in america your sales are going up 3.4%. ashley: good for economy. stuart: mcdonald's, $200 a share. neil, it is yours. neil: we have a lot going on. this is the first day we've wall street rally even though in the face of not so good news on the u.s.-china front. increasing tensions, walmart cfo, those tariffs hit, you are going to get hit. walmart will get hit, a lot of people will get hit. we'll get a read from the former wells fargo ceo on all of this, former american express ceo on all of this, a host of top money guys on the planet investing on all of this. meantime to edward lawrence is is in the middle of a you will of this at the white house and what comes next. edward? reporter: escalating trade

differences between the u.s. and china we're hearing a hardening tone for the chinese. spokesman for the chinese commerce ministry, the areas china needs to have in order to have a deal for the united states. there are three basic concerns. first, cancel all the tariffs. second, they want trade numbers being used to be uniform, not arbitrary. third the language in the agreement must be balanced and acceptable. china will never give in on major issues of principle. there are a lot of major differences. the chinese don't want to put back concessions they made in the last round of talks, protecting intellectual property. spokesperson says at the moment there are no plans to negotiate with the nights for these talks. this language is complete reversal from their tone two weeks ago. in addition china to starting to sell their bonds n the month of march, look at this, china sold 20.45 billion worth of u.s. treasurys. former chairman alan greenspan

not concerned about this because he says the u.s. is a good investment. >> the deficit is sufficiently large, and people looking for u.s. treasury instruments as a store of value is well beyond what our supply is. reporter: still, china holds the lowest level of treasurys, u.s. treasurys they have since may of 2017. you see the graph there. at the height china had $1.3 trillion worth of treasurys. now that is $195 billion less. on all fronts, china is coming after the united states. back to you. neil: thank you my friend. edward lawrence at white house. you might have caught the guy that runs the fcc ajit pai, he was on on "your world" yesterday about concerns notably huawei that do business with telecommunications companies. on this, what do you think triggered this order? >> i think the fact protecting

america's communications network system is critical to our national security, our economy and our personal privacy. especially talking about companies located in countries that present a national security threat to the united states. it is important for the u.s. government to take steps to protect those networks. i applaud the president for issuing this executive order. he understands as does the fcc we simply cannot take risks when it comes to our national security or communications networks. neil: just to clarify where he was coming from. not a matter of doing business with the telecom terms. they force and spy their way in there and the president is not going to have it. the fcc chairman supports that move. hillary vaughn on capitol hill with more. hey, hillary. reporter: neil, huawei is saying that president trump's executive order raises a lot of legal concerns and violates their rights an they're also warning that the u.s. will be left behind without them but they're also issuing fresh reaction in response to the u.s. department of commerce adding them to the entity list saying in a statement, quote, this decision is in no one's interests.

it will do significant economic harm to the american companies with which huawei does business, affect tens of thousands of american jobs and disrupt the current collaboration and mutual trust that exist on the global supply chain but the house intelligence committee today hearing from a panel of chinese experts that are echoing the same concerns that we're hearing from the white house and the department of commerce. >> the ability to divorce the ostensibly commercial aspects of china's engagement including in the tech sector, perhaps especially in the tech sector from the political designs and directives from beijing is impossible. reporter: but huawei executives yesterday evening brushing off being blown off from doing business. saying they don't think it will impact on their business globally. neil. neil: thank you, hillary.

the we've investment officer says if tariffs come to pass it will be a big hit, not a food hit but a bad hit t will -- it will result in higher prices not just 12 or 15 when this started early part of last year. get the read from sean snyder and peyton regal chief economist, jeffrey cleveland. what walmart is saying, not surprising other retailers, retail federation representing all our retailers this is something we cannot absorb. 10% tariffs one thing is one another. 25% is another. putting on limited number of goods is one thing, now putting them on 250,000 goods, is economic hit. do you agree. >> there is lot of uncertainty. in 2018 higher tariffs we did see, reduced real consumer

incomes about 1 to $2 billion a month. to put that in perspective for viewers, we have 21 trillion-dollar u.s. economy. the consumer is 14 trillion-dollar consuming behemoth. the tariffs thus far has been quite small. the increase will change that a little bit, i do not think the tariffs are enough to derail the u.s. economy. the u.s. economy is in good shape. the consumer is in good shape. many of fears out there, talks of recession and fed rate cuts to offset this are really overdone, neil. neil: the market bears you out today. sean, one of the things raised is that the backdrop here is pretty good for walmart included with much better than expected numbers that came out on earnings, the best in close to a decade. one of the other issues that's come up is this idea that that will end up saving the day. this is one of the first days i can remember where the markets were not dissuaded by of no

promise of talks anytime soon between the chinese and united states yet they're still running up what's going on? >> this is playing out a little bit like brexit. we constantly have focus on individual key dates, that the dates will lead to massive rally or massive correction and as we're seeing these things play out over a long period of time. you will focus on the next key dates will be maybe june 1st when chinese retaliatory tariffs take effect. you look at june 28th and 29th when president trump meets with sri xi at g20 summit in japan. beyond that november, 14th, when potential auto tariffs would pass with the six-month delay. this will take a long time to play out. the market is stablizing on this notion that this will take a long time to play out. neil: the fact that the market is absorbing a this today, recouped the ground lost on

monday, one thing stands out, jeffrey, this came despite china does not even know about a u.s. plan for beijing trade talks. that is not being on the same page that is not even reading the same book. what is going on? >> i think, perhaps what matters more today, neil, is that the other economic data that has come out has been excellent. neil: absolutely. >> real time, lay i don't haves are to follow for investors. initial claims data this morning falling back to 212,000. that is a good sign that the consumer is in good shape. that the labor market is solid. i would point you to the housing starts data. housing is a reliable indicator. nine of last recessions were preceded by a slowdown in housing. if housing edges up, even slowly, that tell us we're on a good footing and -- neil: for those who are not encyclopias like you gentlemen.

