per share. jeff bezos, founder, he just made $7.5 billion. how about that, neil cavuto? it's yours. neil: not too shabby at all. thank you very much. we're focusing on the hire wire act of one hillary clinton. now, she has been doing this dance back and forth with bankers, i hate 'em, but i don't hate 'em that much, and then this balance about i'm really for the people and all of this, but this is a test of everything she's ever mustered in the past, because effectively today she is 90 minutes away from repudiating the policies of her husband. the tax cuts of her husband. and the business incentives of her husband. that is a high wire act to beat all high wire acts. she is now for raising the capital gains tax and complicating it at the same at e in stages. if you don't like that tax, she has other taxes, and she will have multiple rates to confuse

the process and maybe confuse her earlier backers who might not recognize her. it is that big, that confusing, and right now in this crazy political year, it is now that much of a show. we go to peter barnes on what she has in store. peter? >> reporter: well, hey, neil. a clinton campaign official confirms she will propose today a progressive scale for capital gains taxes for wealthier taxpayers. according to "the wall street journal," she will, she would increase the rate for profits on investments held for one to two years from the current 20% to the current ordinary top income tax rate of 39.6%. this would kick in for taxpayers making more than about $400,000 a year, people making less would continue to pay at the lower 20% rate. then the rate for high earners would decline on a sliding scale back down to 20% on investments held at least six years. a clinton aide said the proposal is designed to reward, quote,

far-sighted investing that removes incentives for, quote, short-termism and align investment toward long-term value. neil? neil: all right, peter, thank you very, very much. no matter what your view is on this subject, we will have a more tiered and kind of confusing rate structure going on here -- there you are, good to see you. anyway, charlie gasparino's been following this and gets back to this notion she's kind of repudiating everything her husband laid down. this would not be the first time, but this is one of the more dramatic. >> well, she is threading the needle. listen, every democrat needs a wall street bogeyman, basically, to go after -- essentially, appease the left wing of the party. she can't go after lloyd blankfein at goldman sachs because he gave her a lot of money and gave the clinton foundation a lot of money. she can't go after blackstone, and there's tons of -- so who's she going after? she's going after, quote-unquote, activist investors, guys like your friend, carl icahn, who she believes are in and out of

stocks sometimes within a year, and she's saying these guys are perverting the economy and the markets. neil: but they also provide a lot of liquidity for the market. >> not only that, they help investors boost their returns in the stock prices. neil: what about investors? let's say you were to buy amazon today on this big report, and you're not confident it's going to go much further than this. aren't you penalized for wanting to sell out in less than a year? >> that's the whole thing, and it's so stupid. it's going to do nothing. it's not going to help the economy. and this came straight from larry fink. i don't know if he wrote it -- neil: and larry fink is? >> the head of blackrock who's been on a roll against karl icahn because they go after his buddies in corporate america. larry wants to be treasury secretary. he put cheryl mills, a hillary clinton confidant, on the board at blackrock. what she knows about investing is another story. i never thought of her as some sort of person i want watching over the management of my money.

he's been going on a year, and he's a big hillary clinton supporter, and basically, she pulled this page from larry fink's speeches over the past year because i'll tell you, neil, it's easy. it's an easy park. she pisses off nowhere except a band of -- neil: i understand that, but have we seen a discernible study where you can go when you raise the cap gains rate, you put a chill on investing? the biggest example i remember from her husband, bill clinton, is even though he raised the top rate at the time, he lowered invest -- >> later. >> took that rate down to 20%. and a boom fold. >> listen, one of the good things that clinton did working with republicans in congress, the good things was they did lower capital gains taxes, and maybe i'm missing something, but when they lowered it, the economy did really well, and the markets took off. and we had -- neil: but with ronald reagan it was a mixed street because he raised it and lowered it --

>> he took it down to 20%, the level it is right now. this is a bill clinton economic achievement that he touts s. his wife saying that her husband screwed up the economy? neil: we lose sight when you talk about the big investment players, i always think about small investors, and i use amazon as an example. if you were an investor the week b you might be saying, wow, i ought to take my money and run -- >> listen, there are two stories here. there's the practical impact of doing something like this and what does this do to investors. if you're a small investor out there, our viewers, this should be problematic to you. that's one -- neil: then you have to weigh the tax implications. >> don't forget the political implication here. she needs a wall street bogeyman. she can't go after goldman sachs and larry fink and all these big wigs. she has to go after a certain class of fat cat -- neil: but, i mean, to say nothing against her, you know and you hear the stories that you and others have reported about how with a wink and a nod

her supporters are saying she doesn't really support -- >> neil, we're the only business network covering this cynical political story. i'm sure the other one will tell you what your tax rate will be if this gets passed, blah, blah, blah, but there is a cynical political game that she's playing on the american investor. neil: you're right. no one else is reporting -- you know, they discovered this other planet, and it's possible on this other planet, it's being reported. >> it's over in jersey, i i heard. neil: it is. but it is being -- >> it's called your ray us in in new jersey -- neil: thank you very much. look at the time. [laughter] we have to say good-bye. in the meantime, let's go to grover norquist who wants to know not so much what hillary clinton's tax hike plans are, but whether there are any spending cuts in any of that. what do you think, grover? >> well, the reason she leads is revenue enhancements, as her staff referred to them -- code for tax increases -- is so that she never has to discuss reforming government or spending

less. because her answer to everything will be we'll raise higher taxes, do everything we've been doing. when you lead with tax increases as your economic plan, you've just announced there will be no reforms, there will be no savings. neil: well, you know, it disturbs me when i hear a lot of the republicans, i know they want a simplified tax plan, and they're talking about making our tax code more investment-friendly and all, but i don't think it's up to our tax code to be tiered toward anything other than less. that's my kind of view on this. and i don't think trying to penalize investors or reward them should be done through our tax code. just keep taxes very, very low, very, very simple, cut that tax code down so we don't have all these special allowances for anyone. but we're going the opposite way here. >> well, this is called trickle down taxation. first, you tax rich people or people who are in the market for brief periods of time. you raise their taxes. you look at everyone else and

say i'm not messing with you today, yet, i'm just hitting these people over here. so you take a nap, and then, of course, your higher tax rates which were only going to hit short-term investors or rich people or somebody in another industry -- not yours -- that higher rate trickles down to you. neil: now, what i'm wondering is, you know, republicans have a different position on this, and as i said, to cut taxes, simplify them. have they all taken your tax pledge? because i think maybe jeb bush hasn't. i don't know about chris christie. can you update me on those who have sworn off that they will never be looking at tax hikes? >> yeah. everybody who is running with the exception of jeb bush has either taken it or said they're going to take it. many of them have taken it as governors and senators and kept it. so chris christie is going to be taking it, has not yet signed it but was just talking to his campaign to the, he'll be --

neil: why hasn't jeb bush, grover? what has he told you? because his record is for tax cuts. he's done that. >> he had a record as a governor where he did cut taxes, and he never raised taxes, and he vetoed tax increases. i think he should. what everybody suspects is that his dad raised taxes and threw away a perfectly good presidency, and george w. bush -- the recent president -- he dealt with it by taking the pledge himself and keeping it. and then nobody mentioned dad. neil: that's interesting. >> yeah. neil: grover, thank you. one last thing, and just to clarify on this hillary clinton plan, keep in mind it's supposedly aimed at fat cat investors, but it would affect you, and i use this amazon situation as a good example. if you had held amazon for the last couple of months and were surprised to see this earnings report yesterday that's propelled the stock up north of 15% today, and let's say, all right, i kind of like that runup, i want to cash out here because i love the company, but

i don't think it's going to go much further for a while, so i want to get out. well, you can at least at a lower tax rate or at least at the existing capital gains rate. so you would have to hope that stock still levitates at that level. now, it just might, but this is a reminder that this would affect more than just the carl icahns or the big fat cat investors. it would affect you. that's something we're going to to be raising with john kasich, the latest presidential entrant and what he makes of this and what signals it is sending to wall street and main street. in the meantime, take a peek at what's going on with gold right now because there are a lot of folks who say it isn't only slip sliding away, it could slip slide a lot more. what are the implications of that and now well under $1100 an ounce. nicole petallides. >> all that glitters is gold? in this case gold is not shining. we saw it down ten days in a row, went up about $2.50 yesterday, selling off again

