do they want their project to be turned into a utility? all we need -- the only thing below utility is what, the dmz? i don't know. i want to know what the audience thought. that does it for us. connell: "bulls & bears" starts right now. david: congresswoman alexandria ocasio-cortez serving up her own version of truth at south by southwest. what she has to say about capitalism has a lot of people questioning her basic understanding of this economy. we will play that for you. hi, everybody. this is "bulls aind beaan & bea" thanks for joining us. with me today is gary kaltbaum, liz peek and kristina partsinevelos. >> capitalism is an idea of capital. it puts capital, the most important thing is the concentration of capital and it means that we seek and prioritize profit and the

accumulation of money above all else and we seek it at any human and environmental cost. that is what that means. to me that ideology is not sustainable and cannot be redeemed. david: capitalism puts profits above everything at all costs, it is unsustainable and unredeemable. guys, what do you make of the congresswoman's definition of capitalism? >> i don't even understand her definition of capitalism. but honestly, this woman is beginning to frighten me, because she spews out all this stuff that has no basis in fact. it isn't even comprehensible. but a great many people of her generation are listening to her. she's described now as the thought leader of the democratic party which is truly appalling because no one is challenging her in the democratic party and saying no, you're wrong, capitalism actually is the only system of economic growth, it has brought untold wealth to

millions and millions of people across the globe. they are so afraid of her twitter following that they won't say no, you're wrong. i mean it. i really think this is beginning to become alarming. >> funny, because this is the south by southwest conference and she was more popular than the celebrities that were in attendance. it's becoming more political. if we talk about socialism rising amongst millenials, i think what i'm starting to see now is that people, the younger far left are saying what they are against, not what they're for. maybe they are unhappy with capitalism at the moment, therefore, they are against it. i don't think that is the way to move forward in america. you look at europe, look at universal health care there, successful thus far. you can debate -- we can debate public spending, we can talk about progressive taxes and how it may help in quality there but what they are not is anti-capitalist. i think that's very important. >> they don't know what it is. that's the whole point. capitalism really is unknown,

even obviously by members of congress. capitalism, the system of private property, of individual rights, it's a system which extracts physical force from society and says you are free to pursue your own happiness and if aoc cares about the poor, she should be a capitalist. if anyone cares about the poor, capitalism is what has changed the world undeniably, about 40% of the world lived in extreme poverty in 1990. now it's about 10% thanks to capitalism. that's what we should be preaching. aoc simply doesn't get it. >> i don't even blame her anymore. you got an interviewer there and didn't ask the question well, when you make $5 million on your book deal, what are you going to do with the $5 million because that comes from capitalism. i blame the media for really not asking serious questions. i blame "saturday night live" for not doing a parody of her when they absolutely shredded somebody like sarah palin, who is only interested in capitalism, lower taxes and less

regulation, but they leave this woman alone. the problem is very simple. capitalism works, socialism only works from the money from capitalism and these people just don't get it, and unfortunately, she's the loudest voice in the room and she's the most popular voice in the room. david: you know, i'm going to surprise, i think she was exactly right. i think she just switched the terms. that is what she said about capitalism, she said it's the accumulation of money and power at all costs. there is not one socialist regime in the history of socialist regimes that has not accumulated money and power at all costs, no matter what it costs. no matter what it costs the environment, the dirtiest oil wells on the planet were in socialist countries, in venezuela, where they have ruined thousands of acres of beautiful land. in the old soviet union, when it was a communist country, probably still that way, by the way, the oil projects were just

filthy. they don't care about anything except the socialist regime in these countries. >> the biggest divide ever is in socialist countries between the rich and the poor, because you end up 5% plundering all the money and 95% look at venezuela. got to tell you, i'm tired of hearing we're not going toward the socialism of venezuela even though every one of their programs is exactly what the venezuelans did, taking over all industry, dictating to people, authoritarian talk, telling people their lot in life is where it is because everybody else is screwing them over. it's the same old, same old and it leads to destruction. >> gary, i would love to challenge all the panelists just going forward for us to try a different example and not use venezuela all the time when we are talking about how socialism has failed. i think in america, you just brought up inequality. it is still a major issue here which is why you are seeing the

