and the internet, you know. neil: you hit the net that -- hit the nail on the head. to me hell is a shopping mall and i think god forbid everyone thinks it will be. i think is going to be a mall. all of the people look at that and look to the convenience of shopping online. amazon seems to be doing fine. you know, to christians point, some of those venues are doing fine. maybe we are getting a still sort of read about dinosaurs and how they're doing and not sort of like the new mammals' out there that are doing just fine. >> well, as a small-business owner, i have to disagree. obviously the new media -- neil: you are disagreeing with a guy who reads a problem for a living? i think he knows. >> now with you, for -- with christian. the sales are apathetic. they should be booming. and, yes, the internet is enhancing competition. it is increasing online sales.

also, it is helping retailers up the mall level. you know what, we should be moving ahead much faster than we are. as a small business are i see the stress. i see terror in the eyes. neil: you're saying that will be short-lived. don't get hung up on a few months. >> first of all, the trend that we cannot see in a couple of months of data. there's no reason to believe the retail sales should, in fact, be booming. the middle-cla has been squeezed for the better part of a decade. that's just as not happened. my we would expect that all the sudden the retail sector will be a source of bill mcgrath -- growth. neil: any respectable growth that we have not seen now, i think it is time for something to be jelling, and it is not. anyway, that is just me and after all, i read a proper. wanted thank you all.

we will continue "money" with melissa francis is next. melissa: i'm melissa francis and here's what's "money" tonight. priorities, priorities. if this is the sequester it sure doesn't seem like it. after a wave of job openings the government goes on a spending spree. where is all the cost-cutting pain we heard about? we'll get to the bottom of it. plus uncertainty in venezuela after hugo chavez's death but it may create the opportunity of a lifetime for u.s. oil companies. how will it affect consumers and businesses here at home? our power panel of top experts is going to weigh in. >> never-ending debate over people's pay. today we bring you two business executives on opposite sides. they will lay out the real impact of a higher minimum wage on their bottom lin. you got to hear it from those with skin in the game. even when they say it's not, it is always about money.

melissa: okay. we've bottom to turn to the market right out of the gate here because it is the big story of the day. the bulls pulled the dow to a new all-time high. adp reported a solid rise in private sector payrolls for february. u.s. factory orders fell less than expected. the s&p 500 posted a slight gain. it is just 24 points away from hitting its record high. meanwhile nasdaq slipped fractionally from a 12-year high. we start with washington's full-on spending spree. you may have heard about the pesky sequester. pay no attention. we have the shopping list where your tax dollars are actually going right now, just as things like this are happening. take a listen. >> resulting from sequestration, we regret to inform you that white house tours will be canceled effective saturday, march 9th, 2013 until further notice. unfortunately we will not be able to reschedule affected tours. melissa: okay. so all the tourists who

waited for a day to take a stroll through our nation's presidential palace being turned away. we have rest of the details might be hearing elsewhere. some might say the president's priorities are a little bit off. joining with more is democratic congressman john garamendi. thanks for joining us. we played you the tape. they're not letting people tour the white house. the navy ordered two more warships at the cost of 700 million. the we committed 65 billion to the imf in new budget resolution. the list goes on. 50 million on new uniforms for the tsa. that killed me. why are we doing new uniforms right now? go ahead. >> beats me we know sequestration is really real even though we passed a bill out of the house of representatives today that actually funded the military but didn't stop the sequestration for the civilian employees in the military. this is really getting to be

curiouser and curiouser. the issues you talked about, we do know that sequestration is still very real. it is still going to hit. for those employees, 750,000 people are likely to lose their jobs over the next six months. but why the navy went out and decided to buy two more ships for a pile of money, i don't know. by the way the imf is not new money. it is money already within the imf, international monetary fund. it is just changing from one account to the other. melissa: hmmm. >> you about even so we're talking about a really, a lot of foolishness going on. we have not settled down here in washington to look at program by program and what could be cut, what could be delayed, and what really --. melissa: why? why? why aren't you guys sitting down doing that? >> i don't know. do you want me to lash out with a whole series of frustration? melissa: no, i think the american public watches all