today, down $10. morgan stanley said they could see gold go under $800, another chinese equity market correction, start of a rate hike cycle right here in the u.s., everybody's waiting for that liftoff. right now gold is at 1084. they actually think a more likely scenario, okay, don't freak out, not 800, but they think more likely, 1050. goldman sachs also said gold could go under $1,000. take a look at gold versus the s&p over the last few years. right now gold is hovering arounds these lows -- around these lows we haven't seen since 2010. freeport mack moran, down 50%. everybody who's so hot on gold and we remember it so well, neil, in 2011 when it was over $1800, and everybody was saying 2,000 for gold, now they're

looking at that 1,000 mark and a little bit of worry on wall street that goes along with it. neil: all right. thank you very much, nicole. yesterday for those of you watching the show, we were keeping you abreast of this latest nasa finding through its very high-powered telescope that there's another planet that's very much like ours, 1400 light years away. we now have the full skinny on that planet. we can tell you the life form, what they're into, and apparently they really love fox business. god bless 'em. we'll explain what's going on 1400 light years away from us. ♪ ♪

neil: all right. these are the staff members, these are not necessarily the bosses, but we're getting

reports now that the fed staff -- that is, the staff that reports to the governors and presidents that make up the federal market committee, etc. -- are now expecting the fed funds rate, the overnight lending rate that's presently at around 0% to inch up to.35% in the fourth quarter. that would imply a hike of more than a quarter of a percent over that duration but, you know, people are telling me also, well, neil, we're also at .10%. i have no idea. they expect by year end us to be around a third of a point. that would still be very, very low. of course, the fear in the markets is that we're going to go more than that, that the fed will start a series of rate hikes that will send us up much, much higher, but this is the first time we've at least seen a number attached to what that rate hike could be or where short-term rates could be by the end of the year. okay, this is coming from the worker bees. all right, and this is coming from eyes that just look up in the sky, this notion that there is a planet just like

ours, just bigger, older and about 1400 light years away. so i already told you that this is the opposite planet where, you know, just, for example, like, everything is upside down. seriously, i don't know that, because when i mentioned that, we actually had viewers that said, neil -- [laughter] you know what i decided to do? actually talk to someone who knows what she is talking about and talk about space expert cara callfield, she's with space.com. all right, how real is this, and how did it get the attention it did? like, it seemed like we've been looking at the sky all the time. how did we discover this? >> now we know about a thousand xl planets. this year is the 20th anniversary of finding the first one. twenty years ago we didn't know -- neil: what is an xl planet? >> sorry. a planet around another star. we didn't know if the planets in our solar system were the only ones out there. now we know of over a thousand.

so, actually -- neil: so this is one of a bunch. >> it is one of a bunch. in fact -- neil: what got the attention for this one? >> because it's a lot like earth. neil: really? >> and, of course, the big question is, is there life on these planets? so we only know about life on earth, so we're looking for planets that look like earth because we think there's a good chance other life -- neil: how did we stumble upon, i don't mean stumble, but how did we just accidentally fall upon this one? if it's been up there all this time, did we just sort of catch it and say, hey, this is odd, we see it among these thousand of so xl planets, this one stands out because? >> well, i think your question is how did we find one that was so much like -- neil: yes. exactly my question, yes. >> this is actually an indicator that there are a lot of planets out there like earth, that it's not actually that strange we stumbled upon one. neil: this catches our attention, there might be others like you say, but i understand it's quite a bit bigger than

earth, right? 60% bigger? >> uh-huh. neil: so it would have a stronger gravitational -- >> be about twice the gravity. so you can survive that, you know? we could send people to explore it, and it would be a workout -- neil: how do we know working through a telescope the conditions that it has? >> isn't it amazing what they can do with this -- neil: 1400 light years away. [laughter] >> it's amazing what these scientists can do with this little bit of light, i mean, just to first identify the planet just based on it going around its host star and dimming that light a little bit, and then you have a bunch of telescopes that get together and look at it as well. neil: and these are in space, right? >> on the ground as well. neil: okay. >> they all join together, and they all look at it, and what they can figure out is incredible. it's been around for six billion years, that's a good amount of time for life to form. they figure out how far it is from its parent star, it's at a distance where you could have liquid water, and they are working on -- they think there's

a very good chance that, you know, it's a rocky planet, has a solid surface. they're working on that. neil: do you think that everything is all done again and everything, all bets are off if we get confirmation of life other than on our planet? >> i -- it's incredible to think about that, and what's so incredible is that this is within reach. this is absolutely within -- neil: 1400 light years away. >> well, finding life on another planet, that is within reach. again, it's incredible what scientists can do with light, you know, just a tiny amount of light that they're getting from these places. it's mind-boggling, but they do it. and we know these things. neil: you were saying -- you're a lot younger than i, but you think in your lifetime we will get that confirmation. >> a lot of very smart people -- i think if we stay on track with the plan, the astronomy community has a plan for building more instruments, for finding out more information about these planets, we stay on track for that, you know, positive estimates are saying

20-30 years. i think definitely less than half a century. so, yeah, it's really possible a lot of people alive today are going to be around to see this. neil: thank you very much. a great marketing opportunity, think about it, for fox business. [laughter] i'm just saying, not only do we have the hottest network on the planet, but we could extend it to the greater galaxy. i could, but -- [laughter] all right, we've got a lot more coming up about what's going on on planet earth right now, including this section of planet earth and a housing market that just when we thought was taking off, some numbers out that show, hmm, maybe not. or maybe. or maybe it's just a bump in the road. or maybe this is just something that looks kind of pale by comparison to a planet that might be harboring life and doesn't really worry how a house market -- maybe they don't have houses there. maybe they just have designer kays. after this -- caves.you after this. ♪ eno ♪

and a partnership with hp can help you accelerate down a path created by people, technology and ideas. to move your company from what it is now... to what it needs to become.

neil: all right. in the world of professional wrestling, hulk hogan is big,

very, very big, and right now he is big on the outs with the wwe. of connell mcshane, well, our resident professional wrestling expert and fan. what the heck is going on? >> the amount of topics i cover on this show for you -- neil: we appreciate them all. >> you're right, he's big. granted, he's 60 plus years old, but he had been working for the company. there's a debate about he quit or got fired. apparently, i know you probably know this, i'm sure you follow this kind of thing, but in case people don't, there was a sex tape of hulk hogan that came out a few years ago, and according to the national inquireerer, at some point he made very, very racist comments. they started to leak out online, and then an interview he did on at site radio where he -- satellite radio. but it's really the comments from the tape that appear to be

the reason he's out. neil: the reason he's out, the wwe severed relations with him? >> well, that's the debate. his lawyer says -- just moments ago, by the way, to fox business, david houston, his lawyer -- the tape came out years ago, "national enquirer" got their hands on it, hulk quit last night, that's what they claim. wwe, to your point, they put a statement saying they terminated their contract with terry bollea, that's his real name, and they're committed to celebrating individuals from all backgrounds, on and on. they say they got rid of him because this came out from a few years ago. he says he quit. either way, just bigtime fall from grace. i know we joke around about wrestling, but it's a publicly-traded company, and they make a lot of money. neil: holy cow. i think you're going to tell me wrestling's fake next. [laughter] connell, thank you very much. in the next statement, connell will update us with the latest

roller derby crisis. just when housing was looking like it was firing on all cylinders, then we get a report saying new home sales slid 6.8% in june and now a pace that suggests maybe things are ebbing a little bit. trina camp and -- katrina camp and kendra todd. deb -- kendra, to you first. should we worry? is this a sign that housing coming back is wrong? >> neil, i don't think so. first of all, new home sales only account for 8% of the entire housing market, so, you know, not enough of a portion of the housing market is to make a significant impact on the momentum that we're having. and it's really not all that surprising, to be frank. we had a huge surge in new home sales early in the summer. i don't think economists expected, you know, it to correct so quickly during the hot summer months. in the northeast, for example,

