wisdom tree dividend fund. they're an incredibly smart management company. i love them a lot. >> you guys are absolutely fantastic. the cost of freedom in the place for business, keep it right here, fox. >> one health care system for the rich and a substandard one for everybody else. that's what one prominent physician is saying is exactly what obamacare is creating in america as we speak. is is he right? welcome to forbes on fox. let's go in focus. we welcome kerry sheffield to the show for the first time. thank you for coming. >> thank you. >> rich, first to you. there's a new study out that shows that by 2020 nearly 90% of americans will be on some form of a government exchange. so we'll have 90% of americans on one and 10% essentially, the well off, going for specialty

health care. doesn't that show we're working into a two tiered system? >> well it sure does. i point out the article you cited is in the new york times. a friend of the obama administration. i can only imagine what enemies might say. the fundamental flaw of obamacare is on the supply side. that is a heck of a lot of doctors will either take early retirement or are going to opt out and start a practice for the rich. and everybody else is going to be in this government system with waits that are going to be unbelievable, reminiscent of the u.k.'s health system where you wait months for a hip replacement. >> that's what they have in the u.k. one standard system for everybody which i don't think a lot of and then the rich people have their own >> well, this is place. the u.k. system is not what anybody including the article in the new york times is suggesting. what the times article is suggesting is that we'll see a

shift away from health care being provided by employers on to the exchanges and when you say government run exchanges, you have to be careful. it may be government run exchanges but it's private insurance companies on those exchanges. so let's get this some what straight. i think it's very possible you may see that shift take place. as for two tiered health care, guess what, we've had that for a very, very long time. >> okay. but it is the direction in which we're going and so far it doesn't seem like we're going in a good direction. the number of options, for example, that's what america's great for. you have choices. >> right. >> and when you have choices the prices go down and the quality goes up. now choices are diminishing. we have a big drop in the number of health care plans in the u.s. >> right. part of it is because of the mandate. you have some bureaucrat in washington deciding i'm going to load these plans up like a christmas tree. and they're saying guess what, we're going to jack up these

prices and it's going to squeeze the middle class and squeeze them off the plans and on to the government plans. >> it's also squeezing doctors and health clinics. really good ones like the cancer care clinic md anderson. they're saying they're not going to accept exchange patients. so, again, fewer options. >> right remember when they said taxes are for the little people? we're going to see the same thing with obamacare. it is an elite institution for people with cancer and this is something that is not going to be available for every day americans. the fact is that this is just showing in sharp relief the flaws of this syem. only when people own and control their health care dollars can determine their own risk factors can we have a health care system that will really work. >> when you have a problem, when you have a two tiered system, everybody being squeezed into this one size fits all system you have rationing and even howard dean, the former head of the democratic committee has

come out and spoken on this. he said the ipab, this is what used to be called death panels by some, it's essentially a health care rationing body. the ipab will be able to stop certain treatments it's members do not favor. >> yeah. he said that also in an editorial. he wrote an editorial saying that. what he is saying here is that, listen, let's play it straight about what this body does. it will set rates to levels where doctors are going to say you know what, it isn't affordable for us to treat these patients. yeah we've had a two tier system. we've had it in canada for a long time. we've had a system where in congress you can get your own, quote, member services hotline to get your services immediately. so that's a two tier system. listen, we see it across the board. we see doctors saying we have to shutdown. we're not going to be in this health reform exchange plan any longer. it's just not working for us. it doesn't basically keep our cost benefit model in place.

>> and john, we have to listen to the doctors. they have the front line of our helthd care in america and a lot of them are moving to cash only practices. getting out -- not only getting out of the exchange but getting out of insurance all together. also 31% of them are not now accepting medicaid patients because we have all of these new medicaid patients. 31% are saying we're not going to take them. >> we always have a two tiered health care system just as we had multiple tiers for cars, housing, restaurants, you name it. but the beauty of the capitalist profit motive is what the rich enjoys signals what we'll all enjoy if capitalism prevails. the problem is obamacare isn't the two tiered health system it's that there's no capitalism. because there's no profit involved we at the bottom will not get to enjoy future health care advances. >> you can say it's always been there. we know the two tiered system has been there for decades. what we're talking about is

making it work and the idea that you can differentiate health care in this country where the poor and middle class may be iced out by a government imposed model. >> rich, i would push back a little on this that we've always had two tiered. we've had essentially two tiered. the rich get whatever they want. the poor had medicaid. the poor and the elderly had medicaid and medicare and the middle class had the insurance. so we really had three. the point is the middle class is getting pushed down to the medicaid level and everybody now is going to have that sort of government model, right? >> old on, rich. >> exactly. it's going to a two tier system. it's as if you have private jet travel on one end and greyhound buses on the other and not much in between. and you have karcar rentals and multiplicity of choices. we're creating woman standing

