to

help this, but i can't say i do yet. i can't say anyone does yet. facebook and google have more resources than anyone. they have more money and people than anyone, and it's still a problem, but i think we're going to see in the next couple of years a real effort made, because you know, people are speaking up. regulators are speaking up, and they're going to have to. >> alexis, no matter how long you're here, i always have 50 other things i want to talk to you about. before we let you go, i want to ask you about the lyft ipo, what you thought about that and some of these other ipos out there, including the potential uber one. >> yeah, gosh, lots coming i think the biggest thing to note here is these companies are staying private for longer, and it doesn't really -- i don't mind that much in my business because we're often like the first investors in these companies, and we have a long-term horizon. the thing that does worry me in the next 10, 15, 20 years, is so much of the value creation that would have happened for retail, for public market investors with an ipo is no longer happening because all of that value, all that upside is captured on the

private side and there are reasons why, i mean, that is a good thing for folks who are building and growing their businesses, because they don't have to worry as much about the quarter-to-quarter emphasis, but it's also a bad thing, because it means, you know, my dad doesn't get access to a lot of the up side he would have gotten when google ipo'd. >> is that buyer beware when it comes to buying on the first day of trading >> um, sure. i mean, i really, i have so little expertise on the public side but at the end of the day, i think, yes, you know, the stories of the dotcom ipos and the kind of big opportunities that were there that i sort of grew up on, that i always thought about, they aren't there anymore because all that is captured still -- or a lot of it is captured on the private side. >> thank you so much for joining us today >> sure. >> great to see you. >> come back again. >> deal. tax showdown a new group that is getting ready to flood some key electoral states with just one message -- tax the rich. we debate the merits of that tax

on the wealthy with former senator/governor bob kerrey and judd gregg and don't forget, we are counting down to 8:30 and the march jobs report. you don't want to miss that, 8:30 a.m we'll bring you thnuere mbs and reaction "squawk" returns in a moment the biggest week in television is almost here.

xfinity watchathon week. starting april 8th, enjoy free access to the best shows and movies from hbo, showtime, epix and more. what! whether it's more jaw droppers, standing o's upon standing o's or tv's biggest show stoppers. get more into what you're into. get ready to watch with xfinity x1 or the xfinity stream app. xfinity watchathon week. free starting april 8th. boop! welcome back, everybody. more than a dozen progressive groups have banded together to create a new campaign to tax the

wealthy. robert frank joins us with more on this front. hey, robert. >> good morning, becky well, it is the most targeted and well-funded campaign yet to raise taxes on the wealthy a coalition of more than a dozen progressive groups are creating a new effort called "tax the rich," and it's aimed at urging voters and candidates to pass new taxes on the top earners now, they plan a seven-figure ad and awareness campaign starting in the democratic primary states it will kick off in iowa, move to new hampshire, nevada, colorado, including tv and digital advertising, rallies, and town halls they say they, quote, will make it impossible to consider yourself a progressive leader if you do not support taxing the rich >> we've already seen a number of candidates introduce proposals and ideas about taxing the rich, and so the energy is there. but as we all know, it's very easy for big ideas to fall out of the mainstream conversation if they're not talked about constantly and so, our goal in having these conversations in the early

presidential primary states means that we're going to keep it part of the narrative, not only through the primary, but make it part of the conversation that goes into the general matchup come november. >> actually has a lot of voter support. recent polls show that 70% of americans support higher taxes on the wealthy a fox news poll found that the top tax concern for all voters is the rich not paying enough. former starbucks ceo howard -- thanks howard schultz considering a presidential run here's what he said at a town hall on fax news about taxing the wealth. >> the wealthy in this country should be paying more in taxes and getting less we should not do anything that puts more tax burden on the middle class and working-class families we should do everything we can from the state and federal level to insure the fact that people who now believe that they do not have access to the american dream or the promise of america,

that we provide that >> all right, let's bring in our guest, joining us now, former u.s. senator/governor judd gray and former senator bob kerrey. this is a debate -- it's not always good to have two republicans debating things like this, but that's what we have today, i think. >> what? >> that's so mean. >> am i mischaracterizing? it's a serious question -- >> what a shot >> actually, you're right! you're kind of over that way, judd and bob's kind of -- i think you guys are the same person no, i'm kidding. >> we're the rational folks. >> that's right. well, no, honestly, bob, i was actually talking about you i was giving judd the benefit of the doubt for being a republican but for you, are you closer to the geographic center of a classic republican or where the democratic party is right now? are you still closer to how far left the democratic party has become >> no. i'd say more closer to where the republican was when judd gregg

was in the senate. >> that's what i mean, so we've got two republicans arguing. >> well, on economics, that's probably true. first of all, on the question, taxing the rich, we already tax the rich their slogan ought to be "tax the rich more. the question is are they paying their fair share and i think there's a significant amount of evidence that they are. i think -- the problem i've got with the tax the rich campaign is it's demonizing wealth. and that's a bad thing in our system we are a better nation, we're a more capable nation the more wealth we generate it is true, there seems to be a correlation between wealth and people being jerks, but that should not cause us necessarily to say that we're going to go after the generation of wealth and make it more difficult i like that democrats are doing this, because what democrats ought to be thinking about is how do we hit people who are not rich generate wealth how do we help them generate the wealth so they can sustain themselves when they get to the age of "street signs." >> do we know, senator, or do we know once we do this and we get

the big pot of money, do we know what we should do with it and help fix things -- is the reason we're doing this because we've got to fix all these things? how are we going to fix these things i don't hair anyone -- we've tried to fix them before throwing money at them and it hasn't worked. how do we fix it what do we do? >> throw it at me and you, that's fine. >> throw it at the deficit. >> we're borrowing $1 trillion to make this year's budget -- >> but that's not what they want to do with it. they want to spend it. >> i know it the slippery slope with tax the rich is you begin to think, gee, i'm a member of congress, i can allocate capital if you knew how to allocate capital, you wouldn't be in congress the whole idea that now all of a sudden i'm going to take that money and allocate it in some productive way -- there are certain areas where you can actually demonstrate there's increased productivity, but otherwise, all you're doing is transferring one group of money to another group of people and spending the money. >> judd, i want you to channel mrs. gregg, if you could, in this conversation. she and i are closer to purists,