of this go on and they sort of rip out their hair. i understand you feel the same way seems like it whenever we talk to politicians individually they seem like they're so frustrated. so what do you think could be done to sort of stop the nonsense and move on to doing something productive? >> it's the hard work. it is hard work of committees. it is works of sitting down an going through each of the individual expenditure items, line item by line item, with a budget. okay you can spend $10. how are you going to spend it? are you going it spend it here, are you going to spend it there? that is heart detail work and has to fit together. what are you guys thinking? making spending money. the two don't fit together and the whole thing won't work because of the way it is pieced or not pieced together. but it's hard work and it is no the just the political rhetoric and standing in front of a camera as i am. that's easy. it is the hardee tailed work

by a thousand different programs have to be analyzed. melissa: americans want to see that done, for sure. for example, in the past three days more than 1,000 jobs have been posted on the government's website, some which looking for people who can work in social media. and you see we're looking at some of the jobs on the screen. these were posted on usa jobs.governor since last monday. -- usa jobs.gov. accountant for nasa, 136,000. all kinds of things. you talk about people tting pink slips. who is sitting there posting these jobs and didn't sort of think to themselves this is bad idea for me to post this job today. maybe i should wait another week before this blows over? >> i don't know the answer but they should have thought about it. i did have three people in my office earlier today from travis air force base and biel air force base in my district in california and they're facing a layoff. one of those is a manager. she's the woman that schedules the c 5-as and

c-17s that fly missions to afghanistan, humanitarian mission, the tankers. she is the manager that civilian employee, that manages all of this and she is headed for layoff. she said, listen, on a furlough, i can not be at work. and so if something important happens, and they phone me up, i can not go to work to schedule those flights. melissa: yeah. >> yet, at the same time --. melissa: at the same time we're buying new -- >> airplanesor tsa uniforms or advertising for these jobs. it is all insaae. i hope somehow it all comes together soon before the american public totally loses faith. >> it has to, at the same time as you notice from the stock market the american economy is ready to go. let's make it happen. melissa: we've got to go. that is another debate for another time. thanks for coming on congressman, we appreciate it. >> thank you. melissa: putting sequester and looming budget battles aside one thing people are talking about taxes that are too high and too many and

need to overhaul the whole system. 95% of the economist in national association of business economics, saying congress must act to reform the tax code. who better for "money" to recruit one of the foremost tax policy experts. grab a pin, sit down. we'll give the government head start on this one. grover norquist, president of americans for tax reform. grover, it seems like it reached critical mass. that we need to reform the tax code. do you thinkkthat is just lip service or do you think that now for the first time we could really see this happen, loopholes closing, tax code reforming, simplification, what do you think? >> well, two questions. one we need to do it, our economy is growing more slowly than it should. it is killing jobs the structure of the tax code, both corporate and individual income tax that we have now. the challenge we have is that dave camp, the republican chairman of the ways and means committee in the house whose job it i to reform things, he is designing a tax refm plan

right now as we talk. orrin hatch in the senate, senate finance committee is doing the same thing. the president goes to bed every night with sugarplums dancing in his head about raising taxes, not reforming them. so there's a conflict, of vision here as to what direction they want to go. melissa: okay. i have a solution. do it for them. we've been working on this today. let's break it down for them and go through some of your suggestions that made a lot of sense. >> sure. melissa: simplifying the tax code, closing some of the loopholes. number one, ira's and 401(k) accounts should have no cap. >> right. melissa: you should be able to save tax-free. why does that make sense? >> you want to reduce the cost of capital. you want to get more investment. you want americans to be able to save more. this was an idea that was put forward during the bush years and got caught up in stuff. basically allow people to have a personal savings account to put as much money into as they want and as

long as it is building up, it is not taxed. it is only taxed when you take it out and spend it. it would simplify. there are many simple tax advantaged programs. put them into one, simply say if you're saving it, you will not be taxed on it. melissa: even when you take it out, even when you realize the gains? >> well, i would be willing to say look, you should only tax income one time. either before you put it in. melissa: yeah. >> two kinds of iras, roth and the other. tax it before you put in and never get taxed again or put in before youtae packses but don't pay taxes on buildup. pay taxes on end as you took it out as if you just earned it then. melissa: all business investment should be expensed immediately rather than depreciated over many years? >> we could simplify the tax code more than a thousand pages getting rid of those complicated, this equipment should be deappreciated over three years or five years or seven or 15.

