we replaced people with a machine.r, what? customers didn't like it. so why do banks do it? hello? hello?! if your bank doesn't let you talk to a real person 24/7, you need an ally. hello? ally bank. your money needs an ally. neil: you havarti hurdler this guy had to say. and this guy. what he had to say. did you catch what this guy had to say? the biggest speech wasn't the

one you likely watch. but here's one you unfortunately missed. relax, because tonight, rimmed policy her. rand paul is here. welcome, everybody. i am neil cavuto. rand paul has crunched the numbers about what the president has said and says it is about to explode the deficit and there is no way you can talk about spending on things like infrastructure, kind of change initiatives come in green initiatives, all kids initiatives, and so many other initiatives. without initiating a lot bigger deficits. rand paul is here to say that not only does the math not add up, nothing of that. senator, it is great to have you. >> thank you for having me, neil. neil: or do you do now?

what do you do? what you advocate republicans do? >> i think we have to point out the truth. we cannot let the president went on the country saying that he has cut the deficit by $2 trillion. well, that is absurd. we have increased our debt by $6 trillion in his first term. what did he say? bowl, because i didn't increase it, i have reduced it to trillion dollars? that is absurd. he added $6 trillion to the debt and that is just a fact. he must have listed 50 different new programs and they are not going to cost you anything. neil: the deficit immediately raised concerns as to how it will be paid for. when he mentioned about closing tax loopholes and raising

billions of dollars, doing now, and then mitt romney saying about something that he wanted to do, do you think he was setting the stage for more tax hikes to pay for what could be hundreds of billions of dollars of new spending? >> i can tell you that there is absolutely no room for raising taxes. the thing is if we were going to have true tax reform, which means lowering rates and getting rid of loopholes, there is a lot of support for that. but nothing he is talking about is lowering rates. he wants to increase rates for if he wants to squeeze more money out of those that are working hard. he just did that. he stuck it to the rich people at the end of the year..3 he got what he wanted. but he is not going to get any more tax revenue. it will injure the economy. we think it will cause more unemployment. so we will not go along with that.

neil: you know what worries me is in general, we have given up the fight. we are done. what we think will ultimately be for $4 trillion in budget savings over the next 10 years, it's not a done deal yet. you know, that's it. that's the end of it. that worries me because it is a debt that is larger than it is in 10 years. there's a lot of wiggle room in that. what is going on? deployed this is the biggest signature issue of our time. >> he says things out of both sides of his mouth. he says he is ready to embrace things from bowles-simpson. but they talked about raising the age of eligibility for social security and medicare. and then another part he says, absolutely coming somewhere to do anything for the retirement age. i really don't know what he's talking about or if he really is

intending to address the problems at all. entitlements are growing so rapidly, they will consume all the money in the budget within a decade. there will be no money for defense. no money for any discretionary programs. neil: you are right. it's a train that before it happens. but i guess what i want to ask you, sequestration cuts, they kick him march 1. and obviously the way to avoid them is to come up with other cuts or republicans to swallow revenue hikes. given that, i would assume that rand paul would go ahead and let the sequestration cuts come. >> yes, i think they have to. americans need to know that the sequestration, the $1 trillion is a cut in the rate of increase in spending. >> that is very crucial. i am glad you made a crucial point.

>> spending over the next decade will go up between seven and a $8 trillion, even with the sequester. no one is cutting the real amount of spending. that is why the deficit will continue to rise over the next decade. even with the sequester. i think the sequester is a beginning. you have to do it. and you have to do much more than that if you're going to preserve us from a debt crisis down the road. neil: you know, we always see our debt threaten to be downgraded by bringing it to the brain. time and again, you're up against a deadline. there is all this hammering and yammering over everything. that is not the underlying problem. you agree that? he gets downgraded, they don't see us acting and addressing our deficit problem. but the other thing people need to realize is if we don't fix these problems, what happens is we pay for the debt, you lose purchasing power. the president claims that he