right, judd? she always tells you that. >> you're not anywhere near where she is when it comes to purist. >> even i'm not! >> but i want to say this. bob, your time to run for president is now i know you tried earlier, but it's now. >> i know. one ex-wife is enough. >> you're right on >> how do you know if you haven't tried? so, you don't even need to -- you just need to say i think what bob says? or what do you -- >> well, i think it's important to get to the basis of this debate, which is, are you going to have a country which is nominated by people who are running on envy politics, or are you going to have a country that's dominated by people who are running on opportunity politics and when you're talking about taxing the rich as the way you solve your problems as a nation, you're basically talking about centralizing the decision process in the few people who collect all that money and then redistributing it, versus allowing people to create wealth and have the opportunity to get

ahead in our society and you know, our market economy has done more to create wealth than any economy in the history of the world and it continues to do that. >> nobody's doing well anymore nobody's doing any good anymore, judd that's what andrew's saying. nobody's making more money than their parents, and there's no other extenuating societal forces for that. >> okay, but judd, look -- >> here we go. soap box move it over. >> hold on like you haven't been sitting on a soap box for three hours every morning for 20 years okay. >> not signaling my virtue and how empathetic and compassionate i am that's not -- >> senator, so, ray dalio has a new -- >> oh, god. >> -- essay out -- >> he's worth about $20 billion, by the way, in this country, using capitalism. >> okay. >> go ahead. >> joseph. okay, andrew andrew ross. >> judd -- who goes through the math of what's happened really over the last 75 years in

america. and one of the things that he says which i think is very true about capitalism today -- >> i heard you quote this earlier. >> -- is he says the percentage of children today who grow up to earn more than their parents has fallen from 90% in 1970 to 50% today. that's not an improvement. if this is all working so well, you'd think that that number would get better, not worse. >> well, andrew, i think that number is totally fallacious >> okay. >> to begin with, the society as a whole, the water has raised, so exceeding your parents is a more challenging event. >> that's true >> number two, the government has increased dramatically and the debt that the government is putting on our children is going to make it very hard for their standard of living to increase. >> there's less government, less regulation -- >> no, no, listen to this. i know you don't want to hear this -- >> i'm trying, but your friend is trept trupting. >> less regulation now -- >> look at france, where they have continued to move less aggressively for the last 30 years. their standard of living continues to go down why? because you have a concentration

of decision process on the market being made by a few people in the government, and it's an inefficient way to run in a market and it creates less opportunity. and on top of that -- >> i'm not arguing to run the country like france. i think the only questions that are out there right now is -- >> yes, you are. >> no, no, i am not. >> you're basically proposing a french model that's the socialist position -- >> find the tape that says that! >> well, you don't say it, of course -- >> this is ridiculousness! while we're on television, we can have a larger conversation but senator, no, no, the question is, do we need to spend more on education? you may say we don't maybe you say we're misspending all the money in education. >> no, i actually think education is the key to the whole exercise. >> okay, so, so then if you want to spend more on education, tell me where you want to get the money from >> well, let's start with what the problem with education is. the problem with education is the teachers unions. the teachers unions are teaching the lowest common denominator -- >> i don't disagree, but that's

one component of the problem -- >> the private sector is not running education. that's the problem. >> do you need me this morning >> ours. >> you look good. >> who opposes them? the teachers unions oppose the charter schools and that's where the opportunities are being -- >> i'm not going to debate that point. i'm a big fan of charter schools -- >> all you've got are criticisms -- >> no, look, the question is how do you deal with health care how do you deal with education -- >> you criticize capitalism with no answers -- >> and how do you overspend in an economy that's doing as well as it is right now that's the issue the issue is you're taking on $1 trillion of debt right now when the economy's actually doing well and you're not even investing in the things that need to be invested in so tell me where you get the money from >> well, i would if you'd give me an opportunity, andrew. you should be in the senate. you're filibustering me. >> ooh >> the simple fact is that education is primarily a local issue, and that's where the money comes from, your local governments and your state

governments. the federal government puts very little money -- i chaired the education committee in the senate we put very little money into education at the elementary and secondary school level, which is where the problems are the real issue in education is the fact that so much of it is drained off by administrative costs and by unions which refuse to allow opportunity in the school system to give kids a better chance to learn, such as charter schools. >> bob,last word >> look, i think the best way to focus on this taxing the rich idea is that if you look at what the democrats have proposed on social security, back to your initial categorization of me, i think they have a very good proposal on social security that solves the 75-year problem, but it doesn't help lower-income, low lower-wealth americans generate wealth and rather than figuring out how to make it more difficult to generate wealth in america, we should be trying to make it easier for people who don't have wealth to generate it. >> like a man without a country. >> i love america. >> i know you do i'm talking about the democratic party. they're like -- oh, who dat? who dat?

remember that? she said, "who dat?" not our party. robert frank, thank you. senators, governors, one and all, nice to see you. >> nice to see you, judd. >> a pleasure! thank you very much. me i wish i could say the sa coming up, payroll predictions from our panel of experts. "squawk box" returns in a moment terholder does. you've worked hard to grow your wealth. make sure you're working with a wealth manager who can grow with you. cfa charterholders have the investment expertise to unlock opportunities other advisors might not see. learn what a cfa charterholdr can do for you at therightquestion.org plants capture co2. what if other kinds of plants captured it too? if these industrial plants had technology that captured carbon like trees

we could help lower emissions. carbon capture is important technology - and experts agree. that's why we're working on ways to improve it. so plants... can be a little more... like plants. ♪ ♪ ♪

each day, brings new possibilities. that's why you need a partner dedicated to helping your company reach its goals. u.s. bank -- the power of possible.

