20%. >> the vanguard small cap growth index. small stocks are the way to go. >> ben. >> i don't agree. let's go with standard & poor's high dividends. less volatility, steady growth. >> bad timing on my part to end early. cost of freedom on fox. >> every public college tuition free. >> my plan would enable anyone to go to a public college or university tuition-free. >> guarantee health care to all of our people as a right of citizenship. >> i want the opportunity for im grants to buy into ex changes under the affordable care act. >> and it's all free. you heard the promise. lots more government gifts but you didn't hear how they would pay for it all. welcome to "forbes on fox."

can we afford more freshman handouts? let's find out. is a bree that schafer, bruce jeffson. rich, can we afford it? >> david, may i say that i want freshly squeezed orange juice out of every public water fountain? >> you can. >> it's in the constitution. it's a right. >> it is. 60% of americans think we are in recession. it is not a debate that there is widespread economic despair. the problem is we don't have enough economic growth. we have been stuck in the 2% growth economy. if we could get it to 3 or 4% growth. we would create the health. then let's have the discussion whether we should give away more stuff. we have to put the horse before the cart. talk about economic growth.

>> and where is the money coming from? how can we grow the public sector more when we can't grow tax money more? >> part i would say is about priorities and how the money is allocated. setting aside the two wars in the last decade, if you get the undocumented workers paying taxes on the path to citizenship that helps raise money and you could give them freebies. >> mike, it's about immigration. the immigrants will pay for it. >> there is not enough money there by a long shot. get serious. what kills he is how they used to call it when the government spent our tax money spending. that became out of vogue. now they call it investing. these are lousy investments, david. if you go back just 25 years, our debt used to be 60% relative to the size of the whole economy. those investments have been so bad that the debt is now over

100% of the whole economy. >> let's focus on that for a second. the debt is totally out of control. our economy has grown in the past 15 years 74%. can you guess how much our debt has grown in the same time frame? 221%. they are supposed to rise in tandem. at this rate it's unsustainable. simple as that. the economy could go broke in a couple of years. >> it is, david. people are concerned about it. democrats sell this as if it is manna from heaven, as if it has no cost associated with it. we know it will increase taxes, increase the debt, increase burden on the american family and make for a less dynamic economy. this is all bad. >> we just don't get the bang for our buck. look at the poverty program. since they started with lyndon johnson, we spent trillions. there aren't that many people out of poverty as a result of

the spending. >> the cbo which is nonpartisan says 60% of u.s. households on average get more in government benefits than they pay into the system in federal taxes. that's a big swing. the democrats act like there are government spending fairies that pick this money off trees. it is so cynical what they are offering here. we are in deep yogurt. there is way too much grey poupon spending in washington, d.c. and we can't afford it. >> i want to pick up on the cynicism. what happens when you spend this money particularly on poverty programs you create a sense of dependency on government by people that hasn't helped america. what's really helped america grow the fastest and get more people out of poverty is that sense of independence. it doesn't come from taking handouts from the government. >> certainly the poverty program

creates dependency. the bigger story as evidenced by the deficits, we can-- we can afford the programs but it would deprooi real companies that employ and move the economy forward. we should reject these democratic proposals. >> you're taking money away -- i don't think you would argue that the public sector is more productive than the private sector. >> i don't think so. i think if you have people who are working and they are not paying taxes, if they are working and paying taxes they get some benefit. on the health care thing, hillary is not talking about free. she's saying buy into it. right now with undocumented workers, other people are paying -- we are paying for them to come to the emergency room and they are paying nothing. >> first of all, i think that's -- we are in lala land if

we believe that. unfortunately, i think of this from the perspective of women. so many of the programs are sold in the name of protecting women. we are hearing about packages for paid leave and child care subsidies which you will all be paying for. what worries me is the message underneath. it's costing us and there is a myth that there are people in society who are victims. >> we are paying for message. >> yeah. by the way, the government paid out 1 trillion in over payments since 2003. via medicaid, medicare and earned income tax credits. the money is tax free. it was wrongfully sent out the door. by the way, who said this? somebody worked in low income neighborhoods. over time i have seen motivation start to diminish when people are just getting a check. president obama said it in 2011. that's a point about government handouts, does it under mine the work ethic? >> we pointed this out before.

