those from 15 to 20%, defendant from 15 to 43%, i think whether or not we go over the fiscal cliff it will be a terrible road for america. lou: we have time for you to finish your thoughts, we have 15 seconds, 19 asemiautomatic weapons, handguns your view in. >> my view we had 6-year-olds with 3 to 11 wons in eac 11 wouh their little bodies, we have to do something with this, australia did it after a mass murder is worked. jim: lou: thank you for your views, and thank you for sharing them with us, that is it foo us, join us here tomorrow, good night from new york. york. >> unions, i think they could be the death of us, welcome, i am neil cavuto, despite throwing

some punches over michigan becoming a right-to-work state, many unions, making sure the other 26 states do not follow. that does not mean that unions have given up on michigan and maybe ball the governor who put this, does wisconsin ring a bell? that is not a surprise. but what is a surprise how they are doing it. this could be the union equivalent of the pledge by enforced by louder and stronger guys. they have no issue, a pledge not to break up unions. never mind this threatens businesses coming to their state or hiring more workers in their

state, a lot figure out if they are not union workers, maybe they are knol not real workers,s such edstupid, and dangerous. do you want to know my biggest worry for the new year? it is not a cliff, i think will pass, stubborn politicians see the night. it is be on i union bosses who e their own members because they are fuse on see the light. why not stop? >> why not, because the essence of what we need in the economy is build rebuild, and preserve a stable middle class, after world war ii, strong union, businesses

who understood value of a well paid workforce and government policies combined to create middle class in the u.s. was the envy of the world. neil: i agree, but you think now they are over pushing it. >> i think that people are going too far are the governors, who are attempting to really under cut the middle class. neil: how are they doing that but just letting people decide for themselves? >> when unions are stronger, they have the a bum to negotiate on --ability to negotiate on behalf of their members, when it happens, wages go up, and wages for the whole economy goes up, right-to-work states where it is has not helped build new jobs but depressed wages by about 1,500-dollars in every state. >> katie?

>> well, i would say that states have right to work laws have a lower unemployment rate than those who do not. in terms of why people are not joining unions, when they have a choice, we have a perfect example. the recall in wisconsin that went wrong, unions spent $20 million on that, they were not successful, now they want to do it in michigan, in wisconsin, it shows why people do not want to join unions their dues are going toward mittal causes -- political causes, that may might not agree with rather than helping the workers that we call the middle class. neil: you could argue, if things were going really well they would gladly pay the dies and have no question. if they were not going well, they would not pay the dues because they don't think they are getting their money's worth that their choice. >> there is a tremendous aim of

economic insecurity, people feel they do not have enough income, if they could not pay dues and still enjoy the benefits of them negotiating on their behalf. neil: they get 4%f pay raise if they are lucky, but it takes an expensive union with expensive dues to get me that. >> in places where union density it lowest wage, and unions have been strong, in the midwest, and auto industry, that is rebounding. creating a lot of jobs, those are strong union jobs. in michigan it is a mistake to say that unions are ruining the state, they are protectors of middle class wages and style of life for people that are not you know, upper income college educated people. i think it is essential we preserve that middle class. when you lessen the union's a bum to function politically.

the result is lowering of wages. >> nothing to do with foreign competition or anything like that ? >> of course it does, but it is major factor. neil: katie, he does raise a good point. that wages do go down. now more jobs come into the picture, but jobs 10 not to be as well paying, is that gist the flip side of right-to-work states a sacrifice you make? >> more people an opportunity to work and move their way up, whereas states with a higher un. am ratunemployment rate, which e union states, for example michigan has a horriblic next detroit you can buy a house there for $1,000. and like i said. neil: you could argue too a lot

of those auto company management of not -- candidates themselves, they screw ued up. but i will say, what worries me, this notion that you know when you are wounded, you can be very aggressive. you can go too far. i'm worried that unions go too far. or interpret an elect, they did help bring president obama over the finish line, that qualifies them now to just, pull out all of the stops. >> they are doing why -- giveying people an example of why they don't want to be in a union, they are using union dues to pay for the political causes that not everyone agrees with, this is not about the governors of the states attacking the