it's jobs day in america [ whistle we're just 30 minutes away from the number of the morning. and after last month's surprisingly weak data, wall street is watching for signs of a turnaround >> it's a little early. >> i've got to get out of here i think i'm going to lose it. >> coming up, insight and analysis from our jobs panel it's an hour of "squawk box" you can't afford to miss, and it starts right now ♪ >> announcer: live from the most powerful city in the world, new york, this is "squawk box. ♪ my little pretty one, pretty one ♪ good morning good morning and welcome back to "squawk box" here on cnbc live from the nasdaq market site in

times square, not france i'm joe kernen along with becky quick and andrew ross sorkin the futures right now are indicated up 27 points or so the nasdaq indicated up 8 1/2. the s&p indicated up three treasuries are back above 2.50%, i think, 2.54% this morning. and you know what's coming at 8:30 that's why goalsby's here -- >> half hour to the weekend, that's why. >> yeah, half hour to the weekend. no we have a big jobs number. >> we do. and in the meantime, here are the stories investors are going to be talking about. we are waiting this hour for the government's march jobs report that's the 8:30 number economists are expecting an addition of 175,000 jobs to nonfarm payrolls with the unemployment rate holding steady at 3.8%. we're also going to look for possible revisions to february's much smaller 20,000 jobs number. today's data is due out at 8:30 eastern time that is less than 27 minutes and 30 seconds away. boeing's ceo acknowledging for

the first time that bad data played a role in two deadly crashes involving the 737 max planes in a video statement released last night, dennis muilenburg apologized for the tragedies in ethiopia and indonesia he also says it's apparent in both cases that the planes' antistall system reacted to faulty readings from a sensor. boeing is still working on a software fix for the 737 max which must be approved by the faa and global regulators. shares of boeing were up sharply yesterday, probably because it looked like the trade talks with china could be closer to reaching resolution. this morning the stock is up another $1.44 to $397.30. and a federal judge is giving tesla ceo elon musk and the s.e.c. two weeks to work out their differences over musk's use of twitter musk appeared in court yesterday in new york. the s.e.c. had asked the judge to hold musk in contempt for a tweet in february about tesla's projection targets the agency claims that musk violateed the securities fraud settlement they reached last

year a few stocks to watch this morning. amazon making a dent in google ad search dominance, according to the "wall street journal. people familiar with the matter telling the paper that wpp group, the world's largest ad buyer, spent about $300 million on amazon search ads last year 75% of that money coming from google search budgets. also check out shares of johnson & johnson this morning and teva pharmaceuticals, because oklahoma's attorney general has dropped all but one claim now against the companies case charging them with helping spark the u.s. opioid epidemic and then in media, viacom upgraded from sector perform at rbc capital. they believe their pact with directv on carrying its programming will pave the way for merger talks with cbs. all right, we are awaiting the march jobs numbers, which will be released at 8:30 a.m. eastern time economists expecting 175,000 new nonfarm positions. that's the number for today that

were added in the last month let's get right to our jobs panel for what we can expect joining us now, lanhee chen, a research fellow at hoover institution. kate moore is from blackrock, and our guest host for this hour, former council of economic advisers chairman and booth business school professor austan gooslbee if we bring out -- >> joe. >> -- a spread if we bring out a spread, a breakfast spread. >> you brought it! you brought a spread now, as you know, you owe me -- >> yeah, you didn't pay for it. >> -- a major dinner a major dinner the finest dinner in new york. and look what -- this is what -- this is what i'm given this is what they gave me. they gave me -- we got a half a bagel. joe, you chose not to eat this cheese and gave it to me >> i got it from bob kerrey and i regifted it to you >> what is this? -- >> i changed the name. >> here joe is going to use spending to try to solve this country's problems seriously. you're going to pay me off

is this illegal? what >> he paid the coat clerk with that. >> $2 bill, really >> i don't know if i can find a good enough reference for this caviar communist, this learjet -- no, really, austin, you come into town we could have done it now. you don't want me to pay off you want to drag this out until the next election, i swear >> you just want to use spending to get out of problems that's okay. it can work. it can work. >> can we go tonight >> probably. where do you want to go? >> i told you i'll take you anywhere my mutual funds are up so much in the trump economy. >> you promised filet mignon, you took me to white castle. >> i'm so flush from the trump economy, i'll take you wherever you want to go i will i'll take you. >> if you're feeling that flush, it might be time to see a doctor. >> it's a sugar rush what's your number, seriously? i was going to start with kate until you hijacked us. >> that's okay i just ate a crumb of that bagel on the plate i'll take whatever i can get

>> right if you're not a 1%er, that's all you get are crumbs go ahead. >> slightly below consensus, kind of 1.65%, 1.67%. >> what about revisions from last month >> i don't think they will be that important for equity investors in general i think everyone understands that was an anomaly and we're looking at the longer-term trend. there's a lot of good stuff out there and the accommodation and the monetary side is quite supportive of risk. >> 1.50, so a little bit under consensus. i think we're still getting pressure from trade and uncertainty around that has changed investors' behavior, so i'm coming in pretty far under 1.50. >> austin, you typically were below where a lot of consensus were. >> and i think i still am, and i think both of those comments were insightful. i think the trade is weighing on us i think the fed has given us back some. last month we had a terrible number, but the month before we had a very good number so, you know, the average was

looking okay, but i want a big number, but i fear the economy's slowing. i think it's been slowing pretty substantially for an entire year the growth rate's going down every quarter. and if we are in the 1s this quarter, i think that would probably start reflecting -- i'm around 1.55. >> but the first quarter has been, there's been 1s typically in the first quarter for a while, for a weird fact. liesman's written about it. >> and we've had good 1s in the quarters where they had good quarters. >> but for the year are you below 2? >> but you didn't say that for the year below 2 oh, god, i hope not, but possible. >> okay. that's not that bad then, people say. >> i will say, austin, actually, if we get a plus 200 number, plus 250, i think that shakes confidence in risk assets. get a pricing of risk expectations around the fed. i think what we're getting in terms of multiple expansion now, i'd say since the start of the second quarter in the first couple days is driven by expectations of rates staying exceptionally low forever. if we get a small repricing

there against a very mediocre earnings backdrop, i worry that we're going to have a little bit of a pause in the equity markets. >> though, if they're going to keep putting doves, or if you want to call them doves, to the fed, the nominations, i think they could scramble the whole picture. >> just to say, if they're not doves, they're turkeys huh? is that where you were going we need a bird. >> i think people in the markets, i mean, you guys would weigh in here, but i think people might freak out a little about the, whoa, wait a minute, the fed's not going to be independent anymore. >> austin, in general, though, employment, unemployment where it is, that's good even if it was 2.2% for the year, that's not awful and we used to have a lot of conversations during the obama years where i was always telling you -- >> just like that and you would say it's awful and now you're saying it's not. >> you would say it's good compared to the rest of the world because the rest of the world is slowing so here we are again with the rest of the world slowing, so --

