the short. >> you think it is over. >> i believe so. i think rates will go higher. the cost of freedom continues. ♪ >> a battle erupt nothing dc over keeping america from becoming a full- blown welfare state. republicans are trying to turn back timee and overhaul thefood stamp program. recent reports showing that more than two and half million who get it are young, single childless and healthy adults that are not working. some say we need scrap this cornerstone of welfare before we go down the welfareitate town. we'll go in focus with steve, rich, morgan, and rick and john

and mike. rich, scrap food stamps as we know it? >> we really do. we have to protect it for the people who need it. no one wants to see undernourished children or oer folks eing dog food. if we cover the cost of two and half million people who are healthy and on food stamps and working age, we have an unsustainable program. we have disability claims rise by 7 million in obama's te nure. nrick, when millions of people are getting welfare and deserve. it >> i am all for keeping a good eye on welfare. when we talk about food stamps. schopercent of the people of

people on food stamps have one person working and add into what is legimate and i take rich point. t everyone on disability should be. if you add that up. it goes up to 85 percent. you have to be so careful you are not so intent on cutting you cut people who need it. >> many people here have it here. and every time we have welfare reform people attack. it in known 96 president clinton was attacked for suorting the republican reform. the late senator said poor children would be reduced to begging for money and food and engaging in prostitution. guess what, that welfare worked and brought down poverty in this country. >> yeah, none of that happen.

there is nothing about growth in constitution and empowering federal politicians to fight poverty. that is for a good reason. it should be a local initiative. it should be private arities. but the broer point, we have spent trillions over the last four decades fighting the war on poverty. that is a sursignal that the federal government is unbeatable. >> and one of the things in the welfare reform. it brought down poverty. we have had dips in poverty like never before but never a sustainable drop since it began in 1935. >> i am wide open to reform in food stamps andust to be fair, voted down hous bill had 20 billion worth of spending cuts in it. we are putting the cart before the horse. we have 12 millioamericans

unemployed and millions more that are underemployed. when you break downhe numbers, it comes to 4.40 a day. that is less than a value of a mcdonald's meal. >> i know we have evidence but there is evidence to back up the fact that a lot of people who get it don't deserve it. people were buying snacks and potato chips and chewing gum with the card. >> it underscores when we get reform, you have to have a better economy like we had in the mid1990s. this ki of thing should be closed and folded and other welfare programs like for the seniors and supplement income programs and let people make their own choices instead of having them grow willy-nilly on their ow

unfortunately this president will not provide it. it is useful to provide a foundation. >> in fact, the republicans laid the ground work over years before and trying to come up with something spectacular like for example entitlements in cash. five year term limit on benefit disciplines have mothers cash benefit reduced or eliminated. a lot of things can be prepared and maybe somebody in the white house amenable to welfare reform will do. >> we'll so what happen in the '90s and the policies with the labor par tisipation rae. it is normally what you see in a recession. >> we have sewn the food stas growing to 80 percent. they say it is because of the

severity of the recession or a president who believes in weal fair policies nwell, it is both and they create an unholy a liiance and why we are stuck at two percent growth and new people on disability and two and half milliopeople taking food stamps who should not be there. look,if we had four percent growth, what we should be having followingthe recession, throw hundred billion i year more of incremental activity and this would lift the labor participation. i think you have to start with growth and this president is not pro growth. >> even fdr as started it warned about dependency. to many ople getting welfare is not a good thing. >> i will go you one better. i agree with part of what you said a moment ago when you

pointed out that people should not be using t snap benefits and buy candy. food stamps should be for a necessity and nourishments. i am with you there. but don't get to carried away. you end up hurting people. >> i know. sometimes people get hurt when you are getting back on your feet. but you are foesed to. >> there is a reform issue. people on nap can't get access to vegetables and fruits. lk about candy because they can't afford the bag of lettuce. >> i don't buy that at all. >> and there was a year when i didn't have enough work and i had to eat soybeans for $0.87 a day and i turned out to be healthy. i ate soy beeps and fruits and

vegetables. if you want to sustain yourself and if you are healy, you can do it. >> the one thing that led to assault on food stamps the administration discouraged it. and they want more and just the numbers and what is creating the back lash. >> and there is sort of a vicious circle more people on welfare and more people fall nothing t-- falling in the dependency trap. >> europe fell in that. republicans lost the moral authority in this movement because they increased the subsidies to wealthy farmiers. that took a lot away. >> i think we all agree with that. >> i do, and a lot of focus on president obama for balloong the food stamps.

it started balloons under george bush. >> and everybody, let's agree. hold on a second. everybody is to blame. but john, everybody could get together forreform as they did in known 96. a republican bill and a democratic president signed off it. >> they could. but the problem is neither party understand how to get economy grow. getting back to rick's point and the fraud thing. if you localized benefits, it is a lot harder for people to buy candy with it. the problem is benefits nded out from washington. is it any wonder you can see it happening. >> thank you very much. coming up next, critics calling it a desperate ploy for sales. more retailers are refusing to carry the rolling stone issue. d that ploy back four.