they had a 78% increase in new home sales. that's simply not sustainable over the long term. neil: you know, katrina, when i look at this too and how the home builder stocks are getting, you know, hit on this, they had been running up prior. so when you look at this, is this just a blip, or is this, you know, is this something bigger going on here? what do you think? >> well, i think it's important to note that even though new home sales are down, the permits are actually up. and for existing home sales, we're actually at an eight-year high. so the june numbers are actually quite impressive. the reason that these new home sales are down is because a lot of builders are actually focusing on building multifamily properties. and the reason that they're doing that is a lot of homeowners can't necessarily afford to purchase at this time, so the contractors are actually building multi-family residences for representers. so -- for renters. so if you analyze the numbers, it's important to actually look

beyond that and understand why is this occurring. and it is, also, very positive that overall existing home prices and sales are actually continuing to go up. and they're, you know, the highest they've been since july of 2006, actually. neil: and you guys are experts, when you refer to permits, that is often a sign of future construction. it doesn't always pan out quite the way, but it is a sign of activity down the road. kendra, even though they represent a small part of the overall market, that's how a lot of people first dig into a market. and i'm wondering can you have the market, you know, split in two camps here, the new activity, fresh construction not going when the rest of the market is? what do you think? >> well, first of all, one of the reasons for the big runup in new home sales is because, you know, we've had first-time home buyers at almost an all-time low, accounting for only about 20% of all home purchasers. that's normally around 30%. so in a lot of markets, you know, they've really been

jumping into the new home sales. i really think the greater question is, you know, how sustainable is the current momentum that we have for the real estate market as a whole? i mean, certainly we learned our lesson the last time. i really think it's going to come down to the strength of different regional economies to see whether or not over the long term the value gains that we've achieved are going to be able to be, you know, maintained in those markets. neil: you know, we're tight for time, guys, but since you're two trump apprentice players, very successful ones at that, what do you think of his presidential run? a lot of people say this is all a marketing effort and that he's not serious about reasoning for president. but, you know, katrina, do you think he is, and do you think he'd make a good president? >> i was on the first season of the apprentice, so i've known donald trump for over a decade now, and he's very serious about this. he's actually speaking from the heart. i think his campaign is like nothing we've ever seen in the united states. and, you know, whether it's

controversy involved or not, i think voters are noticing that he's not doing what lobbyists want him to do, he's doing -- neil: do you think he has a chance? >> i do. i think he has a chance because i think the american people realize that he's, you know, speaking from the heart. so i think he does have a chance. neil: kendra, you know the rap against him for his comment about mexicans, what do you think? >> i think anytime donald trump inserts himself into the media, he's going to say things that rub a lot of people the wrong way. part of his brand is being sensational. i agree with katrina in that the one thing that i really respect greatly about donald trump is he's not afraid to speak his mind, and he's not going to run his campaign like a politician. i do think that'll be a breath of fresh air. neil: ladies, thank you both. have a safe weekend, i appreciate it. all right, i do not think donald trump is a flash in the pan east, just for what it's worth. knew the meantime -- in the

meantime, amazon, you've seen this runup, but what if it shows that the economy is unexpectedly rebounding at a faster pace and people are buying stuff at a bigger pace? we'll raise that, and we might even bring it up with john kasich, the latest presidential entrant. ♪ ♪ so you're a small business expert from at&t? yeah, give me a problem and i've got the solution. well, we have 30 years of customer records. our cloud can keep them safe and accessible anywhere. my drivers don't have time to fill out forms. tablets. keep them all digital.

we're looking to double our deliveries. our fleet apps will find the fastest route. oh, and your boysenberyy apple scones smell about done. ahh, you're good. i like to bake. with at&t get up to $400 dollars in total savings on tools to manage your business. can a a subconscious. mind? a knack for predicting the future. reflexes faster than the speed of thought. can a business have a spirit? can a business have a soul? can a business be...alive?

neil: all right. hillary clinton is moments away from making a big speech on the economy, on the business community or, on taxes.

but she's got some problems on all of this, you know, e-mail stuff because it's accelerated to the point now that we're hearing from the ig, the inspector general that looks into this case, that she might have sent classified information over e-mail while at the state d.. in fact, it could have been a lot of it. dow jones reporting that this classified material was at times a secret not only then, but even now. and certainly at the time that she sent it which is a big no-no. apparently, you can't do that. the inspector general also finds at least four other instances of classified material in hillary clinton's e-mail when she was secretary of state. in and of itself, none of this necessarily is criminal, but there has been a separate recommendation that at least the justice department review this for potential criminality. not that it is criminal, but to look at it for potential criminality. there is, i'm told from lawyers, a big distinction here. but the bottom line is for hillary clinton this is going to

sidetrack a lot of the publicity she hopes to get and populist publicity at that over how this tax structure is unfair to the common man and how she wants to take higher capital gains taxes to traders and the big traders and conquer corpses of wall street like carl i icahn -- carl icahn. now to amazon, in case you haven't followed this, it made an unexpected profit, and it's had an unexpected surge. a host of firms are saying this stock that is hitting record levels today is poised to go even 100 points higher from here, maybe more. so the feeling seems to be despite just the 15% runup today, et has much further growth to go. but we're stepping back. i don't know what this means for amazon, but what does this say about you? if you buy a lot of stuff on amazon, you're not alone. we're told that the average cart at amazon is a little pricier, that it's not just cheap back and forth, it's bigger stuff, it's across the board, and it is benefiting amazon.

but it's also a sign that maybe the shopper is back, the consumer is back. we're going to get into that with gary b. smith, daiking mcdonald -- dagen mcdowell and jo ling kent -- >> you told me talk to your hand two seconds ago. [laughter] neil: i didn't talk to you, did i? [laughter] >> bam, on fire today, neil. neil: do you think the amazon stock is telling us more? it's on the heels of the jobless claims, 30-year-plus low. is there something going on? >> north american sales are up 25%, and if you compare that to the last couple of quarters, it's actually a huge gain here. so we do see the new orleans american amazon -- north american amazon shopper buying more stuff, and that's partially because of amazon prime. we also saw amazon web services, the cloud computing arm, up 81% in sales s. so those two really drove a lot of the revenue. neil: but i'm wondering whether if they're buying a lot of that

stuff whether you're a prime customer or not, are we seeing this elsewhere in the retail momentum? >> last month retail sales were down shockingly. hopefully, though, hopefully -- it's one company, but a big one noneless -- this is a sign that the drop in gas prices, wages are starting to go up, the job market continues to improve, that this is a follow-on of that, that you are beginning to see the consumer come back. again, the sales that they had in july, i can tie this to the presidential campaign if you like, but i'll let gary b. go first, because i have a connection between what's going on in technology and what these candidates should be doing. neil: boy, i can't wait for that. gary, in the meantime, ahead of that drama, i'm wondering what you get from this. do you, in all your studies -- and people don't know, but you look at charts that i don't understand -- but is there a parallel? in other words, is a company like amazon a barometer, an indicator? what do you think?

