15%. >> under armour up 30%. i own it. kevin plank is one of the best ceos in america. >> 15% in 2016. >> happy new year to everybody. neil is now. >> hi, everyone, glad to have you. i guess i could say i already lost those 30 pounds or so. i now you're thinking. 30, enough with you. because the state department is bragging it's already bringing peace and security to syria. labeling it early on as a 2015 win. also here this week we have ben stein, charlie is still hung over. so when he sobers up we'll have him back and welcome him back happily in a differ studio. so, peace and security in syria, done. >> let's celebrate. it's a new year and peaceful

there and we can send back those refugees. we don't even have to worry about that anymore. we took a record number in over the last year and a half. it's peaceful, let's start sending them back. it's absurd. we know it's absurd. it's shocking that they would even say that. the place is a killing field and it seems to be getting worse and not better but certainly it's news to americans that somehow peace has broken out in syria. >> how do they justify this? i try to say maybe they're saying it was a goal. it was a resolution that somehow they thought they had obtained or put in the wrong column. >> they backtracked on this to be sure. they're not saying it anymore. but 21,000 people died this year. 1800 this month alone and the government has killed 15,000 of those. so this is far, far from settled. far, far from peaceful. >> ben, what do you make of it? >> well, i have never considered

mr. kerry to be in his right mind. >> you're talking about the secretary of state. >> i'm no doctor but i don't think he's in his right mind and for this to go out under the signature of the secretary of state is a disgrace. it's an insult to the people that suffered terribly there and insult to their families and everyone. i can't even think of an excuse unless it's in a buying print there that we haven't seen but it's shameful. >> you know, when i look at this, i always think that even year over year it appears worse. >> i can't defend this. go trump. it's over. it's over. it's a new year. i've had it. why defend it? you can't defend it. there's no way to defend it. the area is a mess. >> yay for julie.

>> this would be like saying they have been lying to me. >> now we have to get back and you mentioned something very profound. because the goal there was to eventually get them back to syria where they would be protected in a neutral zone or whatever they want to call it and that would solve the 3 to 4 billion fleeing the country. tonight's goal was probably a potentially doable goal but not now. >> obviously not now. 4 million flea and 6 million -- >> obviously not now. >> this refugee thing is not going to go away in this country. it not only the humanitarian thing to do for them but it's an economic issue. 91% of the middle east refugees

in this country on food stamps. 30% are medicaid and medicare. the stats are horrific but we have a killing field. >> very few countries want to take them in. you can make the argument that things are better in syria but with assad still in charge there there's a lot of killing still going on there, then now is not the time. >> you keep making this point and i keep saying no. >> julie doesn't want to be -- i guess i'll have to play the role. >> you know, i mean, i look at the number of people killed and the aid we're giving to these people coming into this country. you know, they're getting more aid her year than americans on

welfare get aid. the refugees coming into our country. 12,000 a year. americans 19,000 a year if you're on the same welfare programs. that to me seems not right. >> >> i guess i'm heartless. >> this is why americans are so upset about immigration. >> i'm a former refugee and i came from a totalitarian regime and we were on welfare until we got on our feet and i'm happy to say i pay more in taxes and have been paying ever since. i have a lot of sympathy for these people. >> i was born in the soviet wrun i don't know. we came here as political refugees. we were lucky enough to be refugees and come here but we came here again with nothing. we had $90 in our pocket. so a lot of these people are experiencing the same thing. they don't have a country to go back to. they have nothing in their pockets and fled with the clothes on their back.

i understand why we have to give them aid and i have tremendous sympathy and empathy and i want to help them. and i don't want to say that they're living off of us because if they continue to live here i'm hopeful that the vast majority of them will become productive citizens. >> not everyone is like your family though. >> you know, i am much more worried about somebody born in this country like the san bernardino terrorist and becomes radicalized. i don't worry as much about the fact that these people -- i'm hopeful they're vetted as the state department says but to focus on them as opposed to focussing on the fact that we have a massive problem of radicalization of home grown terrorists. i know some of these refugees. they just want to live period. >> we can focus on both of them at the same time. and whether the tsarnaev brothers in boston or san bernardino people. somebody came here and got all the welfare benefits and all the freedom you got and there was still a negativity within the