if you spend money on a new piece of equipment, you should expense it because you don't have it. it isn't profit. it isn't taxable income if you don't have the money. so when you spend on new investment it should be expensed, in the same way if you hire a person, the wage or salaries expense, same thing with investment. it would drop the cost of capital significantly. melissa: your next one you want to cut the top tax rate for individuals and companies to 25%. that's the european average for the corporate tax rate is 25%. >> right. melissa: if you lower the rate and close loopholes do you think you really generate more income for washington? i know that's not ur goal to generate more income but that is always the promise. that is always the reason why people are willing to get on board because they say if you lower the rate and close the loopholes the government will end up with more money. i know you don't care but do you think they will? >> i think they will as long as it is revenue neutral in effect. if you take rates down as reagan did. reagan took the top rate down to 50%.

we got more money for the government because of economic growth. he then took it down to 28%. we got more revenue because of growth. when bush raised marginal tax rates, bush 41, we had a recession. it didn't help. so we need to take those rates down, and of course we should eliminate a lot of deductions and credits to simplify the code. not to get more money for the government but to have a simpler, more pro-growth. melissa: you want to end the death tax and u.s. should move to the territorial tax system and end the worldwide tax system that brings american companies earnings overseas and brings it home. those are self-explanatory. we've seen republicans luctantly be forced to give in on stocks taxes going up and we're seeing spending cutting. do you think compromise is good for all at this point? >> good policy is good for people. compromising, if it means moving in the wrong direction hurts the economy.

the president had the power, because tax cuts were lapsing in january 1st, of two months ago, taxes went up. that was not a compromise. he had the power to do it and he let it happen. that will not be good for the economy. we could have had a stronger economy without those tax incrses. what's good for the economy is that the tax cuts that are there are now permanent. melissa: grover, than for coming on, we appreciate your time. >> thank you. melissa: up next on "money", venezuela says good-bye to hugo chavez with the country's future more uncertain than ever. whoeverakes his place could help reshape the global oil industry as we know it. we have the latest live from caracas. more "money" coming up.

[ thunder crashes ] [ female announc ] some people like to pretend a flood could never happen to them. and that their homeowners insurance protects them. [ thunder crashes ] it doesn't. stop pretending. only flood insurance covers floods. ♪ visit floodsmart.gov/pretend to learn your risk.

melissa: now on to venezuela. the nation faced its first day without their larger than life leader of 14 years, hugo chavez. his passing marks an uncertain future in a country with deep economic problems. venezuela has the largest proven oil reserves in the world and the u.s. buys more of it than any other natn, more than40 billion worth of petroleum products annually. with me now on the ground in caracas is antonio herrera

which promotes democracy in the country. thanks for joining us antonio. set the scene for us. what is it like from there now? >> thanks very much, melissa. good to talk to you. it is quiet. funeral services are going on. a lot of misses have stopped but not entirely. banks are opening and shopping centers are open but without many people. people are on expectation. it is sort of on standby. it is on hold until the funeral experience which will go on through friday is over. melissa: would you describe it as great sadness? >> yes, and aot of people there is. even in people who don't like mr. chavez, or didn't like mr. chavez. the man has been there for 14 years. so people sort of got used to him. i think, also there is, at this time, obviously everybody is pointing to the things he did well or better

and so, there's a great outpouring of grief, particularly from those that perceive themselves -- [iudible] melissa: oil watchers were saying that what ty would be looking for is any sort of hint of unrest at all and any sort of demonstration, any sort of, you know, feeling that there may not be a smooth turnover of power. no sounds of that it sounds like? >> no. i think basically nothing's going to rock the boat now until the elections are passed which will take place in approximately 30 days. we are going into an election process. there is a candidate that was anointed by chavez as his prefered successor, who is going into the race with all of those advantages plus all of the government patronage working for him. so i believe, i'm told, those elections are passed, you won't see any major, major changes. melissa: you're talking