cares about the poor and middle class and senior citizens. but really he doesn't. he is stealing their money, devaluing their currency, it's a sleight-of-hand. the poor people are struggling, people on social security do not get cost-of-living increases. they struggle to make their tax balance each month and buy food because we have this massive deficit and they lose purchasing power. neil: your view is you suspect that republicans would opt for letting that cut chicken? >> i think so. i think there is more resolve than letting the sequester happen now than there was three months ago. >> okay, thank you, senator. good to see you. okay, coming up. police arresting darryl hannah

today. she is very much in trouble and care to explain. and apple getting blasted for having too much cash. if only washington had that kind of problem. or 47 different companies. well, technically i work for one. that company, the united states postal service®, works for thousands of home businesses. because at usps.com®, you can pay, pnt and have your packages pked up for free. i can even drop off free boxes. i wear a lot of hats. well, technically i wear one. the u.s. postal service®, no business too small.

when the doctor told me that i could smoke for the first week... i'm like...yeah, ok... little did i know that one week later i wasn't smoking. [ male announcer ] along with support, chantix is proven to help people quit smoking. it reduces the urge to smoke. some people had changes in behavior, thinking or mood, hostility, agitation, depressed mood and suicidal thoughts or actions while taking or after stopping chantix. if you notice any of these stop taking chantix and call your doctor right away. tell your doctor about any history of depression or other mental health problems, which could get worse while taking cntix. don't take chantix if you've had a serus allergic or skin reaction to it. if you develop these stop taking chantix and see your doctor right away as some can be life-threatening. if you have a history of heart or blood vessel problems, tell your doctor if you have new or worse symptoms. get medical he right away if you have symptoms of a heart attack. use caution when driving or operating machinery. common side effects include nausea, trouble sleeping and unusual dreams. it helps to have people around you... they say, you're much bigger than this. and you are. [ male announcer ask your doctor if chantix is right r you.

>> it is time for an increase in minimum wage. because if you work full time, you should not be in poverty. neil: we could have talked to an economist about that whole minimum wage thing that came out of the blue and the president's address last night that he was shipping today. but we thought, why not go to the very people that would have to pay that wage. we welcome our three guests. >> thank you, neil. neil: 9-dollar minimum wage.

are you up for that? >> no, i am not. i can't believe that the president, considering what we are going through, it is going to increase my payroll cost 28%. you can't raise your cost for that. it is ridiculous. the one-two punch is he raises minimum wage and we have the affordable healthcare act coming up, which will cripple us. it's another nail in the coffin. neil: backing out of the blue, it's such a negative. >> it's incredible. he to be told what to do. a 24% increase, it's not right. i have kids that are in school, these kind of jobs, they are not worth more than $7.25 an hour. i raise them, what am i going to pay everyone else? neil: i was thinking that it

would be the same thing if you had more seasonal workers that had been around for a while. 24% boost, the other guys are going to be demanding a boost, right? >> that's exactly right. we hire very few people in minimum wage. but we do hire people above the minimum wage scale. so the people you were paying $9.50, they will now 11150. the money isn't there. $11.50. it's just not there. we are all doing so well, according to the jobs council a few weeks back. neil: part of the strategy, the democrats in general, cobbling everyone together and you have a base that will always be fighting for whatever. they're the ones who are fighting you. you are on the receiving end of

that attack. how does that make you feel? >> well, it makes me mad because at the end of the day, when we just raise the minimum wage to $18 per hour. these people are going to have a job. they're going to get laid off. and if you raise the minimum wage however you want, if we can't afford to pay it, but as a matter? cobbling those people together, but if i don't have a job, what does it matter to them? neil: i don't think it's a stretch. do you still want to keep your business going? whoop-de-do? >> we are either going to have to raise prices, which is very tough, there's not a lot of disposable income out there. cut back on hours and staff. take away things that are not necessities. some of my locations are not exactly the most lucrative ones.