union, this is about the union attacking itself, not giving the people a choice to be in it or not. neil: a lot were annoyed. many say i like president obama, but you know cool it. >> i really disagree. if you look at what happened in 2012 elect, we had a very clear choice between an economy that was tilted to the rich, and let the benefits trickle down. if you would or under president obama leadership to build from middle class out. and president obama won -- >> i'm giving your forces credit for delivering the vote, they got out the vote, and turned out to are far more passionate about it than republicans, to your credit. but there is a big difference between getting out the vote and making since, i think that -- sense, i think they feel, and maybe president feels beholden to unions, and unions to him to

look after each other, and for something that the public did not slow the for. -- this is not a collective bargaining thing like wisconsin, this is just a free choice thing, if you don't like it, you don't have to be a part of it. >> by attacking the ability of unions to work on behalf of their maps. neil: why should every public sector worker in the state be part of the union, why? >> because i think what unions have done historically and when they were strong, and are continuing to fight for now is to give workers, whether public or private sector bargain and better wages. neil: let's see if all tv anchors had to be a part of a union, and all camera crews, and someone who does not want to be part of a union is forbidden to

even get to the work site that not fair. >> you don't have to join the union, but you can't take -- >> it's almost impossible. >> you can't get the benefits of union that is working on your behalf and not pay,. neil: you would be open to that if end result of michigan, say yosay-- those who take advantagf it cannot. >> well i really think that -- people don't' those. >> where there are unions representing people, doing a good job. neil: all or nothing. >> people should pay their dues, they don't have to work in a unionized shop. neil: but they like doing what they are doing, they have to be in a union, and they don't want to be in a union. >> but over arching public possibly issue, i think is a middle class needs a workers with reasonable wages.

neil: there was a time for that. >> i think that time is still here. neil: katie. >> if the benefits were so great, people would choose when given the choice to be in the union, in terms of acting like this as some attack on the union, it not, you look at governor scott walker in wisconsin, he put in reforms that state approved of, and they tried to recall him, and he won by a bigger margin the second time, not only did scott walker safe the jobs for union workers but put in place benefit packages that could be sustainable long-term. neil: do you think that republicans risk look, antithe working man by going after the union man? >> i don't think so. the working man is not joining a union. union membership is an all-time low.

>> these governors are doing that, if the governor let it be, and let people choose whether to join a union or not and not under take that assault on the unions -- >> they would reassess and not join? >>i think they would joon. neil: really, we would respectfully disagree. >> calling choice an assault is a little bit of an ex ageration. age -- exaggeration. >> thank you, this one takes the bill, remember that money to help sandy victims. this may be illegal. one stealing dougr for their own pet project should go to jail.

neil: we know what has our focus these days, the tragedy in connecticut, and the crisis over the cliff, but did you catch this, radar posting a decline in second quarter profit this continues a pattern of company warnings that cannot be ignored. worried about things getting bumpy here. he is right, any tax increase on the rich could push us closer to a recession too. tom, you say the sequel could be worse. >> right. i have to tell you fedex, among other companies are concerned about what is going on with the economy. they are hedging themselves, if this administration increases taxes on $250,000, you could see this economy go to a recession. a lot of companies prepare.

neil: do you think this is preblaming, some saying just in case the numbers stink, this is what we're pegging it to? >> a great point. they are forecasting. if this president raises taxes on the wealthy -- >> what if not that wealthy. >> there are studies out there, nancy pelosi and senator schumer said, a million plus. if that happens, the economy will move in a president direction. but you have the rhetoric from this president, that we need to stick to the plan. neil: you like this? >> i think that the economy could handle that. anything less would be detrimental.

on one hand the fed trying to stimulate the economy this president wants to add 50 billion in stimulus, and he wants to raise taxes to hurt the economy, it does not make sense. neil: market merrilly goes along. and economic numbers, are merrilly going along, are they whistling past the graveyard? >> i think that everyone is forecasting. when there is a time of questionability, people do not really divulge what is happening in the companies, they are hedging, they want to see what is happening. neil: so what is fedex saying and so many others that have been warning, test graphing -- dell graphing that things could get dicey here and abroad, what are they seeing? it is beyond a cliff thing? or we seenings slowing down? or what? >> the global economy is

improving somewhat. but this goes back to before the election, companies have been preparing. they don't' what is happening with healthcare costs and taxes. this not for something today but this is over last quarter or two preparing that god forbid this president does get elected and we know his agenda raising taxes, putting regulation on wall street and companies, that it economy could head into a recession. neil: you don't think that it is case of companies giving worse case, and wanting a surprise of the upside? >> that is what i believe. neil: okay let's say things slowdown, how bad does it get? >> we go negative in terms of the economy, gdp, and i think that the unemployment number goes higher, 1 to 2%, if not higher from some time in middle of 2013, and i think companies

