richer. $77 trillion in wealth. time to buy some expensive luggage and go on an expensive vacation. >> by the luggage,he stock, how does he talk that fast? >> are you talking to me? fixing the budget, hi, i'm neil cavuto. depending on your point of view, your budget works, but whatever. that budget deal passing the house and heading to the senate next week in passing the buck to travelers. it doubles the so-called airline fee to raise more cash are. you feeling safer yet? this is about $5.60 or so each flight to keep us safe. and it's double what it was, but it's good because we're safer. >> well, yeah, also the whole

budget deal itself was past something that didn't have a new tax. and i knew somehow we had conflicted taxes. and it's a fee, just like we have to go to the supreme court to find out the obamacare was a tax and not a fee. whatever. the bottom line is we blew through the sequester spending limits and this is what we have to do for the compromising deals. both sides, i can't believe the republicans are taking a victory lap, but obviously it's costing us a lot of money. >> it could be depending on how they dot the i's and cross the t's. a lot of it could go to debt relief. in other words, they don't know where in of it's coming. >> they always do this because this is a very sneaky and crafty way of putting in a tax increase, which is what it is, because they don't think, because the fee that flyers were charged was low enough that they can go ahead and more than double it and people maybe won't feel the pain and maybe won't get angry about it. that's why they came up with this, increasing the premiums on

the pension insurance that companies have to pay. you know, who is really going to raise a stink about that? >> wasn't this sold under the guides of keeping us safer, originally? >> yeah, but i think you're missing the bigger stor >> i don't think i am. >> i do. i'm chairman of the board. there's not going to be a government shutdown. >> and that was the goal, right? >> this is a small price to pay for not having a government shutdown. when youave the government, you're going to see fee increas, tax increases -- >> but i have to say the government shutdown wasn't bad. the market went up, manufacturing went up -- >> but that wasn't bad. that was bad because it hurt the republican party. > well there, is something t be said to that where you liked it or not, it hurt republican and maybe, ed stein, that's what they were focused on.

paul ryan wanted to get the attention away from them and focus on the spending that they didn't control through the budget measures. wt do you think of it? >> well, the spending is so out of control it's insane. the idea of a tiny fee or tax whatever they were going to call it is going to have much effect on the budget is nonsense. there's probably atraveler and afft thedeficit very much. we are in such a deep, deep hole. this is a cosmetic effort. mr. gasparino has it right, it's meant to keep from embarrassing the republican party, but in tms of the long run it does nothing. >> but then what are you worried about, it's not on private citations, do they? >> i fly a regular plane like the poor people. whatever you say, all right. >> adam, i think this upgrades to a very good point, what this

money really proves. first of all, it is not going, all of it at least, to homeland security to beef things up at the tsa. i don't know if that's a good or bad thing, i didn't know where the money goes, but then again i never know where the bank settlement money goes, back into a big pot. what do you think? >> well, if any of it goes to airport security, then it's a tiny price to pay. and it's money well spen >> we need the privilege of the patdowns, you're so right. >> none of us like thatut -- >> i actually do. i would pay, like, if they would let me swipe my credit card, if i was guaranteed a patdown, i would do that. >> by the way, it's been very cold out. but anyway -- >> be that as it may, i've known deegan for a long time and i'm not going to remotely comment on that, but it absolutely a privilege to the safety they

provide. we have this very complex, very successful, very safe and very efficient civil aviation system. it works extremely well. and i disagree with ben completely. you can call this cosmetic, but the fact that we're not going to have another one of these embarrassing shutdowns that embarrasses us in front of the entire world is a very good thing. >> but it's cosmetic in the terms of the budget. >> that's the definition of cosmetic. >> $25 billion is nothing. >> there's a two-year deal that does squirt that possibility of a government shutwn, but it's two years deeper in the hole, too. so i know republicans are hoping maybe we fake the senate and in a couple years we take the white house. >> still can't do -- >> i think you're right on this, but that's the hope. we get our way and then man, oh, man, we are going to get serious. >> then you'll be fiscally responsible. >> it does immaterialize. >> maybe the tea party is a big

loser and the american public is worried about the deficit. >> we are saying this particular deal. the bottom line is that it esn't stop. it just does not stop growing. this deal frees up congress to do real wor because what they have to deal with, let me finish, let me finish, they'll have to deal with obamacare. inste of government shutdowns, because we have to buy the government, bottomine is -- >> what do you really think they are going to do with obamacare? >> i don't know, but it's a train wreck. and smart people have to put their heads together and figure it out because this is one of the worst public policy disasters this country has ever had. >> let me hit on what you just said there, they have to focus on the wasteful spending in obamacare that they put inside that they are not addressing now. >> we can talk about it as an economic issue, it has destroyed average people's lives that have been changed. >> you're saying that what they lose and not show resolve in one area they will suddenly show in