about vie president nicholas ma durd row. >> that is true. melissa: what is sentiment like for him? how do people feel about him. >> not much one way or the other. he is basically been in the background. not in the forefront. he is not considered a good communicator. he is sort of gray in many ways. he's the man that simply is there out of loyalty and that's why he has been put in that position. but you never know. one always gets in politics there are off then surprises. so one can not, venezuela once made the miss tame of sort of sloughing after mr. chavez as a lightweight and lookhere we are now. we have to be very cautious before we discard anybody. melissa: we'll ask you to stick around. we'll continue the discussion and add more people on the other side of the break. so don't go anywhere. coming up on "money", u.s.

oil companies have been shut out of venezuela but chavez's death could open up opportunities. which are set to cash in? our top experts are here to weigh in. finally the truth about minimum wage hikes. two executives with completely different outlooks square off. you will only get it here on "money". don't go away. ♪ .

melissa: so as we heard on the ground venezuela is facing an uncertain future in this post-chavez era. analysts say the u.s. oil industry could strike it rich. the nationalization of the country's oil industry in 2007 caused big oil companies to pull out but will companies like conocophillips and exxonmobil return righ now? we have an all-star "money" power panel with the answers. we have a former u.s. ambassador to venezuela.

roger noriega is with the american enterprise institute and a former u.s. ambassador to the organization of american states. we've got stephen schork of the schork report. welcome to all of you. jeffrey, let me start with you because a lot of this, to me, comes from whether or not the people are satisfied with the conditions they are living in right now. you know they were willing to, seemed to me, deal with it and put up with it because they believed in chavez. do you think now they look around and say, our quality of life is not that great, we need a change? or do they not, i don't know, see what they're missing? >> well, i think there is, you really hit the most important question. and we're going to find out in one way or another, probably within the next month. because the answer to a lot of the questions that we have, for instance that one whether oil companies might come back in or not, will be dependent on what happens in the elections. right now looks like the

candidate date for the chavez people will be the person he put his benediction on, the guy who is vice president, nicholas maduro, and if the opposition can hold together, as they did la year, enrique caprillas will be the candidate. so much will depend who comes out ahead in those elections. in the chavez guy wins, it is more of the same economic disaster. melissa: but you know, roger, it seems like when chavez came into office terp producing 3.5 million barrels a day. now ticked down to 2.5. they say their reserves are bigger than saudi arabia. saudi arabia can turn out with ten million barrels without getting out of bed bed in the morning. they don't have to put any effort into it. seems like venezuela needs outside investment in order to pump the oil and maybe the money they need. are they going to do it? what do they you think?

>> a lot of it depends whether they have the rule of law and political stability there as well as the political wl at the very top. even if chavez people were to hold onto power after the election, it is predictable for those among them who say we need to open up to the private sector, investment, for run investment, capital, technology, expertise, to really renovate what'seft of the petroleum sector. they do produce about 2 1/2, 2.4 million barrels a day but that is woefully underwhat their potential is. melissa: right. >> and i think they recognize that and they're missing the boat. there's, with oil at such hi prices. melissa: yeah. >> they have rolled out the red carpet for the chinese and for the russians who are looking at oil as well as natural gas and so the chinese really have pulled up to the table here and are going to expect, particularly from a chavez

government will expect a first right of refusal. melissa: stephen, could the chinese do it alone? is there any expectation the american companies get a toehold there. >> the american companies have gotten burned once. they will sit back and see how the election plays out. if we go ahead and venezuelan people reelect maduro or keep the chavez program going, then, no the u.s. companies will not come back. if we do get some sort of quote, unquote, pro-west government into caracas you will still take a wait-and-see approach here. this kind of reminds when i first came in the industry in the 1990s with the implosion of the soviet union. you had a tremendous amount of investment went into the siberia to get the oil, get ahold of those natural resources. what they found out was the infrastructure was so dilapidated, so malnourished they never got the money back out. chavez has spent the better part of last four years, butchering venezuela's oil cow.