that surprised a lot of folks a some other numbers from the philadelphia fed, manufacturing index indicator that was also at four-month highs. i'm looking at all the cross current. i'm wondering what you would advice investors to do? you quite correctly pointed out if you're investing based on the crosscurrent and trade talks, lack thereof, you're probably making a mistake but the macro, stepping back on the market right now, a 10-year long plus bull market, what could get in the way of that? because it is proving a lot of doubters wrong? >> in the long run we still think the bull market has a ways to run. we still think the business cycle has aways to run. we're generally in the agreement that the u.s. economy is strong. we may see a bit of a non-recessionary slowdown by the end of the year. we're entering summer month traditionally weaker seasonally. if you think war, solves offense and defense, right? if you have two of the world's

largest economies going on offense when it comes to tariffs we think it makes some sense to become a little more defensive if you're an investor. maybe you want to pull back a little bit on equities, things like cyclical companies. we saw 44% rally in the semiconductor space over about four months. so makes sense to consolidate a little bit there. again not massive shifts. maybe you want to add to sectors less exposed to u.s. trade wars or trade tensions, things like the health care sector. food and staple retailers have exposure to asia. we're looking at those types of adjustments to our portfolios. the back half of the year you tend to see a stronger period of stocks. this may be a near-term kind of weakness and we end up being better off later on once we get through some of these tensions. neil: jeffrey, if we don't get a deal at all, falls apart with china, whatever, i know argument cooler heads prevail, yadi yada, then what? >> if we don't get a deal, it's a negative for our growth

overall. i think the u.s. economy is dowing at about 2 1/2% clip right now, neil. so we would shave maybe 2% off, slowing down to about 2%. shave half a percentage point off for the full year. now it is really important, viewers should understand, that is not recession. that is still continued growth. in fact that is still arguably above trend growth. so even if don't get a deal, we till have growth. the cycle is not over, neil. neil: thank you both. calm in the middle of a storm. you were that way when we were in the storm. so i appreciate it. look a little what is going on with the dow. dow 28 of 30 components. chevron and 3m are up appreciably. ones leading appreciably, cisco and walmart out with numbers that handily beat the street. in walmart's case the best first quarter it has seen in nine years. that is propelling a lot of components that have apple exposure to what happens on the

trade front. this one of the few days, maybe only day i can remember where the market has gone up despite cynical developments on the trade front. chinese saying that they have a 3 1/2 trillion dollar arsenal to fight back the united states. chinese minuter is talking about the possibility, we don't know anything about a meeting with treasury secretary steve mnuchin or what have you. on any other day that would have led to a cascade of selling. today it has not. maybe we're back to fundamentals or people thinking of memorial day weaken, i have no idea. stay with us. you wouldn't accept an incomplete job

from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase relieves your worst symptoms including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one. flonase.

at comcast, we didn't build the nation's largest gig-speed network just to make businesses run faster. we built it to help them go beyond. because beyond risk... welcome to the neighborhood, guys. there is reward. ♪ ♪ beyond work and life... who else could he be? there is the moment. beyond technology... there is human ingenuity. ♪ ♪ every day, comcast business is helping businesses go beyond the expected, to do the extraordinary. take your business beyond.

neil: when you hear the 20 some odd democrats running for president a couple mentioned emergency. they're leery about it. >> 200,000 people in two months on our southern border is a crisis. now what are we going to do about it? neil: if they don't say that, does it matter to you? should they just say it? >> i want to make this point. everyone paid attention a month ago when i said it was crisis. i would like people to pay attention to what the solutions are. neil: jeh johnson was barack obama's homeland security secretary and was razing democrats for not responding more to the emergency that remains at the border. wasn't exactly a fan of what the president was about to propose. the president unveiling a new

merit-based immigration plan but something jeh johnson saying does not go far enough. still the president right now is polling better on the economy than he does on immigration. the irony isn't lost on republicans at least this president is making it a front and center issue. whatever your views, congressional reporter on what happens to the president's plan from here? what do you think, medically? >> it is pretty much dead on arrival in congress. democrats want protection for so-called dreamers. they will not like this plan, and even some conservatives will have an issue with it, it doesn't crack down on legal immigration. the level overall would stay the same. look, immigration has been a really tough issue, even when republicans controlled both chambers of congress they were not able to get anything done last summer. i don't think the point is to come up with a plan to pass congress. the strategy is not only keep immigration in the spotlight, of course it's a signature issue for trump, he is gearing up for