"s" word coming up so often because you have the younger demographic who is unhappy with their current financial situation. whether or not you agree with it, whether you think they're entitled, whether you think there shouldn't be more entitlements and they just want everything given to them, wea have to address the fact numbers have shown they are not able to afford so much which is why they are taking some of these extreme positions. >> it's not just the only nonsense that came out of her mouth. let's go the tape for more nonsense. >> we should not be haunted by the specter of being automated out of work. we should be excited by that. but the reason we're not excited by it is because we live in a society where if you don't have a job, you are left to die. >> this woman is making me crazy. there's no facts there. we spend hundreds of billions of dollars every year and innumerable programs, medicaid,

food stamps and everything else, to help people who are down on their luck, out of work or whatever. i really don't -- this is what's making me crazy. no one is pushing back, no one in her party is pushing back and saying no, that is not true. david: i would suggest that there are people pushing back. they are not doing it as loudly enough or in the numbers but i have heard, we have had people on fox business and fox news that have pushed back, democrats, but not as much. clearly, she has the audience. that's what's absolutely clear. >> the dems aren't coming on our network. i will say that right now. i have reached out and they just refuse to come on fox business or fox news. david: we invited her here. >> she says, what she says is actually correct. you need to work to sustain your life. metaphysically if you don't produce, you need to rely on others who do. yes, automation is a major benefit. we're not running out of jobs. there's an unlimited amount of jobs that can be created in a free society and that's aoc's problem.

one of her many problems. she does not advocate for a free society. these are fears for her, not challenges to be overcome. >> i think you just hit on exactly the right thing. we are talking about freedom. freedom of choice, freedom of opportunity in this country. that is something she never talks about because she doesn't want people to be free. i think what worries me so much is not that baby boomers are going to be influenced by her. it's the next generations, the gen-z and gen-x generations which are listening to this stuff. i think that's what has to be the pushback. it has to be about personal liberty, personal freedom, because that is still a very, very cherished commodity in this country. david: i wonder what she does want. we got a little taste of it through the green new deal, where you were -- everybody was allowed a salary whether they wanted to work, whether they were unable or unwilling to work. i think she just thinks that everybody deserves to be at home playing video games, right? and getting paid by the government for it.

you're shaking your head no. i haven't seen any other response. >> when all is said and done here, we are talking about authoritarians. they want to dictate policy. they want to run the show. they want to run the state. they think they are smarter than you. and their great sell job is the people not doing so well in life, as i said, and they blame it on those that are. imagine the people that produce the jobs, the people that created the wealth. they are the ones that are be g being -- on by these people when these people have never created a dime of wealth. by the way, to what she said, there's like over 80 to 90 welfare programs doling out over $1 trillion a year. nobody's being left to die if they don't have a job. there is so much giveaways at this point in time to people that aren't making it right now. >> i think your statement is a little too black and white by saying they have never contributed a dollar. i think of a lot of these companies run by younger -- >> are you kidding?

>> no, i'm not kidding. >> bernie sanders has been living off the taxpayer since day one. >> let's talk about republicans then. talk about the president currently in power. we always go bash, i'm just trying to play devil's advocate. we do this, we have to look at both sides. >> kristina -- >> it's a pretty easy dichotomy. on one hand you have capitalism, a system of individual rights and on the other hand you have socialism which is a system of mob rule. you're right, kristina, to the extent it's practiced somewhere more than others, venezuela though is socialism. that's the definition of socialism. yes, of course, you sacrifice your own life for the greater good and what ends up happening is that no one's wealthy. we see that again and again and again, and aoc is just the latest incarnation of this old tired idea that failed every time it's been tried. david: got to leave it at that. a record $4.7 trillion ballot is brewing over the president's new 2020 budget proposal. how will the next shutdown battle play out? we will get the very latest from

the white house coming next. >> we do have large deficits. that's why we're here transparently saying we have a problem as a country. it takes a long time to get out of that mess. naysayer said no one would subscribe to a car the way they subscribe to movies. we don't follow the naysayers. ♪ ♪ we all make excuses for the things we don't want to do. but when it comes to colon cancer screening... i'm not doin' that. i eat plenty of kale. ahem, as i was saying... ...with cologuard, you don't need an excuse... all that prep? no thanks. that drink tastes horrible! but...there's no prep with cologuard...