household that breed resentment against this country. >> this is what happened in europe. >> this is what happened in europe. this is how these groups of muslims, these no go areas developed overtime. we have to be smart about this. >> two things, first of all the vetting is complete nonsense. there is no vetting. there's no documentation about who these people are and where they came from and what their political backgrounds are but also if i may say so the refugees from the arab countries in particular. but they're not at all as the same as the refugees from the former soviet union. it's muslim arab refugees coming and terrorizing women. this is not to be compared with the soviet union's immigration to the united states. no remote comparison. >> wait a second, you're telling me that people that are fleeing the carnage in syria are coming

here to rape and kill people. >> i didn't say that. >> what are you saying? >> you didn't even hear what i said. i said in stockholm they're not having great results like we got with the soviet and jewish refugees coming to the united states. they're having the highest rape rate in europe entirely as a consequence of taking in all the muslim arab refugees. that's not made up. that's a fact. i didn't say that had anything to do with refugees coming to the u.s. it might or might not. it's something to bear in mind. >> so these refugees deserve to stay in syria and get slaughter because one or two are raping people. >> it's not one or two of ten of them. it's thousands of them in various european countries and it does require it. they're not supposed to be brought here to disturb the civil peace of the united states. that's not supposed to happen. >> we do know enough that they

were not adequately vetted. even though she was cleared three times by pakistan so even those with suppose the proper paperwork can fool the system and now with these refugees the potential is a lot more. so that gets back to what we're talking about in syria and whether that is the answer, whether it's 2016 removing assad from power and providing a means by which the refugees find a home because in europe -- >> exactly right. it seems to me that europe would be a more natural place for the refugees to go instead of coming here. i don't understand the policy. we're not prepared for it. we're not able to vet the people. there has to be another way. we saw what happened in europe and the concentrations of muslims in france and in britain. it was a disaster. we have to do better. >> all right. we're going to take a quick break here. when we come back, this is something that has not happened

in 76 years and could spell big trouble for hillary clinton this year. i'm already going to tell you that ben stein does not agree with the premise and i am going when heartburn hits fight back fast tums smoothies starts dissolving the instant it touches your tongue and neutralizes stomach acid at the source tum, tum, tum, tum smoothies! only from tums new zicam cold remedy nasal swabs shorten colds with a snap, and reduce symptom severity by 45%. shorten your cold with a snap, with zicam.

battles are still going on. now back to cavuto on business. >> think about it, we have not seen this since fdr was president. the dow closing down a year before we pick a president. it's a rule of thumb that the year before presidential elections is almost always up

for the market and i have no reason to think that she's not right, but that could be trouble for any democrat that wants to be president because the trend is not generally that in that event. >> it's the average the stock market is up in the year before the presidential election. that's what everybody is looking at right now but let me tell you f the stock market is a proxy for how americans feel about their money it ain't good. it's also wages and the jobs market. all of this stuff is bad news for democrats that have been in charge. >> but they can point to the numbers that make them look good. the stocks are up. the fact of the matter is that minus this past year they have had every year up going back to 2009. so what do you think. >> i think the average person out there is not looking at the market as a proxy but their wages that are down. they're looking at the fact that when they do look at jobs they're all part time jobs. >> well, they're not all part

time. >> but so many of them have become part time jobs. >> you're a hilary hater. >> no, it's not that i'm a hilary hater. i don't like to love whoever the next president is but i want them to bring back real prosperity. i want to get rid of this welfare utopia that's destroying the country because i don't know how many more chances we have. >> they'll argue, depending on what happens because i mentioned earlier 8th year can be problematic for presidents. but do you think that as things stand now the markets and the economy can be a problem for the democratic nominee. >> let's go back so the last time we had an open election. the markets are up and everybody was feeling positive and something else was happening and the worst economic since the depression. what matters is exactly how

people feel in the fall of next year. >> i don't know. you can see where confidence is up. >> consumer confidence used to go lock step since 2000. consumer confidence is up but it's so far below -- >> i get it but the problem for the republicans is going to be in packaging exactly as you said because hilary is going to stand up and say the last time we gave the car keys to the republican party, look what happened in 2008. >> do you remember ed. >> i do. >> do you feel better off? if i'm a gop nominee. >> wait a second, do you feel better off? you feel better off than when george bush left the white house? of course you do. >> i think the average american is going to say absolutely not. >> ask president what's in your wallet and people will be like not enough. that's the deciding factor for so many american families. >> but you don't operate in a

vacuum. you have to choose between two. >> ben stein do you get a feeling though that it's odd that the last couple of years it was problematic. but even though clinton by the time the year was ending and dipping into a recession and that this has been a recovery? that's a little long in the tooth. some are saying well past it's prime and that that stumbles? your argument i believe is that it's not going to stumble enough to be to the democratic nominee. did i get that right? >> well, what it reminds me of is this comparison people used to make is that john f. kennedy had a secretary named lincoln and lincoln had a secretary named kennedy and they're both assassinated. what's the connection there. there's no connection. they're not going to rat it out.