the re-election campaign. this is a way for the trump and gop to counter the criticism they're anti-immigrant. they can say we support legal immigration but we think there has to be requirements. here is what we think it should look like. you're seeing the trump team trying to counter the narrative, change the narrative on immigration. have a focus on the border, cracking down on illegal immigration. now we see what the president will do when it comes toil legal immigration. neil: i'm glad you brought up that distinction, melanie. so few do. this morphed into anyone who has tough view what to do about the border, anti-immigrant, anti-illegal immigrant. i can't stress this enough, in the latest year numbers, 1.25 million folks around the world became legal u.s. citizens. that is a record. it is over year in, year out for the last 11 years. that has not changed. if anything picked up the pace

iconically under this president. i'm not here to give him a bow but point out the fact there is a difference. >> right. neil: what i'm wondering now, each president says i i have a plan to deal with this, needs congress's help. you seem to look at this plan, indicating he will not get congress' help. >> it is not even legislative text. it is a proposal. an outline. "washington post" reported that jared kushner struggled to answer questions in a closed-door meeting. this is a plan that says to democrats what will you do about the crisis at border? president asked for $4.5 billion to address the influx of migrants at border. it is going nowhere on capitol hill. democrats say there is a crisis, we need to do something but they're reluctant with specific request, includes money for detention beds. another child died after being

apprehended at the border. they have some concerns. they are reluctant to sort of validate trump's rhetoric they railed on hill for years an years. i'm also told democratic sources pelosi will be meeting with the acting secretary of dhs maybe we could see some movement next week. neil: we shall see. melanie, thank you for the distinction an info. always good is having you. >> thanks for having me. neil: making 24 or 240? new york city mayor bill de blasio officially running for the presidency of the united states, running hard left at that. take a look. >> there's plenty of money in this world. there is plenty of money in this country. it is just in the wrong hands. as president i will take on the wealthy. i will take on the big corporations. i will not rest until this government serves working people >> where have you heard that before? neil: pretty impressive. what do you think? charlie gasparino is here. one of those people the new york city mayor want to take money.

>> he doesn't like me for a lot of reasons. we have covered new york city politics. what we're looking at here, bill de blasio will compare his run, saying if donald trump could do it, donald trump was a unicorn, why can't bill de blasio do it in crowded field. here is the difference. bill de blasio is essentially mimicking half the democratic contenders right now, bernie sanders, elizabeth warren, they're all the same about the garbage about income inequality. donald trump actually had positions that were differentiated from the pack. he went further right than ted cruz on national issues, nationalist issues. he went further right on immigration. he wept further right, with rhetoric that was very high per bowlyized, muslims dancing in the streets after 9/11, stuff that separated him he was able to appeal hardcore, 20, 30% of

the republican vote. bill de blasio cannot do that. i spoke to people that are close to him, why he is doing this? it comes down to two things. it's a help wanted sign. he can do this while he is mayor, try to position himself for next job, books lectures, all the stuff goes with it, as much as he sounds like a communist, as much as he honeymooned i think it was in cuba -- he wants to make money. neil: "new york daily news," don't scoff at bill's candidacy. he points the out again and again he defied expectations. he never lost elections, city council, public advocate, mayor, crowded field, something people thought each and every time people thought he couldn't do. >> he won the democratic primary, christine quinn, bill thompson, moderate candidates. neil: i'm saying don't, i saw

the "new york post" cover with everyone laughing. be careful. >> i don't see it. he is not that much different than any of the others. neil: you would think unless he distinguishes himself from the field he just gets lost? >> i think he has to run to the left of bernie sanders. i don't know what else he will say. neil: can't be moderate. >> he should be karl marx. he should espouse markism. people say number one it is help wanted sign he wants to make money. other thing he despises being mayor, it is boring. he gets to travel the country. food in iowa, in new hampshire. on our dime. neil: i will ask about that. cornel west is coming up a little later. >> really? neil: get his views. charlie, thank you very much. >> i bet you cornel west agrees with me. neil: i likes bernie sanders. >> i bet he agrees with me on comrade bill de blasio. neil: i will ask him. >> yes. neil: that is a good question.

i'm telling you he will agree. i will not ask that question. >> everybody in that liberal progressive -- neil: you're not fair and balanced. you're a it haar. no. no. >> come on. neil: a lot more coming up. immaturity continues. former wells fargo ceo coming up on china, on interest rates, getting a little too tough or maybe not tough enough. what does it mean for our country and for the world. there is a lot at stake. after this. good-bye. in the transportation industry without knowing firsthand the unique challenges in that sector. coming out here, seeing the infrastructure firsthand, talking with the people behind the numbers creates a different picture. once i know what a business is truly worth, we can make better informed investment decisions. that's why i go beyond the numbers. ♪

is it to carry cargo... or to carry on a legacy? its show of strength... or its sign of intelligence? in crossing harsh terrain... or breaking new ground?

this is the mercedes-benz suv family. greatness comes in many forms. visit your local mercedes-benz dealer for exceptional lease and financing offers. mercedes-benz. the best or nothing. when it comes to type 2 diabetes, are you thinking about your heart? well, i'm managing my a1c, so i should be all set. right. actually, you're still at risk for a fatal heart attack or stroke. even if i'm taking heart medicine, like statins or blood thinners? yep! that's why i asked my doctor what else i could do... she told me about jardiance. that's right. jardiance significantly reduces the risk of dying from a cardiovascular event for adults who have type 2 diabetes and known heart disease. that's why the american diabetes association recommends the active ingredient in jardiance. and it lowers a1c? yeah- with diet and exercise. jardiance can cause serious side effects including dehydration, genital yeast or urinary tract infections,

and sudden kidney problems. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may be fatal. a rare, but life-threatening, bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this bacterial infection, ketoacidosis, or an allergic reaction. do not take jardiance if you are on dialysis or have severe kidney problems. taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. so, what do you think? now i feel i can do more to go beyond lowering a1c. ask your doctor about jardiance today. we're on the move. hey rick, all good? oh yeah, we're good. we're good. terminix. defenders of home.