neil: in the end, fewer workers? >> yes, fewer workers. >> the same thing here. we will hire people that are packing cookies, doing that kind of income and they're not going to do that anymore. that is not a 9-dollar per hour job. less people will be on the payroll. it goes back to the same thing. if i have to increase prices, i cut my total sales amount. people don't have the money. when i raise prices, i lose customers. neil: the president is saying we have always heard about minimum wage going up from the work force arrives, things get better, life goes on. you know, they all said, calm

down. what do you say? >> i say that maybe we weren't in the same kind of circumstance that we are now. we are in the middle of huge turmoil. real estate is taking a hit. what are they going to do, knock us down even more? we cannot absorb this hit. not this time. it is not going to happen. maybe before when times were better, but not now. neil: small businesses that pay that. they are the ones talking about it. you guys are the ones disproportionally backed by health care and regulations and etc. you feel like custer ever? >> there is no concrete plan. there is no concrete plan about it.

neil: wait for the win on wind on your back. it's coming. >> it's ridiculous. >> we don't see this. >> people like us, we are struggling and we need help. neil: okay, david, is there a way out of this? what would you tell them to most ease your burden. what would be? >> what you have to do is go back and look at history. we have always got through this before, i will say that. in 1960, there were 1100 bakeries in the city of st. louis. today there are nine. you want to tell me how good we are doing? there used to be a meat market on every third corner.

there used to be a florist on every fourth or fifth corner. do you want to find me a local florist? this is a bunch of bull when they say that we have made it. they businesses have gone more successful. small businesses are going down the tubes. how many mom-and-pop businesses are there left anymore. when you get out of big cities like new york, there are no little grocery stores. there are no little convenience stores on neighborhood corners anymore. small businesses are dying a rapid debt. when you consider how many tens of thousands of businesses have gone under in the last 25 years. mr. president, answer that question for me. >> i would just say, mr. president, commie. because before you make another one of these boneheaded decisions, talk to me. i am going to tell you what the consequences of that decision. we will go up and we will talk to the president. neil: the president is never ever going to call you.

[laughter] you will never get back on. [laughter] >> but why doesn't he talk to small business owners before he goes and pulls this out of his ear and says it's a great idea. it is dumb as can be. if he would have asked some of us, we would've told him. neil: they are not some big, you know, corporation. oblivious to the effects of the common man and woman. they are real. meanwhile, the president is pushing a jobs plan that could not cost a dime. steve is going to make his case next

neil: high-tech steve case is here. talent that investors want to see more of. jerry moran introducing a jobs bill that they believe would do just that. steve, to you first. would this be more effective in generating jobs? >> i think it would be effective. it is one of the recommendations that the jobs council made. now we need to focus on other issues around entrepreneurship. most important one is talent. that is the key to driving an

entrepreneurial economy forward in high skilled immigration has to be a part of any immigration reform. the legislation that was introduced, along with others, it really helps deal with that front and center. our issues around reforming our policy with high skilled workers. neil: one more question on that front. do you think there wouldn't have even been a need for a jobs council from the get-go than? >> i don't think it is helpful, including things like we are no longer focused on. >> it was only supposed to be for two years. i think a continuing effort, making sure that the

recommendations that we may have been put into practice. it can only happen with bipartisan support. >> senator, we are trying to reform the immigration system in our country and deal with the millions here. are we putting foreigners to the front of the line? will they get these great jobs that americans won't? >> it's absolutely a challenge. i certainly think that the review of our immigration policy is important. we have an immigration system that is dysfunctional. people who try to come here legally get trapped in a system that never gives him an answer. the legislation that i and my colleagues have introduced, start up 3.0 deals with a segment of that. one is a stimac issue that has received a lot of attention.