the dow was down 1% and therefore we have it. >> it leads to the last year. i think the economy is quite strong. the one area that's done quite well is in the economy. but i think in terms of the economy, i don't see how republicans could have -- >> you don't see the weak jobs thing that charles was eluding to. >> no, i do not. the economy was very strong in terms of jobs. if people are hard working and educated -- >> hollywood liberal -- >> listen, ben was right. he is wrong on the economy. you guys, college grads parking cars, millions of them. it's not a great economy. we're just plotting along. it's not an american economy. put it that way. >> it's a great economy. >> great economy. >> there you go. i can never figure you out ben.

>> everyone has to show where you live. i don't know. i don't know why everyone does. >> we're going to explore how good this economy is or is not. because the first is doing it. fox business network. we're at it again in charleston, south carolina. coming up nor states are raising the minimum wage as the ball the minimum wage as the ball comes at ally bank no branches equals great rates. it's a fact. kind of like shopping hungry equals overshopping.

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.

all right. ring in the new year by raising the minimum wage. more than a dozen cities and states will start with such hikes. ben stein says get ready for the jobs to take a hike. very few in the $15 neck of the wood but higher than the national average of $7.25. ben, you're worried. why? >> because it's a simple matter of arithmetic. if the jobs will be twice as expensive per hour there will be fewer jobs. that's the way it is. not apple manufacturing which makes $600,000 per employee but at burger king, taco bell or del taco there will be fewer employees. it's arithmetic. i would like for retail and salespeople to be paid more per hour. i would cough up to pay more but it won't happen. it will cost jobs. it has to. it's math. >> he may not happy to pay more. there is a limit on how many americans would.

that's what leads to these company that is lay off people, right? i wonder what happens. >> if you raise prices people buy less of it. raise labor prices, people hire fewer people. 3% of folks out there make minimum wage. it's not a big deal. the thing we should focus on is median income, not minimum wage. >> what do you think? >> first of all, a hike in the minimum wagele affects all wages, lifts all tides. >> you lift there and the others will be lifted. the advantage is if you hike minimum wage they have more disposable income so they will spend it at burger king and mcdonald's. >> why not triple it for everybody? >> i would be happy to do it. great idea. >> you would? >> thrilled to do it. i don't think it's unreasonable -- if you ran a chain of restaurants would you do that? >> you should see what i pay people in my company. you want to work for me. i'm the biggest chump in the world. >> really? >> you can't live on $7.50.

>> i'm not arguing that. but whether you don't realize the flip side of raising costs on one side. >> ben is 1,000% right. we haven't talked about the average poor household may have two or three people with these jobs. when one person loses a job the hike the other two get and they have to pay extra as well. if you lowered the minimum wage got more people into the work force and let it work out. exactly right. >> wrong. >> you're not for that. >> 1,000% against it. give people more money to spend they will spend it. >> if you raise all the wages and all the prices in the economy go up. inflation everywhere. >> well, we wrapped up that conundr conundrum. you're probably having a very happy new year if you listened to charles. the thing about charles i love, look at the money he made you in

this is what you misfd you weren't watching last year. how to avoid paying by listening to charles payne. how do you top those recommendations? we'll go with your technology play of avago. auto zone. people still fixing ten-year-old cars and signet. with the money people are making they will take it there.

>> ben? >> i like the index. bless you, charles. i hope you get to be rich if you're not rich already. come live near me. >> i want to. that's goal. >> fox continues right now. >> i have made it clear to the intelligence community that unless there is a compelling national security purpose we will not monitor the communications of heads of state and government of our close friends and allies. >> that was president obama pledging nearly two years ago to stop spying on allies. a new report saying the administration kept nsa surveillance on our closest allies including israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu and some of our own lawmakers. their conversations got swept in with the snooping. some here say we should be paying the nsa to spy on our enemies, not on our friends and neighbors. are they right or wrong? hi, everybody.