i can't take the time off work. who has two days? and i feel fine - no symptoms! everybody, listen! all you need is a trip to the bathroom. if you're 50 or older and at average risk, cologuard is the noninvasive option that finds 92% of colon cancers. you just get the kit in the mail, go to the bathroom, collect your sample, then ship it to the lab! this is your year! own it! cologuard is not right for everyone. it is not for high risk individuals, including those with a history of colon cancer or precancer, ibd, certain hereditary cancer syndromes, or a family history of colon cancer. ask your doctor if cologuard is right for you. covered by medicare and most major insurers.

ask your doctor if cologuard is right for you. conventional wisdom says you can't make a 400 horsepower sedan, that's also environmentally conscious. we don't follow conventional wisdom. ♪ ♪ comcast business built the nation's largest gig-speed network. then went beyond. beyond chasing down network problems. to knowing when and where there's an issue. beyond network complexity. to a zero-touch, one-box world. optimizing performance and budget. beyond having questions. to getting answers. "activecore, how's my network?" "all sites are green." all of which helps you do more than your customers thought possible. comcast business. beyond fast.

david: hold on to your hats. the white house proposing a record $4.7 trillion budget for fiscal year 2020, setting up for a big budget battle with democrats. let's go straight to blake burman at the white house with the latest. blake? reporter: president trump's spending wish list calls for a 5% increase for defense spending in fiscal year 2020. jumping that number all the way up to $750 billion, while also calling for a 5% decrease in non-defense discretionary

spending. the acting budget director russ vought saying the administration is making the tough choices. >> yes, we are trying to say we need to continue to secure the country. we need to continue to secure the border. we are not going to be bashful about that. at the same time, we are also going to say that we have many, many programs that are wasteful and inefficient that we can no longer afford. reporter: the administration is also projecting trillion dollar deficits for this year and the following three. over the next decade they predict deficits to run north of a combined $7 trillion. but the committee for a responsible budget believes it will be more like $10.5 trillion and says the blueprint is full of accounting gimmicks. >> the administration is assuming that growth will be 3% or more for most of the decade. there isn't actually any other serious impartial budget group analyst out there that's calling for that growth level. reporter: president trump is also requesting $8.6 billion for additional border wall funding. one of many reasons why democrats up on capitol hill say

the budget is dead on arrival. back to you guys. david: blake burman, thank you very much. gang, even though $4.7 trillion is huge, it does include some cuts over time so is this what's needed to get our fiscal house in order? what do you think? >> i'm just glad i had a light lunch today. david: you're very graphic today. >> you know, i'm sorry, but i just feel like we are being conned by both parties. the president came into office with mcconnell and ryan and told us what they were going to do about debt and deficits. all i can tell you is government spending is up $700 billion a year from the day they stepped in. and the democrats even want more. we are headed for a day of reckoning to where the first trillion dollars of our taxpayer dollars goes towards interest and that's based on low interest rates. if interest rates ever get out of hand, look out. unfortunately, we have no heroes in washington, d.c. working for

us and doing our bidding. >> yeah. it's like they say there's cuts but yet it's still the biggest budget of all time, $4.75 trillion. you know, we talked about well, discretionary and non-discretionary. half of the budget is medicare, social security and entitlement programs anyway. that is largely untouched, from my understanding. i think the president needs to draw a line here and say look, we need to fund the military. that is the proper role of government. if we are going to spend it anywhere, it should be in the military and not in these redistributive entitlement programs. that's the first thing that sth should be cut. >> i want to weigh in and say it's not a budget. it's a political statement. this is what president trump is going to be campaigning on in 2020, building up our defenses, building the wall and cutting back on some of the services like the environmental protection agency which his supporters really think we spend too much money on. i would go back to when president obama launched various budgets. there were three years in a row,

true statistic, where not a single democrat or republican voted yes on his budget. three years in a row, complete zero votes in favor of his budget. those too were political statements. i don't take this terribly seriously. i don't think anyone should. >> you are spot-on. the one you are referring to, the 2015 budget filed by obama -- >> '13 and '11. >> this is coming from obama, president obama himself at the time. i think like you said, this is a political push for him to show what he's going to campaign on. however, there's two points that are a little interesting. one, the cuts to medicare and medicaid. in 2015, then candidate trump or he was looking to go into it, said he would never cut, we actually can pull out his tweet, right, his 2015 tweet where he states that i was the first and only gop candidate to state there will be no cuts to social security, medicare and medicaid, huckabee copied me. you have that first statement. then you had the second statement i know we all talked