fdr said the same thing. one of the founders of the welfare system said in the 30s that the danger is people become addicted to these government handouts. >> they do. if you are going to argue for some public assistance which fdr and even eisenhower did, make it in the form of infrastructure. we built things like the golden gate bridge, interstate highway system. we put a man on the moon. yes, this is government funding. it employed people toward noble causes. the democrats should make that case, but they are not. they're talking about give aways. >> frankly sometimes i hear about the infrastructure building. that was what the stimulus was supposed to be about. that was going to get the economy going. it didn't work out well. >> during president clinton's term infrastructure spending was roughly the same. the bigger picture is the message the democrats are pitching. they are going away from an

incentive driven economy whereby the business and the viblg takes on the risk. achieves the prosperity. they get tax money to the opposite where the government feels it owns your prosperity and you should be happy with whatever crumbs. >> the trillion dollar question to john. what do the american people believe? do they believe still in the independence they get from working on their own is more important than government controlle? >> i think americans know governments have no resources. they know governments cannot spend in confident fashion. we allow the political class, people like john boehner and nancy pelosi as opposed to bill gates, warren buffett. reduce spending and grow prosperity. >> don't the folks in silicon valley believe that, rich? >> yeah. they do.

i want to push back a little bit against john. why did we used to be able to do these things well? what has happened? i think it's public sector unions, crazy environmental laws. that's what the democrats should be talking about. >> go ahead, john. >> imagine how much better the highways and infrastructure would be if they were run by the private sector. we would have gotten to the moon more quickly. >> they wouldn't have been built. >> you're saying there would bnt a road from los angeles to san francisco? >> hold on. i have to bring up an example here. hold on, guys. it does involve donald trump. back in the 1980s. remember the goth of new york city, the local government was trying to build an ice skating rink. took five years, they were over budget. he said, give it to me. within six months he had it done, under budget. i would argue, rich, that's an example of the private sector doing it better than the public. >> you wouldn't have interstate 80 going across kansas.

we are an intercontinental nation. >> we used to do this stuff well. now we don't. >> in 2009 president obama's stimulus plan, just 7% went to infrastructure standing. >> coming up next, the most polluted cities are in one of the greenest states in the u.s. that state and why some here say it means all the green laws should go up in smoke next. at ally bank no branches equals great rates. it's a fact. kind of like ordering wine equals pretending to know wine. pinot noir, which means peanut of the night.

it's a highly thercontagious disease.here. it can be especially serious- even fatal to infants. unfortunately, many people who spread it may not know they have it. it's called whooping cough. and the cdc recommends everyone, including those around babies, make sure their whooping cough vaccination is up to date. understand the danger your new grandchild faces. talk to your doctor or pharmacist about you and your family getting a whooping cough vaccination today.

at ally bank no branches equalsit's a fact.. kind of like mute buttons equal danger. ...that sound good? not being on this phone call sounds good. it's not muted. was that you jason? it was geoffrey! it was jason. it could've been brenda.

fox." have a great day, everybody. >> take a wild guess which state has seven of the top ten most polluted cities in america. did anyone guess california? ironically, that's the state

with some of the toughest and most expensive green laws in america. so, john, you say this is proof that all the global warming regulations aren't worth the cost. >> of course they are a waste. you can't legislate a clean environment more than you can legislate morality. a clean environment is an effect of a prosperous society when people are well to do they have the time to care about the world around them. if you want to clean up the environment, reduce the governmental barriers to prosperity and get the clean environment. >> let's ask a californian. rich, you're from california. it was surprising to you, was it not, to see seven of the most polluted cities were from your state? >> john makes a point. the central valley of california where the top ones are is desperately poor now, a lot because of regulations wrecking the agriculture industry or at least hurt it. i will say this. when i came to california in the '70s the entire l.a. basin smelled like the tail pipe of your car.

it is significantly better. it didn't happen by accident. >> mike, there is something in economics called the law of diminishing returns. in the '70s and '80s you needed pollution controls. the government agencies are so big they feed on themselves. they only exist to employ the bureaucrats. >> you look at the paint care program in california. that makes sense. paint manufacturers, recycled consumer paint so it doesn't get dumped. they go over board and stop the building of water storage tanks so they have a drought, they're in trouble. that's when they go too far. they have gone too far over the years. >> sometimes the government agencies cause problems they are meant to protect like the animus river spill caused essentially by the epa. >> by the way, the epa is basically being used as a cudgel by the white house after the clean water act.

