ishares, small caps are the way to go. >> i love that pic. berkshire hathaway i will take that always always always. >> i want to thank you. the cost of freed now continues on the place for business pants on or off, this is where you come, fox. one of the latest would be terrorists in the united states is so young, we can't even show his picture or say his name. he's a 16-year-old south carolinian who was just sentenced to a juvenile prison an alleged plot to join isis and attack military bases in the u.s. and he's not alone. home grown terror threats popping up all over america. so with threats this widespread are we spending enough to stop another terror attack on the homeland? hi everybody, i'm david asman. welcome to "forbes on fox." are we doing enough?

i'm not for a police state. the congressional research service says since 2011 since 9/11 there have been 74 plots by radicalized americans, people radicalized here. and they were stopped, thank god, before anybody was hurt. the boston marathon bomber. those guys were radicalized americans. so the thing is they're not really pouring across the border. they're tourists visas, they're overstaying, committing terrorist acts. i think we need better policing there. >> mike taji not only are we seeing these threats but the american people thinks we should be doing more. 81% of the american people says isis does pose a real security threat to the u.s. what say you? >> i think we could be doing a better job of sharing information among law enforcement agencies but i

think we also have to be very careful about civil liberties. i mean this reminds me of kind of the communist red scare in the 30s and 40s, where we thought everyone was going to become a communist and take over the country. so yes, i agree, i want to be protected against terrorism too. but how far do we stretch this definition? how much do we give up in civil liberties in our society, where we turn ourselves into a police state here? we're very close to that right now. >> unlike the red scare days we have had attacks here it individual attacks that sought out to do a lot of damage. >> thaert but you have to think intelligence is doing something in this country. i think they're doing what they can. the problem is freelancing. these people on their own, one or two can get together as we saw in boston and do real murderous attacks. so think we're probably doing what we can.

obviously intelligence sharing, as mark pointed out. but how much more can you do especially against freelancers? it's not just here in the united states. it's all over europe you're getting these freelance attacks. >> if there is an attack on the homeland another attack that really causes mass injuries or deaths we're going to be spending more than we are now. >> i think so but i do also remember we're a country of $300 million people. these are a few outliers that are very dangerous. we have to make sure we don't establish policies that are going to put the onus on the rest of us. one of the things we hope our government is doing is working with the muslim-american community to root out radicals within these communities. i think we should be relying on sort of larger spokes women and men, people like ian hersey ali who have written about what it is like to be part of these communities.

so that we're sort of using the services more effectively. >> well that would be helpful, but, mike, you know, we don't want to scare people. you look at how porous our borders are. you wonder the terrorists clearly are taking note of that and doing their best to get in that way, aren't they? >> i'd feel a lot more comfortable if we had a president who adhered to the constitution instead of issuing orders to the border patrol and saying don't enforce the laws there. we don't know who a lot of these people who are coming into the united states what their backgrounds are. instead of having a president say, hey, just let anybody in and then also let's give them social identification and all that sort of stuff, we need to do a much better job just following the law. >> you look at the map of all those states. it really is from one coast to another. and all the flyover in between. >> well i think the map revealing the answer to this. the facts are, most people are not murderers. and so if government is going to go after all the presumed

terrorists we are going to be incarcerating a lot of innocent people. i don't think we want to live in a country like this. i think this is very dangerous. >> we don't want to live in a country that is a police state obviously. but isn't there something between what we're doing now and the police state? >> yeah listen it takes one person to just destroy so many lives. my god, look at what happened in boston what happened in new york city at the pentagon in pennsylvania -- >> ft. hood. >> ft. hood. >> of course what's happening overseas in paris, kenya, et cetera. >> so many families hurt. so many lives destroyed. we're so focused on grandma with her tweezers in the airport and so focused on politicized fights about the border that we're wasting so many resources. we could do things the police are doing now. community networking and behavorial behavioral profiling. it's working in maryland los angeles and minnesota. >> mark do you think that's acceptable or would that be too much in your eyes? >> i think we have to get to the

bottom as to why people want to join these organizations. and understand this kind of a profile. i don't agree that we lock down borders -- >> you think we don't understand why people want -- i mean isn't it more important just to stop it? >> i don't think we -- >> we don't understand them? >> i think we need to understand this problem so we can try to solve it. that does not mean more laws. it does not mean more guns. it does not mean more fences on the border. come on guys. we have to be able -- to combat this we have to figure out what the problem is here. >> i understand but, steve, the fact is, we've been tealing with evil for a long time, at least going back a couple thousand years. do we really need to understand why other people want to below people away -- >> to combat it we need to understand it. >> go ahead, steve. >> human nature is not changed. you always have evil outliers. the thing is you stop them when