about that mexico's going to pay for the wall, yet here you go, in this budget you have funding for a wall that's not by mexico. >>. david: looking on the positive side, and there is a little bit of positive, cutting back on discretionary spending and that includes, by the way, what the old clinton method of dealing with welfare, if you are able-bodied, if you are unwilling but able to work, you will be forced to work if you receive any money from the government. that's a good thing, right? >> there is nothing positive about spending being $4.4 trillion last year and $4.7 trillion next year. by the way, that's the starting of the negotiating process. look, the last year of bill clinton's presidency, our spending was $1.8 trillion. i just want to know where the other $2.9 trillion is going, how is it benefiting us, what's it going to. i just don't think there's any accountability. most importantly, i don't think they care. we had kevin brady on the other

day and we interviewed him. it sounded like he cared but we got the same talk of oh, it's them, it's this, that and the other thing. i just deal with facts and numbers. you can't lie with numbers. they are just getting really out of hand here. as i said before, we are going to wake up one day and the markets and economy and interest rates will react to this. then wait until you see what happens. david: their major concern is getting re-elected. they think if they spend more of our money, they will get re-elected. simple as that. elizabeth warren took up the you didn't build that banner once again but will it work this time? we debate that, next. all money managers might seem the same, but some give their clients cookie cutter portfolios. fisher investments tailors portfolios to your goals and needs. some only call when they have something to sell. fisher calls regularly so you stay informed. and while some advisors are happy to earn commissions whether you do well or not. fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better.

maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management. (butcher) we both know you're not just looking for pork chops. you're searching for something more... ...red-blooded. right this way. you thirst for adrenaline, you hunger for raw power. well, you've come to the right place. the road is yours, dig in.

david: remember this? play the tape. >> somebody helped to create this unbelievable american system that we have that allows you to thrive. somebody invested in roads and bridges. if you've got a business, you didn't build that.

david: now democrat presidential hopeful senator elizabeth warren is recycling the "you didn't build that" platform. roll tape. >> those great fortunes in america that people built, worked hard, had great ideas, are inherited. those great fortunes were built here in america with workers that all of us paid to educate, with their goods brought to market on roads and bridges that all of us helped to build. they were protected in their factories by firefighters and police officers that all of us helped to support. so what we're really saying is look, just put a little bit back in the kitty. this is what we're asking for. pay a fair share so the next kid has a chance to build something great and the kid after that and the kid after that. david: so gang, does senator warren have a point with her message? what do you think? >> look, i think she completely dismisses the idea that these great companies that she's

talking about hire people, create wealth amongst their workers which is definitely the case, and by the way, she should look at silicon valley and by the way, all the stuff that we're supposedly paying for, that's called taxes. that's what taxes go for. infrastructure, roads, firefighters, et cetera, that's what taxes are for. but in terms of not giving back, if you look at silicon valley right now, all of the major billionaires out there have pledged to give half of their wealth away to charity. that's a fairly significant demonstration of the fact that these company leaders do believe that they want to give back, that they're not going to just sit on their wealth or pass it to the next generation. i mean, look, elizabeth warren is past her due date. she was very popular when she was attacking banks. now she's attacking all businesses but she isn't nearly as attractive in doing it as alexandria ocasio-cortez. so next. >> it's the same message. the same guilt. you didn't build that. >> that's right. >> for some reason they say that. bill gates didn't build

microsoft because he drove on a public road? are you kidding me? this is the purpose of socialism. it's to trip out the individual, to say we're all in it together, there's no individual effort, it's all communal wealth. about the billionaires giving back, they should be getting a tax cut. how do you get to be a billionaire in this country u get to be a billionaire by producing something millions and millions of people benefit from. they give it back as it is. they give it back. that's what we should focus on and appreciate. they should have statutes erected to them, not more taxes put on them. >> isn't that tax cut in the form of their charity organizations like the bill and melinda gates fund, all the other funds that wealthy people, even george soros in that mix, too? i agree, this is very similar to our first discussion about going after capitalism. i think it's an old story and i think this is what america's built on.

