thank you. that's three new paper shredders. [ boris ] put 'em on my spark card. [ garth ] boris' small business earns 2% cash back on every pchase every day. great businesses deserve unlimited rewards. read back the chicken's testimony, please. "buk, buk, bukka!" [ male announcer ] get the spark business card from capital one and earn unlimited rewards. choose 2% cash back or double miles on every purchase every day. told you i'd get half. what's in your walle you know how painful heartburn can be. for fast, long lasting relief, use doctor recommended gaviscon®. only gaviscon® forms a protective barrier that helps block stomach acid from splashing up- relieving the pain quickly. try fast, long lasting gaviscon®.

"money" with dennis kneale is next. david: homes for heroes. >> i'm dennis kneale in for

the irrepressable melissa francis. here is what is money tonight. it is code red for the meat industry. possible widespread beef shortage. are the fears overblown? secretary of agriculture tom vilsack joins to us respond. president obama wants $50 billion in fresh stimulus. completely missing out though on $100 billion stimulus already coming, from the private sector. it is an economic boost almost no one has heard about. we'll explain. are rlling blackouts coming to california? officials admit a growing dependence on green energy could cause an electricity crisis. you got to hear it to believe it. we got the details. even when they say it's not, it is always about money. dennis: all right. first let's start with today's market moment. stocks mounting a huge rally today. concerns over europe's debt

crisis eased following a strong debt auction in italy. u.s. pending home sales also topping expectati, hitting close to a three-year high. the best day for the major indexes since january 2nd. the dow is now 89 points away from its all-time high. we'll see if the bulls put it up over the top tomorrow. only two more days before we are hit with the dreaded sequester. now the president has until midnight friday night to sign the order. government agencies are making a list in a last push, sounding the alarm about the dire impact. now the u.s. secretary of agriculture, tom vilsack, has warned that cuts to the usda which oversees safety inspections of meat and poultry and egg processing plants could result a ten million to the industry and higher prices and shortages for consumers. a short time ago i spoke to secretary vilsacksack from

the new york stock exchange whether the whole situation might be blown out of proportion? >> well the reality is the way the sequester is structured we have to cut evy line item of our budget including one in food safety by the same uniform amount. when the food safety budget is predominantly front line inspectors it means we will have to furlough inspectors. when they walk off the line because they'reeing furloughed the plant will have to shut down production at the time of the furlough. that is the unfortunate circumstance of congress not getting its job done by dealing with the deficit and dealing with it in a smart way. dennis: i'm sorr for the rude or impertinent question, given it crisis and food might go out the door without ininspections how would you be at new york stock exchange, shouldn't you be in your desk working on war room. >> first of all let's be clear about this. your food will not leave that facility without being inspected. what it means is the production lines will have to shut down. that is the tragedy of this. and so it's important for folks to understand and appreciate exactly what is

going on here. we are in new york today, in order to talk to folks about the consequences of the see questions ture. we're also -- sequester. we're busy with folks about the knewtics programs and the impact this will have on 600,000 women, infant and childrens who will not get benefits of the wic program if the sequester goes through. dennis: yeah, i see. talk about the meet inspectors. i find it hard to believe, a person running their own shop the way you're running ur own department of agriculture doesn't have a little more discretion, actually cut back on public relations spending. i will cut back on a public ad campaign. i will cut travel. why would you have to cut your inspectors straight out? >> first of all, two reasons. one because the sequester requires it. it requires that every line item be cut by the same amount. there is no discretion, no flexibility. secondly, our budget is actually $1.2 billion less with the sequester than it was in 2009. so we basically gone four years without any increase

and so we have been engaged in all thectivities you mentioned. we've cut travel. we cut conferences. we cut supplies. all told between those efforts and our reduction of our workforce by 8%, we saved somewhere between 700 million and one billion dollars. dennis: i see. >> that is how we have dealt with cuts up to this point. the sequester is on top of that. dennis: or spent that much less versus actually saving it. you only have about 8400, 8500 inspectors, right? they, inspect one out of every what, ten or 100 pieces of meat coming off the plant? what is the ratio of inspections? >> depends on whether you're talking about poultry or procesd beef or processed pork. the bottom line is, that we're fairly confident that in our food supply being safe by systems we have. we're obviously looking at ways to improve the inspection systems. the law basically mandates companies can't sell product unless it has been inspected. it mandates the usda is one does the inspections.

