hostage taking room. you are watching the place for fox news. the cost of freedom continues on the for business. the only place. fox. ♪ ♪ >> david: with a controversial healthcare exchanges about to kick in. the president admitting the law did kick up taxes. >> it's paid for by a combination of things. we did raise taxes on some things. >> david: some things? well, some here say try a lot of things. they're not things. they're people. it's just the beginning. so are they right or wrong? hi, everybody. i'm david asman. welcome to "forbes on fox." focus with steve forbes, john tandy, rich unger, rich karlgaard, sabrina. some things? >> you get more taxes. the government is running so it you get less supply and less innovation.

at the end of the day you get less longevity and more pain. in other countries it's higher taxes or less supply of healthcare. they can't get around it. >> david: rick, we had a solemn promise by the president selling this that the taxes would not go up. now, he admits, first, he violated that promise. this will hit people and their pockets. >> we had a solid promise that the president would not raise taxes on people earning less than $250 ,000. >> david: he said taxes would never go up. >> he didn't say that -- >> david: he did. he said it would pay for itself. taxes wouldn't go up. >> i don't know how he said taxes wouldn't go up when he imposed certain taxes by itself. i'll tell you where you are right. this is why you didn't elect the president. oh, wait. yes, they did. he raised taxes on people going in tanning booths.

you pay taxes if you go to indoor tanning booth. he cut the deduction. you have to hit a threshold of 10% of the adjusted gross income if you want to deduct your medical expenses over 7.5. other than that, there is nothing that he did in the aca that raises taxes on people below $250,000. >> david: okay, john, the fact is you look at the list of taxes that are going up and the amount of money hitting people over $250,000 or not, that is coming out of the private sector to pay for the public sector, something that the president said would pay for itself. >> i'm's inevitable. the man who promised to lower sea level and global temperatures for existing is now discovering that basic market forces are far more powerful than a community organizer. obama promised the nation cheap healthcare. but what we're realizing is that to get cheap healthcare it's very expensive. it will be delivered in a very poor way. >> david: bill, don't forget the thing that is going to hit people below $250,000, the

individual mandate. if you don't pay, you got to pay a penalty. >> i'm not too worried about more obamacare taxes. i'm worried about all purpose taxes. brace yourself, steve. we will see the taxes salaries in the form of a higher social security wage base. we'll see the taxes on millionaires. we'll see taxes on carbon. i think that medicine cabinet tax steve doesn't like is the least of his worries. >> david: carbon tax, by the way, talk to people in us a trail yeah. i think it failed a while back. sabrin what abt the obamacare taxes? the president now saying yes, taxes are going to go up, after he promised they wouldn't. >> completely unsurprising. this is not complicated. they demand they provide something to americans they don't want nor need. we have teetotalers getting the alcoholic rehab and men buying prenatal care. it'scid clous. of course there are taxes. only way to pay for the

spending we have. there are plenty of taxes. >> rich, even as rick said, even if those taxes that only fall on the upper tier, if you are taxing medical devices you know that the companies make the medical devices will pass the taxes on to the consumers. right? >> or they will go offshore. we will lose the major american industry. taxes are going to go up, because young healthy people are not going to sign up for the exchanges. there, there will be a huge shortfall in cash. therefore taxes will go up way more than anyone is thinking. certainly than brother rick is thinking here. this is an abomination. missing in action is role of innovation. i hold the republicans equally accountable to obama. they may protest obamacare and properly so. bring innovation in the

equation. cell phones are cheaper today and we have nearly universal coverage because we have innovation at the free market at work. this could happen in healthcare. >> david: steve, there is a spinning spiral effect to the taxes as well that happens. if you are a wealthy person and make over $250,000, if you sell the house you have to pay an obamacare house on the sale of your house -- obamacare tax on the sale of the house. that could affect the housing market. could it not? >> it will have weight on the housing market. rich said something important. obamacare, government involvement we will get less innovation. innovation is the only way we move ahead. we should go in the opposite direction having real free enterprise in healthcare, which we do not have today and effective safety net instead of the hodgepodge system we have now. >> all due respect that shows lack of understanding of what the aca is. in point of fact -- >> david: that is the healthcare law. obamacare. >> yeah. obamacare. what it most of this law, in

fact, does deal with innovating. i can't tell you everything is going to work. we'll have to wait and see. but much of it is. one thing to what rich said. what people tend to forget, that very innovation in technology and medical a lot of it driven by the government dollars by the way, which i don't think you like. that hasnak raised the price -- has in fact raised the price of medicine. it's a good problem. technology that keeps you and i around longer today and healthier but it costs money. >> david: so much of this is based on promises. you know, promise me taxes won't go up. promise me this will pay for itself. promise me this, that and now supposedly this is all the taxes. no, more. do you believe all the promises? do the american people? >> well, i think it's based more on cruelty. rich karlgaard is right, the best way to get to low prices is through the high prices. once you see the high prices