>> i think it partly is. i think amazon benefits in two ways. the first way that it would be an indicator is, you know, as jo and dagen have kind of implied, that overall spending from the consumer is coming back. the way it's not an indicator, and i sound like an economy. on one hand, on the other hand. the way that it's not, i think we're definitely seeing a shift from, you know, the storefront to online more and more. we've been seeing that shift for years, but you go to the normal mall right now, and they're still, i think, they're still ghost towns. so is the pie getting bigger? i don't know. amazon's share is -- neil: i think hell is a mall. like, if i you were many -- i'mt picturing flames -- [laughter] i'd drop dead in a mall, and i'd go, oh, my god, i'm in hell. maybe that's what's going on. people are buying away from structures like that, gary, so that's what's going on. >> that is what i think makes up -- i don't know, i'm picking a number out of the air, that's

probably 70% of amazon's growth right now. people just don't, as you don't, they don't want to go to the mall when they can get everything they want on amazon delivered to their door. >> look at the hard numbers from the commerce d., and that's pretty much true. web sales last year up 15%. they continue to grow at this 15% level. but it doesn't necessarily mean people are buying more overall. neil: don't read too much into it. >> but people are shopping more at amazon online and shopping less at all brick and mortar retailers. let me make the connection really quickly. these candidates, all the republican candidates, need to run on the success of american technology companies. we rule the world in terms of innovation. stop running against it, which hillary clinton's starting to do, attacking uber and airbnb and that part of the economy not by name, but what they do. run on their success. how do we create more success in this country? how do we create, basically, raise children to be the next

tech leaders? run on that. neil: right away. all right, thank you very, very much. >> no, you didn't. neil: i'm kidding. [inaudible conversations] that'll be a question i raise with governor kasich who's coming up. stick around. ♪ ♪ hi. hi. hi. hello. hi. hi. hi. hi my name's josh. kelly. my name is raph. steve. my name is anne. tom. brian. krystal. and i am definitely not a robot.

i'm one of the real live attorneys you can talk to through legalzoom. whether it's for your business or your personal life, don't let unanswered legal questions hold you up. because we're here. we're here, we're here, and we've got your back. legalzoom. legal help is here.

neil: all right. now to the guy that if you believe the hillary clinton campaign is their biggest worry, i am not talking about donald trump, i am not talking about jeb bush, i'm not even talking about chris christie or any of the others. i'm talking about the latest entrant in the race, the 16th guy in this race. i'm talking about ohio governor john kasich. governor, very good to have you. what do you make of that? you've probably heard these reports. they're most worried about you, they're most worried about your track record, your success, your midwestern appeal and the fact that of all the entrants in the race thus far, you have the highest poll numbers within your

state. what do you make of that? >> well, i think, neil, they are obviously concerned about the record. i mean, you know, when you balance a federal budget, when you reform the pentagon but you support strong defense, what i did when -- and my team did when i became governor of ohio, i think it's a a formidable record. it's not just talk, it's actually results. but, neil, they get one other thing, too, they get me. [laughter] and some are going to like me and some are not. but, you know, i am what i am, and i have a lot of fun. i tell you, i had some big crowds in new hampshire and really connected well, and about halfway through i i was looking at 'em saying how am i doing? they all clapped. so i'm actually enjoying myself. neil: that is very clear. you know, that is very clear. whether people accept or reject you, it's very clear you're having fun. and it's been the way you've been running ohio. i guess what comes back as well is with all that success, and you did, you know, i didn't realize the fact that you winged

that entire speech which is remarkable in and of itself. i'm glad you left fox because you would have probably taken my job. so leaving that aside, do you worry that you're not getting the attention? because then along comes this trump guy, and he's sucking all the oxygen out of the room. >> look, i think we're getting plenty of attention, neil, and, you know, i'm not really worried about that. my people feel good. there have been lots of columns, lots of talk, lots of places. but what i really -- i left this out. when you take a look at my record, the other thing i want people to know is that economic success and growth means that everybody's included whether you're drug-addicted, mentally ill, working poor, a member of the minority community, america needs to rise. we all need to rise. we all are part of the american family. so i believe very much in inclusiveness and ending the division, create jobs, economic growth, strength in the military

and send the signal to everyone in the country that you're part of us, we lo you, we want you to do well, and we're going to be committed to doing exactly what i'm saying here. neil: all right. that was, obviously, a speech not written by political handlers, because political handlers would have told you, governor, that the appearance you give in remarks like that and talking about reaching out and helping with medicaid and all this other stuff to help the disadvantaged and to mention god and to mention our greater goals and our greater good sounds liberal. and you're ticking off hard core conservatives. [laughter] what dueck? >> you know what? look, i not only studied ronald reagan, i knew ronald reagan. and he had a great heart. and, neil, when did we get to the point that if you're a conservative -- i don't think this is really even accurate -- that you don't care about other people? i mean, the whole purpose of conservativism -- neil: you don't care about them during the primaries, i think is what they say, but go ahead. >> well, look, if i don't win and i say that, that's okay with

me. i'm not changing my message. and i tell ya, i go everywhere. i lay it all on the line. and people are east going to like it or -- either going to like it or not, but everybody understands the problem of mental illness, drug addiction. it's in all of our communities -- neil: no, no, governor, i take no issue with that. i think you understand where i'm coming from. the immediate interpretation from hard core conservatives is, oh, that's kasich, the government guy, that's kasich, the spender. what do you think? >> yeah. well, look, i balanced, you know, was the chief architect of balancing the federal budget. in ohio we went from $8 billion in the hole to a $2 billion surplus. we've cut taxes $5 billion, neil. i don't think anybody's each in the ballpark on that level of tax cuts. we've cut regulations in ohio, we have school choice. you know, it's just that i'm a believer that everybody's got to have a chance. america divided doesn't work, and america united does. and, you know, faith's a part of it, but i've got to tell you, i mean, i'm a flawed man.

i said it in my speech. you just get up every day and try to do better. my purpose in all this is to be positive, bring people together and unite america again. that's when we're strong. neil: you know, you mentioned your record in ohio, and i don't think governor christie was talking directly about you, governor, but i think what he was saying was all these other guys are touting their success. look what i've had to do in new jersey or tried to do, and i'm facing, you know, a democratic legislature that tries to stop me at every turn. so, of course, by inference, i think he was suggesting you and by extension jeb bush -- >> yeah. neil: -- had it easy because you were working with your party. what do you say? >> yeah. well, that's a fair point. i mean, i love chris christie, okay? he and i are buddies. i wanted him to run for president the last time, and he has had it tough. i have to also tell you down in washington fighting to balance the federal budget, i wasn't just fighting democrats, i was fighting republicans. so sometimes you have to work your way through. but i think it's a fair point on the part of chris.

i've been fortunate to have a republican legislature. now that we're out of the woods and we're up 350,000 jobs and running surpluses, my job now is to make sure we don't go backwards. look, you deal with the hand you're dealt, and, you know, it depends how you pray your cards. god bless chris. he's a good man, and i'm really thrilled with what we've been able to do. neil: that was not the response be i expected, so i'm going to let go of the line of questioning that was to follow your getting angry at him. all right, so now i want to -- [laughter] now given your rise here and the clinton folks who are worried about you, along comes this "time" magazine story that you and hillary clinton, who actually worked quite closely together with health care back in 1993, and you were one of the people she sought out. i think you were the ranking member of the house budget committee at the time, an influential young player in washington. >> yeah. let me tell you what happened, neil. neil: tell me what happened -- >> yeah. no, let me explain to you what

happened. we knew hillary had this big health care plan, and a friend of mine who was a democrat, i said why don't we have hillary come to dinner, and i'll get all the republicans so that she can hear her concerns so she just doesn't go forward with what she wants to do, because it's not going to get anywhere. so she came to the dinner, and she was supposed to stay a half hour. i think she stayed an hour and a half or whatever, and we had our health care experts there and explained to her exactly what her problems with. so i am a believer in dialogue -- neil: your plan just to be clear, governor, your plan was a more private market solution, right? i believe, at the time, right? >> yeah, yeah, absolutely. and what she was trying to do wasn't going to work, and i was the budget committee chairman when the whole thing blew up under or her. you know, look, i'm going to always talk to people, neil, who i have to work with was at the end of the -- because at the end of the day, we cannot solve the problems of health care, social security, protecting the border unless we have at least some bipartisan support, neil.

remember reagan working with tip o'neill? did that make him a liberal? i don't know, i don't think so. neil: all right. this sanctuary city debate that's very big right now, how do you feel about that? should we have them -- >> well, i don't -- neil: there's an effort to stop it. what do you say? >> i don't think that these officials should be thumbing their nose at the law. and, frankly, as we see when people ignore the law, some bad things can happen. so i hope they move forward with some of this legislation. i don't know the details of all of it, but at the end of the day, we don't want people who have violated the law to walk away and have no consequence. neil: so we don't want sanctuary cities, is what you're saying. >> no, we don't. we don't. neil: okay. now, this iran deal separately, there's a big, big fight as to whether it should go through. the opposition is already there, but the president would likely veto that opposition. there aren't enough votes to override it. he says, secretary of state kerry says that the alternative is war. what do you say?

