>> stay tuned and get up early. enjoying a break at the pump? what if i told you something could bring those prices even low her? the keystone pipeline. the house just giving it a green light. the senate voting on tuesday, yet the white house more than hinting it could put on the brakes with a veto. so why not give fuel to something that could create more jobs and lower gas prices by saying yes instead? hi, everyone. i'm brenda butner. this is "bulls & bears." here they are for the week, welcome, everybody. during the why veto lower gas prices and more jobs. >> i don't know, brenda.

i don't understand why this wasn't done years ago. look, i think it rests on three key points. you have the potential impact on the price of gasoline. you have the environmental aspect. and you have the jobs aspect. let's talk about price and take that off the table. the oil is probably going to get here anyway. whether it's by a train or a truck or by the pipeline. so the -- i think the price is going to be -- positive impact but probably minimal. so now we'll look at the environment. the oil is going to come here, but it's already been shown that the current way it gets here by truck and rail is actually less safe than building a pipeline. so we can take that off the table. that leaves jobs and both the state department and transcanada who by estimates are in agreement. 42,000 jobs. brenda, this is a no-brainer! >> is it, sasha? what do you think? >> well, i think at the end of

the day the president isn't going to veto it and it's going to go forward. and i think it's about time that it does. the reality is that 42,000 jobs, yes, that's great, don't get me wrong about that, but that's a drop in the bucket comparatively compared to what the president is trying to do in terms of climate change. and that is one of the most important issues we're facing and will face in the near future. >> but tracey, we have heard from the white house that they take a very dim view of these kind of proposals. that sounds like more than a hint to me. >> i'm with you. i don't think -- i think he's going to veto it, which is looney tunes. i don't get why he's pandering to the environmentalists at this point. no one is backing him anywhere, any time soon. this is good for the country. we have bipartisan support on this. he would be a fool to walk away without this on his plate because at least it's something positive we can say, hey, president obama did something good for jobs, for energy

independence. and i don't want to step on john's toes, but this is about energy independence. and while oil prices are down, we should do this because opec is not going to be happy with oil down for much longer and prices are going to turn fairly quickly. >> energy independence is very important, john, but do you think this will actually lower prices at the pump? >> not significantly. this is the most important part, the oil turning into gas is going into the global market anyway. so you're going to see it whether it goes to asia or comes to us. we get tall co2 emissions, but whether we get the oil or not is completely up to us. we get 36% of the oil from canada, the oil we import. but the balkan formation near north dakota is at a massive bottleneck. this is a shovel job, i know the president may not recognize any of those because he spent $800 billion trying to find them, but this is a shovel-ready job that alleviates the bottleneck in north dakota because farmers are complaining in north dakota they can't get their crops out and

can't get the fertilizer in because every train available is being used to get oil out of there and as gary b. already mentioned, that's a far more dangerous way to ship this oil than it is by pipeline. >> jonas, where do you weigh in on this? >> first of all, it's taken so long that if we wait any longer there won't be any oil in the barrel. $40 oil, they are not going to be pumping oil out of canada because it is too expensive, the production costs. so we already missed an opportunity. it should have happened near very 130 already 140 a barrel. i never understood the environmental angle. to gary's point, the other way to get the oil markets are worse. the pipeline option is the best. if they want to help the environment, consider a tax. doing this is just kissing up to environmentalists and doesn't actually help global warming or anything, there are better ways for the president to deal with

that issue than fighting this thing all the time. >> i think the president says the current price of oil is out of the picture because it's going to take years to build this thing, right? so oil, by the time we get this up and running again, oil will be back up. we can't think of where oil is right now and put the kabash on it and say, we don't need this thing because this will turn again. opec will make the turn as long as we are part of that and dependent on them. prices will go back up again and you need years to get this thing working, so why not get it started. >> lower gas prices put money in people's pockets. isn't that what we need? >> well, absolutely. but as john said, the pipeline isn't really going to have much to do with that. i think at the end of the day the reality is it's going to happen or as everyone has been saying, it's going to happen one way or another and the pipeline is a better way for it to go. so it aught to be done, like i said, i don't think we'll veto it but he's trying to get concessions out of it before he signs it into law. >> it's been six years, gary b.