that industry in that countryis skeleton to what it once was. it will take a significant amount of investment to go in there. give the terms how they are negotiated i really don't think, exxon, conoco, they will not go rushing in. they don't need to at this point. melissa: it is so tempting though, i mean, they are so rich with oil resources. i mean they had rafael ramirez go to the last opec meeting and stand there how they have more natural resources than saudi arabia. with oil getting harder and harder to find around the world it is just too tempting of a morsel. jeff, who do you think the has the best chance to get in there even though as stephen said, that's right, it is a big gamble, that is huge pot of treasure there? >> not all the private companies left. a lot of them stayed and had to accept minority status in joint ventures with the national oil company there. what they found, that

company, the oil company is increasingly mismanaged it can not meet its part of the bargain. it can go into a partnership but it has to put up money, it has to put up some technology and it is not doing what it signs contracts to do. the people who are finding this out in a very big way right now were the chinese. who have signed a lot of deals with venezuela, lend money to venezuela to be paid in oil. by the way at very disadding haved rates for the venezuelan people. and the chinese are pulling their hair out right now because they're finding that contracts that they have signed have not been complied with. melissa: right. >> because the venezuelans are incapable of doing it. melissa: roger, let me ask you quick before we go, vice president nicholas maduro, what is his future look like? do you think he is able to hang on to power? does he win the election? is the guy? >> well, under the constitution he shouldn't even be the president of venezuela after chavez's

passing. article 233 says it should go to the president of the national a someably. maduro already usurping power off to very inauspicous beginning when it comes to reassuring investors or democrats or the international community that they're going to turn over a new leaf after chavez. melissa: we'll leave it there. guys, thank you so much. >> thank you. >> time for today's fuel gauge report. oil futures slipped for the fourth session of the past five. u.s. crude inventories last week climbed higher than many analysts expected. oil fell 39 cents a barrel. that price may seem like a bargain by the year 2020. oecd gave a fresh long-term outlook for oil prices. they say it could soar to $270 a barrel. don't you love those reports? where do they get these numbers from? growing demand from china, india, and other emerging markets will largelyuel the increase. all right. exxonmobil will invest $190 billion in exploration and development over the next

five years. it will begin producing on 28 oil and gas projects during at that time. exxon says its new projects will produce an estimated one billion barrels of oil a day. next on "money", finally minimum wage debate worth listening to. we have two business executives on opposite sides. they will explain how paying more will really affect their profits and their bottom line. you want to hear this o. plus, businesses are swimming in pools of money while the masses struggle to find a job. at least that's what the "new york times" wants you to think. a it piece against corporate profits, completely misses the mark. we're going to explain why. you only -- "piles of money" coming up. ♪ .

♪ . melissa: you might never think you're getting a clear picture of it. talking about the issue of raising the minimum wage which political pundits argue about ad newseum. right now you're in the right place because you're getting a conversation everyone should hear with two top corporate executives on opposite sides issue how raising minimum wage $2 will affect the bottom line. jamie richardson is vice president of white castle and john cooper is vice

president of spectronics corporation. thanks for joining us. jamie, i want to start with you. let's talk about economics. one argument always made, lower wage workers who make minimum wage, spend what they make. you pay them more money and they're likely to go out and spend it in the economy and a boost to everyone. what is wrong with that? >> if you look at white castle, family-owned business for 92 years, the very best day when there is new hire because we know the team members learn about responsibility. they will learn about making a difference and customer satisfaction and all the great things come with it. when we're able to provide that to them we want them to stick around and when we see them stay, and make that decision, in fact, one of four white castle team members has beenith us ten years or more we know we've done the job. we want to offer the opportunity to more and more people. what we see is that with the increase in the minimum wage, that doesn't allow us to accomplish that. that makes it more difficult