>> well, i think that's such hyperbole, i don't agree. frankly, the deal's so bad because they're not only going to get a nuclear weapon, but they're going to have a lot of cash to put to fund these radical groups that want to destroy our friends and hate our way of life. i'm not so sure it's over, neil. look, i mean, i'm not sure the votes aren't there to override. we'll see what chuck schumer and ben cardin and a number of the -- neil: let me ask you, if you became president of the united states and this, we had this deal with iran, what would a president kasich do, rip it up? >> well, we'd have to closely monitor everything that's going on, and if we think they're in violation, we'd have to fight to reimpose the economic sanctions. neil neal but it would be a done deal. it would already be a done deal. let's say it's a done deal, right? then a president kasich has a chance to either rip it up -- >> yeah, but if they violate the agreement, neil, then you slap the economic sanctions back on. so in the short term, we have to be very aggressive as the world

and, frankly, we ought to reach agreement -- neil: but it would hinge on them violating it, governor? >> well, you know, we're going to have an agreement, and if they don't violate it d i don't like the agreement. neil: right, right. >> so we'd have to see where they are. but if this puts off the development for a while, we'll accept that. but my fear is that they will not reach agreement here, they will violate the agreement, and i think the best course is then to reimpose economic sanctions. and if i could get that done, that's what i would do. i would get our allies together to say knock this thing off, and let's go back to the sanctions until they change. because we're going to see cash flowing to some of these radical groups, and that's very, very bad. but to say we're going to go to war on the first day, neil, come on. that's not realistic. it may sound good, but i don't think it's the proper thing to say. no more red lines, neil. neil: understood. hillary clinton is about to make a big speech in new york on a tax plan that will have a multitiered capital gains tax rate. it will go up, and you will be

penalized for selling investments in under or a year. i think you know roughly the drill here. what do you think of that? >> terrible idea. i mean, what we really need to do is to do what we did in ohio, modernize government and get ourselves in a position of where we deregulate and cut taxes. and we're business-friendly. you know, the next president needs to have people who are business-friendly in the cabinet, all throughout the cabinet. we need to shift power out of washington, empower people where they live and provide the incentives for businesses to invest in plant and equipment so workers can have the tools to have greater productivity and higher wages, and then the tax code needs to be simpler. it needs to come down at the top and provide incentives for the working poor at the bottom. neil: all right. >> it's another left-wing redistribution plan on the basis of hillary. neil: governor, thank you very much. and don't do the scriptless thing all the time. i'd love to talk to you more, but i have to get back to my prompter. governor john kasich from the

fine state of ohio. >> thank you, neil. god bless. neil: we mentioned hillary clinton, she is going to outline that tax plan which, of course, is pretty clear, governor kasich is not a fan. why is that? why is this so controversial? and when you find out who she's talking to, why is it so risky? more after this.

neil: you're watching coast-to-coast, high and neil cavuto and this is the our hillary clinton will thread the needle the you heard charlie gasparino talking about at new york university on this notion that you can use the tax code to incentivize the right behavior and bias that this populist pitch to help shareholders and find a way to reward them with not only pay for performance but shared stake in american operations. there is nothing wrong with that but here is where the details get a little controversial to

many on wall street vichy is using the tax code to do things they argue could hurt them or at least the big players on wall street, the carl icahns and that is she would put under a different tack skier, capital gains tax rate that would change depending how long you hold an investment. that would not just affect those fat cats but you'll. is among the many things that he jonathan honig find so obnoxious. the joy in says, you don't like this. >> i value freedom. i value thes right to make their own choices in the marketplace about how they conduct business. hearing from hillary is not just the same mold redistribution, it is economic dictatorship, hillary clinton wants to

prescribe how long you should hold an investment, how companies should invest their assets, whether activist investors should pursue one line of profit or another, whether a company should buy back its own stock, she is the commander-in-chief, the president is commander in chief of the army, not the economy but she wants government to play an integral role on every element how we trade. neil: to put a different tax rate in effect for how long you hold the investment, complicated by extending and altering it in to a degree we have not seen in the past but what is wrong with that? with penalizing those investors who get in and out of stocks fast? >> trade is good. all trade is good, long-term, short-term trade is good. what people like hillary don't see are the consequences of policies like this. stuart:s to diss incentivize short-term trading, who did the long term traders trade with when they want to trade?

the short-term traders who provide liquidity to the marketplace, the activists hillary goes against, who helps boost the portfolio returns for the pension investor? guys like carl icahn the go in and with companies into shape and it is done through trade. when hillary talked about wanting to incentivize, government is done. neil: young people on stock and all, i don't know if you specifically -- don't get crazy going in and out of stocks, that this was a good long-term strategy, isn't that close to what hillary clinton is saying? >> i advised them to think of themselves, make a rational perspective how to live their lives. it is their money. had learned expensive lessons involving cutting losses are keeping gains. neil: tax impact affect your strategy is? >> i see it all time. they don't want to pay their taxes but they sell it a lot

low-rent pay less taxes but have less profit as well. any investor with you are the fact that or small fry should be in salted that a politician wants to come along and tell you how to allocate your money and as inc's for hillary clinton any politician to know the. along and say i know best, we know how best for you to put your assets to work and how much to pay your employees and woodstock you should be issue, this is the basis of a private economy and government should have no role to the extent that they do. neil: some of her friends on wall street, take a chill pill, don't necessarily believe all this, just get past the hole bernie sanders finger and say all the right things she doesn't believe. >> it is more disconcerting but i have respect for senator sanders because i do believe that -- he comes to it with that sense of honesty, i think hillary clinton, basically would say anything or do anything to

get elected. neil: she repudiates the policies of her husband? >> she is 0 one and ended the different economic time, when her husband was president decelerated well, people who made money in the markets, the tactics of the day, they were celebrated. now if you are too successful the perspective is you got it from picking someone else's pocket and hillary is riding that train to the white house. neil: i will put you down as a maybe. >> put me down as the no. neil: donald trump. on the issue of politics and controversial characters, the current saying is bottom line, republicans themselves have simply failed to measure the magnitude of donald trump and now they are coming to regret that. what do you mean? >> republicans are tearing their

hair out, might have been an understatement. if they really are put in a box here donald trump, if they don't push back hard on him, steamrolling the party, and if they push back too hard he friend as he told my colleagues in an exclusive interview he might run as an independent candidate. they are in a bind. neil: if he does, he is sending a signal you have every reason to hate me. >> he might be sending that signal but donald trump is a master of the media, he knows how to play an news cycle, gives an interview to my friends that the whole saying he might run and then he backtracks a little, makes headlines, we are going to run out of ink talking about those guys. neil: i also wonder, i was saying this a few minutes ago, he will be the guy who gets the most attention for what he says or how he acts. i don't know if that is fair or

right but he knows how to work a crowd and get those quotes out there. do you think that hurts all those other guys especially the guys trying to emerge as prominent players themselves? >> the other republican candidates are in trouble with donald trump in the race, no question about that. the only way these other candidates get any price is matching donald trump. lindsey graham had to put his phone in a blender. pat is the only way they're getting any attention. i do think donald trump does risk over shocking folks. people get tired of that. team might become the lady gaga of the political world. i don't think he will be wearing a meat address any time soon but people are tired of being shocked. neil: i respectfully disagree. i think he is around for the long haul, he will be more than herman cain or lady gaga. i think he is sticking around and is serious about going all the way.