in profit that attracts innovation and the competition. people like rick want to blunt out the high price. result you get no innovation and no competition. >> david: bill, it's not like we don't have examples. we do have medicare and dicaid. we have seen how those turned out. they cost a lot more than people expected them to. >> only about 100 times as much as projected. >> okay. all right. the government costs money. you might be losing sight of the bigger picture here. the obama care expenses are just a small part of it. the whole government is going bankrupt. that's why they will be taxing everybody to death. >> sabrina, no matter what happens we have to sit back to accept higher taxes. >> we have an election coming up in a few years and that is the time word. this is a president that was grossly dishonest with the american pple. he promised benefits and he will have expanded coverage for no consideration for what it costs the taxpayers. chickens are coming home to roost. >> david: rich, we do have an election coming up and this is likely to affect the election one way or the other. who do you think benefits benefm

the roll-out of obamacare? republicans or democrats? >> the republicans should benefit, but they are blowing it because they are in their hos stillty toward obamacare. they are making the wrong argument. making argument out of anger. i understand why people are angry but they should make the positive argument of what healthcare could look like in the future if we had free market innovation that we see in technology, and so many other parts of our sti dynamic economy. >> david: i think actually, rick might agree with you on part of that. >> i hope you ask that question in three years, because what you are going to find and all of you republicans won't admit it, but you know it. people are going to like much if not all of this law. wait and see who this -- >> david: i have to agree with rick as far as one thing goes. we'll wait and see. we will all find out the answer to that question. coming up next, five years later and the governnt is still going after bigbacks like jp morgan chase over the mortgage crisis. but what about going after

lawmakers who also helped create it and make this debacle especially thank you orville and wilbur... ...amelia... neil and buzz: for teaching us that you can't create the future... by clinging to the past. and with that: you're history. instead of looking behind... delta is looking beyond. 80 thousand of us investing billions... in everything from the best experiences below... to the finest comforts above.

we're not simply saluting history... we're making it.

♪ ♪ >> david: well, five years after the financial crisis hit, the government is slapping new fines on big banks like jp morgan. regulate torse say it's because the banks helped cause the crisis by pushing loans on people who couldn't afford them. but steve, you say if you are going to prosecute anybody for this, start with a lawmaker.

who are pushing banks to approve the sub prime loans. >> that is right. since the 1990s, and going to the late 1970s, the government is pushing up the sub prime loan, coming up with the quotas and the like. while we're at it, go after the federal reserve. money led to the housing boom and bust. the treasury department did the same thing. it's regulators and lawmakers. in in this case, the bankers from least villains but they are getting the biggest hit. >> david: bill, so many examples of lawmakers, mostly democrats, some republicans by the way, saying we won't have trouble with the housing market. for example, here is barney frank in 2003. >> the more people in my dgment exaggerate a threat of safety and soundness, the more people conjure up the possibility of serious financial losses to the treasury, which i do not see. we have endities that are

sound. >> david: fannie and freddie collapsed. they wanted the banks to take the bad loans. >> i'll concede. fannie and prez are wicked. a lot of democrats are wicked. i'm being serious. government messed things up intervening in the housing market. >> david: why shouldn't we rescue them? >> here is the problem. if you prosecute lawmakers for passing bad laws you would empty out every legislature. so now what do you do to run the government? if you don't like it, barney frank, don't vote for it. >> david: the fact is right now they are trying to put all the problems of the financial crisis on shoulder of the banks. the banks had some blame. so did the lawmakers. >> pay lawmakers in mortgage back security. here is a problem. bill clinton, barney frank, republicans are acting like the big boozezy bar tepidders and the big boozezy frat party

handing out free drink and fake i.d.s. even if national bureau of economic research said they were trying to fix income inequality. no less than a progressive newspaper like "village voice" said they were trying to lay claim to record number of homeowners on their watch to act like a launch pad for political office. they were like the grand prix, you know, start flag guy at the monaco grand prix. for banks that compiling in, following what the government was doing. i blame banks, too, but it started with the federal pocies that caused the crisis. >> david: rich, emac makes a great point. when "village voice" comes out with a piece about andrew cuomo, now the governor of new york, he was head of the h.u.d., holding the two babies fannie and freddie and they blame him for the mortgage crisis. when "the village voice" is doing that, there are people other than the banks that bear responsibility for this, right? >> sure. then you have to blame ben bernanke at the fed.

anytime you have ses liquidity in the system, it's going to find a bubble somewhere. this one found a bubble in the housing market. look, there are so many people to blame. i hate the blame game. i do like the big boozezy party, emac, but if i'm hungover the next morning the fault is mine. you know, let's -- >> $6 trillion hangover. it's a huge $6 trillion hangover. they turn the government to sweetheart sub prime lenders. you income, no job, no problem, here is a mortgage. that's what happened. >> david: morgan, you looked in to all of this and you focused on housing for several years. who do you blame? >> it's true. blame game goes from everybody to the rating agency. i did as emac mentioned it started with the politicians. i will give you a great example. we thought it started with president clinton and it rolled to president bush. give you an example. statement on hud's website, they took it down in 2007, i believe. they say that not enough americans have cash for down payments and even more don't have sufficient, quote/unquote, income. >> david: who needs cash?