they have an idea to have a dream, they want americans to work. and they are told that they can't do that here in the united states because they can't get the status to stay here. neil: i understand. but how would you address things. we certainly don't want these guys coming here, what you say? >> the visas included our visas that will help me demand work for employees in the united states. we need to spend more time and effort and energy and resources on making certain that americans pursue degrees, advanced degrees in mathematics and science and engineering and research careers. but the facts are that we have

hundreds of thousands over the next few years of job openings. in the absence of being able to feel those with american students who have graduated and are looking for work, if they can't be filled by someone else who has studied in the united states, those who have that skill set and intellect, those companies are going to go outside the united states. the global demand for talent. here is what i say about the legislation. we are talking about it as it relates to the entire immigration debate. in my view, 80% of my colleagues would agree with me. republicans and democrats think that this is common sense. it is about creating jobs and economic opportunities within the united states. if we do not do it, the jobs will be created elsewhere. we cannot wait. 80% of my colleagues agree with me. but yet, there are those that say if we can't do everything, we are not going to do everything. neil: i would like to get a quick lay of the business plan.

the president pushing to raise the minimum wage. nothing for small business, but they feel slighted. more than that, they feel pretty angry. they doubt that they will see much action or much improvement until that focus changes. is there anger justified? >> each case may be different, but i think there is focus on small business. there is an essential driver of our economy. the kauffman foundation data, basically saying that 40 million jobs, we can't just focus on small business and big business, but the entrepreneurial businesses, a source of jobs and

innovatioinnovatio n. economic growth, the only way to solve the fiscal problem in the long run is not just to focus on cutting spending or figuring out ways of revenue, but how do you drive the growth rate. there has to be that of entrepreneurs, this is a step in the right direction. >> thank you both very much. neil: at the white house today, actors darrell hannah was arrested for protesting the keystone pipeline. she is just out of jail. and she stopped by here coming up next. did you know not all fiber is the same?

citrucel is different- itit's the only fiber for regularity that won't use excess gas. it's gentle and clinically proven to help restore and maintain regularity. look for citrucel today.

neil: actress daryl hannah arrested today. >> thank you for having me. neil: you know, you were protesting at the white house. as far as i know, the president said nothing about keystone last night. he is so against it. so why protest outside the white house? are you worried he is going to buckle? >> well, we have never heard him say that he is a guest against

it. it is our to being put in through texas and oklahoma. we are asking him and pushing him to reject the entire keystone pipeline. because it is an export pipeline neil: this comes at a time, another similarly supportive situation, unions. they want the keystone pipeline back online. so the president has to choose between friends. what do you make of unions effectively saying, you environmentalists, pipe down. >> it is interesting. because this pipeline has brought together a lot of

factions, skin service -- conservatives and when you look into it, the promise of jobs the trans canada support. when you look at the big picture, he realized the threat of the climate crisis is still urgent. we have an obligation to act and demand that the keystone not be put through. if we allow it, not only is it only for them to be able to have their product to export, but it was dirtiest form of extreme extraction of fuel on the planet. >> had to explain that to a lot of americans within 30 sunday's? you know, what is really getting me upset, these higher prices.

there is daryl hannah. >> yes, this has nothing to do with our gas prices. it has nothing to do at with that. this is and even gas for us. this is expert on the global market. neil: do you worry about fossil fuel reliance for folks abroad? in the end, in the interim -- it's all or nothing for you? >> no, let's be clear, it is for export. they want to get it into the global market. we are already processing that fuel and oklahoma and other places. they cannot get it to export through their own country. they can't get it -- [talking over each other] [talking over each other] >> the canadians don't want it. [talking over each other] [talking over each other] neil: indulge me, if it were, --

>> it is a moot point. the extreme extraction mining project is a legal product. [talking over each other] [talking over each other] neil: the pipeline will run both ways. we will be able to take advantage of it ourselves on the road. you seem to be denying the opportunity for americans to do that. >> americans are already using this fuel. we are already processing it and other refineries. [talking over each other] [talking over each other] neil: [talking over each other] [talking over each other] neil: if it got to the point where der henle could say, okay,