>> and we're in exactly the same spot we were in before -- >> but you loved it then and now you hate it -- >> i didn't love it. i used to say -- >> we both swapped positions. >> i'm saying exactly what i said then -- >> but your excuse to the world was it's slow and now it's slow again. >> yes, it is, and you're right. >> what's your number? >> i think it's going to be a combination of the number in the 2s, plus significant movement on wages. i think it will take those two together i think independently, whether you get a good number on wages and a good number on jobs, i think independently, that's probably not going to change a whole lot. i think it's steady as she goes. but if both come out in a positive light, then i think people get nervous. >> we may switch on this, too, austin i think that these wage gains are good are you worried they're going to hurt corporate profits >> i haven't switched. i'm 100% where i was before -- >> you like the way -- >> and i agree with you and i welcome you to the fold. wage increases are good. if we could get the growth rate up, that be fantastic. if we get good, strong jobs

numbers, i don't think good news is bad news. i think we would be happy to get a good jobs number my fear is that growth is slowing and it is going to continue to slow, and i think there's some pretty serious risks of recession, and we had a $2 trillion tax cut, and that stimulus value, if you want to call it, is wearing off. and so, we're now going to be exposed to kind of the wins from the rest of the world, which are not good so, getting into more trade wars with mexico, shutting down the border, threatening trade war with china, all of those things absolutely could lead us into recession. i hope we back away from that. >> we may have already lanhee >> china i think will resolve itself sooner rather than later. i mean, i -- i think there is a lot of political alignment here in terms of getting something done short run i'm not saying the long-run problems are solved. we still have all sorts of geopolitical issues with china, structural issues. those won't be solved, but i

think in the short run we will see resolution on china and that's going to help i think we're seeing encouraging signs out of europe and asia, not great, but encouraging. >> but in the last four days, we've had the president of the united states get up and say he's going to shut down the border with mexico. >> he was just kidding about that. >> he backed off -- >> he did back off, but if every six days we're going to drop a huge bomb, shake the cat in the bag -- >> it's not helpful. >> -- and say oh, that was just a joke. >> it's not helpful. >> it's not helpful. >> a lot of the trade-sensitive assets have not been selling off, despite these bombs and this bit of news flow, right we've actually had a fairly resilient market, and this is against the backdrop -- >> yesterday boeing and caterpillar were strong on the idea that we would reach a resolution. >> and some of the chip makers are doing really well, despite weaker demand, at least in the first quarter -- >> pricing in communities starts to filter out and try to decide what he means -- >> yeah, but we've heard that uncertainty factor from companies for the last two quarters now it really started in the fourth quarter, not just in the first quarter. but i'm -- >> okay, but growth has slowed a

lot over that period, so let's not be overconfident is i guess all i'd say. >> i'm not suggesting we should be overconfident actually, one of my risks is people have become too complacent around some of the trade stuff, that they're expecting things to sort of glide through, that we're going to have an agreement. >> you think the fed's coming back in because things are good, not things are bad they wouldn't come back in if things were bad. >> i'm not saying the fed's coming back in i'm saying -- >> 200 or so -- >> yeah, that might shake confidence in the equity market. >> not even bring the fed back in, but just worry market participants that they might come back in. >> that's right. they're looking for something to worry about because they've been baiting risk for most of this year as the markets have ground higher, we've seen outflows out of equities both passive and active and we've seen investors kind of say this is not sustainable, and yet the market keeps moving. >> what about mexico rosa mexicana? >> back to your dinner >> is that too cheap >> oh, back to dinner?

is that too cheap? what's expensive i want this guy to pay. >> i'm fine. i told you -- >> i might just order and give it to some people. i'm going to give it to people >> wherever you want to go. >> when you say your mutual fund -- >> wherever you want to go. >> -- you mean you're already spending out of your retirement money? you've exceeded -- have you hit the threshold where they make you take the distributions >> in this economy, i'm feeling good across the board. all right, when we come back, a true hollywood drama that we are watching closely here on "squawk box," like that guy's watching us closely, too writers are facing off with their agents in a battle that could affect your favorite shows on television. and the clock is ticking down hi the clock is ticking down to this weekend we're going to bring you all the details when "squawk box" comes right back ♪ living in beverly hills one-millionth order. millionth order. ♪ there goes our first big order. ♪ 44, 45, 46... how many of these did they order?

ooh, that's hot. ♪ you know, we could sell these. nah. ♪ we don't bake. ♪ opportunity. what we deliver by delivering.

we segetting to patientscines in record time. at emerson, when issues become inspiration, creating a better world isn't just a result, it's a responsibility. emerson. consider it solved.

welcome back to "squawk box. it's a very busy morning with the march jobs report coming up at the bottom of the hour, but there's a story out of hollywood that actually is a jobs story, too, that's capturing a lot of attention among entertainment executives it could lead to 15,000 writers telling their agents "you're fired! julia boorstin joins us now to break it all down. julia, good morning. >> good morning, andrew. well, if they don't reach a new agreement by sunday when their

contract expires, writers may fire all their agents, making it a lot harder for the studios to hire writers to staff shows for the fall now, the writers guild is at odds with the association of talent agents over their 40-year-old deal the writers are demanding that agencies eliminate packaging fees, which agents earn when they put together clients, such as actors, writers, and directors, for a project now, the wga, the writers guild, said this creates a conflict of interest by aligning the agencies more with studios than with their clients this comes as the rise of netflix and amazon, which have shorter seasons and don't offer royalties, has pressured writers' salaries. under a threat here, talent agencies, including caa and endeavor's wme it reports that endeavor is planning an ipo, which the writers guild says strengthens its call to end conflicts. saying "it is impossible to reconcile the fundamental purpose of an agency to serve the best interests of its clients with a business of