>> so if you have two industrial giants both taking on severe levels of that type of analysis, in other words, having a great deal of loss of purchasing power it is not good for either one. so that the, there is a winner in the fight but both sides

lose. so the winner is the one who loses the least. neil: i like that. the winner in this trade war is the one that loses the least. that was alan greenspan with maria bartiromo this morning. it is an interesting issue to pick up with a former wells fargo ceo. he says right now the back and forth on all of this is not helping matter any. richard, very good to have you. what is remarkable this is the first thing i can think, richard, the markets are fully aware of the impasse we have got with china and china going out of its way to say we know nothing about upcoming meeting, calling out steve mnuchin to say we don't know where he is getting that upcoming meeting thing. then letting know they have 2 1/2, $3 trillion to play with to support their economy when it comes to big tariffs that last a long time. what do you make of the market poo-pooing all of that today apgoing back to fundamentals? >> it is surprising, i would

admit to that but also we've been up and down on trade now for how long? i mean one day, another day is another day. neil: you're right. >> i think actually the economy, based upon what is happening at walmart that is basically economy, 2/3 of the economy is strong. i think people said look, the economy is going to do fine. this is all rhetoric. everyone is posturing. you get back to it is in both countries interest they get this done. neil: what if they don't? what if they don't? you had expressed concerns you know, that the federal reserve already was risking a recession with its policy. you add this on to that, and the fact that since you made those comment, the market seemed to be factoring in rate cuts toward the end of the year, not one or but maybe two or more. so what's changed? >> well, i think if they don't get this done, i think it is going to have a negative effect on the world's economy, to some extent. the estimates are maybe .2, .3

in the u.s. because we are not a big exporter or importer relatively and, and also that it is going to impact the stock market. i think at this level of the stock market, if a trade deal doesn't get done, it goes down. neil: how do you think the president handled it? >> i don't think he has delled it well at all. the problem, you know, the president is used to dealing with real estate developers. this is the way you deal with real estate developers. the opposite party, particularly in asia, has to save face. trump thinks he has to win. and that's very dangerous. you want to win without making it look like you're the winner. he is the opposite. he doesn't care, i think -- neil: if you're right, he doesn't change that stance we're not going to have a deal, are we? >> well you know, you know, he will change the stance. i mean, you know, it is in his

interests. he says, he put the stock market as his indicator how good he is. neil: that has been the wind at his back to your point. let me ask you a little bit about, we were talking about earlier in the show, bill de blasio, the new york city mayor entering the presidential race, almost to a man or woman they are hard left. joe biden would be more moderate if you buy consensus press on all of this, they all to a man or woman are going after rich folks, going after financial institutions. a couple of them have fingered wells fargo, long after your stewardship there i might point out, but my point is, it will be a crowd that is largely unfriendly to for wont of a better word capitalists who think say abused the privilege. what dowhat do you say? >> we have to make the case. the case is capitalism created the most wealth for the most people for the longest period of time for highest standard of

living from any other political system. you just have to point out. do you want to be extreme socialist and you know, you have communist china and russia and develops sense and cuba? you want to have moderate socialism? you look at europe. europe economic growth is half what it has been in the united states. their standard of live something lower. they have unemployment, for i don't know how many decades of close to double digits all the time s that what you want? but you have to make the case. and i think it is up to the other party or whoever is running against to make the case that this is better than any other alternative that has existed, any other political systems that existed. neil: this might be more parochial right now, interim ceo, alan parker, a lot of people say he becomes the permanent one. do you have any thoughts either way? >> i have no idea what is going on. i've been retired since 2009.

actually i think, it sounds like that the eeco would be involved. you should probably ask them. neil: thank you for coming buy. the former wells fargo ceo from 2001 to 2005. vice president joe biden expanded lead over rivals as number of rivals increases. cornel west not a fan though after this. key portfolio events. all in one place. because when it's decision time... you need decision tech. only from fidelity. that have made the rx the leading luxury suv of all time. lease the 2019 rx 350 for $399 a month for 36 months. experience amazing at your lexus dealer.

going back to the doctor just for a shot. with neulasta onpro... ...patients get their day back... ...to be with... ... family... ...or just to sleep in. strong chemo can put you at risk of serious infection. in a key study... ...neulasta reduced the risk of infection from 17%... ...to 1%... ...a 94% decrease. neulasta onpro is designed to deliver... ...neulasta the day after chemo... ...and is used by most patients today. neulasta is for certain cancer patients receiving strong chemotherapy. do not take neulasta if you're allergic to it or neupogen (filgrastim). an incomplete dose could increase infection risk. ruptured spleen, sometimes fatal as well as serious lung problems, allergic reactions, kidney injuries and capillary leak syndrome... ...have occurred. report abdominal or shoulder tip pain, trouble breathing... ... or allergic reactions to your doctor right away

in patients with sickle cell disorders, serious, sometimes... ...fatal crises can occur. the most common side effect... is bone and muscle ache. ask your doctor... ...about neulasta onpro. pay no more than $5 per dose with copay card.