[talking over each other] neil: this is about clean energy? >> this is about a foreign company using our country, the purity and cleanliness of our water and soil to get their product to market so the global market can sell to china and india and not to give to us. neil: i think yoo are using that as a smokescreen. >> i'm not. i'm not. neil: you're saying that this is going to the various sites around the world. it sounds like you'd still be against it. >> that is ridiculous. there is no way they would even promise that. neil: but you don't like fossil fuels at all. >> definitely time to that we move away from fossil fuels. nevertheless, -- neil: you're not against all the options here? nuclear, wind, solar, you are

not against a full doddle strategy or use the more? >> i am against using things that are destructive to our health and our clean water been tainted, our soil in our lives been tainted. our ecosystem as well. neil: it is good to see you. >> it is good to see you too, thanks. neil: coming up next, we will talk a lot about this

hey, it's me, progressive insurance. yep, there i am with flo. hoo-hoo! 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 y did. cannonbox! [splash!]

>> nothing should increase our deficit by a single dime. neil: do you believe that?

not a single dime? a lot of people are questioning not. the president is telling the truth, says my next guest. he's one of four democrats who brought an undocumented immigrant to last nights night's speech. cumbersome, i want to get into immigration with you in a second, but i added up some of the stuff that the president proposed, and i stopped at about $330 billion. >> here's what i did. i figured i would do my homework on the immigration portion of this program. as you know, grover norquist is ford immigration reform. we heard senator marco rubio yesterday. and others. they are pretty fiscal

conservatives. i think we would all agree on that. $18 billion per year, it is spent on immigration enforcement every year. that is more than the dea all the rest of the federal government combined on enforcement issues. we will save billions of dollars once we legalize that. a lot of people kind of think about this as, well, it costs money. you know what costs money that we cannot be innovative. we do not have the high skilled talent that is necessary. technology, innovation, we can do it right here. we don't have to spend a broad. neil: you are obviously factoring in the savings you will get. [talking over each other] [talking over each other] >> it would not to stop. you know, we currently can take

our resources and better pinpoint those resources to those that are murderers, rapists, causing harm. what we are doing is having 11 million people, you are targeting them. -- there is not going to be any immigration reform package that will fill out an income tax reform at the end of the year. neil: for all the other things that the president wants to do, expanding high school commitments around the country, initiatives in green technology, all of those things, you're going to have to find a way to pay for it. i would take it at face value.

>> the other thing is there will be fees and penalties. [talking over each other] [talking over each other] neil: all of this and how we get to this -- >> and-itis please share and be physically honest with you? i need to evaluate just how it is. neil: do you think you know i like to think he made that up? >> i voted for him, i like them, and he's a great guy. but i don't have an answer. what a difference. when i went and did my homework, please invite me back. neil: you are honest enough to say that. >> it all sounded good to me. things we should do. i do think that he didn't

explain that. but i think i am writing to give that a chance. and an opportunity. neil: congressman cummings always a pleasure. two weeks and $1.3 trillion, i would like you to meet a republican here to say that tax hikes are the alternative, bring it on and let it rip theoys used double miles from their capital one venture card to fly home for the big family reunion. you must be garth's father? hello. mother. mother! traveling is easy with the vture card because you can fly any airline anytime. two words. double miles! this guy can act. wanna play dodge rock? oh, yoguys! and with double miles you can actually use, you never miss the fun.

beard gring contest ango! ♪ i win! what's in wallet?

neil: i am talking

$1.3 trillion, total automatic spending cuts that kick in unless congress wakes up and does something soon. sequestration cuts are actually delayed from late last december, presumably to allow them to prevail and come up with something better. well, those automatic cuts are now very much affecting everything from discretionary and domestic spending. john grasso says the cuts will be the lesser of two evils. the other being higher taxes to offset them. senator, given the choice, what do you do? >> i believe that this requester is going to go into place on march 1. it was originally the president's idea about a year and a half ago. congress passed it during the debate, he said it would never happen. yet he has not proposed a solution. unless you actually pass another law, it cuts it on march 1.