bureaucrats slamming the little guy at a time the epa had $144 million in bonuses and trophies they gave themselves since 2007. >> is a bree that, the overall cost of the e pa was put together. epa ranks cost in 2015 are expected to cost $386 billion. that's a huge chunk of the economy. >> it is. the devil is in the details. of course we all want a clean environment. but we have to ask ourselves at what cost. when you look at some of the regulations that california passed and the stories are always about my home state. why is that? when you look at the regulations a few years ago they passed a gas vapor emissions bill. it had a tiny impact on the environment but a huge impact on small gas stations, family owned businesses. we have to ask ourselves at what cost and is it going to have an impact or the desired impact. >> are the regs worth it? they cost almost $400 billionle

a year. are they worth it? >> i won't defend the regs but i wonder if some of the free market zealots on the show went over board here. john, if your factory stinks up my air, why would a free market motivate you to do anything about it? >> there's a question. john, answer it. >> the free market motivates it because if you are fouling up the air, you are going to lose business. >> really? fromle little bill baldwin. >> john, finish the point. >> i grew up in los angeles in the 1970s. people weren't rushing there from around the country because it smelled like a tail pipe. they came out because it was prosperous. what did we get ? we have all sorts of sierra clubs and junior leagues fixing it. they don't have them in poor places. >> it was the development, as john is saying, of los angeles that ironically was part of the reason it got cleaned up. now these bureaucracies remained

and they are just useless. >> yeah. that's the point most of us are making here. there are diminishing returns. i want to say, i think all political bills coming out of washington these days can be called gas emissions, vapor emissions bill. >> cap and trade in washington, d.c. rhetoric. >> all right. >> i am for cleaning up pollution. it's awful. >> that's the last word. the cashing in gang ready to roll at the bottom of the hour. eric, what do you got? >> hey, david. most democratic presidential candidates answering black lives matter over all lives matter. is that a good message from a potential president of all americans? plus, donald trump saying he should get secret service protection and that was before the violence at a rally. should taxpayers pay to protect presidential candidates? see you at 11:30. >> good questions. thank you, eric . we'll be watching. first here the number one fear of americans right now -- belief it or not it's not another

terror attack or crime. it's something to do with the government that could

what scares you the most -- a terror attack or somebody breaking into your house? check this out. america's biggest fear right now is corruption of government officials. nearly 6 in 10 say that spooks them more than cyber terrorism. companies tracking personal data or a terror attack. mike, you say they have good reason. >> absolutely. this has been going on for decades. people are sick of it.

the voters know the people in washington can be bought either with money or personal favors at some point either when they leave office. this is one of the big reasons donald trump is polling well. >> i think you're right. it's a you know you have the anti-establishment fervor. bruce, we have a list of the federal officials or government officials, federal state and local arrested for corruption. i know about 98% of them are from chicago, right? >> yeah. that can add more to the list. the superintendent of schools was just pled guilty this week for kicking money to some company. u.s. speaker hastert has a plea deal for bank fraud to cover up whatever. i wish people were more outraged. i don't think people are outraged enough. >> really? >> sometimes the scandals drive down voter turnout. i think here anyway in illinois

and other places that keeps some of the clowns in office. >> by the way, it is widespread, just to make a point here. it is not just in any one particular location. i would think this is a great selling point for republicans who think it is because government has grown so big we have corruption. that's what people are afraid of. >> certainly they should use it that way. i was surprised by this. i would love to see the question wording on the survey. it goes back to the point when government plays god, it makes lawmakers prone to ethical misconduct. more and more americans are picking up on that. i hope and republicans should pick up on this. that this is an opportunity to roll back some of the progressive states. people are open to it. >> john, what do you think? >> it may surprise people that i think this is a waste of time. it lends credibility to the noncorrupt things the government do. big crime that's the size of government holds it back. not the little instances of corruption. >> rich, agree or disagree with

that? >> as usual john makes good points. look, i think the republicans aren't winning the issue and they should. trump might be. >> we are just reporting what the people are worried about. coming up with the holiday shopping season fast approaching we now know how much shoppers will be spending.

$1200 is it how much holiday shoppers will be spending this season. what stocks help pay for it? a basket of stocks that pay dividends. >> pretty cheap from vanguard.

>> if you must feed a dividend addiction this is the low tar version. >> visa. >> people are putting christmas on plastic. >> true. >> pretty ex-pen as he now. >> that's it for "forbes on fox." thanks for watcng. keep here. we continue with eric bowling and "cashin' in." >> critics call it the dumbest answer at the democratic debate. before the candidates hit the stage i said my number one question would be do black lives matter or do all lives matter? guess what. cnn asked the question but i never expected the answers. here's bernie. >> let's put the question to senator sanders. >> black lives matter. we need to combat institutional racism from top to bottom. >> then it was o'malley. >> the point the black lives matter movement is making is a very, very le g-8 mat and serious point. black lives