to hire people. melilissa: you say you have a certain pile of money to spend on labor. when you're forced to pay each individual worker more the math works out the division, that you have fewer workers, right? >> right. benefits a few but hurts many and makes it really difficult for us to create more jobs. melissa: john, i want to show you a chart. if you look at minute mum wage over time and look at teen open employment because these people work at minimum wage, it shows a direct correlation. as the minimum wage goes up, there it is teen unemployment rises. that is hard to argue with. >> oh, but i will argue with it. melissa: go ahead. >> before i get to the that, jamie, white cools sill and spectronics are alike in one respect, we're both family-owned businesses although white castle a little larger than spectronics you point to with pride 27% of your team members have been with you more than ten years. you didn't address how many low income workers are, with you for that long. how many of them last, let's

say even a year employed. but at spectronics, more than 72% of the our employees have been with us more than ten years. we have many employees with us for 30, 35 years. melissa: do you pay them minimum wage? >> we pay, almost all of our employees, certainly close to if not above what the proposed minimum wage would be. whether you you're looking at $9 which is what president obama proposed or 10:10. virtuallyll of our employees get paid above the 10.10 threshold. >> thank you. i just like to share a point really quick on that. because in fact, our average wage for our team members -pbehind the counter, not the people in the home office, not people working in restaurants on hourly rate each day is $9.5. and in fact, 6.7% of our total team member population is currently at that starting range of $7.25. but it is a starting range. it was never meant to be a living wage. it is that first rung on the

economic ladder that gives our team members chance for prosperity. we're happy to share we have over 10,000 team members. 900 have been with us 25 years or more. melissa: if you pay over minimum wage what do you care? pay your workers over minimum wage. you're already doing it. to me that is argument the don't need the government telling people what to pay. >> there millions of workers not getting paid $10.10 an hour. my commany treats our employees, we think of them as extended family basically. jamie agree, but i would not want one of my family members living in poverty. but that is exactly what is happening for tens of millions of employees, hard-working american employees that are earning subsistence living right now on $7.25 an hour. that work the out to $15,080 a year. a family can't survive on that. melissa: jamie, go ahead and respond to that. >> when we look at this and think about it is the bigger perspective it is about the opportunity. we have 10,000 employees.

we're part of an industry that employs 13.1 million people many on the path of prosperity because they got the first job in the restaurant industry. the fact at end of january, teenage unemployment was 23.4% is absolutely criminal. if we raise the minimum wage, we're hurting the people we say we're trying to help. melissa: yeah. >> that doesn't seem compassion nalt. doesn't seem like what we're trying to achieve. melissa: a lot of people, argument he is making. a lot of pele on $7.25 aren't trying to support a family. they're kids in high school, kids, in whatever grade who are out there trying to earn and have that first job. >> i don't think, i don't think it is the case. i think 88% of the people that get minimum wage are, not teenagers. they're actually adults. and, i think that if we could pay these folks a, something closer to a living wage, that money is not going to stay in their pockets. if they get extra $100 a week they will spend it locally buying food for their families, clothing school supplies for the

kids. it will go to local businesses, small businesses. it will boost the economy and grow jobs. melissa: we'll leave it there, guys. thank you so much for a great debate. we appreciate your time, both of you. good stuff. coming up on "money", big bad businesses are sitting on mountains of profits meanwhile workers can barely get by at least according to "the new york times." a new report takes twisting the truth to new heights here. we set the record straight. that is coming up next. at the end of the day it is all about money. ♪ .

♪ . melissa: ah, "the new york times", missing the point i think. reporting on the growing divide between companies and their workers. according to the article, companies are seeing sky-high profits but instead of hiring more employees and expanding they are choosing to sit back and put up their feet, just staring at their huge piles of cash littering the floor all around their offices. so we're here to give you the real facts and what you should know about this. joining us nowis diana fourth got roth from the -- furchtgott-roth. i'm screaming at myself in

the office at a newspaper. >> exactly. melissa: let's take it apart piece by piece where they might have gone wrong but where you may disagree. i want to start with the basic thesis, they're talking about the guff, the divide between workers and their companies explains why the stock markets are thriving even as the economy is barely growing. and unemployment remains stubbornly high. this is one of their central thesis that sort of really stuck in my craw so to speak because i think why the stock market is on fire because ben bernanke is just, you know, buying, he is just expanding his balance sheet hand over fist as much as he possibly can. investors with money are forced into the stock market in order to reach yield. there are not fundamentals behind it. exact what do you think? >> exactly. the fed is juicing up the economy. they're buying $85 billion a month in mortgage-backed securities and treasury bills and notts. that is as much as one fiscal year ski