dennis: wonder whether a company can be trusted to protecits own brand making sure not to ship spoiled food. i have a numbers. kind of a "mission impossible". i looked at one of your food service inspection report of 2011, they have 6200, 6300 sites to inspect. they have 147 million head of livestock every year to inspect. they got 9.1 billion chicken carcasses and doing that is maybe like, a staffof 8600 in the field. and which means, i have to be inspecting 53 carcasses per hour, almost one a minute. aren't thee guys kind of rubber stamping stuff anyway? could the food go out and let the company take care of it. >> the problem the law doesn't allow that. it doesn't mandate that. it mandates that usda basically be there in order to conduct the inspection. the mandates that the company has to have the food inspected. i will tell you not just simply watching the food go down the line. it is also some testing that is done. some of the pathology that's done to make sure there is

not salmonella or an increased amount of e.coli. we're constantly learning more about the science and constantly changing our inspection process to make sure we do the best job we possibly can in terms of food safety. this an issue here where it isn't so much about food safety but food production. once our inspectors leave that processing facility. that processing facility has to shut down operations. that's the disruption. that is the uncertainty of it all. dennis: i got to tell you for some of us outside the beltway we hear all the hand wriging. we saw the crisis. it feels a little contrived, a little manipulated. who set up your trip to the new york stock exchange to preach the downside of the sequester? was this directed by the white house? was this your own decision? >> our communications department wants to make sure people understand and appreciate when the disruption occurs they have adequate notice and we'll do everything we possibly can to minimize the disruption. there is no question in the food safety area we have very little flexibility. most of the budget is indeed the front line workers and

support workers for the front line support workers. if you sequester, have to cut five or 6% of that budget and do it in a three, four, or five month period it is really about ten or 15% of the remaining money you have. there is no way you can do it without affecting personnel. dennis: do you think both parts of congress might ve tan that and set aside the meat inspectors guys to go ahead and let them go uncut. we appreciate your time, mr. secretary. good day, sir. >> you bet. dennis: so is the economic impact of sequester really going to be that bad? what are congressional republicans saying? let's bring in illinois congressman adam kissinger. >> thanks. dennis: are we overexaggerating or are we in for a rocky ride? >> we're in for some hysteria here. the ag committee has had conversations from the usda they don't expect any closures of any processing

plants because they're going to be working furloughs in a way they can keep everything going. the sequester is not the way we want to go about this. this is really up to the president. he could drive 1.7 miles to have a conversation with harry reid what they wi do to avert this from happening. instead he is pointing fingers at congressional republicans who twice voted for replacement plan to do something about these but, absent the president's leadership, absent harry reid doing anything we'll not sit here to debate against ourselves. it is time for real leadership out of washington and we're not seeing tha dennis: president obama has been warning us, women and poor children, will go without being able to eat if we have the sequester cuts. yet he hasn't scheduled an emergency meeting at white house until friday. the cutsave to go into place according to congress based sometime on friday. is he taking this seriously enough? >> i don't think so. i mean if you actually look, he is something like 5,000 miles on nrcc.org. you see the video. we talk about that he has

flown 5,000 miles for campaign rallies seemingly for re-election he already won. i don't understand where his quote, unquote leadership is coming in this. we want to avert this with real cuts that make sense. the president hasn't been a partner. and this, look this law will go into effect without the president and harry reid having a discussion. they're unwilling to do it so far. dennis: search your soul, congressman. isn't there some part of every republican in congress hope we go for the sequester cuts? at least we start to bend the cost curve? >> well we do have to reduce the cost of government because the next generation, frankly, it is becoming current generation, is bearing the brunt of this out of control debt and it is actually going to take away things like, you know, food programs for women and children which we care about. we just want them to go away because the government simply has no more more money. that is the track that we're going on, unless we begin to rein in the out of control spending in washington because we literally have gone far beyond what we can do. >> let's talk about that out