♪ neil: all right. we might have a big ol' debt but that hasn't stopped some big ol' goals on parts of parties. a lot of candidates running for president of the united states right now are looking at bigger government spending. fbn's jackie deangelis is looking at impact of this spending more like socialism that seems to be developing around the world. jackie. >> good afternoon to you, neil. a new gal almost poll on may

9th said think would vote for a socialist candidate. that not the majority but those numbers are increasing. that is why we're having this conversation. i say let's look around the world. look where socialism has worked or not worked. we can start with venezuela. that might be the extreme example. no candidate get on the stage, follow me, be like venezuela a country in crisis. a lot of candidates, bernie sanders, alexandria ocasio-cortez, they say let's be like the nordic countries, think about norway and sweden. i would say there are big differences to consider there. the first thing government intervention in business there is not all-in. they're not taxing businesses as high as you would expect them to be either. a lot of people would say, those are not really socialist countries at all. second issue, the vat tax. you have the consumers themselves, the citizens paying into the system and tourism helps with that as well. the final point i would make, it is about population.

we have 325 million people in this country. norway? five million. sweden? 10 million. big difference in size and scale there. so when you look at this, you look at the system, you say, you know, it may need some tweaks here in america but it is not necessarily broken. and the question is really, do people who ask for socialism really understand what it means? neil, we'll have a town hall at 2:00 hosted by charles payne. we'll answer some of those questions. neil: look forward to that. jackie, thank you very much. someone who take as more favorable view of socialism at least not in the way a lot of capitalists define it, harvard university professor, multiple best-selling author, i will get it right, cornel west. he joins us now. professor, very good to have you. >> a blessing to be here my brother. neil: let me ask you a little bit, the crowded field of democratic candidates right now, i know you're a bernie sanders fan, that he is the genuine

article and the rap you always get on him, professor, he is unelectable. what do you say about that? >> i think that is not true. he brings together young people, working people, brings together of people of color. he committed to dignity of each and every american. he sets the progressive standard. i think we have lot of weak imitators, people are saying now what he was saying years before. why? because he is morally consistent. because he is politically committed to empowering working people. neil: you had said not too long ago, professor of joe biden, i hope i got this right, i don't think a neoliberal centrist can generate any of the deep fire we need among the best of our, best fire or the best sensibilities among our citizens. you're going to have to have somebody who has a long history, longevity of integrity. were you intimating joe biden does not? >> well i think joe biden has a certain personal decency, he had

cozy relations with strom thurmond and jesse helms. fought against constitutional amendments integration of busing back in the day. he has been know he has been very pro-war. he is very tied to big business. he contributed to elimination or possibility of bankruptcy for students. he is neoliberal in the classical mode. neoliberal system dying. the center is dying. we either have a right-wing populism or a left-wing populism. keep in mind we talk about democratic socialism, we're not talking about elimination of personal liberties. we're not talking about liming nation of private sector. we're not talking about the elimination of markets. the that market prices don't dictate justice. keep in mind, brother, look at military, 56 cents of every dollar go to the military. are we as a nation willing to allow the military to proceed

based on the ideals of capitalism? no. that is very socialistic in terms of the role of the public. public value, but public life. neil: society, been there, tried that failed at that. they just don't work. a lot of people point to venezuela as a government and a country that had enormous resources an wealth and squandered it all making cradle to grave promises for all they couldn't afford. >> there is a number of socialist experiments that have failed and there is number of capitalist experiments that have failed. there is number of capitalist experiments in the united states has failed. health care is a sick market. we've got some healthy markets. we keep them. that is a sick market. you need public intervention. the history of slavery. the history of jim crow. the history of patriarchy. the history of not allowing the personal dignity of gays,

lesbians and trans. those are failure as a capitalist society but we can intervene. we intervene democratically. we intervene constitutionally but we intervene with strong organization an mobilization. neil: what happens under democratic -- >> we can afford it. neil: democratic and republican presidents our debt piled up to the point it is $22 trillion. bernie sanders is a fan of raising taxes particularly on the upper income to address that. you are for that, right? >> no. we got to keep in mind, my brother, reagan to trump we've been increasing military budgets continuously. neil: we have been increasing a lot of budgets as percentage of gdp. >> across the board irs all i dt pollgies for that. we want a afford the government we have now. can we afford more government later? >> the argument is poverty, jobs

with living wayne, women's rights, those are issues of national security the same way the military is issue of national security. this is what martin luther king, jr. understood. militarism, racism, poverty, materialism. we have spiritual crisis you agree with me on that. neil: with noble goals, right? i'm just wondering the actual percent of those impoverished remained roughly the same through that period through democratic and republican presidents. what i'm asking -- >> we did a good job, no, we did a good job with poverty for our precious elderly. the problem instead of going for full employment with dignity of labor, went welfare programs. welfare programs are qualitatively different than full employment. that was major battle we lost in '70s, to respond -- neil: what did we screw up? i didn't understand you there. that we went to welfare or our goal was full employment? >> no. we should have gone full employment to insure that people