>> i was surpred and disgusted and irresponsible for rolling stones to put that picture on th

i am jamie colby. we'll see it back here at 1 o'clock eastern. cope it on fox. >> you are encouraging them by putting them on rolling stone. >> you are glamorizing terrorism. >> it is despicicable to put him on there. >> why would they put it onhe

cover. >> it endorses hate and violence and should be stopped. >> more back lash on the rolling stone cover that appears to put the bomber on as a celebrity. retailers are refusing to carry it. you favor a boycott? >> yes tis not what you put on the cover. but how. they wouldn't have done that to george zimmerman. by contrast look at what time magazine what they made adopt hitler as man of the year. and shed him turning out a hymnal of hate and they called joel. and they did it the wrong way. >>ome of the description. gentle demeanor and he had morals of golden person and noise commriant and pillow soft

kid and he was too sweet. you and i know you can choose which quotes to put. my feeling is they are trying to paint him as a victim and not a criminal. >> i haven't read the story. and they ought toous the word monster. for all of us, our hearts and prayers continue to go out for the victimsnd families in boston and that were touched by the tragedy. the concept of a poi cot. if it was a preinternet age. i would be concerned because it would limit american's access. but we are in the internet age. stores have a right to boycott and aricans can boycott. and rolling stones have a right to put it on the cover. we are continuing the coersation and by default we are pushing the marketing of the

cover out. >> that is a good explanation. >> are you for a boycott? >> i continuing is up to the stores. i think morgan put it well. the storesre not the government and so it is not a censorship issue. the biggest problem with the cover. and rolling stone can do as they plose. i haven't read the article. but the problem i have. the same photowassoused in the new york times and yet put the two of them together and so they have glamorrized the photo. that is journalistical not right. nrich, i read the article. they goosed tup and made it softer and gentler. but the descriptions of the gay are way oaf the top. >> i don't understand the left's love of violence and french

embracing the camboddian murderers in the '60s or embracing the oklahoma cy bomber. is is what people should do. write to the advertisers and corporate officers and board of directors and write to every advertiser and said is this what you stand for and are these your values in>> this is something very comrcial. did the ploy work? have we talked about it enough. >> the good thing and redoming thing about a boycott and a competitive economy that the power is limited. what would be scary if someone had monoply per and i don't like the politics of your owner and you can't get a permit in my city. >> john, is a boycott necessary or not? >> rolling stones is a private enitiy

if it want it on the cover is fine. it works both ways i think. >> and businesses had nothing to do with the verdict. they are finding themselves in a violent. why is capitalismunder atta. and you want to quit shelling out green in the pump. some say get rid of the

hey, buddy? oh, hey, flo. you want to see something cool? snapshot, from progrsive.

my insurance company told me not to talk to people like you. you always do what they tell you? no... try it, and see what your good driving can save you. you don't even have to switch. unless you're scared. i'm not scared, it's... you know we can still see you. no, you can't. etty sure we can... try apshot today -- no pressure.

>> ouch. pain hitting drivers everywhere. national average for gas jumping $0.20 a allon. law makers are holding a hearing and looking into how toase the pain. start by scrapping government man dates a have green biofeels to gas. rich, are they on to something? >> they are on to manage. this will not immediately reduce the price of gas in the pump. that goes up and down.n. and it is ridiculous the government is cramming more and more ethynol in the gas lone. and forcing oil companies to squander theirenergies. oil excutives do have a point.

nrich, you just came from california and they do it more than most states. >> it is how to distract our attention from the real issues. i don't mind if you want to look at it as a solution. many things could bring down the price of gas. it is july andaugust. two peak times of year for driving. prices go up every year this time and to add to it, you have had problems in the refiners. >> people are suffering out there, stove. >> even al goal can't defend ethynol. and it adds to expense and maintenance. and get rid of them. big thing on gasoline taking out the lead. the rest of the stuff is a waste of money. nmike, we have opinion arguing

about it for years. here at forbes talking about what a waste of money the biofouls are. maybe it is a perfect political moment. david, it destroys carburetors and adds to cost. what i am more irate. it forces poor people to starve. it goes to the biofuels and it causes food prices up. that is most destructive. >> bill, what do you think? >> ethynol deletes run off and jumps up the price of chicken and oh, wait a minute, enriches iowa wacorn farmers that are worth $10 million. >> and stove, that is a gre point. it increases price of gas and od. >> absolutely. and bill just hit on it.

>> iowa has the firstaucus and why candidates is in favor of ethynol. i wasn't which is why i am here. >> what do you think? there are some democrats looking and saying maybe we should get on the bandwago >>ust like the republicans and senators from iowa that have defended ethynol for years. it is political. wouldn't deny it for a second. but there is a lot of things oil companies could do to bring down the price if they wanted to. >> temperature outside is hot, hot, hot. and our informers have stocks that are hotter. names rising with the mercury ming up next.

evy parent wants the safest d healthiest products for their family. that's why i created the honest company. i was just a concerned mom, with a crazy dream. a wish that there was a company that i could rely on, that did all of the hard work for me. i'm jessica alba, anthe honest company was my dream. [ male announcer ] legalzoom has helped a million businesses successfully get started, including jessica's. launch your dream at legalzoom today. call us. we're here to help. to fly home for the big family reunion. you must be garth's father? hello. mother. mother! traveling is ea with the venture card because you can fly any airline anytime. two words. double miles! this guy can act. wanna play dodge rock? oh, you guys! and with double miles you can actuay use, you never miss the fun. beard growing contest and go! ♪

win! what's in your wallet?

>> we are bavenlth -- back. >> chip maker with smart phones. nmike, you like it? >> don't buy it. competition is causing it to collapse. >> you like k corp. >> i don't truck banks financials. >> you like williams companies? >> natural gas weighs a lot. nmorgan, you like lliams? >> they have earnings per share to it drop next year.

>> boy, you guys are good. eric bowling continue.bowling >> why is capitalism under attack here. uncle sam trekking yourer move zooming in on your license plate. and they are storing your into. cashin' in putting you in the driver seat right now. >> wayne, and johnathon and bob and jamushgs.