of control spending and the debt. now you met today i believe it was with young folks who are carrying an awfully big burden. you know the debt i'm carrying as my portion. government. only last a little while longer until i die. someone 20 years old will carry the debt longer. the debt figure, every citizen, $50,000. every taxpayer almost up to $150,000. do these kids that you were meeting with today have any idea what you're talking about? >> oh, they absolutely do. the millennial generation, i'm a gen-ier i guess. they are very engaged the fact that we have $16.5 trillion in debt and they're coming to grips with the fact that when they get out of college and get married and have families they're the ones we'll hand this out of control debt off to. it was an amazing meeting today with the republican conference and a group of us to listen to young people, just hear what they have to say. you see them on tv a lot talking about social issues. that is understandable,

something they're passionate about. these young people are just as fired up about the debt. sometimes it is a boring issue it talk about so folks don't do it. but they get it. they understand that you know, we're handing them this, potentially a nation that will be worse off than the one we inherited. it would be the first generation to do that. dennis: yet both parties in congress, both of you guys keep spending and spending. our federal debt has tripled since 2000 but interest cost on the debt is roughly the same as it was in 2000, only 360 million the because the fed kept borrowing rateso low. ultimately does it turn out you congressman are utterly incapable of cutting and will cut only when the fed raises interest rates and our interest cost triples in a year? >> note but i'm hoping washington to that point. we passed the paul ryan, the house republican budget which touched the third rail of politics. the discussion that medicare is going bankrupt in 12 years, we have to save it for current seniors and make

changes for younger people like myself in order to bend the cost curve, not just down but way down to get us to a balanced budget. we have to do that. if we don't talk about the quote, unquote third rail of politics, that is 2/3 of federal spending. that is what is growing every year. unless we have an adult conversation we're in trouble. dennis: thanks so much for being with us. we appreciate your time. representative adam knizinger of illinois. >> thanks. dennis: the president wants another a dal billion in stem. maybe someone should tell him about the $100 billion boost from the private sector. that jolt is something no one is talking about. california is going green, right but it may end up going black, turning out the lights all together. why officials are warning of an impending electricity crisis for the golden state. more money, baby, just straight ahead. ♪ .

♪ . dennis: take a look at this. in just the past four months 75 u.s. companies have announced more than 100 dal billion istock buy-backss. just yesterday home depot

adding to that it will be buying back $17 billion worth of its own shares by year-end 2015. forget president obama's push for a new $50 billion stem back to build up our infrastructure. major public companies creating their own stimulus plan. it is more than double what the president is proposing. they're raising some dividends. inddition to buying stock back like there is no tomorrow. how big of a boost could this give the economy? joining me now, one of our favorite economists peter morici. thanks a lot. welcome, peter. i bet someone ten bucks you would bewaring a bow tie. i appreciate you being there today. >> they should have taken the other side of that debt. dennis: they should have. $100. i feel this could help the economy. what do you say? >> absolutely. people spend money basis of how wealthy they are, not just how much income. during the great recession, people spent less, now the reverse is happening. this is great for car sales.

dennis: pepsico ten billion. gm five 1/2 billion they bought straight back from the government. mastercard at $2 billion. is this saying these big companies feel like their stocks are truly undervalued? that investors are kind of missing a major point? >> you have to remember that stock values really haven't gone up in the last decade. we're arou the peaks at 2000. so there is a sense that stock values are not high enough. but also the companies that are very profitable and efficient doing the right things often don't have enough new places to invest their money in this very slow-growing economy. so they buy back the stock instead of undertaking organic growth. that makes raise is the stock values. makes the stockholders wealthier and that they go out and spend money that is good thing. dennis: you wish they would put more money into the dividend increases like the way home depot did 34 cents.