when the ratings agencies downgrade us committee hadn't yet seen a credible plan to provide the confidence that we are really going to deal with our financial problems and this requester is just one step. neil: do you think that the ratings agencies counts when they see charade like this, where you are up against brinksmanship and the deadline and everyone is going to lose their heads and go crazy, and we keep doing this sort of stuff? >> i would like to have a long-term look at social security and medicare, for the next generation. right now we are both on a path to vagrancy with them. i would love to see the kind of arrangement and deal that you had when ronald reagan and tip o'neill worked together in a bipartisan way.

the president really has not worked in a bipartisan way to get to that. neil: he talked about the $4 trillion, sequestration cuts added in there, that is it. the $4 trillion in budget savings, don't look for them to do much more than that. is that right? >> i think you are, it's interesting, the state of the union, it was a laundry list of things if you would like to do, all of which would cost a lot of money. >> the american people are not going to be fooled a second time. he said the second thing, about the health care law. >> i think what he was saying,

it will add a dime to the deficit because i'm going to raise taxes on folks reported. >> it's interesting. entering your first question, the president talked about young people graduating from college with huge educational debt. but every child born in america is born with an incredible debt based on the fact that we have over a 16 trillion-dollar debt in this country. it is a mountain of debt. it is interesting when the president focuses on an individual student college debt. at the graduate can't find a job in an area for which he or she is prepared, but ignores completely the debt on every american. >> senator, it's always good seeing you, thank you. neil: today, apple investors are getting a lashing out. you know what apple's big problem is? way too much cash. they have way too much cash.

[ roasting firewood ]

♪ many hot dogs are within you. try pepto-bismol to-go, it's the power of pepto, but it fits in your pocket. now tell the world daniel... opepto-bismol to-go.

neil: the first lady last night posting investors. apple ceo tim cook, lately he has been getting cooked. more investors are outraged over something they find unforgivable. all of that cash, $137 billion worth of it. one is even soon, saying the money should be given out to shareholders. our guests are discussing this on whether having too much money is a problem. >> tim cook said it himself. a year ago last february, he said yes, i don't know what to do with this money. he promised he was going to do something about it. he was going to sit with the board, but it never happened. so now he had 95 billion in the bank. two thirds of which, by the way, is sitting in foreign banks.

neil: it wasn't as big a deal last year. right now, it's a big deal, is that right? >> well, this is the fundamental problem of what is driving wall street right now. one hundred years ago and people invested, they made fundamentally sound improvements. >> they are holding onto this cash because they don't know what kind of storm might be coming. this might not be enough cash on hand, considering where our tax dollars are going in this country. >> this is david saying, hey, guess what, that's the risk that he takes on. >> it comes from steve who was

paranoid about not having enough money. in 1995, he had to go to microsoft and get $150 million in alone. can you blame him? >> he has a rainy day fund. [talking over each other] [talking over each other] >> not $135 billion. >> a dividend that they haven't given how long would be out of the question. >> i don't know how much of that i would be getting, i'm not saying that he has to pay out. >> he has proven that. [talking over each other] [talking over each other] neil: it was sort of like, taking oil out of the strategic

reserve, you have seen the stocks sink of late are getting antsy and even mad. but now is not the time. >> apple has been making an acquisition every other month for the last 10 years. this company is not sitting around idly. ultimately, apple will do the same thing. rainy day fund response. you guys tell me, it is a half trillion dollars, where is the level when you start to go, okay, these rainy day funds are crazy.

>> cash is power. and they have power right now. if you are going to lose half of its value, it is in a position to buy back stock. >> you are demanding so much more from this company. >> you are forgetting a very important thing. who owns apple? the shareholders do. >> hold on. [talking over each other] [talking over each other] >> is shareholders knew that this was a deal w