will readjust again, that will take us into a further recession, this can be avoided if the president is open minded on working with the business leaders. neil: no, i think he hates you guys, i do. and for you, for him either, but whatever, there is such bad blood. i don't know if he gets warm and cozy. >> rarely do is a dagree with you neil, so i agree with what you said. neil: which is what? >> he doesn't feel for business people, and businesses the way he should feel. neil: i think he wants to stick it to you. >> hopefully not, right, because that would put people at risk with laying off people, peoplelowings jobs. neil: let's say your rate goes up, do you start looking at your firm, and say, you go, you go. >> you do have to readjust your

cash flow. you never -- the worse thing that anyone wants to do saleh ofis -- is layoff people. nobody wants to do that. he has to be open minded to working with the business people of this country. neil: you sound like the guy who i got my first loan with, tom thank you very much, have a merry christmas. >> thank you. neil: tom belesis, a good guy. in the meantime, we did snooping around. you will not like it. this family ed capital one venture miles

to come home for the holidays. that's double miles you can actually use... sadly, their brother's white christmas just got "blacked out." [ brother ] but it's the family party! really jingles your bells, doesn't it? my gift to you! the capital one venture card! for any flight, any time! that's double miles you can actually use! how illuminating. what's in your wallet? let me guess, am on the naughty list again? ho ho ho!

neil: ubs paying a staggering find for rigging a key global

interest rate, 1.2 million going straight to u.s. government, focus on what it is paying that money to. u.s. government. washington. same folks for whom $1.5 million is a rounding error. these guys get the money? have you wondered what the heck they are doing with that money, last i checked there are no lockboxes. those big fine, every year government collects billions, where does that money go? we can't a lick about it forget about finding company that have to hand over the money, how about finding the government that pockets it and doing who knows what with it, marvin, thank you for joining us, where does it go? >> it goes to the u.s. industry,

they pit -- treasury, they put it in general fund 92 not a lockbox thing. >> no unclose court issued a special order it cannot be used to pay the people they claim they are protecting that were injured. it goes to u.s. government to spend like they want to spend, it is almost like a slush fund. neil: the victims of that supposed abuse are not awarded? >> they still have to find their own lawyers. >> money gets dumped in this general fund, what do they do with that? >> they use it for paying interest on bonds, for paying government agencies, for programs they want to finance. the treasury department writes the checks for the u.s. government, they can write it for going they want with that money. neil: do the ones that pay the fine say, all right, this is going to res restitution to peoe

you claim we zhud, or no just pay the fine and get out. >> it used to be that general order will first go to pay investors or jr.ed people, -- injured people, what is left the treasury, now government takes position it goes to treasury, and injured parties or their own. i have seen cases where government does not put money back on table. neil: the numbers are getting big. the fines. i guess it is meant to scare the you know what out of other entities, you have a big pot of money? >> a senator from president obama's home state, he w.h.o. said, a billion here, a billion here, pretty soon you are talking real money, they are talking real money at this point, they claim this is designed to scare the people.

but none of the institutions that paid these huge amounts, have you not seen them going out of, so maybe a quartery's worth of their revenue and profits, they just travel along. not like they are really crippling them. neil: and it does not know much to deter -- if you deem it to be criminal. do you think that the government is more inclined to push big finds like this because it needs money or, what do you think is really driving this? >> well i think two things, government needs the money. and is looking for anyway to raise money across the board. and i think also, they have abandoned idea of staking meaningful action against the corporation, just make them change the way they do business. insped of taking the shareholders money and say we'll

pay you $1.5 billion but it is coming out of your pock et or my pocket. if you are ex shareholder ubs s, now we have punished them. if you punish them there would not be a business tomorrow, city branch paid a huge fine, that is a quarter worth of money for them. it is not having a big impact, it is basically i'll write the check for being a bad boy and be on my way. neil: all right, thank you. next, halftime, full threat else, you do want to see john's tobacco go full throttle.

you do not want to see john angry. something just got john veryrag angry.