the stock buy-back helps the company more. >> they get the cac in hand they will start to spend the money. in stock buy-back you raise the value. inrder to realize the gain they have to sell some of their shares. you don't have an immediate effect. dennis: you know something, peter. there is a risk to this. of course stock buy-backs were pioneered by tom murphy at capital cities abc. warren buffett loves them. you could end up paying a whole lot for your shares like netflix that did a lot of buybacks at $200 a share the stock plummeted way below 100 bucks. they wasted money. also isn't it a sign that the companies lack creativity? why shouldn't they plow the cash back into building new businesses instead of just buying stock? >> i think we have to look at the nature of the business. take apple which has huge amounts of cash. cash i not an important fact for apple when it comes to organic growth. it is what is the next great product they can create? they're the next idea away from growing. if you're creating a lot of

cash in a slow growing economy doesn't mean you're not doing your job. you just have t operate within the constraints of the economy that you're in. if you're a consumer products company like a proctor & gamble, they can't grow much more rapidly than the economy is growing. but they become much more efficient and generate a lot of cash or buy back stocks or increase dividends their management should be commended for that. dennis: all right. we're almost at 120 billion in the past three or four months. do you think that that will be it for the year or will we see more multibillion-dollar buyback plans unveiled? >> i think we'll see more buyback plans unveiled because the economy will continue to grow slowly. the opportunities for expanding companies within the existing market spaces will be limited. they have to do something with the cash and this will go on. dennis: thanks so much for being with us. we appreciate it. peter, have a good day, sir. >> take care and thanks for having me. denn: okay. let's just remember, guys, the bow tie is banjo of neck wear. coming up on "money",

officials warn green energy could cause california to go dark. an electricity crisis looms there and wind and solar power may be the reason, not the answer. you need to hear this one. a lawsuit between tv titans could change your cable bill a great way forever. why paying for channels you don't want to watch may end. you can never have too much money.

♪ . dennis: ain't easy being green. california prides itself on its sensitive environmental policies. the state faces possible blackouts. it is all because of its growing dependency on solar and wind energy. here to break it down, are david kroiter is of the heritage foundation and

michelle kin man a green energy advocate in environment california. david, start with you. the problem is not a lack of energy because of solar and wind stuff. they will have a surplus going into next year. so what is the problem? >> dennis, the problem with wind is that you can't turn it up when you need it and down when you don't need it. not being abl to turn it down when you don't need it could be just as much trouble. in order t account for all intermitt ansy, the up and down, you need to balance wind with something you can ramp up and down very quickly. that is natural gas turbines. california doesn't have enough capacity for the amount of wind they have. it adds instability to the grid. that is where you get blackouts when you have too much or too little. dennis: michelle, what do you think?. >> no. in fact california is not facing a looming electricity crisis. what we are facing though is a crisis with our air pollution. california is home to nine out of ten most polluted cities in the country. and that is due in great part to the overreliance on

fossil fuels. it is creating a major public health crisis. for that reason california leaders rightly so decided to shift towards renewable energy. then in addition to the environmental benefits, renewable energy is creating a more stable grid. let's not forget ten years ago california did have an electricity crisis. in that case it is widely accepted that a major part of that crisis was our overreliance on fossil fuels. it is incredible important we diversify our electricity grid dennis: michelle, you say the whole crisis is. the whole reassn we're doing the story today, because "the wall street journal" covered this big meeting of state officials and energy industry officials in california yesterday where they said we face rolling blackouts by 2015 because of this intermittentsy problem. why do you say we'll not have the problem when clearly state officials themselves admit they are? >> what is troubling energy planners today is not an overreliance on renewable energy. what is troubling energy planners is just figuring

out how to ramp up the reneble energy quickly enough in balanced manner going forward. the good news, california as well as the rest of the country has a diverse amount of renewable energy. i mean if we put down what is renewable energy. >> cut to david. we know what. david, you're chuckling tell us why? >> two things. when they had the crisis everybody else in the country was dependent own fossil fuels. they didn't have the blackouts. the problem california had a constrained pipeline system to bring natural gas system for their plants. let's leave that alone. you do have the intermitt antsy problem and trouble balancing it. that is what is causing the problem and why we see headlines. dennis: michelle, last year in the u.s. our carbon emissions dropped to a 20-year low, not seen since 1992 because nat-gas prices were so cheap, utilities stopped using coal and on their own they switched over to natural gas. the market drove a decline of 20 years worth of carbon