, right? >> sufficient income for a house at the current mortgage rates. here is what the hud statement said in response to that? financg strategies fueled by creativity and resources of private and public sectors should address both of the financial barriers to the homeownership. they digged the rock down the hill. i turned in to a snowball. >> david: mike, what is worse than -- as bad as all of this is, what is worse it may be happening again. right? >> david, the problem is what bothers me the most about what obama is doing is, you know, they are going after jp morgan for things that stearns and washington mutual did, the banks that jp morgan bought at the behost of the government to save them rate. they going after jp morgan for things that those banks did before jp morgan bought them. to your point, what is the big, what are they going to do next time the government says hey, we need your help. come in and buy these guys? well, wait a minute. i don't know.

if there were bad things at the bank you punished us. >> they are going for the blim that can pay out. they have money to make it right. >> david: also, jp morgan has a chairman, ceo, jamie dimon who doesn't like a lot of what the obama administration is doing. you think this is targeted to somebody for political reasons? >> david, it's absolutely true. there is another bank out there, bb&t that is punished because they tried to defy the government. having to take the tarp money. they didn't want to do it. they are being punished for it. so, jamie dimon is punished. he made it clear he did not like tarp money. he made it clear he was opposed to the president now. he is paying the price for it. jp morgan was the best run bank out there, one of the best run banks out there with a couple of others like wells fargo. they are getting big punishment. by the way, when the federal reserve is picking up the point out there, made the money cheap, the housing

prices went up. everyone thought it was a natural law of the universe. prices would keep going up. if a borrower defaulted it didn't matter. the asset would be better than ney good. >> david: last word from steve forbes. both parties continue the power struggle in washington this weekend, a new poll showing a record number of americans think the government has too much power. period. the "cashin' in" crew how we claim the power back coming up. but first on forbes, satisfying, satisfries. the new fries saving people calories, some they they are going

>> david: burger king is hoping you will be satisfied with -- sa tabisfries. it has fewer calories than the current one. the food police are happy but on the flip side, we don't need the food police. right? >> absolutely. burger king is showing private sector innovation is a better route than doing what the food police at the city council in l.a. did in 2008. when they banned the fast food restaurants and 32-mile area. that was stup. this is smart. >> davavid: fire the food police. let the free market do it. >> sam someone show me the

laws. they tried in new york and court overturned it. >> david: failed. >> failed. in california, three or four cities put it on the ballot and it didn't pass. nobody is complaining about the food safety laws. >> being elected doesn't make you a genius. new york city elected anthony weiner. restaurants intervate around what the needs are. some do fatty foods and some are not. >> emac, are you satisfried? >> i want celery stricks with the big mac and i want ronald mcdonald and burger doing be lifestyle ambassador for the entire way to eat in country. i'm kidding. the free market is doing it. >> steve, should we be happy about this, the fact that the food police are losing?

>> i am glad what burger king is doing. it's what the soda companies did before we had the food fascists, create a diet soda that had a real taste now. the same with french fries. that is the way it works. >> david: it's from the food police to the food fascist. thank you, gang. forget the debt message.

>> david: we are back. our informers have stocks to survive dc. >> a long-term play and long-term capital appreciation. cheap fund. >> david: bill, you lie it? >> the manager john rogers is a great judge of corporate intrinsic value. >> head waters. what is this? >> if they had a motto it would be making america great throughfully ash. >> what does it do? >> it's exciting. >> this is a great company. but this is head winds. >> smucker up. why do you like this? >> when times are tough people turn to peanut butter and

jelly. >> david: emac, you like it? >> dividends like smucker's shares havave to be good. profits coming down lately. >> david: that is it for "forbes on fox." ke it here. the number one business block tonights with eric bolling and "cashin' in." ♪ ♪ >> eric: a power struggle in dc, not just between democrats and republicans but between you and washington. a record number of americans say the government has too much power. the epa admitting green regulations meant to cut co2 won't cut them at all but they will cut plenty of jobs. time to put the global warming on ice. took the fifth when asked about the i.r.s. targeting conservatives and now lois is taking a cushy retirement packal paid for by you and me. does she owe us an explanation before the checks clear? "cashin' in" shining a bright light on the characters