neil: halftime full throttle. john mccain is upet that senate is rushing through sandy aid mill. we first brought this to your attendtion last week, setting aside money in the 60 billion sandy helper for folks who do not real need the help. not courtesy of sandy. money for a new roof at the smithsonian in washington, d.c. that was in bad shape even

before sandy. that is the kind of stuff this irks mccain, this is taking good money, and taxpayers po who for2whofork it over on a good r. and you remember these guys, helpers patting each other on the back. >> we're pleased that under leadership of janet napolitano and fema. >> fema has been fantastic. >> you hear nothing but good things g about fema about this continues to be my number one priority. neil: that is what really annoys the storm victims, not so much help was immediately on the way, but they were high five each other, fooling the nation to thinking that help was already

there. let's say staten islander, wall street veteran said, not every penny goes to victims, it goes to politicians, john, taken it to his own hands to help out people with volunteer project. wide wednesday respect among everybody. >> thank you, neil. neil: what do you think of this? all this money, and a lot not going to those affected? >> i wish i could get into my true staten island vernacular to express the words, when i see this bill, i am resulting mad, -- ripping mad, whatever happens to staten island right now could

happen to them, why in god's name do we care about alaska fisheries, you know on the ground, i am a really sensitive guy, been helping people sunday two, there are people in staten island living in gutted home, model rimold ridden, and new hed new electricity, and yet we have to worry about a new roof for the smith sonnian, i don't get it. the humanity of people should get the bill through. do we really need to coax people. we have on bribe them? stick pork and earmarks with into a people so they can get the help they need, this is sickening, almost sinful to think our politicians need to

get money their are for their pet projects so staten islanders can get help. >> and this bypasses the folks it is meant to help even that does money that gets into help them. that will never makes it way to them, it will make it to large agents and barr creas bureaucrar filter down. >> we have a potpourri of task forces and agents out there assessing the damage, and trying to tell the state and city. neil: what do they do run around with clip boards? >> they do, they have clip boards, and they bac back flappg with politicians,. neil: what do you do with the fema officials? >> we don't see the officials, we see the reps, they are holed

up in a trailer making decisions on what next person they will appoint to what next task force. but people are not getting any help. and what i can tell you, that there one guy who i think has a good solution, new york state senator, andrew lande, he reached out the me today, said, john, i need you and i need you to find me guys like you on the ground i can bring civilians into this task force, give us ideas where we need help, and what we can do with this money when he get it. how -- >> we're channeling it through washington, and the agents and regional heads then to staten island, then jersey shore, pennies on the dollar by that point. >> the smit sitting son --

smithsonian roof, and the alaska fisheries. >> they need them. >> but people need heat, we need others to rec mysel recognize te sector has to be parts of the solution, right now i do not see it. >> thank you, john. john puts his money where his mouth is. way before fema. >> what is rich to you? $250 thousand, 400,000, a million? result ber ross doesn't -- wilbur ross doesn't that the rich are a target. no matter where you are in that spectrum, so are you. from the best players in history

to the number 1 club in the world. the potential of manchester united unlocked. nyse euronext. unlocking the world's potential. can i still ship a gift in time r chrisas? yeah, sure you can. great. where's your gift? uh... whew. [ male announcer ] break om the holiday stress. ship fedex express by december 22nd for christmas delivery. by december 22nd yep, there i am with flo. hohoo! watch it! [chuckles] anyhoo, 3 million people switched to me last year, saving an average of $475. [sigh] it feels good to help people save... with great discounts like safe driver, multicar, and multipolicy. so call me today. you'll be glad you did. cannonbox! [splash!]

>> we should be raising taxes on the wealthiest few. >> our plan b would protect american taxpayers who make a million dollars or less. >> all we heard from them is they don't want to tax the rich. >> there are a lot of people who make above 250 who are not rich. >> let the expire like they are sun owessed to. neil: the rich are getting a lot of attention from politicians, billionaire wilbur roth, i guess safe to say, if you are a billionaire you are rich, but the definition has changed, taking from 250,000 to maybe 400,000, boehner today looking

on a vote tomorrow that would put it over a million. bottom line, where do see this going. >> it seems that the argument is about how much redistribution the president theic track. because, whether it is one sealing or another is not moving the dial in terms of total tax revenues that are collected. so, i think these are not economic issues, these are political issues. neil: what worries me about it, i accept, as a consequence of this election, that the rich will have to pay more, i do not like it, i do not think it is necessary, is it is, what it is. what worries me is we're spending more time defining the kind of tax hikes we get than the spends cuts. >> that is the real issue, the problem not we're under taxing