emissions. in california, michelle they have decreased by golly, 2020, one-third of all of our energy has to come from green sources. why not let the market work out what energy supplies come online? >> well, what we've seen if you look back at the electricity crisis it was really about overreliance on fossil fuels. it is important to think about what renewable energy is. wind power i strongest at night when our industrial customers need it the most. solar power, provides us electricity during the hot, summer days when more and more of us need that electricity. then we have stable sources of renewable clean energy like geothermal and biomass which provide eectricity 24/7. so it is really all a question of the diversity of our clean renewable energy resources. denn: go ahead, david. >> the geothermal is negligible part and will remain a negligible part. the wind and solar, you can not turn it up and down. sometimes it may balance if you get lucky. sometimes it comes on, if you get lucky. if you're not lucky you have

to face reality, and if you don't have the natural gas to balance it, you're going to get blackouts, whether getting too much from wind or whether getting too little from the wind. dennis: michelle, gas prices are around $4 a gallon for gasoline. they would have to be $8 before solar and wind are actually economically viable. do you want to pay $8 a gallon for gasoline so finally solar is economically a good choice? >> the cost of solar is coming down rapidly. we see that, best of all here in california. the cost of solar has come down about 40% in california for commercial systems over the past five years. so it is a case where you've got a new technology that we're investing in, and that we, you know, if we think back in little analogy. think back to cell phone usage 15 years ago. if you told us we would carry around little tiny pieces of equipment that would allow us to talk to one another anywhere we were, we would have said you're crazy. california is really investing in solar and wind, other renewable technologies

that are bringing the cost down. dennis: thanks so much. i've been hearing that solar pitch since 1979 in my senior year in college. enough already. thank you very much, david and michelle. be sure to catch arizona governor jan brewer tomorrow night on "money". melissa talks to the california about the high taxes help states like her woo companies away. time for today's fuel gauge report. rbob gasoline futures tanked for the third straight session. if i kno what that really is. do's decline, refining activity in the northeast sued last week, easing concerns about gas supply shortages, u.s. oil imports in 2012. they sank to a 15-year low. the energy information administration, fell 5% from 2011, hitti 8.42 million barrels of crude today. canada was a top supplier to the.s. a title it held for

self or so. shell oil is halting oil exploration, in alaska, for the rest of the year. the company has spennearly $5 billion searching for new oil sources there. rigs and spill containment vessels were hit by a slate of recent problems. shell says the break will allow it to problem properly repair around retool its equipment. next on "money", don't you hate paying for tv channels that you never watch? just to get the ones you want? a landmark lawsuit could change the way you get cable. we're going to explain. plus internet gambling, hits the jackpot in jersey. while legalization in the garden state could spark a gambling revolution across the country. "piles of money" coming up. ♪ . ♪

[ male annouer ] from the way the bristles move to the way they clean, once you try an oral-b deep sweep power brush,

you'll never go back to a regular manual brush. its three cleaning zones with dynamic power bristles reach between teeth with more brush movements to remove up to 100% more plaq than a regular manual brush. and even 76% more plaque than sonicare flexcare in hard to reach areas. oral-b deep sweep 5000 power brush. life opens up when you do. dennis: if you're anything like me you probably aren't but you are probably sick and tired paying a huge cable bill for channels you don't even watch. now there is a chance that model one day could end. cablevision is suing cable channel giant viacom saying quote,iacom effectively forces cablevision's customers to pay for and receive little-watched channels. this case could set a precedent for a whole new way of paying cable a la carte. maybe even bring the bills

down a bit. with me are media analysts. we have the ceo after small auts channel dropped by time warner cable last month. rich, thanks for joining us. let's start with you. do you think the lawsuit from cablevision which is going after a practice of bundling that has been in the cable industry for a couple of decades, could it have an impact? could it help break up the dial? >> i think so. chip dolan, who is the rodney dangerfield of cablevision ceos is on the side of the angels here because a lot of content owners are getting in between the way consumers want to consume media and the way artists make a living. capturing economic for themselves. innovation is different story. they're a different type of network. when you have a situation where in minneapolis viacom has very low ratings for black entertainment