you can. one of the questions, borders been made note of but are we doing enough in some of these mosques where we have suspicions evil things are taking place? instead of curtailing police intelligence local intelligence we should be encouraging it. prevention. maybe we can understand them. i'd rather prevent them from doing it in the first place. >> to mark's point, we don't have to -- this is not about sympathizing with terrorists so much as understanding what's causing this motivation. one area is our prisons. we know these are breeding grounds for extremists. different kinds of extremists. black liberation army the aryan nation. we need to see these are vulnerable populations. what's making them vulnerable and how can we intersect them earlier. >> i'm kind of a simple guy. i see people that appear to enjoy killing other people. that's all i have to understand about their motivation. that's simple enough. is that too simple? >> no you're simple and a very nice guy, by the way.

listen what happens here is it's not rocket science. we know why they're doing it. they're getting radicalized on the internet. they're disenfranchised. they're poor. we get all that. that's been a story line for 15 years now. what we've got to do -- i'm sorry to get -- because i'm tired of people getting blown up at work. it is so wrong. we know what is going on and we've got to stop them. >> is this a problem of not understanding these people? is that what this is mike? >> no what the problem is -- and it's a big problem, too, that the republicans are part of because they confirm loretta lynch as the attorney general. she is the same mold as air being holder. she's going to not enforce current laws. that's a big problem. >> steve, quickly. >> in the -- >> you know the bottom line is motivating people the psychopaths to join us. do it abroad, make our problems

easier here at home. >> i'm going to end with you because you're having trouble talking today but go ahead. >> if you're worried about the boarders legalize immigration and then we can look for the people sneaking across. seems pretty basic. look for the people who are trying to hide themselves coming in. >> all right. i shouldn't have ended with you because you started a whole other argument we don't have time for. meanwhile, a reality show cast member winning millions of dollars in two separate whistleblower payouts. some say rewarding whistleblowers is actually a crime. so should theyll see you at 2:30 eastern.

now, back to "forbes on fox." you may know him from "real housewives of new jersey" but did you know that cast member jim marchese is also scoring millions of dollars in two separate whistleblower cases. one worth more than $8 million over alleged shoddy mortgages at bank of america.

the other for a $1.6 million settlement in a case accusing a pharmaceutical firm that he worked at of medicare fraud. while the justice department wants to up rewards for whistleblowers are we just incident fizing americans to become a nation of snitches? steve what do you think? >> absolutely. when you have rewards like that you're going to have 999 people going, trying to win the lottery, by going on thissish iffing expedition. and a lot of wasted effort. all this does is encourage a lot of snitching and in the case of bank of america, they didn't do anything wrong, they bought a company during the crisis at the behest of the government that did wrong things and then they got shaken down by the politicians. so leave well enough alone. >> mike, ensentincentives do matter. you look at the number of whistleblower lawsuits. the cases have been going up dramatically over the past several years. >> i'm going to snitch for no money now. steve had a doughnut before we came out on the set.

no but -- seriously, yeah incentives work. obviously, the people paying these huge incentives think it's going to save more money going forward. look i'm not going to say some of these payouts don't seem outlandish they do. in general, yes, incentives work. they help solve some of these cases and put these people where they belong behind bars. >> you see all these million dollar payouts. for whistleblowers. we can put up the amount of money. it topped out in 2011 there. that was the time when all the so-called predator lending payouts took place. shouldn't people be whistleblowers just for the truth's sake? >> i think so. i don't understand why we have to pay people to do the right thing. there's a problem in our society that everybody expects to be paid for everything. including just doing what you should be doing either as a

citizen or as a good employee. why pay people to do this? shouldn't people just say what they feel is going wrong and tell the right people? >> i think he makes a good point. i don't know about you. by the way, one of these cases, the bank case three other whistleblowers got $15 million each. >> we have paid so-called whistle blowers, hundreds of millions of dollars there. i am for whistleblowers. they caught problems at enron, halliburton. even in the u.s. government they are retaliated against. they often lose their jobs. they're often iced out. one taxpayer whistleblower watchdog group said only 8 out of 10 actually walk away with any money. >> to tell you the truth, if i got $15 million, i'm not sure i'd come to work tomorrow. you don't have to have another job if you're paid that much money. >> that's one of the things that caught my attention. i was reading up on these

stories. this is why i'm sort of on the fence. i want to make sure the government isn't asking citizens to do its dirty work. on the other hand a lot of these cases -- they don't happen overnight. it takes years before these are settled. in the meantime someone can really face all sorts of hardship. financial, personal. i do think we need some incentive to make sure people want to come forward. i am a little bitten the on the fence here. >> there are two groups. one, whistleblowers. two, the government. because the government gets huge payouts in all this. the one where the guy from the housewives got $8 million for being the whistleblower, the government got $16 billion in settlements from banks for that. >> i don't like this at all. the idea of the feds taking resources from us and then using them to pay us to inform on others is wrong. secondly the problem, as steve pointed out, is the government