i don't think you can really beat that down when we have come so far. there is inequality in america. that is an issue, and the education system definitely needs some reforming and there's lots of points of error. but there's strength and a lot of it has to do with business. >> it's the continuation of what i call the con job. global warming, climate change, pay us more money, we'll fix it for you. you are making too much money, you are immoral. you didn't work that, you didn't create that, you rode on the roads. give me a break. none of this makes any sense whatsoever. it goes back to these people, authoritarians who want to run everything in our life. whatever happened to something called rugged individualism? you work, you earn it. somebody who makes $50,000 and somebody who makes $5 million and takes the same road every day, why does the guy have to pay more who makes the $5 million that only uses the road the same as the guy with

$50,000? it's just a joke. david: i think you are all missing one important point. what she's doing is setting up a ration rationale for the wealth tax. it's confiscating part of your property and if your property doesn't actually belong to you, and that's what she's saying, that's what president obama is saying, you didn't build that, it's not exactly your property, she can do a confiscation tax which is what a wealth tax is. it takes away your property on which you have already paid taxes. go ahead. >> you know how dumb it is? if she ever gets close to winning, guess what all the wealthy will start doing with their wealth? they will be in bermuda and bahamas and we will lose that money also. it's very simple. capital people, businesses and money, are going to find the place it's treated best. when you have these people trying to take a bunch of it away, people will run away. >> one of the interesting things here is that the reason, one of the things that drives her crazy is ceos make a great deal more

money than the people who work in their companies. part of that is because the government pushed several years ago that pay for ceos, higher level executives, should be in the form of stock and stock options so their interests were aligned with their companies. guess what happened? the stock market did extremely well and basically these people began to earn more money than ever they had intended to do or was expected to do. that is one of the great sources of this great chasm that's opened up. >> one way or the other, they earned it. the worst thing about it is i don't care whether you earn $1,000 or $10 million, this type of you didn't earn it mentality destroys the self-esteem that goes along with working, with not being on the government dole. the aoc and leftists would love that, more government handouts, but when you work and earn and save money yourself, that comes with tremendous self-esteem. you didn't earn that means oh, no, it was just a communal effort. that's what destroys capitalism from the inside.

>> to go back to liz's point, what you are seeing with a lot of corporations is the short-termism and the fact their conversation is linked to the share prices and time and time again, it's a problem. what about if we talk wealthy, warren buffett said he's paying less in taxes than his secretary. isn't that a point of concern for you guys?e about the short-termism. speak to any great corporation, they are planning out five, ten, 20 years. >> what about buy-backs, then? >> it is not true whatsoever that's going on in the corporate america that i know. >> warren buffett's commentary was really just about, look, warren buffett is a ridiculous example because he doesn't even get that much of a his company. it's all in trusts and foundations and everything else and stocks. it doesn't mean very much. >> but that's wonderful. >> it's wonderful. >> he makes a lot of money. doesn't pay any taxes. your answer is to want him to pay more taxes? that's the solution? you want to legislate that decision? >> i'm not saying that.

i'm not saying that. i'm just raising, just shedding light on the fact you have somebody, people that are in a much lower income bracket and those that are in much higher and there are a lot of loopholes for those in the higher. david: to defend kristina's point, we all know buddy boards, where the ceo puts all of his buddies on a board and they decide lo and behold he deserves an extra $3 million for his salary, something has to be done there. [ speaking simultaneously ] david: not enough has happened. >> public boards now are subject to enormous scrutiny. there are no longer buddy boards at most big companies. david: i'm told we really have to go this time. china was very quick to ground boeing planes in response to a deadly crash in ethiopia. gordon chang says there's much more to it than safety. that's next. - hi folks, i'm matt mccoy.

for people as experienced as you and me,

careful driving just comes naturally. all that experience should be worth something, and it is with the aarp auto insurance program from the hartford. switching saved me hundreds. in fact, four out of five aarp members age 50 and over who switched to the hartford from companies like allstate, state farm, and geico got a lower rate with the hartford. - with the hartford not only did i get a better policy and better coverage, but i got a better rate as well. - of course drivers 50 and over like to save money, but it's great when it comes with coverage and benefits designed for us. that's real value. call the hartford for your free quote. not an aarp member? the hartford helps you join in minutes. here's an insurance company that respects its customers enough to do the right thing. like with new car replacement. if your new car is totaled in an accident, the hartford will pay the full replacement cost for your car. that's pretty cool, huh? - sometimes life happens, and when it does it's important to know that the company

you're doing business with has your back. the hartford has my back. - they even prove their loyalty by offering lifetime renewability. that's the hartford's promise not to drop you even if you've had an accident. - it's a great feeling, and a very comfortable feeling, to know that i'm not gonna get dropped for that reason. i feel like i have a partner in the hartford, and that i can trust them when and if i need them. - [announcer] you could save hundreds of dollars when you switch, and get other incredible benefits like new car replacement, and lifetime renewability. - i would recommend the hartford to friends, relatives, anybody. - and certainly when we needed them, they were right there for us. it was pretty impressive. - [announcer] call the hartford at. to request your free quote. that's. or go to.