questionster. that is driving the market to new highs. keeping interest rates loy. anyone on fixed incomes. anyone who wants any kind of a return has to go for more risky assets that is driving up the stock market. melissa: they also said when companies hire it is often overseas where the growth is. you know that's true to a certain extent but also the case they're looking for employees here but they don't have the kind of skilled workers here in this country right now to fill their slots. i mean we hear from people all the time. we have ceos on of technology companies who say they can not find computer programmers and engineers in this country. there are millions of jobs that are going begging and those people exist overseas. what do you think? >> well that's true. also, for many companies, their markets are overseas. so you have china and india growing at about 7%. last quarter's gdp growth was .1 of 1%. it makes sense to put your factories where your customers are. but plus, companies are

keeping about 1.7 trillion outside the united states and not bringing itin because we have one of the highest corporate tax rates. in fact the highest corporate x rate in the indus treeized world. -- industrialized world, 35% corporate tax and tax companies on worldwide income instead of just domestic incomes. melissa: they say buoyant earnings are rewarded to investor to make american companies more competitive they haven't translated to additional jobs at home. like you said it makes more sense to leave money overseas. at whatoint do you ask maybe companies in america are not investing here in america because they don't believe the economy is real. they don't believe the market going up reflects a economy that is growing at a stagnant pace and they don't want to take the risk? companies after all, do want to invest. that is how they make more money in the long run. if they're not doing it is not because they want to stare at their money in their offices. that doesn't do anything for them.

maybe there is bigger reason. what do you think? >> you have to look at the difference between investment and employment. so with the new cost of employment, if you look at the it,000 per worker -- $2,000 per workerpenalty under the new affordable health care act if you don't have the right insurance, companies are many becoming more capital extensive and labor extensive. drug stores, changing to self-scanning machines. parking lots, they don't have people in tollbooth anymore. u stick in a credit card to pay. one thing it means increased investment doesn't necessarily translate as much into increased employment. melissa: yeah. >> it is a capital labor ratio is changing. that is big problem. president obama just proposed increasing the minimum wage to $9 an hour. that will --. melissa: we were talking about that. >> that will make more people less employable. you see what i mean. they will hire people with high skills. melissa: thanks so much. you bring in the last seg mane. this is why people have to watch the whole show. diana, thanks for coming on,

we appreciate it. >> great to be with you. melissa: coming up on "money", flying in the middle seat is about to get more fun. the tsa is letting us bring knives, bats and clubs back on planes. thank goodness. i was wondering what i would do with the club. that is our "money" question of the day. is this a good idea? people are going nuts on this. facebook.com/melissafrancisfox or follow me on twitter, @melissaafrancis. should the tsa scrap this move. sharpen your knives. "spare change" is coming up next. ♪ .

melissa: it is time for a little fun with spare change. grover norquist maybe should havencluded this in his tax overhaul. a legitimate tax write-off. it all goes towards keeping up with write-offs. as long as the money that is and

isn't lavish or extravagant, which clearly would be lavish or extravagant. it. >> otherwise it is a free-for-all. >> that is a really expensive sticker for $25,000. i don't know, i'm not an aficionado. >> i think you get a lot for your money for $5000. >> some of these guys for but my $50,000. melissa: oh, shut up. [laughher] >> where do they keep their receipts though. >> i don't know if these girls have these receipts were not. melissa: they say that maybe the rappers need to keep their image of comet keeping your streetside billing. >> it is that just are the

biggest offenders? melissa: okay, moving on, the tsa lifting its ban on knives and hockey sticks as of april 26. the reason is that it allows tsa agents to focus their attention on more high risk items like explosives. i don't know. do you feel safer? the one on the right makes me feel really unsafe. >> i want to be able look at these items and feel okay. box cutters, of late, things like that.