another. i think you are crazy. >> i think they have to vote their time away from the stupid sequester battles, which don't amount to anything, and dealing with the fact that people are not going to be able to go to the doctor. >> i'm going to point out the sequester, if memory serves me right, the backup is the backbone for those who didn't have it. so the defense was that. the one good thing that came, at least the charade is over. >> their charade is over because this bill increases spending by $62 billion and is budget gimmick. this airline -- >> and you still have $4 trillion. at a minimum for the debt. >> it's not about -- it's not about safety, it is budget and political gimmickry. you want to talk about to boba a obamacare, bring it back to that. >> don't get me going on that. >> that is a low -- >> do you think the government utdowns are good?

does anybody think that? >> how about some honesty, though. >> don't you start speaking out -- >> i don't see where it was so bad that we're going to slow down. i saw the market go up, i saw the jobs improve. show me the evidence. >> okay. because there's a lunatic governor in virginia right now. that's why it was bad. that guy, terry mcauliffe, that's a bad thing. >> adam, what were you saying, i'm sorry. >> i was going to say the market ultimately went up because got it resolved, charles. >> it was up the 2% -- >> adam, i stopped everything so you could make that ridiculous point? >> be stein, do you think then that speaking of the markets they are just going to look at this as more theater that comes to submit congress and what they come up with and they don't take

them seriously? >> they said the effect and causes in economics are almost impossible to correlate. you can never tell what the cause is of any effect. >> well, if i understood that i would fully agree with you. i want to thank you very much. we'll take a break here. help wanted. the help for the health care law. but why bring someone else in when no one is going out? that's just weird. ♪

i'm eric shawn.

now back to "cavuto." i asked the administrator to create a new position of chief risk officer, this will be a full-time employee charged with assessing risk management practices and developing strategies to minimize those risks. >> i thought that was your job. health and human services kathleen sebelius adding a new position to help deal with the health care mess, but the government is still not getting rid of anyone else over this ms. that's what's so weird, new folks come in to crowd out all the other chief that is are policing, and here we go. >> more levels of bureaucracy because that's really going to help it out. the communication is going to get so much better. >> that's what i thought. i love how the default is, we have more people coming in. that's crazy. >> if you like the cast of characters who put it together, my goodness. risk officer, that's a weird

title. >> seat technology officer -- >> up specter general. >> it sounds like they are going to infuse this with business principles and stuff when the reality is if they would run it like a business, she would be fired. >> and also, why now, and one, we don't know what the person will do, but also, like, what's changed that we didn't need that person tre like three or four months ago? other than she screwed it up. >> what does a chief risk officer of obamacare do? >> what does that person do? >> i think mr. gasparino nailed i a big company like goldman sachs would have a chief risk suervise trades and make sure they would not do much exposure on trades. if they are doing this for obamacare, this is nonsense. they can add 100 people, 2500 people, it doesn't matter.

there are so many that people don't notice. that's the problem with big government, it just gets bigger and bigger and you say, we just add 1% of the people. it gets bigger until it eats up everybody. >> and it crowds the decision-making process as well. they move slower, not faster. >> absolutely. >> i sure would like to weigh in on this topic. >> wel i'm not interested in your opinion. just kidding. but i insist, you have to ask yourself this, to me it sounds like after the titanic hit the iceberit was sinking, they say, we're going to bring in a new captain. well, it's sinking. what do you do? a navigator, exactly. >> i know there's lots of pre-holiday laughter here and that your job -- >> actually, no, there's not. there's not a lot of holiday mercy, but go ahead. >> my job is to defend obamacare. so i'll give you a real-life example from the business world. way back when when ebates' site

crashed, she didn't fire anybody but brought in a new team of people to fix the se. they worked on it really hard. they are going to try to -- >> wait a minute, you are comparing this with a site that auctions off velvet paintings? are you kidding me? >> e-bay then and now was probably a lot bigger in terms of the commerce. >> the government should be responsible. if you screw up to the degree of figure that is screwed up, it may be fixable, i don't think it is, but my deal is that you fire people. you have to fire people. >> the founder of lululemon, he epped out of the picture and said, i've been doing a terrible job for the sake of the integrity of the business i created. but this is the guy who said women shouldn't wear -- >> right. but bottom line, is this really going to work? you have to bring new management in. say we blew her out, like the