have assets for a living wage. neil: that is what donald trump is doing now. isn't he trying that now? >> no. but there is not a living wage. statistics i give, i give brother trump credit for that but still grotesque wealth inhe quality. neil: better than it was, right? better than it was. we have a long way to go. >> absolutely. absolutely. i give credit for that. i give credit for that. neil: african-americans lowest rate looking at in 50 plus years. would you give the president any credit for that. >> i give them credit for that, absolutely but issue has never been just the statistics. the issue are there jobs with a living wage? are people working two jobs living in poverty? are we able to deal with grotesque wealth inequality. three individuals having wealth equivalent to 50% of the population. you could have wealth inequality and still have good numbers. we're talking about the quality of life for our fellow citizens not just the statistics. neil: i hate to be blunt, that

you make a lot of very good points, is that enough to win election? the rap against bernie sanders he was ahead all of this stuff whether you agree with his points of view, he was saying this decades ago, having said that can't win can't win, and you say? >> i don't know why he could have beat trump back then if the democratic party treated him fairly and allowed the clinton machine to get out of the way. we can beat him this time. we'll generate enthusiasm. you watch us, though, brother. neil: if joe biden with the nominee it is not going to happen you say? >> i just don't see it. i just don't see it. neil: you scored a lot of headlines, push a lot of candidates for reparations for african-americans, descendants of slaves you were against that, are against that, why? >> no, i've been a supporter for reparations for last 40 years, i remain a supporter for reparations. i don't have full agreement with

my brother bernie -- but i support reparations. neil: you just said handing a check to someone isn't going to change things. what did you mean by that? >> oh, what i meant was rep pa races -- reparations is finding out about the truth of past. we'll never be able to repair done to the bodies at bottom of atlantic and lynching and slavery. neil: if they want to give you a check -- i'm confused are you for reparations or not? their idea of reparations is cut a check to people? >> no, no i think reparations is matter of first investigation, second collective voices including collective voices of black people. we're not just talking about checks. we're talking about something more massive than that, education, jobs, ways of accounting for an ugly past. like tort law. i don't think you start with the result. you start with the process. the truth and then the repair of the damage. so in essence i've been always pro-reparations but let me say this, there is a whole host of

folk like my dear brother bernie sanders who is profoundly anti-racist and doesn't think reparations can credit. my brother reed, wrote piece on joe biden he is one of the great intellectuals. we have disagreement. we're on same love train, brother. we're on the same justice train. neil: i'm just flattered to be called brother. it is nice to know. very good to have you, professor, thank you very much. >> have a wonderful day. neil: to the professor's credited, i see this again and again. people can disagree with him, he is never disagreeable. that is never a way to be. focused on the dow,down 262 point runup. we'll get behind that, all of this is coming demight what seems to be escalating military tensions in the persian gulf. i mean escalating fast. after this.

neil: all right. i don't know the venue for this but the president was just asked if the u.s. is going to war with iran? he simply responded, hope not. retired brigadier general anthony tata on the threats building, seems a armada made

its way to the region or are on the way. general, how dicey does this get, do you think? >> neil, good to see you. what is happening here, this is flexible deterrent operation that president trump put in motion, national command authority met, reviewed intelligence. the intelligence says there is an imminent threat against u.s. forces and personnel. neil: what was the threat based on, general? there is divergent opinion there was genuine threat. brits say no. i don't know how this goes or everyone has to write off on the threat, could you tell us? >> the threat comes from sources and we have human intelligence, imagery intelligence. we put all that together. you never rely on one piece of intelligence. and, neil, foreign secretary hunt from the uk has come out and said that their assessment aligns with the u.s. assessment. the british general on the ground there was just being politically astute, waiting for top cover from his civilian leadership before he went public

with their assessment. neil: i said, some of these reports of images of boats with missiles on them was meant to be an offensive tack taken by the iranians and whether we're overresponding but be that as it may, do you think that this could turn into something worse? >> i think that president has taken the exact right steps to put america first and protect american lives and property and that is his responsibility. based on that intelligence and i do not believe that this president wants to have a war with iran. he is not an interventionist. he is right to be watching mr. bolton's neocon ties. it would be a bad thing for the likes of wolfowitz and pearl and -- neil: a lot of infighting in there and bolton -- >> to get anywhere near this thing. so president trump is the dominant gene in the room though. he will make the right decisions here with regard to this.

we're responding to iranian threats in the region. neil: general, thank you very, very much. sorry for the tightened time. >> sure. neil: we're looking at the markets. we're trying to get updates what is going on iran and who is really updating us with information that is accurate. after this. nah. not gonna happen.

that's it. i'm calling kohler about their walk-in bath. my name is ken. how may i help you? hi, i'm calling about kohler's walk-in bath. excellent! happy to help. huh? hold one moment please... [ finger snaps ] hmm. the kohler walk-in bath features an extra-wide opening and a low step-in at three inches, which is 25 to 60% lower than some leading competitors. the bath fills and drains quickly, while the heated seat soothes your back, neck and shoulders. kohler is an expert in bathing, so you can count on a deep soaking experience. are you seeing this? the kohler walk-in bath comes with fully adjustable hydrotherapy jets and our exclusive bubblemassage. everything is installed in as little as a day by a kohler-certified installer. and it's made by kohler- america's leading plumbing brand. we need this bath. yes. yes you do. a kohler walk-in bath provides independence with peace of mind. call... for a free kohler touchless soap dispenser with in-home quote or visit kohlerwalkinbath.com for more info.