television and in new york it is very low ratings for country music television, hey, why does the cable company have to --. dennis: buy at all? >> maybe, there is 12 or 13, according to run track, 12 or 13 people watching this stuff in prime time? dennis: exactly. viacom is forcing cablevision which wanted eight channels to order 14 other channels as well. chad, over there at ovation, it seems like you would be a better plaintiff in this lawsuit saying that your channel is being stopped from getting on board other cable systems by these terrible bundling agreements. have you ever looked at suing over this? is it a many problem that affects your business? >> dennis,hank you so much for having me on. it absolutely is a problem that affects our business and happens to affect the consumer as well. the bundling at business-to-business level, which is different than the retail level which is richard is talking about, consumer level, the

business-to-business level is really what will is going on in this lawsuit. you've got anti-competitive bundling practices, that 20 years ago may have been perfectly fine when there were a lot many more companies that were operating in the pay tv market. the pay tv market in the united states of america is not a free market. it is a highly regulated market. today there are only ten companies that control 90 plus percent of the pay tv households and there are ten giant programing companies, like news corp, that control the vast majority of the networks that are being distributed to them. dennis: okay. >> so in that very concentrated market environment it's, it's virtually impossible for the small independents like ovation and a few others out there, to compete on a equal playing field. dennis: okay. but you know, rich, the fact is when time warner cable jettisoned ovation. they didn't do it because we have got no room left on the dial. they did it because they feel you guys didn't get

higher ratings. >> back off on that for a second. they jettisoned ovation because espn hit them up with a 30% price increase and they needed to make room in the budget and ovation was the casualty. dennis: okay. >> which is a big difference. >> that is exactly correct. >> making the customer pay for espn 4 which unwatched and bundled with espn --. dennis: why is it okay for a cable system to make that decision? is cablevision acting as if it is a victim in this chad? cablevision has plenty of power. they have plenty of room on the dial? >> it, look what richard said is exactly right. time warner cable threw ovation off because ovation is independent network and they c throw us off because we're not bundled. in this market environment where you have big companies on either side there are assets that each of them need. cablevision can not effectively compete unless they carry mtv, unless they carry "nickelodeon." because of that viacom uses its

leverage to throw against them all the networks, the smaller networks that ovation directly competes against that don't have to earn their place on the dial every day. ovation has to earn under the circumstances place on the dial every single day. that is what we're a casually of. dennis: rich, if you're a shareholder of viacom, don't you want viacom to do exactly this practice of bundling >> in the short term it is effective. in the long term it is unsustainable. therefore i ace problem for the industry, right? when it is unsustainable. people can't afford a 150 cable bill. at current rate of inflation it will be 4 or $500 ten years from now. people can't afford that. dennis: they're breaking the cycle. >> cable bundle has incredible value, unle you watch 4 or 500 hours of tv every day --. dennis: this fight is just beginning. i hope we getting back on air. rich and chad. thank you, gentlemen. >> thanks. >> thank you so much. dennis: breaking news. u.s. senate is now voting

whether to confirm jack lew as the next u.s. treasury secretary. as soon as we know the official outcome of that vote which is pretty much expected, we'll bring it to you. coming up on "money", new jersey goes all-in on internet gambling. we'll tell you why casinos and politicians across the country are readying their own bets. at the end of the day it is all about money. ♪

♪ . dennis: governor christie signs a bill legalizing online gambling in the garthen state. it couldn't come at a better time. slammed by competition from neighboring states, atlantic citys facing rapidly shrinking revenue. their once $1.5 billion gambling industry is only half that in the last few years. maybe letting blackjack fans bet from the bac is the saving grace. new jersey state assemblyman john amadeo, i hope i said that right. is cosponsor of the bill that just passed. currently on the gaming

oversight committee. thanks for being with us, assemblyman. tell us what is the three great things you like about the new online gambling law in your state? >> dennis, thanks for having me on. i just think this is an opportunity, online gaming the internet gaming bill has been a work in progress, as far back as 2010. we know that governor christie vetoed the original legislation in 2011 and this assembly bill went in front of him back a month ago, almost 50 days ago and on februarith he made three -- february 7th, he made three, five strong recommendations that were conditionally vetoed, recommendations on the gernor's behalf to actually make it a better piece of legislation and we were all on a bipartisan, you know, on board to agree to all his conditions.