extreme choices and the vast, vast majority of people will be stuck on this rationing system. >> the main part is its about quality. we see from the study the quality in terms of the outcomes of people on these medicaid plans. it's as if they didn't have insurance. the quality will be severely diminished and that will be awful. it's also the only thing americans are caring about. if you look at opinion research, they don't care that it's a government run program. they don't care about cost. they care about quality. promoters think that americans are going to go along with this or go along with the idea that they can't choose a doctor they want to see for their child, i think they're underestimating the american people. >> and i think that's a great point. the fact is that we focus on price and we can debate whether it's more expensive or less expensive. i think it's more expensive already but the point is there's another cost and the cost is quality. don't you think the quality will diminish as the government gets more involved.

>> the government is not -- >> the government is more involved. we can debate about degree. >> i won't bother answering if everybody wants to do it for me. >> you really think -- hold on, rick, do you really think the government is no more involved now than it was before. >> how is the government more involved? >> by forcing -- you asked a question, let me answer it, by forcing insurance policies or insurance companies to do things that don't make economic sense and that raises the price for everybody by forcing a lot of companies to do what they say they can't do without raising prices. that's the government getting more involved. >> you didn't show me how the government got more involved. >> it's forcing people to buy products they don want to buy. >> all right. rick, again, how is the government less involved. >> you suggestedly said you

think they somehow changed the economic model. government has evolved with regulating health care from as far back as you and i can remember. all we've seen happen here is that the federal government set up a minimum coverage level for private insurance. >> we gave you your say. i'm not buying that. you think that the government is no more involved now than it used to be in health care? >> it's far more involved and president obama said he wants to bend the health care cost downward. that misses the point. high health care costs are beautiful. that's a lure for entrepreneurs to come in and figure out a way to bring us obscure surgeries and health care programs that once were out of our reach. you need high prices to get low prices. >> coming up next on america, the charge from louis headquate.

now back to forbes on fox. >> un-american, louis lerner's lawyer said that's what holding her in contempt of congress would be. they plan to vote on this as early as next week. but what about the irs targeting conservatives. isn't that un-american? >> let's go back to what she said in her apology before congress may of last year. she said we should apologize for targeting groups whose names are like tea party or patriot.

we're talking about the massive growth of government spending. it was wrong and incorrect. we asked two broad questions about donor names to these groups. the problem is there is too much money in the nonprofit system. that is what, in terms of political activity. but that's the reality we're living with now is an irs that was choosing to target and potentially for audits to target these groups for further scrutiny. >> okay. if that point could be proved, wouldn't that be more un-american than what loui louis lerner is talking about. >> anybody that thinks that's right is wrong. there's no way you should be targeting anybody if you're the irs. but i do wish at some point and i hope at some point we'll turn our attention toward rooting out those breaking the rules an spending too much money in politics when they're not supposed to. not targeting them by their political belief but targeting them all for acting improperly. >> well, sabrina, there's been a

lot of work on that. they were obsessed about it but the question is whether they were obsessed about one particular group and whether that is un-american. >> the only thing un-american is we have a progressive government targeting it's own citizens for free speech and the only thing that is unfair in this story is that we haven't gotten any answers. we don't actually know who is really to blame in this situation and there have been no criminal charges placed. so i think that's the real story here. >> and bill, that's another thing that people sugge is un-american. bill baldwin, is having -- not having an investigation that's supposed to be independent. >> maybe. okay. so it is un-american but i think that these tea party groups have been doing a lot of squawking about a problem. they could have waltzed right around. instead of applying for and waiting for a nonprofit status they should have organized as for profit organizations and sent in a corporate tax return that shows that their revenues and their expenses are exactly equal. the tax liability is zero.

there's nothing to audit. they don't pay any taxes. it's real easy. >> but that's an interesting bank shot that bill baldwin. to the point of which is more un-american, which do you think it is? >> i think the big thing is that president obama has been deceitful on so many fronts whether it be benghazi or obamacare that there may be no other option than contempt and i think we see how deceitful that it's here because the democrats are already trying to push through legislation looking to see what type of information the tea party uses on its forms to then make that illegal going forward. >> and rich, bottom line is, again, we get back to this american charge, un-american charge, who do you think is right here? louis lerner or the people that say what she did is wrong? >> selective enforcement of the law makes a mockery of the law. if urban police target african americans disproportionally

liberals will scream and the liberals are right to do that because that is un-american. this is just flatly un-american to selectively go against only conservative 501 c 3. >> of course this obama administration is not going to be here indefinitely. people on the right and the left should be agreeing on this because the fact is eventually it could be the groups on the left who are targeted if we allow this to continue. >> where we have gotten to mow is the lawyer for louis lerner citing the mccarthy hearings. the case cited was recarting a private sector defense worker alleged to have been spying. we're talking about a person that runs one of the most powerful agencies in the country. >> well it is powerful. >> arthing ttargeting the roots >> the final question was this a political conspiracy to kill a political movement that endangered the president's re-election. >> looks like that by the fact