maximizing returns for wall street." the agencies responding that they want "an agreement that serves the best interests of writers, respects the individual choice, and prevents uncommittee interruption to our industry." consumers are unlikely to see any immediate impact on the screen if these two sides don't come to a deal on sunday, but until this is resolved, it will add an extra challenge for the studios looking to get the next season of shows off the ground back over to you. >> go ahead. >> i was going to say, julia, how big of a deal is this not just for the jobs involved on the writing side, but i also imagine the future of some of these agencies, some of which want to go public, and what those packaging fees really mean and the ability to be in the production business? >> well, look, yes, these packaging fees have been incredibly lucrative for the agencies i do have to say, andrew, i do expect these two sides to come to a deal. it's possible that they won't come to a deal on sunday, and the writers guild has already been talking about how they have all of these new digital tools

and platforms to help studios find writers and writers find jobs, so they're trying to come up with an alternative, but i do think that it is in the best interests of both sides to figure out some sort of agreement. but if packaging fees go away entirely, which we'll see what kind of compromise is reached, but if they go away entirely, that would be a meaningful source of revenue that the agencies do lose though these are agents. i expect them to negotiate a deal. >> it depends how substantial that is. one of the arguments you hear on the agencies' side is that in this day in age of netflix and way tv has moved with less back end, that the packaging fees don't matter as much as they used to. having said that, you wouldn't think the agencies would be fighting for the packaging fees if they didn't matter. >> look, i think it depends on the situation. the agents argue that packaging fees end up helping writers because they're not charging writers a percentage of their salary because they're just taking a packaging fee and i think a lot of that really comes down to where the incentive lies

are they going to loop someone in and bring someone into a show where they're not negotiating them the best fee that they're meant to earn just because they want to get this deal done and they want to offer a package to the studio so, i think it's almost less about where the percentage of, you know, the fee comes from the agents and more from the writers' perspective whether the incentives are misaligned and they're not getting the best deal >> it kind of reminds me of the athletes and owners. it's like, you don't have much of a game without the athletes, and without these writers, you've got, you know, these agents couldn't -- >> the thing is, all the money's going up everywhere, except the writers. their pay has been kind of flat. so then they turn on their agents, you know -- >> yeah, without the writers, you've got no "game of thrones" or anything. all right, thanks, julia when we come back, the all-important march employment report economists are looking for gain of 175,000 jobs after just 20,000 jobs were created in february we'll get predictions from our all-star jobs panel and bring

you the number that the markets are waiting for. stay tuned you are watching "squawk box" on bc ' retirement. don't worry. voya helps them to and through retirement... dealing with today's expenses ...while helping plan, invest and protect for the future. so they'll be okay? i think they'll be fine. voya. helping you to and through retirement. ifor another 150 years. the fire going ♪ to inspire confidence through style. ♪ i'm working to make connections of a different kind. ♪ i'm working for beauty that begins with nature. ♪ to treat every car like i treat mine. ♪ at adp we're designing a better way to work, so you can achieve what you're working for. ♪

>> you're on air right now. >> oh! coming up, this morning's big number, the march jobs report is due out in just minutes. you've got to stick around for that wall street watching closely after last month's weak showing. >> whoops! al anyway, market reaction and anysis from our jobs panel when "squawk box" comes right back >> he's dying over here.

♪ it's the final countdown ♪ the final countdown welcome back to "squawk box" here on cnbc we are live from the nasdaq market site in times square. we are just a few minutes away from the government's march jobs report we're going to get some final predictions from our jobs panel. lanhee chen -- actually, we'll go through the panel in a second lanhee, i'll start with you because we have just a couple minutes on this. i know you said 150,000 is the jobs number. what are you looking for in terms of unemployment? what other numbers matter? >> i think wages, 3.7 year over

year is about right and unemployment i see ticking up just a hair. >> kate, what do you think 163,000 is your number. >> i think we'll have a pretty good number. what i was saying is i'm a little worried if the number was too strong, the market might we number and that would shake expectations in the equity market, but i think we'll have a wage gain and companies were expecting them to grow. >> it's not a bad thing -- >> it's not a bad thing if they maintain costs and margins we'll be looking at that. >> austan gooslbee >> i thought i would be pessimist pessimistic, but i'm in the middle, 155,000. i think the unemployment rate may tick up a little bit more. i hope we're all wrong and we get a big number, but i fear gdp is slowing down, and we want wages to grow, but the huge anvil that's been weighing us down for more than ten years has been slow productivity growth.

and so, we've got to keep an eye on that. they're not going to announce it today, but we've got to keep an eye on that, because without it, we won't get much wage increase. >> rick santelli, what are you expecting? >> 201,000 i'm looking at strong jolts, low jobless claims, and my guess is the government probably hired a lot more people to try to figure out what happened to that 20,000 number last month. >> right, right, right steve liesman is also here and oh, he let out a huge sigh with that number >> 201,000 is also my number i have five components three have been strong -- manufacturing, ism employment, services employment from ism, claims have been strong, the adp moderated a little bit, and the three-year average moderated a little bit so i've got two kind of moderated and three pretty strong, still. so that's what the model says. i've got the government actually subtracting workers. if the government adds, it will be more. >> we've got about 27 seconds, and it's not that anymore even let's get to ylan mui in

washington with the numbers. and we're up a little bit, up 35 on the dow, up about three on the s&p, up about seven on the nasdaq -- >> can we look at the ten-year, too, before the number hits? it's 2.5-something a little earlier. >> these could move on wages they could move on a lot of different things. >> there you go. >> including the overall rate. what is it, yla snnk let's get it. >> 196,000 jobs, nonfarm payrolls rose by 196,000 jobs in march. the unemployment rate unchanged at 3.8%. average hourly earnings, they were up 4 cents in march to $27.70 that's a 0.1% gain over the month and a 3.2% gain over the year the payroll numbers for january and february were both revised upward from 311,000 to 312,000 in january and from 20,000 to 33,000 in february together, that's 14,000 more jobs than were previously reported the three-month moving average