whether he does is debatable but i don't think he is on a flash in the pan. >> he did say this morning in an interview he was concerned that people might tire of him so he does recognize that to a certain degree. neil: we all live with that in the broadcasting world but the viewers are tired of us. it is good seeing you. i am reading an article today about the way china is going in effect to new york and elsewhere, this push for $50 minimum-wage, the damages people have feared have not materialized. one of the examples is chipotle where they had a surcharge to higher commodity prices, higher guacamole and told that, don't get me started on guacamole, won't touch it but people are happy to pay higher prices and the upshot of the article between that and higher wages people will suck it up and happily so so they shouldn't have a problem with a $15 minimum wage. the new post is fine, could be in any paper but this narrative

that disturbs me, what works for chipotle which has a lot of rabbit fans would work for mcdonald's or the local blinder or a host of other shops and it probably, my buddy charles payne as well, big difference. charles: i was in the studio when jacoby reported this week and stock was down 50 bucks and they say it will do this and we go up 50 bucks, jacoby is in a world of its own. there is 1 across the street, talking about large cities where people pay $5,000 to rent a closet. absolutely right. you go around the country to small-business this, not in metropolitan areas and can survive and $15 minimum wage. is ludicrous to say because chipotle is an okay, jeff bezos made an extra $7 billion today, does nothing for me. neil: the thing i notice, you can somehow correlate whatever is going on, joy public can

absorb the pain from this, that applies to everybody. my point is people might take 10% 15% more for to the likud but i don't think they will pay 10%, 15%, 20% more for big mac. charles: chipotle is the hot restaurant company right now. i am not a big mexican fan, not a big robert: but my family is ended is an amazing stock. lou: they know what they're ordering the joy before they act like it. neil: black beans and what do you call this? all right, but another one, they raise prices and their fans are no day. para foot traffic has gone down, burger king suffered this same thing. we have seen these things in business, it is crazy but hardest hit by this, the people who can't afford to go in chipotle, small, poor families where there are workers and for the most part two four workers had a small uneducated family

trying to get out of poverty, you take one of them out because now a small business can't hire the man you have two earners in at family and they can't afford the higher prices. neil: we haven't seen empirical evidence of that yet. charles: we have seen empirical evidence of this and it is pretty much common sense. neil: this city that raise the minimum wage -- charles: they take a big picture and always pick seattle as the first one. neil: billionaires'. charles: amazon, seattle, starbucks today seattle, seattle, microsoft, seattle is an amazing boom town. neil: we are talking rain. neil: nonsensical thing that you see seattle, go to any local deli, asked the deli owner what $15 an hour you're going to hire more people or let people go? this is nonsense and i think it is scary because we are talking about influencing the free-market and this is just the

beginning. when do you dictate what ceos can make? how much a shareholder can make? all those things are coming down the pike, they call it constants capitalism and i am afraid that because it is becoming a snowball into a boulder and it will hit us hard and does country. neil: you have to go because you are introducing something at nyu, 20 minutes away so you got to go. important things to do. we look forward to this, hillary clinton and the big announcement, which you allow line as far as investors and the wall street success times like charles payne have to pay up to shut up.

neil: i read a statistic in china, 90% of the respondents, nine of ten people, pretty good

with numbers think things are great. economy is good, they are optimistic about the future and i am saying to myself, with everything going on in china when did they do this survey? at the time they were doing it, vaginal wall? melissa frances on f this adds up. like the north korean guy who was elected with 100% of the vote. melissa: 81% believe the economy will be better next year, people are relentlessly happy you want to smack them, they're just insane. that is what this reminds me of. could you look at the stock market? neil: a lot of this craziness was going on in the market. it would seem to call into question whether they are drunk or -- or they are just confident they will get through it. >> get through what?

they are growing at 7%. neil: i don't believe that. >> let me give you the numbers. neil: the numbers you will tell me are lies. >> no they are not. these are numbers from morgan stanley. neil: which is a lie. >> may be alive but everybody says the same thing. china, anything, the numbers are a terrible mess. so our hours incidentally, a terrible mess. so does everybody. so does everybody in this world except me and you. neil: they live the most. are within clued the new planet. i want to get back. >> melissa, neal, everybody out there, don't pay china for granted. if china has lied they understated their gdp, not overstated it. you look at the way they -- wait a second. hold on.

neil: get out of my face! >> talking about. d-backs, 20% a year, that is not a lie. car sales not a lie. retail sales have been growing 10% to 15% year. anywhere in gdp numbers. melissa: what i said at the beginning of the segment about people relentlessly positive, delusional and why you are sort of like -- >> i relentlessly negative because this is the idea. neil: accused china of understating. >> i am negative about us. by leaving china is doing worse we are not treating them as enough of an adversary. neil: i wish you had said that. >> why hate to say it. you are a lovely woman and the brightest on tv, brightest on tv, i want to make it clear that i am not delusional. i am scared because china is coming up and they are growing

faster. neil: i love you to death but they are actually worse off than we are getting a sense of. to what end? >> less of a threat. is there development -- maria: delusional and paranoid. >> a little based on statistics. >> if that were true it would mean we could manage our economy, an incredible boom what. neil: it structuring public opinion. >> was part of this tanking the stock market? neil: yes. >> chinese are a lot different.

2% or 3% of the population participate in the market and it matters to 2% or 3%. gold prices, and -- >> 3% participate in america are incredibly powerful. >> when it went down everybody talks about it going down, what has it done year-to-date. and a new year you are up. neil: opted by lies. >> i'm not making them numbers. neil: 150 pounds. >> 100%. and everybody makes of fuss out of 35% down. we think everybody -- neil: what do you think of that? >> it was manufactured but what is the end game in sneaking up on us. will they show up with joy and weapons?

>> tables show up with you on as a reserve currency? neil: don't get me started on that. >> back it buy gold and where is the dollar. where is the dollar? melissa: i hope you are right. neil: i want to bring in -- stock it! i want to bring in the very calm lewis did adam shapiro to weigh in on breaking news, he broken and is developing it. adam: that was a lot more fun. let's talk about the f a real quick, we continue coverage of the scandal, congress reviewing documents in their possession and this is a quote from one of the documents the faa is committing fraud against the department of transportation, the office of personnel management and congress by knowingly willingly and intentionally underreporting the amount of official time granted to representatives, officials time is the time federal employees who are members of unions are allowed to do union work on federal time at taxpayer expense.

according to the documents being reviewed by one of the committees in congress, that is being abused, the faa senior managers are aware of it and doing nothing about it even though, stopped immediately and the administrator of the faa says he disagrees with our report. we have more coming up about now. neil: adam shapiro, we have the dow down 118 points. a lot of concern about whether momentum at amazon expect everyone else and growing concerns as well, housing situation has been disrupted. all i can tell you is these things go day-by-day but for the moment divide these numbers and stephen lee says it is in the eye of the beholder. more after this. we live in a world of mobile technology,

but it is not the device that is mobile, it is you.

that they and their families would get the benefits and support they earned. we fight for all veterans so that promise is kept. dav. for help, visit dav.org. neil: penalized for selling investments. i think you know the drill. what do you think of that? >> terrible idea.

what we need to do is do what we did in ohio, modernize government and get ourselves in a position where we deregulate and cut taxes. neil: is not what john kasich likes, presidential candidate, governor of ohio but it is what hillary clinton is set to an outline moments from now, speaking at the school of business with a plan, a lot of business types might find business and friendly, stuck between the tax code such that you have a tiered capital gains rate that could go anywhere from 28% to a top rate north of 40% depending on how long you own and investment, there are other incentives built for providing equal pay on a percentage gain for all participants in a company from the bottom to the top, i don't even know all the details, just know they are in there. we will go to it because this is her campaign, she is putting

numbers to a plan many argue would be opposed to the kind of populist success a lot of candidates like bernie sanders have had, about the wonders and and getting away with financial murder, this is a response to that. in the meantime, saudi arabia, this concern of for this iranian deal and i get -- i am looking at the saudis obviously are skeptical. officialese they say they back it but you are hearing from a lot of players, it is giving a leash that isn't there. giving a lot of time to do what they want to do and the money to do it. but the votes are not there at this time in congress to stop it. >> i can't count the votes in congress. i am not a political expert. we will see one way or the other, we have to know what our policy is with iran the next 10 to 15 years.