>> yes, sir. all right, now, new jersey is going to charge a 15% tax on gambling revenues, almost double the 8% tax that you charge on gambling in atlantic city. yet online gambling doesn't raise the state's cost at all of police enforcement, of road building, why are you doubling the tax rate for online gambling? >> well, the governor had a concern about addressing issues with come pulsery gam i think about treatment programs. the original legislation had 10% in it and we certainly championed his recommendation of going to 15% because of all the benefits that the casino revenue fund receives, not only from the 8%, but from the original casino gaming act but from this 15% to help support, you know, with the decline in revenues as you stated earlier, this will help support the senior programs, the programs for the disabled, the pad, transportation programs, meals on wheels, many programs that help the

elderly and our disailed in our state. so i championed that effort. dennis: couldn't you guys in trying to help atlantic city which has gone from five or six billion down to 3 billion gambling revenue couldn't you hurt atlantic city because i can gamble from my basement in new jersey and i don't have to go to atlantic city to do it? >> good question but it has been going on for years. offshore gambling establishments have had internet gambling. this gives us the opportunity to regulate it and make sure we put protections and transparency in place. d also to win on the revenue side rather than having strong revenues, leavinnot only the united states but even the state of new jersey for the ones that participate in the illegal offshore enterprises offering internet gaming. this allows us to keep it within our jurisdictional boundaries within the state of new jersey and to be able to draw that revenue and increase that tax revenue to help the residents and

seniors. dennis: estimates, half a billion dollars in gambling revenue the first full year and new jersey would get 15% of that. congratulations on your breakthrough, assemblyman. good day. >> dennis, thank you. dennis: okay. up next on "money", you who far would you walk in the snow to get a job? one teenager's epic journey to land a paycheck takes an unexpected twist. stay right where you are for this one. you can never have too much money. ♪ .

♪ dennis: michael jackson, believed. it is time for a little fun with "spare change." joined. think you for being here. first up, the kind of initiative and drive today's news media, the jobless teen walked 10 miles of the snow and indiana for an interview at dairy queen. he had asked another restaurant owner for directions on the way and run san suu the setback on the way back. that night the restaurant owner calls the tune and offers him a job that is restaurant. >> love it. why don't you tell america what you said during the break.

he did walk 10 miles pass this restrant for a guy who is willing to give him a job. >> that more people took that attitude there would be more jobs filled today. i have to tell you. >> extending unemployment. it is a disincentive to go find work. i have a friend decided that would work, novel. >> good a job and your blaming the government. >> extending unemployment benefits. it is very enabling. you're in favor of that, like the net. >> these people are not sitting on their but doing nothing. >> then why are disability claims skyrocketing? easier and easier for paying them. >> euros fleming most of these people sitting there taking advantage of the government.

the two years of unemployment benefits is definitely making some people. >> role of the streets in the gutters? >> go out and find a job. dennis: and unacceptable percentage of people who are living of the government. not all of them. and in most cases people deserve some help. there has to be a safety net. there are too many people abusing the system. >> i was looking up until the word desert. too many people feel like they deserve something from government. you deserve an equal opportunity dennis: and other job hunting sweet success. take up the rest may have a job in new york in the shape of a chocolate bar labeled. let cal he printed his skills in the ingredients section. he put in things like 110 percent for his work ethic in so far has worked. he found an and marketing job. what do you think, ashley? >> diabetic shock it is so slick -- sickly sweet.

you have to get yourself ahead of other people. resonates aside a pizza issues saying i will walk a thousand miles for this job interview. dennis: you hire people for your firm, i imagine. >> it depends on what the guy was like. actually, it would make me pay attention and bring a guy and. dennis: in marketing. >> he obviously wants a job and will go above and beyond. i think it is very clever. >> a long time ago qaeda was pitching and pitching for an ad firm, a big brand. there would not answer. finally a sense a ransom note saying, we kidnap your dog. if you no return our call you'll never see him again. >> so he got in jail or in the job. dennis: here is one to melt your hard. this atmachine gives out free money. it is in spain which has been hurt -- hit hard by recession.