david: boeing facing intense scrutiny after all 157 people on board, including 8 americans, died yesterday when a 737 max 8 plane crashed in africa. so far, it's unclear what caused the plane to go down just six minutes into the flight. it's the same boeing model that went into a nosedive in indonesia back in october. that killed 189 people. china was quick to ground all of their 737 max 8 planes amid crucial trade talks with the u. u.s., china's civil aviation vice-chief saying quote, it is a hard decision to ground all 737 max in china and it is unrelated to china/u.s. trade dispute. but is that true? let's bring in gordon chang, author of "the coming collapse of china." so is this retribution for huawei, gordon? >> the chinese government is notoriously opaque so we don't know. but the fact that they are very defensive about it, that's a sign and also, they were very quick to pull the trigger on

boeing and we got to remember that the chinese government is backing comac in a couple years that will deliver competitor tocompetitors to the max series. there very well may be a commercial consideration involved here. basically china wants the world to buy chinese planes rather than boeing. >> gary kaltbaum here. have you noticed in the last couple days, at least over the weekend, everything i was reading coming out of china is they're not so ready to strike a deal right now because they think our side is being too onerous with their side? >> yeah. what's going on there is that xi jinping, the chinese ruler, is in political trouble. he owns the trade war. he owns the slowing economy. if he comes to do a deal which people in china perceive to be one-sided in favor of america, i don't think it's that way really, but if it's perceived that way, then i think xi

jinping could be subject to a number of criticisms, some very major political players. yes, you are absolutely right, there are a lot of troubling signs for the chinese leader. >> gordon, it's kristina. i wanted to pivot the conversation and keep talking about huawei. on friday, the united states administration sent a letter to germany saying that if you don't drop huawei, we are going to cut back on sharing intelligence with them. what do you think of that pretty much vail veiled threat? >> it's absolutely essential. if huawei gets into the 5g backbone of a security partner, it really makes it very difficult for us to protect our networks. we share some very sensitive information with the germans and the chinese will get it, in all probability. you've got to remember that between 2012 and 2017, the chinese were secretly downloading data from the headquarters of the african union because the au had huawei equipment with back doors in it. so this is not some theoretical

concern that we are worried about something that might happen. this already has happened. >> gordon, liz peek here. nice to see you, always. question for you. why isn't the government being more explicit about our concerns having to do with huawei? you just mentioned one example, hard, concrete example of huawei's misbehavior. it seems to me most americans have no idea that that took place or that other problems have arisen and i think the government needs to tell us that. >> well, certainly. we have to be much more forthright about a couple other things. for instance, we know huawei has been stealing u.s. technology from the time it was formed in 1987. there are ongoing fbi investigations against huawei stealing from that small chicago company. there's one thing after another about huawei. this is a criminal enterprise. it's been involved in a repeated number of acts in which people

are very concerned, so i think it's about time that we lower the boom and we try to put this company out of business, because you know, we tried cooperating with china on huawei. it just hasn't worked. the same is true also on zte, which is a repeated violator of sanctions. >> right. >> it's jonathan hoenig. thank you for being with us. you say lower the boom on huawei. doesn't that ultimately prolong the trade war that is having an impact on u.s. consumers and u.s. businesses as well, farmers, for example, so i know for example, china is saying they are not grounding the 737s because of the trade war, because of the trade skirmish but doesn't this all fit into prolonging the trade war that's hurting the chinese but also americans as well? >> well, it certainly is prolonging this trade friction but unfortunately, there are so many things that china is doing. it's stealing somewhere on the order of say $300 billion to $400 billion a year of intellectual property. that's a grievous wound to our economy. we have to do something about it. i don't like to prolong this

friction but nonetheless, that's the only way that we are going to defend ourselves because china has proven recalcitrant, it has proven it has continued to steal u.s. i.p., continued to engage in trade violations, continued to do all sorts of things that undermine global order on the economy. so they're not leaving us with very much choice. david: by the way, we have to run but weren't they caught in the act in hong kong recently? >> yes. this was really interesting, david. huawei's smartphones were not downloading content from twitter and mozilla. if you are just a smartphone manufacturer like huawei says, you wouldn't do this. you would do this if you were an instrumentality of the communist party, which it is. david: gordon, thank you very much. good to see you. appreciate it. fed chair jay powell was on "60 minutes" last night with good news about the economy. so why did it seems like cbs scott pelley wasn't buying into it? here's a taste. >> where do you see weakness in the u.s. economy?