saudi arabia has to live with iran, they have a different attitude. they will be there for a hundred years along with the iranians. i heard them since 2006 when they stood up at the bahrain conference and announced we will not allow iran to have anything we don't have. i had a meeting with the crown prince of saudi arabia, prince sultan who has since died in 2006 with some others, private meeting, not government and he said it is just like any other civil nuclear program. it is civil nuclear but if we need to converted to something else we can do it so it was a hedge against iranian nuclear break out even in 2006, more recently the princes of saudi arabia said whatever deal the iranians that we want the same thing, no less. we are supposed to be your friends. those people who say there is no domino effect, no nuclear proliferation break out in the middle east i think are whistling in the graveyard and this is dangerous and we need to be careful. neil: what is too late given that the united nations security council voted unanimously that

no matter what we do these incredible countries have already done it, have already given the green light to this so let's say congress does agree to stop this so we are not part of it which is legally not such a sure thing, all these other countries are lifting their sanctions, lifting all their financial punishment and providing tens of billions of dollars and that is without a seat in part of it. >> first of all that points up i have a little bit of problems with the way the administration is selling this accomplishment. on the one hand they say the allies are four square concerned shoulder to shoulder the we care about preventing iran from getting a nuclear weapon but on the other side of their mouth they say if we don't agree to this deal they will lift sanctions and couldn't care less if iran gets the bomb so i think they need to get their story straight. the concern is even if the deal goes through, iran is expected to cheat on it that is one concern but there's another concern that if they don't cheat

they still be, from the legal nuclear break out state in 10-15 years so under any scenario we better start thinking about what our policy is with iran. neil: thank you for taking the time on a crazy news they and we want to take you to downtown new york, hillary clinton about the outline a plan, a thread that fine needle between keeping at least the wall street guys happy and the guys who support could cost her from unraveling. so she is going to make his populist pitch to go after the fat cat freighters which would be the carl icahns. by having a tiered capital gains rate, hold on to investment a long time or you will get screwed, more after in this. technology empowers us to achieve more.

it pushes us to go further. special olympics has almost five million athletes in 170 countries. the microsoft cloud allows us to immediately be able to access information, wherever we are. information for an athlete's medical care, or information to track their personal best. with microsoft cloud, we save millions of man hours, and that's time that we can invest in our athletes and changing the world.

neil: at this podium, how many times we are waiting for you are looking live tax and empty podium. i don't know why but empty podium is right so i have a strategy. i will have in a room and empty podium and we don't know who will come up to said podium but we are live when they do. in this case we do know, there we go, that is a live feed in a frenetic fox news room. we will keep you -- and now the

nyse very busy at this hour. there we go. to make the point that hillary clinton is moments away i built -- hillary clinton is speaking out against wall street and more to the point short-term thinking, investment thinking that benefits a select few. charles payne is on his way to introducer, he did show up. they saw him, he went back up and down to be here. jonathan honing his back with us, charlie gasparino, adam legend ski could have gone if he wanted but he is in san francisco. he is providing his own video feed. to all of you. as president liberal, i got to ask you weather is this cross is that tough down that hillary has got to make here, not kicking off wall street that making enough of a populist sentiment think you keep the bernie sanders crowd happy.

what do you think? >> exactly it. neil: that is so cool. >> this is the july 2015 policy proposal at a time when she is appealing to the left part of her base, not a completely crazy proposal. everybody agrees excessive short-term is bad for the markets and she is not saying by the way -- >> di fine excessive short-term, if you sell a stock after one hours that too short-term? five hours? is that short-term? >> larry fink has been running around, the head of bacharach's listing to be treasury secretary. neil: you are the only one who does that. >> but i know it. he is lusting. neil: that is a little weird. >> it is we're he is so obsessed with it. and other people. his wife probably will say.

in any event, this is such a stupid proposal. he is running around saying activist investing is costing jobs because carl icahn and nelson peltz go in there and tell corporate management to do stock buybacks. there is no real study that says this is a big cost. neil: that is what is going on. they have a loyal community of ten rich guys. >> one line she used, the tyranny of earnings season or reports. i don't disagree, stocks overreact on quarterly earnings. it is at antipathetic because a lot of individual small investors overreact with that. i would like to see this report was the like the europeans that this is all a smokescreen. this is all a smokescreen. this is what the problem -- she is talking about raising taxes so that we will stop a certain

kind of behavior, class a progressive -- that is not her job to stop me from trading. it is not her job to stop the ceo. >> you don't like the quarterly earnings reports and the obsession and i can understand that the the quarter beer earnings announcement does that cost jobs? >> noaa doesn't. >> it is the dumbest thing in the world. 5 or 6 different things she should be talking about that get companies to create jobs. >> the corporate income tax. >> i wish more wall street fat cats oppose higher taxes. hillary's message when she does sandra to the podium is going to be in effect you didn't turn that. any money you earn is community owned and a lot of fat cats. >> she will get warren buffett out there. >> even warren.

>> somebody who buys the deal. >> keep it down. we are trying to discuss this issue. what is your thought on this? they are cynical not only about her motives but when did this even works. >> to charles's question this is all tax policy is used to affect some kind of change and secondly. neil: joy and be. i think keep tax is very low and don't use it as a mechanism or a device for anything or anyone. >> i think you would agree that it is fair to disagree but the second thing is -- neil: go ahead. >> she is not saying you can't trade every minute. neil: i will penalize you if you do. >> it will cost you more. it will cost you more. >> the think activist investing is closing jobs? it is a stupid. is so dumb.

>> you are changing the subject. i have no problem. i have no problem with activism but charlie, you are talking against your own point. that is not short-term trading. >> activism, she will take a shot at them and basically say. >> that is it. hillary might give lip service to appreciating free markets, free-market mean freedom in those markets. neil: a copy of the remarks, she is saying anything you heard from jonathan honig, charlie gasparino or charles payne is disingenuous. >> i wear that as a badge of honor. >> this hurts the big guy, it hurts a lot. and better than expected

earnings report. you are going to be penalized. >> recommended a couple months ago. and to take profits in a lot of small investors made a lot of money on fat. neil: hillary clinton would. >> any ceo, they are running a major corporation, how investors react quarter to quarter, a learning from jeff bezos, wall street ridiculed for how long, could they ridiculed him for building a masterpiece company -- >> that is the whole point. >> think of how stupid this is. let's just say -- neil: of higher bark for this show. >> you bought a bunch of tech stocks in february 1999. neil: hillary clinton?

>> under hillary clinton, you would not be able to sell out, you would not be penalized if you sold out before. >> this penalty, you are making out like this penalty is the end of the world. >> many of of your pocket. >> let me give you a comparison. think of it this way. if you bought internet stocks in february 1999 you would be to incentivized to sell it before the crash. >> you have that kind of conviction you have to pay -- >> why would you think that hillary -- >> somebody for doing something smart and good? >> you mentioned this notion of punishing the activist, who else, '80s the activist, carl icahns, they want to get the stock. thankfully some one wants to get the stock because joe 6-pack is the one who has a couple hundred. >> used to go up. neil: how long was that trade.

neil: penalized. charles: penalize on 100% profit. neil: we are waiting, she is running late. no doubt listening to this argument trying to fine-tune it in her remarks. charles: 27.5 because of this conversation. neil: the point i want to make about hillary clinton is 180 from her husband. i know she has done a number 180 from her husband but this strikes to the core what made her husband's presidency successful at least for the economy and jobs and markets, balanced out in this end, higher taxes on the rich with lower investment related taxes and it was a good elixir but she has ignored that or maybe she is afraid of bernie sanders but in your heart of hearts, very low left wing business reporter, you would have to admit that it is goofy, is of little goofy. >> i think you were teasing a

moment ago that she is listening to this conversation and fine-tuning the numbers. i think it is very reasonable to believe she will fine-tune the numbers over the next year as she gets closer to actually -- neil: what we are waiting for is political. >> it is always be s. neil: wait, you are saying we are about to go live to something that is total bs and a waste of our time. did i hear you correctly? >> it is a term of art. policy trial balloon. >> numbers change the economic and philosophical principles will not. >> layingone has power to get her not on the stage. >> doesn't have the gifts. neil: the dow is off a lot right now but i don't follow these gyrations as charles payne does the we know interest rates will take a little bit. the fed staff is saying 0.35