>> yeah, this is what i don't understand. you know, obama has this populist message. he wants to help the middle class, he wants to create jobs. this is a slam dunk as john points out turn-key shovel-ready thing and he's looking for concessions? just sign the darn thing or don't veto it, whatever you need to do, and put the 42,000 jobs on the books. >> john, what do you think it means if he does veto it? >> i think it's going to push our neighbor canada to make trade deals with asia. and this is insane. we don't want that oil. gary b. is right, we're probably going to get it one way or the other, but if they build the pipeline to the west coast in canada and start shipping the oil to asia, we have lost a very good partner with a lot of our oil that's going to be leaving north america. remember when the caspian sea found out how much oil reserves were there, we protested in a huge way for the pipeline to go across russia because we said if the pipeline goes across russia,

they control that oil. we got it to go through turkey, one of our friends into the mediterranean. now all of a sudden we are saying pipe lines are not as important. we want to be able to control oil in north america is just as important, so is building the relationship with our partners instead of chasing them off to asia. >> jonas, do you agree? >> i think the president has had ample opportunities in other places to slow the production of oil down. we are at all-time highs in the u.s. obviously he's done nothing. it's all over north america they are producing oil than when he was president. this is mostly just a pretend environmentalist. if he was, early in the administration he wouldn't have tried to increase the offshore drilling and let all the fracking take place, this really is not an environmental president other than the case on cars, you can't make a case that he's worried about the production or north america wouldn't be at all-time highs. >> tracey, what about jobs. >> yeah, and it is not just the jobs that are going to be created during the construction

of this thing. there's so many ancillary jobs with a whole industry butting and about to explode as john pointed out. this is good for the country. this is an easy feather in the president's cap. and to jonas' point, if he's not a greenie, why not sign the thing? i don't get it. it's a very easy way for people to start to change their opinion of the president and his policies. >> gary b., last word? >> look, if the president wants to move the right way to bipartisanship, this to me sounds like the easiest way to do it. we'll see if he can step up. >> we'll be watching for sure. thanks, guys. could the president's executive action on immigration turn a d.c. shoedown into a government shutdown? neil and the gang on whether that's what is really going on, but up here first. >> you pitted the american voter -- this is a very clever exploitation of the lack of the economic understanding of the

american voter. >> if that isn't turning people off from signing up for obamacare today, maybe the soaring premiums

hey, heart, what's this? that's my resignation letter. you're resigning? why? because you're constantly ignoring me, you're half as active as you used to be and you eat stuff like this! you've been putting me under a lot of pressure, lately. that's why i'm ready to quit! i forgot! i'll do better. please don't quit on me! ok, but remember, it's not what you say, it's what you do. [narrator] listen to your heart. don't let it quit on you. let's go for a walk! [narrator] uncontrolled high blood pressure could lead to a stroke, heart attack or death. t yours to a healthy range before it's too late. "bulls & bears." america's most powerful name in news. here we go again. healthcare.gov round two. premiums are spiking and enrollment expectations, well, they are falling. tracey, is this bad news for the economy? >> it's bad news for everyone, brenda. serve getting up this morning,

pouring their cup of coffee and potentially going online to enroll. all you're going to find is that the supposed lower price plans are long gone. and if they are still there, the prices have gone up. so you'll be forced into the entire premium plans. in some states premiums are going up as much as 20%. so this is bad news for sentiment. it's bad news for your wallet. and overall, it's just bad news for the economy. >> well, gary b., even if you aren't going to enroll in obamacare, does this hurt the economy? does this hurt you? >> it has to, brenda. look, if we take a step back and look what obamacare is, it's basically a shell game. i'm healthy and can afford it. my premiums as we have talked to a number of times in the show have gone up 25%. my 25-year-old daughter who files on her own and makes nothing per year, she gets $176 a month credit. so she doesn't have to paying anything. so all we have done is move money from one entity to the other through the government. now, when in the history of the