is 180,000 jobs. now, job growth is strong, particularly in the health care sector, which added 49,000 jobs, but there were losses in some other sectors. retail down nearly 12,000 jobs and manufacturing down by 6,000 jobs labor force participation rate edged down from 63.2% to 63%, while u-6, the broadest measure of unemployment, was unchanged at 7.3%. back to you. >> ylan, thank you let's get reaction from our jobs panel. let's hand it first to steve and rick you guys were the closest to that, just a few thousand away. >> if we're using "the price is right" rules, we have had a long-running debate over a couple decades, but i will take a win because anything below 50,000 reduces my -- >> what was steve's number >> it was 201, rick. >> same as yours. >> it was 201. >> ah. >> but you were right on the government adding 14,000 but let me just say, it's a little bit spotty. there are some interesting things here. retail down 12,000 after being

down 20,000 in february. whatever the reason, that's where the weakness came -- part of the weakness in february, along with construction and goods producing overall were bad in february. some of them bounced back in march. what else is going on here temporary help was down. leisure hospitality was way up that's looking like maybe a weather effect in february may have bounced back here overall, you know i spent a lot of time on the detail. we had an anomalous -- i think now we're going to say anomalous february number, and now we've come back to trend and i think the trend for jobs in this economy is higher than what most economists think potential job growth should be, because again, we come back to those numbers, 80,000, 90,000 are the entrants to the workforce. we're putting them to work and then >> so far, the market likes the no recession better than -- >> of course it is. >> -- the increase in rates possibility -- >> no, this was a perfect number i think for equity markets in the sense that it was solid job

gains but not too strong, you know, unchanged unemployment, solid wages but nothing that was a huge surprise to the up side no mass revisions to previous months. >> you feel better, austan, about your gloom and doom? >> i feel better. >> yeah? >> i feel better but i will say, the two things that don't make me feel as good are the most cyclical sectors it seems like are the ones that are doing the worst in the report. if you look at manufacturing or construction, or those -- >> construction was up, just for the record. >> oh, construction's up >> it was negative in february, which is why i thought there was a weather impact. >> okay. so then i'm not feeling as bad i still am wondering about this productivity if growth is slowing as much as the gdp numbers say, but we're still getting decently strong jobs numbers, that suggests that productivity must not be growing as fast as we thought, and so, i'm a little worried about that. >> lanhee, does that -- >> yeah, this is sort of the

million-dollar question, you know, what exactly is going on here the health care number was strong, i think as i recall, 40-some-odd thousand, which is interesting, given the uncertainty around health care the last several months. i thought that was interesting i think the health care sector in general is thinking about what comes next. so the fact that they're adding jobs and creating jobs there i think is a good sign so it was a great number, actually, a lot higher than i expected, that's for sure. >> also, the workweek went up. >> yeah, workweek's big here. >> and that's an input in another way into gdp i don't know, austan, if you want to take that for a second if people are working longer i see what you're saying about productivity, that you've got to get the growth -- >> hours are the same as jobs. >> hours are jobs, right >> and the total hours worked in the economy, part of that comes from the extensive margin of people get a new job and part of it is people work more hours on the job they're in we still have this, if output's up 1% and total hours worked are

up 2%, it means that productivity is probably going to be negative and so, we've got to just keep an eye on that, because that's the thing that's the most tied to wages, or supposed to be. >> rick, we are seeing the market pick up on this news. dow futures now indicated up by about 82 they were up about 30 points when we started. what are you hearing down there on the floor what's your reaction as a former trader >> well, you know, interest rates popped a little bit. they came right back to kind of prenumber levels you're right about the equities. you know, this report, the headline's good. and hours worked, i'll talk to ed lazear, that's his big thing. that's really a big positive and austan, you are right, that is like jobs it's creating jobs but i don't like the retracement that's going on in labor force participation. that's disturbing, because to me, the meat on the bone, the optimism that we can really extend here is that the pool of available workers -- and we can debate skills at another point -- is actually much bigger, and what could be transferred back into the productive economy

and we have seen that dynamic. so, that retracement makes me a little bit nervous -- >> no, rick, rick -- >> on wages -- >> don't -- >> i'm not done! >> okay. >> wages, i'm not happy about the month-over-month year-over-year isn't bad that's a little disturbing okay, what's up, steve >> i don't want you to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. the labor force participation rate should be falling much more than it is it's a huge success to have gone up and remain up you've got -- >> i completely disagree with that logic and i disagree with the 99% of economists that spew it a year ago, nobody thought we could get to these levels! >> steve and rick literally have the exact same number, and they've won, and they're both like, you're wrong, i was right! >> i would have pleaded the fifth number amendment yeah, i didn't know that was his number. >> if you guys can put up lp from -- >> you know how many people that represents i do get excited about it. yes. >> rick, it's a victory. people must be coming back into

the workforce to maintain 63% because so many are leaving because they're retired, demographics inexorable in that regard i will say one other thing, though, rick, which is i want to look at the fed funds futures, where we've been the market seems to have correctly priced this. it went a little crazy last week, the week before, betting 50%, 60% for a rate cut. it's now down to around 30%. this was before the number it remains there that feels a little bit more right to me than it did on the 50%. >> and kate, just watching, the futures continue to pick up. >> yeah. >> dow futures now up over 100 points and the s&p futures up by 10 points. this comes after six days in a row of gains in the markets closing yesterday at their highest level, for the s&p and dow at least, that we've seen in six months. >> we've had this phenomenal run through 2019, and that's been great, but mostly driven by multiple expansion, higher prices and lower downward earnings revisions so the thing i'm most focused on now that we've gotten through this payrolls report is actually the guidance from companies about their full-year 2019

expectations. >> right. >> because if they say first quarter wasn't as soft as we had expected, and actually we feel better either reiterating our current guidance or raising, i think that would put a little bit of a floor in terms of downward revisions to earnings expectations and we'll see a little bit of a pickup. >> we're at on the s&p the year-end target of a lot of the market strategists we're at almost 2,900 -- >> above in some cases. >> yeah, above should we go home? >> we shouldn't go home, but we should expect a little bit more noise in the second and third quarter. if we don't get it i'll get a little worried we can't just drive this entire year with multiple expansion it has to be driven by fundamentals. >> what, you're laughing, rick, because they all went to 2,507, remember, rick, in december. >> i do remember year-ends are tough to call. it's kind of like fed fund futures. they remind me of the percentage odds in vegas of the cubs winning the world series we can take a snapshot at various points in the season, but somehow after you watch a few games, it always changed.