the population but the problem is we're over spending. neil: but it is falling on deaf ears, most like line -- like nt a issue. we're making the concessions left and right on revenues, we're closer to where you are mr. president, you are nowhere close to us on spending. >> the president has to move some if he has a negotiated settlement. boehner is taking a very big political risk by endorsing this package. neil: the two-part plan. how do you think that goes? >> i think it gets through, i think there will be a lot of grumping, i think maybe a few democrats that vote for it,

anybody that votes again it will be voting to increase the taxing on everybody. >> do you worry the way that president's using the shooting in connecticut to talk about the nation's it is course, and mood and attitude we should not be sniping over this, republicans, just go with me, and quit fighting me. >> i don't know that the republicans are sniping more than democrats, you saw arm waving and stuff of nancy pelosi and harry reid today, they did not seamles seem any less excit. >> do you get a sense fitch rattles cages today, moving on, saying that a bad deal is not

going to save you from a credit downgrade, much like when s&p downgraded, over a year ago, it was after the deal. it did not matter. cuts were not there and they punished them. could the same happen? >> it could. it would not surprise me if one or another of the agency did downgrade, it would not surprise me if interest rate paid on treasury debt did not change as a result. i think people know the situation, i don't think that rating anxieties at had level -- agencies at this level determine the interest rate. neil: how do you think that markets will do? >> i think they will be okay, if there is a reasonable resolution. neil: if not rea reasoning at rn

what? >> if depends on how people interpret it. we're going over a cliff. some kind. there will be some spending cut, and some tax increase, this is not a question of no cliff but how steep is the cliff, and how does it interact with the rest of the economy. i think protects the people, ma the hundreds of thousands with a very good idea. neil: you seem calm and serene. >> i got my first and best christmas present, richard branson gave he the shift shirt off his back, they sponsor a football team, he put on the back, i'm number one,. neil: that is a pairing i would

have never envisioned, you and richard branson. >> wilbur thank you very much. yesterday we told that you government is protecting birds by finding oil companies.

neil: in tonight's let me be brief. environmentalists right now, did you hear about this, epa is forcing taxpayer to clean up mess that bankrupt or gone companies left in their town, for some homeowners could add up

to tens of thousands of dollars to their tax bill. is that right? the government and businesses should pick up the tab but attorney kelly said that taxpayers should be responsible, kelly explain. >> well, this thing is who else will pay for it? government does not have the money. come from tax dollars, if the particular instance we're taking about, it is an area in philadelphia where, there is lead in the ground, and homeowners are getting tax breaks, and this is 150 years in the community they got jobs from the companies. >> all right. , i'm thinking of a new neighbor, someone just moved in. unbeknown to them, i am now sad olded with this about it goes to knowledge at the end of the day who knew about this lead issue,

was it disclosed. i think that epa, if you go to their web site they talk about a duty to protect health of the citizens and our environment. so, who knew? if they have a duty, did they know at the time that this was going to happen? or should they have known? we're talking about lead. neil: what about all of the companies that were there. they are now out of business or gone or kaput. >> you have to break it down? did they try to protect themselves? did they protect themselves in bankruptcy, or did they change their name. neil: you would try to track them down? >> you have to, they created this mess. neil: they are long gone? >> sure, then that is the problem, then i agree, you have to go to taxpayer because, they pay for it through epa or federal money. neil: kelly, we're left with a

lot of taxpayer there, paying a lot. in some cases tens of thousands more for this clean up, that they are saddled with even those who moved in knew nothing about it are now getting reamed, and they can't sell their homes, they are sitting on lead. >> you are right, and i am not -- you know it stinks, but it only viable solution. these fundses for the epa have been cut, as far back as 2002 from the bush administration, it is government employees they are moving slow, the businesses go out of business. neil: the lesser of evil thing. you don't like saddles the government because that is us, and you don't like saddling the people in the community because it is not their fault but they are the closest to the fire. >> government can say we want

your property, we will pay your value, to build a stadium or whatever, but in a case like this, we don't want your property, i think they -- if they want the benefit of their purchase. they should also be able to -- or be forced to buyback the land that people relied on. neil: wasn't it that epa's responsibility to check with the companies? >> sure, but this happened so long ago, isn't that our argument always. neil: we pay. >> that means we pay, full circle comes back to our tax dollars, is this a universal problem. and the epa is very behind. they are saying one in four americans in within i think a 10-mile radius. neil: you are saying someone is

getting screwed regardless. >> they always do 92 . neil: i am not happy about that.