united states has moving money through the government in a big shell game not hurt the economy? it's just -- it's obvious. this is going to kill us, just like all the other thing this is administration has done. >> sasha, you don't think that it is going to hurt everybody. why not? >> no, i don't. if that were the case, gary b., people wouldn't be so happy with medicare. >> i'm not talking about medicare, it's broke! >> you don't see posts about seniors and medicare. >> that's because they are not paying anything. all the healthy people are paying into medicare. we'll leave that alone. >> here's why, yes, it's a problem in some states. in about 8 out of 50, two out of 50 cities in the u.s., there are prices going up because they are dropping the competition. the upside is 25% more health insurers are getting in this year and it will stabilize to work itself out.

so for the vast majority of the people involved in obamacare, the prices are either -- the premiums are either going down or the rate of increase is dramatically less. >> okay, john, take that on. >> i don't know what is wrong with that pessimist gary b. look, you didn't get the memo. it's free pizza for everybody, gary. nobody has to pay. >> i missed it. i didn't swallow the kool-aid. >> we are going to get the rich kids to pay for it. this has gone through a ton of tax increases. go through them, it's 20-something deep. >> they are penalties. remember that? >> correct. correct. they get you when the government -- they call it ceiling pork, also, by the way. it's all phraseology with the government. nobody really thought they were going to get the projections right. look at how they projected the gdp the last four years. they have underestimated them making 50% of what the actual

gdp is. they look at the world an put numbers together. no wonder they estimate the numbers. when you estimate 13 million are in and now are saying 9 to 10, that's probably lower because they overestimate everything else. someone has to pay for this. this is not free. through premiums or tax increases or penalties, whatever you want to call it. >> jonas, when you crunch your numbers, what do you come up with? what does this mean for the economy? >> insurance in general leads to overconsumption of everything. it's like that with health insurance, whether the rich people pay for it with the capital tax or through your health care with higher premiums, you don't have to pay for physicals we used to have to pay for. so you'll see more money spent in the health care industry. a lot of it is paid for by employers. that's bad for the economy but so was the already taxing

situation to employers. think just want to write you a paycheck and don't want the h.r. to hunt around for medical benefits. there's nothing in there to lower costs other than those who get physicals and maybe better health comes later if they are healthier for doing that. we won't know that for years so it's a little early to say it will get expensive for everybody. >> i don't think that's true, jonas. we have had ceos and major corporations down to little mom and pops, not one person has said, thank god for obamacare. not one person. >> no employer should have to pay for health insurance. that's why they are saying that. i agree with that, by the way. >> i'm talking employees -- employees are angry and employees don't want this nor do employers. it's not going to help the economy. if you have an employer who is so wrapped in trying to figure this out, they can't even do business. >> that's going to be the last word. thank you, guys. cashing in just over an hour from now.

eric, what do you guys have coming up? >> hi, brain da. the president is looking to give them a free place in the economy in spite of the opposition. plus, a school banning religious holidays from its calendar. should taxpayers be forced to fund the pc wars in our schools? see you at 11:30. >> sounds good, thank you. eric, we'll be watching. up first, as americans save up to spend big on black friday, what some union-backed walmart workers are planning that could put a lump of coal in the holiday calendar.