>> lanhee, what else do you take away from this >> i mean, there's a resiliency here to the economy that i think is quite impressive. >> really? >> we've come back to a trend -- yeah. >> really? >> i think so. >> tell that guy next to you. >> by the way, this is all in spite of all of the rhetoric and the uncertainty and, you know, the president sort of saying different things on different days people sort of return to the fundamentals, which i think are still quite strong and so, i see a quite resilient picture right now. >> austan -- >> this is exactly -- we had these exact type of numbers, and joe condemned them this is the worst! >> you average 1.7 for eight years! >> you're counting the recession, joe. >> take a pill -- >> not after the recession ended. >> do we really want to go back over this? >> no. >> let's ask austan the question -- >> things are better now. >> what is the status of thinking among economists, which has been wrong for a while, about running out of workers here we lost a giant in alan krueger,

one of the main thinkers on this issue. where are we now we keep printing 190, 180's the average. we're only bringing 80, 90 into the workforce. >> i think that a lot of the people who -- they ought to be held to task for having predicted for ten years we're in imminent danger of inflation, and we ought to start typing right away because the economy's about to overheat. the skills gap, there aren't any workers left that's not proven to be true and that has not proven to be true -- >> or that i'll add stimulus made a difference in the credit crisis let's go, austan want to start at the beginning want to play >> rick, i'm sorry, were you saying something of why did we cut taxes $2 trillion in the middle of a boom >> and why's japan going to raise them watch what their markets do, austan watch what their markets do! you want to turn us into japan, huh? >> so angry -- >> not angry >> still so angry. >> you keep glossing over all of the mistakes that's what makes me angry.

>> the stimulus package such as it was, engineered the biggest turnaround in gdp -- >> oh, god the u.s. economy would have bounced -- a waste of money, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah you're wrong >> you are you're blah, blah, blah, blah, rick. >> wrong, wrong -- >> wait, wait, wait, blah, blah, blah, everybody. let's come back. let's come back. >> cash for clunkers, rick. >> i'll give you numbers the worst bounce after recession in the history of mankind! >> 19 minutes to the weekend, guys. >> i'm going to give you the number, rick -- >> we're almost there. >> shovel-ready -- >> that's why the expansion lasted so long, because it didn't start until 2014. >> shovel-ready. cash for clunkers. >> austan, tell me, stepping back, if we're going to take a look at -- still going back to the 20,000 number from last month. we go back to this what worries you what are the potential hurdles that could come, versus, okay, this looks really resilient? >> i think that inverting of the

yield curve and everything in that space ought to make anybody nervous. there may be reasons why it doesn't apply the way it has in the past, but that ought to make people nervous the other reasons for nervo nervousness, our consumer confidence went down in a lot of the most cyclically dependent sectors still don't look great on the strong side, as steve says, the labor force that we continue to find workers we still have decent jobs numbers on a three-month average. and if we can keep plugging along at 2.5%, let's say, for the year, that's respectable it's perfectly solid that's not recession, and that's good >> lanhee, you're more bullish, right? >> yeah. >> and 2 1/2 would be 40% higher -- >> i asked what would be the potential -- >> no, i heard, but it would be 40% higher than what you delivered, austan, 2 1/2. >> if you help the recession that was going when we came in,

yes, i agree. >> usually you have a sharp snapback after a deep recession. you don't barely get to two. anyway. >> fundamentally, i am optimistic what i worry about is a little bit of immunity to the dysfunction. we have become immune to all of the noise, and it seems like people are starting to really -- you know, it's like, after you hear the noise a lot for a while, you just don't pay as much attention to it well, what happens if that noise actually at some point pops up and it's really noise? then have we prepared ourselves properly that's what i worry about a little bit, and it's not just from the executive, it's congress' inability to do something, but what if they decide to do something crazy, which they could for political reasons, and we're coming into an elections cycle so that i worry about a little bit. >> there used to be conventional wisdom that discord in washington was good for business and environment, no changes in regulation or legislation. everyone could just keep to their knitting >> although i've got to say -- >> but -- >> -- what would happen if either party were to take all three positions at this point? because the positions that get thrown out there are so

extreme -- >> exactly. >> -- that it's a deviation from the norm -- >> rates are turning back up here, gang. >> at the same time, i think businesses are trying to focus on what does the demand look like, what does the trade situation look like? where are the pockets of weakness, uncertainty? i think if we get a lot of noise going into the 2020 election, and it shakes confidence a little bit further, because we're already seeing not just a rollover in consumer, but also a rollover in corporate confidence and cfo surveys, et cetera, that that could lead to slightly slower activity, but we're constructive for 2019. i'm just watching this tone from companies very closely. >> rick? >> i think, kate -- just real quick. the economy seems to be okay the question is profits, right i mean, i think you're going to do -- i think 2%'s a lock, which i'll take any day, because that i think is still potential it may be a couple tenths above that this year question is what happens to corporate profits and how much they come off with both the comparison of last year and the reality of how they react to the -- >> right, slower activity and

the comps are really challenged. >> rick, what do you think >> and the wage gains. >> wage gains, good point. >> the rates are really starting to move here, gang we need to pay attention we're trading cycle highs off the lows that we established for example, 2.54% right now on a ten-year note. 2.55ish was the breakdown point, the early 2019 low-yield close that was 2.38% in twos we're getting very close if we start to go through those levels, you could see action in equities and that would fertilize the cross side in equities. >> and dollar spiking a little. >> yes yeah, they're very close we're within striking distance of a 21-month high in the dollar and the euro right now at 112.18 hasn't closed under 112 in the same 21 1/2-month period. >> rick, can you look at the board and tell me what the chance of the cubs winning the world series is right now? is that also moving as well?