today's senior living communities have never been better, with amazing amenities like movie theaters, exercise rooms and swimming pools, public cafes, bars and bistros even pet care services. and there's never been an easier way to get great advice. a place for mom is a free service that pairs you with a local advisor to help you sort through your options and find a perfect place. a place for mom. you know your family we know senior living. together we'll make the right choice. but dad, you've got allstate. with accident forgiveness they guarantee your rates won't go up just because of an accident. smart kid. indeed. are you in good hands? neil: all right. one of the interesting things about today is we're not getting good news on the trade front. the prospect of trade talks, the chinese say they don't know of

any, so this is one of those rare days where markets are running up on here's a concept, fundamentals, better than expected earnings, stable interest rates, a very forward-promising guidance from a lot of companies. the kind of stuff that used to dominate markets. with today's gains, we had, if we hold them, essentially wiped out the losses from monday. to deirdre bolton on the worries of the market about china possibly retaliating. deirdre: so we see that neither china nor the u.s. is really backing down at all in this trade situation. we know president trump and the rest of the trump administration has expressed a lot of optimism about the u.s. economy, about our ability to withstand the trade war, wage growth for the first time in decades, but some wonder how can china be so patient. we just got these recent data points which show the chinese economy is losing momentum even

before this late st round of tariffs kick in. how can china be patient and the answer is money. it's a pretty clear one. if you look at what china has unspent, if you like, in its budget, it is northward of $3 trillion and that is actually 10% more than what china had at its disposal this time last year. by the way, that north of $3 trillion figure, that's equivalent to germany's gdp. so this is not a small amount of cash that we're talking about here. we can't forget either that china just quite simply has more control over its economy than we do here in the u.s. they have different schools so they have monetary policy, fiscal policy, essentially whatever the government wants it to be. they also have direct control over these state-run or state-owned enterprises, completely different system here in the u.s. so a lost experts saying listen, china can afford to be patient. another thing i want to highlight, if you look at the

chinese holdings of u.s. debt, because there are some investors who say well, maybe as this trade war rachets up, that china would begin to dump u.s. treasuries. i called a few people, not too many people i spoke with are really worried china would dump u.s. debt but it is worth noting that they hold the least amount, that they have held since may 2017. most people i spoke with said look, china would not dump u.s. treasuries because it would hurt china more than it would hurt the u.s. for all of our tiffs with russia, russia has quite simply stopped buying the sort of -- exited, if you like, the u.s. treasury market, but where russia has stepped in, japan has stepped in, brazil has stepped in. china, even though it is reducing the amount slowly and steadily, it's still essentially the number one foreign holder of u.s. debt. outside of the u.s., china owns around 18% of this pool of foreign owners and that, as i mentioned, japan is number two and brazil is number three.

a look at all these moving parts, the consensus seems to be china has a little more time, perhaps 12 to 18 months, and maybe keeping fingers crossed that the administration changes or perhaps the u.s. is distracted by its own election and they are just going to try to hold out for as long as possible with these trade tiffs. neil: thank you very, very much. then there's global auto makers, their association ceo joins us right now. john, you must have been encouraged yesterday on news that the president was going to push off for at least six months the higher auto tariffs kicking in, i believe targeted at the european union and japan, more to the point, although it did include chinese auto parts makers. but an encouraging sign or no? >> no, i wouldn't use the word encouraged at all. here's the problem. we just have more uncertainty over a longer period of time and uncertainty is a killer for the business. look, companies have to make investment decisions now and this is an incredibly uncertain environment to make those

decisions. i think prolonged uncertainty is bad for the industry. clearly tariffs would be awful for the industry. there's no question about that. but the uncertainty, you know, is problematic. neil: what are some of your members doing? i know a lot of them seek out other operations, other ways to get materials from china or get materials to china. how do they get around this, even assuming a lot of them seem to be thinking this is going to last awhile? >> yeah. look, you know, this is the challenge, right. companies, i'm here in nashville joining you from nashville where i just got done with a meeting with nissan's north american leadership. they have to make decisions right now about where to build products that are going to be in the marketplace three, four, five years from now. so do they build them here in the united states in tennessee or do they build them in mississippi or in japan. the uncertainty is really a challenge. that's before you get to the

question of the supply chains. so you know, that's an example of what we're facing here. if you add on top of that the actual tariffs, auto tariffs on parts or on the vehicles themselves, that would be a body blow to american consumers and auto workers. neil: you know, auto workers in this country have been doing better. the president takes a bow for that because he says if it weren't for him, it wouldn't be happening. if this is resolved, do you expect that continues or do you worry that it's too little, too late? >> yeah, look, we share the president's goal, which is more investment in the auto sector in the united states and more employment opportunities for americans in the automotive sector. that would be great. my concern is that the tariffs have consequences. those consequences -- neil: i'm sorry i wasn't clear. the president has been saying you guys have benefited from the

drastically lower tax cuts, tax rates that it's more than offsetting whatever pain you are feeling or could be feeling from these tariffs. you say? >> yeah, i'm not sure that's true. you have to look at the cumulative effect. we have steel and aluminum tariffs that have increased the cost of producing cars in the united states by billions of dollars by themselves. the tax cuts were enormously important and helpful to the sector. why would we want to claw back those gains by punishing consumers and workers? neil: well said. very good catching up with you. i appreciate it. >> thank you, neil. neil: let's get the read from one of the best financial minds i know. we have been lucky this week. retired american express ceo, former aig chairman. harvey, we were talking about that, how something going south on the trade front could unravel all of this. are you worried about that? >> no. not really.