the overarching question is are we headed to a recession? are the days of 4% growth over? this isn't just any moving day.

this is moving day with the best in-home wifi experience and millions of wifi hotspots to help you stay connected. and this is moving day with reliable service appointments

in a two-hour window so you're up and running in no time. show me decorating shows. this is staying connected with xfinity to make moving... simple. easy. awesome. stay connected while you move with the best wifi experience and two-hour appointment windows. click, call or visit a store today. in honor of my dad, who was alzheimer's. i decided to make shirts for the walk with custom ink, and they just came out perfect. - [announcer] check out our huge selection of custom apparel for every occasion. you'll even get free shipping.

get started today at customink.com. david: head of the federal reserve, jay powell, does not see a recession hitting the u.s. economy any time soon but cbs'

scott pelley seemed a little disappointed with powell's upbeat outlook. take a look. >> in the u.s. economy? >> generally speaking, the u.s. economy is coming off a very strong year. record seven million americans have fallen behind on their car payments. never happened before. what do you make of that? >> car sales have been quite high for a number of years. >> retail sales declined in december, the fastest pace since 2009. are these things taken together suggesting that the system is blinking red? >> there is also evidence, by the way, that spending has popped back up in january. >> but the overarching question is are we headed to a recession. >> this year, i expect that growth will continue to be positive, continue to be at a healthy rate. >> so 4% is something we shouldn't expect in the future? >> there will be years of 4% growth. >> a collapse of the financial system like we saw in 2008

cannot happen again? >> our system is vastly more resilient. >> how long can it last? >> i would say there's no reason why this economy cannot continue to expand. david: is the mainstream media rooting for recession just to get trump out? what do you think? >> of course they are. in fact, i would say beginning two or three months before the midterm elections, the liberal media began to color everything very dark. they had a great boom in job additions, then all of a sudden interest rates were going to go through the roof. it was a steady drumbeat of negativity. i'm not at all surprised scott pelley was taken aback to have someone defend the economy, because after all, president trump is going to run on the strength of the economy. liberals, democrats, are desperate to have it fall apart so that he cannot do that. because that is his big calling card. let's face it, that's the one thing where he polls very, very well. >> i'm not sure i would say it's necessarily a liberal versus republican situation, just because on the new york stock exchange floor, in the month of

december, several days of really seeing how traders react and you have one network, one business network run like a conversation about recession, then you have another network that will do the same thing because they are looking at what the competition does. that's often the situation of how these stories become bigger, because the competition is doing it. so the recession issue is a self-fulfilling prophesy at the moment. the concern is not about getting trump, in my opinion, out. it's about the fact, maybe gary can speak to this, the debt level is still concerning, it's still, that's i think one of the major red flags when we are talking about. it comes up briefly in the conversation about student debt and car loans but look at this budget, for example. i know it won't go anywhere, but. >> first ofshf, there's only on business network. >> very good. you've got to be aware of what the competition is. that's all. >> there is no competition. scott pelley sounded like me watching the new york knicks this weekend. i never seen a guy more depressed. for me, the media, i watched in

december and january as the market was getting trashed. they were kind of excited. the market was down 600. they had it in the chyron as it was dropping. there was a little giddyup going there. i do think that's going on. i think it kind of sort of does go both ways. but yeah, i think there's a little rooting because big election going on. i don't think they like this guy in the white house. >> look, there is a real chance of a recession. scott pelley was not making up any of the data that he cited, especially consumer debt has exploded. david: we talked about it. yeah. >> yeah. it's not inconsiderate to ask those questions. even if you poll economists, average everyday economists, the odds they cite of recession have risen from 7% to 25%. you could say it's due to tax cuts or slowdown or shutdown or whatever it is, but questioning the federal reserve chair, if you've got him for an interview,