>> yeah, yeah, no! to me, it looks like about the same chance as going into a recession. >> okay. >> all right, our -- >> ha ha >> about 20%, 21%. >> thanks to our jobs panel, lanhee, kate, steve, rick. have a great weekend, everybody. austan's going to be with us for the rest of the hour. we have a lot more to come, your morning stock movers. we'll talk about that after the break. and later, an interview with under armour chairman and ceo kevin plank. his company's got two of this weekend's final four teams in the men's ncaa tournament. wearing under armour gear. that interview comes your way on "squawk on the street" at 10:15 eastern time stay tuned you're watching "squawk" on cnbc which ones target your goals? it's not about quantity. it's about quality. no trendy stuff. i want etfs backed by research. is it built for the long-term? my reputation depends on it. flexshares etfs are designed and managed around investor objectives. so you can advise with confidence. before investing, consider the fund's investment objectives,

risks, charges and expenses. go to flexshares.com for a prospectus containing this information. read it carefully. ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪

could yyeah, of course. files? what is going on guys? oh hey, servicenow frees us up to do the work we want to do. so we're digging out from all the work we don't want to do. ugh, getting rid of so much paperwork. oh, doug. i didn't know you still worked here. i called for help but no one came. [ laughing ] classic doug. okay, carry on. yup. can you call my wife? thanks. servicenow. works for you.

welcome back to "squawk box. the government's latest employment report showing an addition of 196,000 jobs to nonfarm payrolls last month. the unemployment rate at 3.8%. and the futures responded positively, up 97 points now the dollar stronger and the ten-year after rates initially sold off down to about 2.52%, turned around as you can see with the dollar, now back to 2.538. >> under an hour until the open on wall street dom chu joins us with a look at some of the morning's biggest movers and dom, just watching what's happened since the jobs report could change a lot of things, too. >> it could. but some of these are individually driven based upon just specific catalysts on the analyst side of things

we'll start for instance here with shares of intel, becky, down about a percent or so roughly about 100,000 shares of premarket voumt. the computer chipmaker do downgraded from wells fargo to outperform, citing a more balanced of the given recent run-up on stocks and more heated competition with advance micro devices. next up is boston beer company which is down 3% or so on thin premarket volume they started to increase head winds on competitive front and tougher comparison on the company's fmb growth it makes twisted tea

shares of deutsche are downgrading constellation brand. investments and drinks before 9:00 a.m., it is 5:00 some where. those shares are half a percent. back over to you >> thank you, we have a couple moments left, i want to get his thought on the hedge dalio-reform where we debated this earlier capitalism is not working well posiing a threat for the u.s all good things taken to an extreme can be self-destructive. this is true for capitalism. this is not an argument against c capitali capitalism he's saying we need to reform

the system >> yeah, i may be agreeing with that i am a capitalist, i think it is clear that markets are critically important for achie e achieving a bunch of the goals that we want it is interesting that you dee da li dalio and dimon and not everybody is sharing the same prosperity >> what's the answer >> there are many possible answers. one answer is don't go cut taxes, $2 trillion to big corporations and high income people in the face of the conditions that everybody can see with their own eyes. you look and a tiny fraction of 1% are having huge income gains, why cut tax on top of that

i think other parts of it are increasing ownership for folks, increasing investment in our own people we'll see how it plays out >> do you like the earn income tax credit yes, i have. i think that helps a lot it has helped a lot. >> do you believe there is a mobility problem in the country? >> geography >> income mobility in the 1970s you used to do better than your parents and today it is a much harder thing to do. >> has it gotten worse >> yes >> some of the evidence says it has been about the same but they highlight the geography is very different. in some parts of the country it is virtually impossible to get

into the top and others there is progress >> they did not start at the top. >> that's not feudalism compares to the way it was in europe. >> compares to medieval times. >> if you are born into a neighborhood and your parents are able to help you with school and things, obviously you do better this is a country where you can still make it if you work hard >> i agree with that >> i am not saying you should not try to make it better for people >> i think we are all doing better >> the bar is so much higher than it was years ago. >> let's get down to the new york stock exexchange. our problem is we cut taxes on corporations that's why it is causing income inequality i am exhausted it is friday i had a tough week

>> at law school democrats were against tax corporations as were the republicans. it is a tax on another tax you tax at one level and you tax it again that's not the american way. i found things incredible and how things have shifted over the years. a lot of the idea that ronald reagan had is considered to be left wind idea we are more flexible of politics and what's considered makes sense. you can say what you want about rich people or poor people corporate tax had not been a great way to raise money a lot of countries around the world understood that. i hate to kind of get caught up in politics. it is just bad policy. >> right exa exactly. >> i don't know where you got it you must have read jaime dimon's letter did you see a lot of hand ring

>> he had a lot of good common sense ideas. that i felt could be embraced by both parties i thought the spirit of it, here are some things the left and right can agree on it that makes the country great. it is about china being united it is about every person in america could find correct as oppose to some of the things that's controversial he's a banker, he cannot run for president. boy there was a lot of stuff in there wow, i think that's something we all share i thought it was very smart. >> it is almost an answer to the what is the mainstream political thinking with millennials and aoc and everything else. >> it is common ground i thought it was great what can i say >> jim, thanks, we'll see you in a couple of minutes. we want to thank our guest for being here this hour when is your next trip back here >> when is my dinner

>> i will make the reservation >> he comes in, i fine out you are here this morning. >> you can't buy your way out of this or spend your way out of this >> when are you coming bk?ac >> stay tuned, "squawk box" will be right back. ♪ at pgim, our bottom-up approach uses a technology lens to identify long-term winners. from energy... to real estate... to retail. finding such opportunities for alpha is the true value of active investing. and around the world, you have a partner in that pursuit. pgim: the global investment management businesses of prudential.

your daily dashboard from fidelity. a visual snapshot of your investments. key portfolio events. all in one place. because when it's decision time... you need decision tech. only from fidelity.

the quarter is a little stronger we see the future picked up. have a great weekend everybody, we'll see you next week. right now it is time for "squawk on the street" ♪ it is friday morning, welcome to "squawk on the street. i am carl quintanilla with jim cramer and david faber that's going to help the stocks finish a strong first week after the quarter after the best q-1 in years our road map is going to begin with the jobs bounce back.