that she wouldn't testify. >> fifth amendment. guys it's un-american to accuse people that haven't been proven guilty. it's un-american to accuse them because they took the fifth amendment. i'm with you. approximate she did it she should never be done it but she gets to be heard. >> last word to rick. coming up take a look at this. >> but it's a hassle. i don't need it. >> so what did eric balling do to get bill o'reilly going. >> a new minimum wage rage erupting across america. democrats suggesting hiking it will pull americans out of poverty but some say it will push more into poverty. who is right?

the performance review. that corporate trial by fire when every slacker gets his due. and yet, there's someone around the office who hasn't had a performance review in a while. someone whose poor performance is slowing down the entire organization. i'm looking at you phone company dsl. check your speed. see how fast your internet can be. switch now and add voice and tv for $34.90. comcast business built for business. could mean less waiting for things like security backups and file downloads you'd take that test, right? well, what are you waiting for? you could literally be done with the test by now. now you could have done it twice. this is awkward.

check your speed. see how fast your internet can be. switch now and add voice and tv for $34.90. comcast business built for business. minimum wage protests turning ugly in seattle and getting louder in d.c. this week. meanwhile the president slamming republicans from blocking a hike to $10.10 an hour. >> they prevented a raise for 28 million hard working americans. they said no to helping millions work their way out of poverty. >> but raising the minimum wage would actually hurt the poor more. explain your flip side, john. >> of course it would. it would be a barrier to entry into the work force for poor people. more broadly, we should like income inequality. that's what happens in a

capitalist society. if steve jobs and jeff smith had been lay abouts we would have reduced income inequality. why is it a bad thing when people do well? >> well rick there's a new survey out. 38% say they're going to have to cut back on their workers if it goes up to $10.10 an hour. >> at this point it doesn't matter what i think because the senate did what the senate did. all i think we can hope for now, we have to be realistic. we do have to take into account the job losses that could happen. we need to look for a compromise where you greatly reduce the number of job losses but we still find a way so that people that work a 40 hour week are not living below the poverty line. i'm open to suggestions. i think the president is too. >> well, carrie the president says he's particularly interested in the minority interest in all this but there's some indication that minorities may be among those hurt hardest. right now they're doing poorly compared to the average national

unemployment rate 6.3% among african americans, 11.6. >> that's why i don't understand why they overwhelmingly vote for president obama when he has clearly shown he doesn't take their interest at heart. john mentioned barriers to entry. the people that will face the highest barrier to interest is african american and hispanic workers and young workers. the very people that need this work experience and need this life experience and they're going to be shut out. >> and young workers, we just got word by the way that colleges in illinois are saying they're going to have to fire a lot of their student worker ifs the minimum wage goes up. so young minority workers in particular but all young workers will be hurt. >> what this is about is a financial kick back from president obama to the unions who support his campaigns financially. union contracts have automatic restarts many them that workers get pay increases as soon as the

minimum wage is increased. that's what this is about. if the president hadn't given us the worst economic recovery since the 30s we wouldn't have this huge need of raising the minimum wage in the first place because the rising economy would be having 4% growth instead of 2% so people naturally would be earning more. >> as we saw from the unemployment figures this week which came down, that was a blessing but what is not a blessing is all the people moving out of the work force and just give up. >> the president is quite right to be concerned about the plight of the poor people in this country. the question is whether this is going to help or hurt to raise the minimum wage. what it does is takes away the bottom rungs on the career ladder. makes it less likely the poor people will work hair way out of poverty. it's well intentioned legislation that backfired. >> absolutely and rick you said you want an area of compromise. talk about the earned income tax credit. that's in president obama's budget. >> that's another argument for another day.

we have to leave it at that, gang. the dow hitting a new high for the first time in 2014. now get the

we're back with stocks set to soar. big companies with dividends. >> that's right. large cap dividends and it's also cheap. >> do you like it? >> i don't like did i havidends. they raise my tax bill. >> you like oil and gas

drillers. >> i think this company is going to do particularly well when some of the fossil fuel deniers in congress get voted out. >> you'll have a slippery ride on this on that's it for forbes. thanks for watching. have a great weekend. here's eric. >> cashing in. >> love it. >> buckle your seat belt. bill o'reilly is here. the king of cable is fired up about what's becoming a costly race debate in america. then bill and i go another round in our tussle over tesla. should the government ever give taxpayer money to private businesses. >> this is like two years ago. >> explosive new details about a possible white house cover up on benghazi. no wonder americans have lost trust in our government. and then. >> i have to admit i'm not the strapping young muslim socialist that i used to be. >> the white house