was involved in mortgages and banking in the first place. what they did to b of a was hideous. this is such a dangerous path. that people can enrich themselves by working with the federal government against citizens. >> i'm not saying all these whistleblowers are liars. but on the other hand you don't know because the incentives are so strong for people to snitch that maybe they'll bend the truth a little to say what the government wants them to say. >> i can't argue with that. you're absolutely right. the specific case that john just pointed out, he's absolutely correct. you know we're trying to make a blanket statement for all of this. i just think in some cases, for the reasons that he cited, you do have to incentivize people to point out who's doing stuff really wrong. >> the tendency of government to get, you know, sometimes snitches to bend the truth to make the government's case so they get the billion dollars and the whistleblowers get the

million dollars. too many bad incentives here. >> especially if the industries that are regulated by the government like banks, were the banks know they can be put out of business if they don't go along. so they become atms for the federal government. there are civil procedures you can take if you feel you've been done wrong. >> the "cashing in" gang is getting ready. eric what do you have? >> americans unplugging from the president's green agenda. what owners of electric cars are doing that should have the white house worrying. taxpayers, beware. how obamacare is helping folks cash in on food stamps. >> up here first, there's a company out there promoting adultery and they are looking for your investor money. woul just because i'm away from my

desk doesn't mean i'm not working. comcast business understands that. their wifi isn't just fast near the router. it's fast in the break room. fast in the conference room. fast in tom's office. fast in other tom's office. fast in the foyer [pronounced foy-yer] or is it foyer [pronounced foy-yay]? fast in the hallway. i feel like i've been here before. switch now and get the fastest wifi everywhere. comcast business. built for business.

would you invest in a company whose slogan is life is short, have an affair. the owner of the website ashley madison.com is hoping you will. it's a site to help spouses commit adultery and now it wants investors to commit to its stock debut. would you invest in this? >> wouldn't but the constitution does not protect americans from being offended. if some americans or people around the world want to invest in this it's their property they should be free to do just that. >> avoiding the libertarian, i'm

just curious, would you invest? who would invest? >> absolutely not, i think this is more' and financially bankrupt bankrupt. he can't get good talent to work for him. so to have this on your resume. and he's really twisted. he's tieing this to hillary clinton and saying, look we might have a president whose spouse is openly cheating. it's going to change the social mores. this is the kind of guy -- >> i didn't know that was part of his sales gimmick. >> look this is a slippery slope. if we start saying what we can invest in and what we can invest in then we better start knocking a lot of companies off the list. take tobacco. take alcohol. >> i understand. mark i get you. i don't think anybody here is against the idea of this company being able to have an ipo. but would you invest? i haven't found anybody that would be -- >> sure. >> you would? >> if it's something i can make

money at from a pure capitalist standpoint yes, i would invest in it. i don't see a problem with that. >> sabrina, would you? >> i would have a hard time. i didn't even tell my husband about this segment. it's one person's trash is another person's treasure. but i'm with mark on this one. i think people invest in all sorts of things that i find sort of morally distasteful or just unpleasant, you know porn strip malls bad fast food. but this is one -- you have to be able to sleep at night, i mean come on. >> he says in fact he would invest if it would make a buck. would you? >> no this is just glorified prostitution. you don't need an ipo for prostitution. it's been around for 4,000 years. absolutely not. >> i hate to come back to you twice because i know you're having throat problems but would you personally invest in this? why would you not, if you wouldn't? >> no i would not. i'm a happily married man. there's no way i'd invest in

this. >> i hope your new wife takes care of of that throat. >> it's a bad business model. it's flawed. >> they're going to be displaced by robots. >> more than 7 in 10 parents say their biggest money concern is paying for their children's college

big day on monday with apple reporting earnings. we hope you watch. right now, some stocks to help you pay for college and then some. >> it disinfects waste water. with the california drought, i'm looking at water companies. i like this one. >> you like it carrie in. >> sure, and like sky works. out of massachusetts. they are in the cloud, internet

connectivity. it's huge. >> i like this stock, buy it on the dip. >> okay that's it for forbes on x tofox, everybody. thank you for watching. continues now with eric bolling and "cashing in." while the president uses gas guzzling air force one to sell his green agenda this week we're learning this. a record number of consumers are now trading in their electric cars for gas guzzling suvs and ford laying off workers at green car plants. does this mean americans aren't buying what the administration is selling? hi everyone i'm eric bolling. welcome to "cashing in." lisa let's start with you. the auto research website ed mons.com now saying 20% of people would traded in their hybrids and electric vehicles in 2015 bought a