of course i think scott pelley was right to ask him, are we headed for a recession. that's called journalism. >> i think that's true, jonathan, but the relentless sort of steady drumbeat of coloring everything very negatively about the economy, i don't think it's accidental. i think it's purposeful and i think it's basically to sow doubt in everyone's mind including investors' mind, about the persistence of this upturn. let's face it. even over the weekend, larry summers came out to say we cannot grow at this rate. the author of the secular stagnation story which is obama's great ace in the hole. that's why we didn't grow for eight years, because we had secular stagnation. i don't believe it. david: but can the media, assuming the media doesn't want to get rid of trump by talking down the economy, can they do it? if the economy is strong and resilient, does it matter what the media says? >> i don't buy into that. maybe there's a little small component but look, i think the economy, $20 trillion in big,

big, big and people are going to go on their merry way regardless of what's said and regardless of what's driven home every day. david: last word from florida and our friend gary. does it make sense to keep adjusting our clocks? seems like every other month we are doing that. why some lawmakers are now pushing to end daylight savings time or at least to extend it or something. we will talk about that, coming up. you can get protected monthly income for the rest of your life. that's what i'm talking about. how about those song lyrics? what song lyrics? tell him again. tell him again. repeat it. yeah, same thing. (advisor) so with a nationwide annuity, you can get protected... to be nobody but yourself in a world which is doing it's best to make you everybody else... ♪ ♪ means to fight the hardest battle, which any human being can fight and never stop. does this sound dismal? it isn't.

♪ ♪ it's the most wonderful life on earth. ♪ ♪ it's the most wonderful life on earth. ...that's why i've got the power of 1-2-3 medicines with trelegy. the only fda-approved 3-in-1 copd treatment. ♪ trelegy. the power of 1-2-3 ♪ trelegy 1-2-3 trelegy with trelegy and the power of 1-2-3, i'm breathing better. trelegy works 3 ways to... ...open airways,... ...keep them open... ...and reduce inflammation... ...for 24 hours of better breathing. trelegy won't replace a rescue inhaler .. trelegy may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling,.. ...problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur.

think your copd medicine is doing enough? maybe you should think again. ask your doctor about once-daily trelegy and the power of 1-2-3. ♪ trelegy 1-2-3 save at trelegy.com.

(bird chirping) lots to do, hope you fuelled up. sure did. that storm sure ripped through. yep, we gotta fix that fence and herd the cattle back in. let's get at it. (whistle) (dog barking) (♪)

but some give their clients cookie cutter portfolios. fisher investments tailors portfolios to your goals and needs. some only call when they have something to sell. fisher calls regularly so you stay informed. and while some advisors are happy to earn commissions whether you do well or not. fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management. david: are you tired of changing your clocks and adjusting your sleep. some florida lawmakers are calling to make daylight saving time permanent. marco wriewbio weighing in saying making daylight saving time permanent is okay with me. does it make sense to keep it going?

>> it's okay with me, too. it saves money. you don't have to turn on lights. there is nothing better than being on the golf course at 7:30 at night. i don't know why we changed in the first place. >> it was initiated during world war i. then they scrapped it and brought it back during world war ii. but now they find because of the increased use of air-conditioning, maybe it doesn't have that impact. but who cares, really. >> the week we make this change, there is an almost 25% increase in the number of heart attacks associated with springing forward. there are a lot of arguments to be made why we should keep it. health could be one of them.

>> more car accidents, apparently, also. when you change the time in the fall more people are hit by automobiles who haven't adjusted to it. >> jpmorgan said we lose in opportunity cost because it takes someone 10 minutes to change all the clocks in their house. putting a monetary number on it. david: i'll ask the guy who is closest to the farms. that's you, jonathon. a lot of this has to do with farmers. if you have permanent daylight savings time farmers half the year they will wake up and it will be pitch black. is that a problem? >> maybe we should rethink that. at one time this country was 70,

80, 90% agricultural. but maybe we should change that. david: thanks for watching. we'll see you next time. >> we have a humanitarian and national security crisis at our border. he gave congress a number of opportunities to thrill adress it and they failed to do so. so the president is taking his constitutional authority congress granted him. the only reason he has the authority to call a national emergency is because congress gave him the right to do so. they failed to do their job. the president is doing this duty to protect the people of this country and secure our borders. liz: that was white house press secretary sarah sanders make the case for