funds rate. taking that with news that a president hillary clinton never came to pass would be raising taxes. is that something wall street should look for? charles: of course not. more anti business climate. these averages mask a real tough market. almost every day for every stock making the high two are making a new lows but selling beneath the surface more stocks below the moving average and above there is pure carnage underneath the hood of this market and the idea that somehow -- sandra: a good market. charles: these should penalize people. neil: you would pick to these conventions when they gather and democrats will remember when we were in the middle of a meltdown, we are a lot better than where we were and they will argue the dow, and i agree with that, i don't dispute it but republicans risk of looking alike wiener's if all they do is talk of about how this is a subpar recovery when for a lot

of americans getting the latest might be better. >> what i wonder about is why isn't donald trump talking about this real issue? charles: he has. neil: has done illegal immigration. >> he should beyond this. charles: to your point i think you are right. i don't know why they don't articulate because they will see corporate profits at an all-time high and yet your paycheck is smaller but they won't apples sold more products in china than america. neil: donald trump in south carolina. >> all that corporate cash. high corporate cash. that is how they got it because the corporate profits. charles: american corporate profits are a reflection of the global footprint and the fact that people want our motorcycles and washing machines but we are not generating any domestic demand. neil: good little fox business sellers to the sound on top of the empty podium-the sense of

urgency. we all need, waiting to hear from hillary clinton outlining his economic plan calling for raising capital gains taxes depending on how long and there we go, thank you. >> what do you think is worth? listening to her or sitting there? charles: there because! by the way! breaking news came up! thank you for bringing the nation back in gear. now the front runner and a democratic party for president of the united states spell that out, wall street and main street, listen up. [applause] >> thank you very very much. i want to tell you it is wonderful being back here at and why you, thank you for joining me today and especially my good friend and former colleague, congresswomen carolyn maloney, thank you for coming. i am grateful for this

opportunity to cheryl: further thoughts about the economy and the work that our country needs to do in the years ahead. first, i want to say a word about what is in the news today, it is because there have been a lot of inaccuracies as congressman cummings made clear this morning. maybe the heat is getting to everybody. we all have a responsibility to get this right. i have released 55,000 pages of e-mails. i have said repeatedly that i will answer questions before the house committee. we are all accountable to the american people to get the facts right and i will do my part, but i am also going to stay focused

on the issue is particularly the big issues that really mattered to american families. over the past few months i have had the pleasure of meeting young people all over our country. many came of age in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis and the deep recession that it caused. the fallout from that crash tempered their expectations for the future and a left some clear eyed about the challenges ahead. the challenges they face and that america faces. yet like generations of americans before them, there is also undimmed optimism. today's young people are preparing to enter an economy they know will be competitive, not just at home but globally. they are thinking about how they will find a good job after graduation that can help from get ahead and stay ahead. the risk of a setback or

potentially another crisis is never far from their minds, but what inspires me is that they are undaunted by these challenges, they are seeking real opportunities and real rewards for the work that they put in. and they are hopeful that tomorrow will indeed be better than today so i hear these stories everywhere i go. hard work, the grit, the sacrifices of people across our country that have brought us back end driven our recovery. so yes, now we are standing again but we are not yet running the way america should. no country is better positioned to thrived in today's global economy than we are. we have the most innovative, enterprising private sector and most talented workers anywhere in the world yet while corporate profits are at near-record highs, paychecks for most people

have barely budged in real terms. out of pocket costs of everything from health care to prescription drugs to child care to college to caring for aging parents are all rising a lot faster than wages. that then is putting a lot of pressure, enormous pressure on families and their budgets. my mission from my first day as president to the last will be to raise the incomes of hard-working americans so they can once again of ford a middle-class life. [applause] >> we need to end the wage stagnation that is holding back our families and holding back our country. this is the defining economic challenge not only of this election but of our time.

it gets to the work of who we are as a nation. the basic bargain of america. if you work hard and do your part, you should be able to get ahead and stay ahead. and when you get ahead our country gets ahead too. last week at the new school i laid out broad economic agenda to raise incomes and build an economy that works for everyone, not just those already at the top. it is an agenda for strong growth, fairgrowth and long-term growth. and in the days ahead i will continue outlining plans in all these areas from setting ambitious goals for new infrastructure and clean energy investment to raining in excessive risk on wall street. today i want to focus in particular on long-term growth. consider this fact. a survey of corporate executives found that more than half would

hold off making a successful long-term investment if it meant missing a target in the next quarterly earnings report. in another recent survey more than 60% said the pressure to provide short-term returns had increased over the previous five years. we also know that publicly held companies facing pressure from shareholders are less likely to invest in growth opportunities than their privately-held counterparts. large public companies now return eight or nine out of every $10 they earn directly back to shareholders either in the form of dividends or stock buybacks which can temporarily boost share prices. last year the total reached a record $900 billion. that doesn't leave much money to

build a new factory a research lab or train workers or to give them a raise. in fact according to the wall street journal, between 2003, and 2013, while typical companies in the s&p 500 doubled the share of cash flow, they spend on dividends and stock buybacks, they actually cut capital expenditures on a things like new plants and equipment. as the founder of the investment management co. vanguard put it, a culture and it has run rampant. one of the concerned business leader calls it quarterly capitalism. i understand most ceos are simply responding to very real pressures from shareholders and investor are looking for strong, reliable returns but it is clear

that the system is out of balance. the deck is stacked in too many ways and powerful pressures and incentives are pushing it even further out of balance. quarterly capitalism as developed over recent decades is neither legally required nor economically sound. it is bad for business, bad for wages, and bad for our economy. and fixing it will be good for everyone. increasing number of business leaders, investors, academics are mobilizing to change the culture of boardrooms, classrooms, and trading floors and to better align incentives for long-term growth. the sake of our economy and our country we need to stand with them. innovators like google and spacex are investing in research that does little for today's "bottom line" but may yield

transformational benefits down the line. venture capitalists are patiently nuturing the next disruptive innovator. the big three automakers, gm, ford, and chrysler are putting the memory of the crisis behind them and putting new invests in factories and technologies of the future including advanced batteries. companies like trader joe's and quick trip that prospered by investing in workers, increasing wages, and improving trading are becoming industry models. and large employers like target and starbucks recently raised wages for entry level workers and things to pressure from workers, the trend has even extended to mcdonald's and walmart. now you may have heard that i am a fan of chipolte. [laughter]. that is not just because of

their burrito bowl. last month the company announced it would provide paid sick days, paid vacation time, and tuition reimbursements to its part-time employees. [applause] these are all smart long-term investments that will and do payoff for companies, workers and our society. they point to an important question for the future of our economy. how do we define shareholder value in the 21st century? is it maximizing immediate returns, or delivering long-term growth? of course we want to do both but today too often the former comes at the expense of the latter. real value is lasting value.

we all know that in our own lives. i learned it watching my father sweat over the printing table in his small fabric shop in chicago. he scrimped and saved to build that business and provide for our family's future. it wasn't good enough to be secure for today. what mattered was tomorrow. and what's true in life is also true in business. real value comes from long-term growth, not short-term profits. it comes from building companies, not stripping them. from creating good jobs, not eliminating them. from seeing workers as assets, to cultivate, not costs to be cut. american business needs to break free from the tyranny of today's earning report so they can do what they do best, innovate,

invest, and build tomorrow's prosperity. it is time to start measuring value in terms of years, or the next decade, not just the next quarter. that is one of the ways we can raise incomes, help families get ahead and deliver real value for shareholders. now there is no single cause of quarterly capitalism and therefore no single solution. but there are smart, specific reforms that can be made by both the private and the public sectors, that would better align market incentives for long-term growth. reforms that many forward-thinking business leaders themselves have been calling for. i will mention five areas of focus today but this list should be the beginning of the discussion, not the end. first i'm proposing a reform of taxes on capital gains. the profits earned by the sale of stock and other assets to

promote and reward far sighted investments. the current definition after long-term holding period, just one year, is woefully inadequate. that may count as long-term for my baby granddaughter but not for the american economy. it is no way to run a tax system. of the so as president i would move to a six-year sliding scale, that provides real incentives for long-term investments. for taxpayers in the top brac connects families earning more than $465,000 a year, any gains from selling stock in the first two years would be taxed just like ordinary income. then the rate would decrease each year until it returns to the current rate. this means that from the moment investors buy into country, they will be focused on its its