♪ i'm almost done. [ male announcer ] now you can pay your bill... ♪ ...manage your appointments... [ dog barks ] ...and check your connection status... ♪ ...anytime, anywhere. ♪ [ dog growls ] ♪ oh. so you're protesting? ♪ okay. [ male announcer ] introducing xfinity my account. available on any device.

black friday is gearing up as walmart workers are kicking things off early with a sit-in protesting the nation's biggest employers. nearly two dozen were arrested for blocking traffic near the retailer and they are just getting started. >> it's going to be the biggest black friday protest walmart as seen. >> all right, gary b., who is backing the protests and what does that say? >> well, this is all another union tactic. akin to back in the 1950s, twisting arms and hitting people over the head with crowbars. they try to do it more subtly now, but it won't work because walmart will go out to hire more people. but if you drive up to a walmart and see it's blocked, the entrance by a big mob, what are

you going to do? go down the street to the target or the sears or something like that. so walmart sales will suffer. then what will happen? walmart says, well, we didn't make our holiday sales, we'll have to lay off people. it's going end up hurting the worker not helping the union. silly union tactics, they are obsolete but trying to hang on for a few more years. >> what do you think, sasha? >> i think if people are willing to go out on black friday when people get trampled on, then probably they will be willing to go through protesters. i don't think it's going to have a sit impact. and these aren't people that aren't showing up to work. they are demonstrating their right to protest. so, you know -- >> john, what do you think? >> i think sasha is right. these protesters are a lot more bite than they are bark. you'll have the news put on the loud mouth of some slamming walmart, but the truth of the matter is 6,000 employees are making minimum wage at walmart out of 1.3 million.

i don't understand exactly why they are going after walmart except for the fact, like gary said, they want the union money because walmart is not unionized as a nationwide entity. $12.92 is the average pay of a walmart employee. much higher than the minimum wage that has been proposed. >> tracey is this about the worker's union or the pay? >> totally about the union and the workers pay will get hurt in the process. look, black friday is now the big holiday along with cyber monday. they are missing the boat on that. people are going to shop regardless. if you're one of those pro-style i'm going to get you shoppers, you're going out protest or no protest. gary b. made the biggest or best line, this will hurt the walmart employee. >> at tend of the day, someone will step over you to get $20

off a go pro camera. if they went to target over this, if anybody did, you don't think they would pay the half a percent of worker who is make minimum wage something other than minimum wage so they can say nobody gets paid minimum wage at walmart? how little will that cost a company like walmart? they don't do that because the consumer doesn't care at all. in fact, this could be the cheapest place to shop because they don't pay wages to anybody. so if the consumers cared about that and want to pay a higher price at a higher wage, shop at a price that pays more for one season and this will go away so quickly that your head will spin. >> thank you, everybody. thank you to sasha for joining us. >> thank you, guys. >> taylor swift in a major battle. how her fight could shake out your profits.

woman: as long as i live. man: i realized, at that moment, when we first saw the damage, these people really needed us and i was going to make a difference, right here in my community. together with local responders, we cleared trees and collapsed walls. we had to get to the family trapped beneath. as a citizen-soldier, i made a difference. announcer: be there for your community, at nationalguard.com. don't talk, when we don't touch ♪ ♪ when it doesn't feel like we're even in love ♪ ♪ it matters to me ♪ when i don't know what to say ♪ ♪ don't know what to do ♪ don't know if it really even matters to you ♪ ♪ it matters to me.

predictions, go ahead, gary b.? >> we have the lowest percentage of people eating out since 1995. that's good for stocks like kraft. >> bull or bear? >> the easiest bear. >> john, your precinct. >> new wrong, new infrastructure spending, i hope. benefits up 20% in a year. >> gary b., bull or bear. >> bear. >> power of the people, the lovely taylor swift is leaving spotify for not distributing her

album. good for google. >> john, bull or bear? >> i like george strait. bear. >> studies are efficient. the new bathroom is the new water cooler. they are on their cell phone eating lunch but they are not washing their hands. >> yuck. neil is next. cokum-bay-ya? i don't think so. 5 million illegals just through washington and while we're at it, american is thrown for a loop. welcome, everybody. i'm neil cavuto. the president is clearly doubling down on a series of executive orders reportedly set for next week freezing not only deportation, but if john boehner is right, freezing the hope for cooperation as well. >> we're going to fight the president tooth and nail if he continues down this