president fired her, and he brought in another chief risk officer, and this thing is not going to work. it doesn't add up. the notion that you can basically force people to put guns to people's heads and do certain things -- >> it's not working! >> do you think it's working? do you think it actually works? we are down about 6 million health care policies, that's how many americans have lost their health care insurance. we have to make up that ground under a goal that was supposed to be about providing health care coverage for everyone. we have 6 million viewers without it. so when does this mass turn in your favor? >> so i think it's working and it's working poorly. >> that's not what i asked. when do you think it turns to your favor? >> the next 12 to 18 months. i'm making that up because how do i know? i think we should try. >> you might be the next chief officer. >> i propose on this show, adam backs the new chief. >> it's working so well the

obama administration has had to tell insurers to accept late payment for those who want to be insured because the system is completely screwed to you know where. >> well, we'll see what happens. in the meantime, going low and at the same time going higher, why the ford game says a report on the low number of people signing up for obamacare is all the proof we need that we're all going to pay more for obamacare, and sooner than you think. that's at the top of the hour, but up next -- all i wa is a refund. >> refund? refund? refund? are you crazy? refund? refund? refund? >> bailout! it's too late for a refund. you don't get a stinking refund, but don't say we didn't warn you. what gm did with our $50 billion taxpayer money still could have done on its own i bankruptcy. layoff workers and jump

well, at least we're out, right? but were taxpayers taken for a ride? the government closing on the bail-out. to be fair began with president sh. to leave taxpayers with $10.5 billion loss. but charles, we're out. what do you think? >> we're out. and i'm really worried about this. not only did we lose $10 billion and the american

taxpayer came up short, it was done to help unions. it will be sold in the future as bail-outs work. that's what we listen to in the last year. bail-outs work. setting us up for the next big round of bail-outs and redistribution of cash from taxpayers to unions. that cares me about this. >> did't the government stilts up to fail with this in terms of losing -- set itself up to fail in terms of losing money? had they not done that it way -- >> there are ways they could have done it to work out bet evidence for them. >> cash in a suitcase. >> at the time you couldn't bail out the banks we did and not rescue an american icon that would save the number of jobs that it did. i was for it then. i hate the loss but glad we're out, too. >> i thought bailing out the banks was a necessary evil. it's easier for banks to repay loan when you have q.e.

>> i didn't mention that. >> but my point is we didn't bail them out to ke a profit. we bailed them out to bail them out. that is the reason why george bush -- >> a good point. very good point. we bailed them out to bail them out. bottom line is i wonder, ben, whether you are for or against the bail-out, charles said if it set a precedent. not just in too big to fail, but if you are seen as an important institution, too important to let go, we will not let go of it. we will not do that. >> it is the precedent. correct precedent. i don't think we should have let general motors fail. in the unlikely event it happens to ford or g.e., we shouldn't let them fail. >> what if it happens again? >> we should not let them fail. >> why do they get a special place? is microsoft in the same situation? >> sorry? >> is microsoft in the same situation? bail them out? >> yes. absolutely. it costs $30 per american to bail out g.m. that's a small price to pay to

keep a gigantic icon, american manufacturer in business. allow me to continue -- >> all right, all right. >> and for my cadillac. >> adam, what do you think? this is providing mechanics for his cadillac, i undstand. adam, what do you make of that? >> straight out, the bail-out did work. money spent to pursue a policy, an important policy is money well spent. same for spending money to fight wars and protect the country. that is what we did here. it was the right thing to do. we don't have to like it. >> they did what they said they wouldn't do. bankruptcy. shut plants and got rid of workers. if they said that in advance i would have said all right. >> erican airlines survived bankruptcy. >> the argument was it couldn't have been the same thing there because we were in the middle of a meltdown. do you believe that? >> yeah. at another time we could haven't had to bail themout. >> i think you're right.

thank you. up next, stashing cash for the new year. americans is now saying saving money is the úp@@xcç

all right. stocks to save for the future. charles? >> play on the global infrastructure, boom! >> ben? >> i love s.d.y. index fun. emphasis on dividends. >> adam, how about you? >> vwo. vanguard emerging markets etf. add more when it's down.

>> you did that so quickly, we have seconds to spare. it's cold outside. good luck shopping. be prosperous. cost of freedom continues. target enrollment number for the end of december is 3.3 million. based on hhs' release this morning your department is more than 3 million off the target numbers. isn't that correct? >> through the end of november, that is correct, sir. >> uh-oh. the administration's target for obamacare enrollee is off by nearly 90% so far. those signing up are likely not the young healthy one the system needs to pay for all the new costs from the law. so are you abouto see your healthcare bill goes up more than they have? hi, everybody. i'm david asman. welcome to "forbes on fox." mr. steve forbes, rick ungen. mike