the chinese/american trade issue is a complex one and has been building over a long period of time. everybody knows they steal intellectual property, they require forced intellectual transfer, information transfer, and they have high tariffs. we have low tariffs relative to china. the situation for them is terrific. they don't want to change that. neil: we've got to compel them to change. >> exactly. the question is how do you chan change. hopefully they decide they need to give up something on those three things. now, they were looking for a deal in which they would promise to stop stealing intellectual property, stop forced transfers and do some modest stuff on tariffs but not really do anything overall and they thought they could get that kind of deal. donald trump said no, you can't get that kind of deal. what he is doing is changing the cost of the current situation to

the chinese. his major lever for doing that, the only one available to him perhaps at this time, is to institute these tariffs which american consumers will pay for in the short term in higher prices, but which china will pay for in having jobs transfer out of china to lower cost countries or to lower prices, lower profits for chinese companies. neil: how did you deal with it? running american express and later aig, just operating there. i have heard from those who have been there that man, it's like dealing with the mob. i don't know. when you were there, to get access, it's tough, right? >> dealing with the mob is russia. but the chinese -- neil: their attitude was take it or leave it. >> take it or leave it. the chinese would always be nice and polite and work on it with you over a period of time. neil: did they mean it?

>> no. neil: okay. now the markets in all of this. assuming this is going to be an uphill climb, you seem to be admitting there that the chinese are pushed to the corner, they have to do something because the president's not going to blink. and we get a deal, what does that mean for the markets? >> okay. first of all, i don't think it will work quite that way, neil. if the chinese believe that the president is not going to be re-elected, if they believe that, and -- neil: wait them out? >> they will wait them out. and if you have people on the left and in the democratic party who criticize the president's policy with regard to this trade negotiation, that -- neil: very few do. joe biden was out there saying they're not a competitive threat. >> which is -- i mean, joe biden is not very bright and that really illustrates the point. neil: why do you think he said that? >> because he's not very bright. you know, i really don't know.

i harear a lot of stuff on the left. neil: if he were the nominee, would donald trump be in trouble? >> if i were the nominee? neil: no, if he were. >> i'm going to support bill de blasio. neil: you are not. stop it. >> i am. neil: a lot of people are getting a sense on the left that they are anti-capitalist, and pretty much anything that hints of the tax cut that donald trump has done, they will make a big reversal on that. what do you think of that? >> i think it's based on false premises. your guest cornel illustrated this point. his point of view and the left in general is that what they see as inequities in our current system, somehow or other there's an unequal distribution of income and wealth and that people still exist in poverty is a consequence of the capitalist

system. and that what has to change in order to deal with those issues is change the capitalist system. that's not the case. the capitalist system is the vehicle that allows us to run a reasonably robust welfare state, and the reason why people are in poverty in large measure is due to choices they make, not the capitalist system. the capitalist system allows them to get out, to advance, to grow, to self-actualize, to do whatever they want to do. and they think that if they blame, if their understanding of the capitalist system is at fault, then what system should replace it? you can't think of any system. neil: now they maintain if capitalism is so great, how to explain this growing disparity between the rich and the poor. >> because a lot of people on the poor are kept in poverty in part by government policies and in part by how we measure it. we measure this disparity on a

before-tax basis. so it's done, if you earn $100 and i earn $50, you earn twice what i do, but if you pay a $25 tax that comes to me and now we both get $75, that hasn't changed the calculus. it's still you are 100 and i'm still 50. neil: there's an argument on the left to raise taxes on guys like you that could forcibly bring that gap closer to an historic meme. >> but the gap is not the issue. the issue is are poor people living in a way that is not consistent with what it is we believe. neil: you're saying government isn't the answer to fix this. >> government is not the answer to fix it. it will make it worse. we have spent a trillion and a half dollars on the war in poverty since johnson announced it and the poverty numbers are the same. neil: but the gap is worse. they say, the candidates who are running right now, unless we address that, we will have a revolution. >> but unless -- but the gap is what creates jobs for people.

so does anybody care that zuckerberg has $100 billion? if all of a sudden tomorrow he only had 10, would you be better off? would i be better off? would the nation be better off? neil: so you're not anti-success, you're anti-the government trying to address the disparity in that success? >> trying to address the disparity in that system through policies that won't work. neil: okay. you think the president is re-elected or not? >> my guess is today, yes. neil: all right. bill de blasio were the nominee, he wouldn't get it? >> we can only hope. neil: thank you very much. retired american express ceo, former aig chairman. uncanny market read. he zigs when the others zag. the president has a very strong approval rating on the economy. it's his numbers on immigration that are startlingly low. why is that? after this.

at comcast, we didn't build the nation's largest gig-speed network just to make businesses run faster. we built it to help them go beyond. because beyond risk... welcome to the neighborhood, guys. there is reward. ♪ ♪ beyond work and life... who else could he be? there is the moment. beyond technology... there is human ingenuity. ♪ ♪ every day, comcast business is helping businesses

go beyond the expected, to do the extraordinary. take your business beyond. we're on the move. hey rick, all good? oh yeah, we're good. we're good. terminix. defenders of home. you wouldn't accept from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase relieves your worst symptoms including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one. flonase.

neil: all right. president trump unveiling a new merit-based immigration plan in the next hour. there's a lot more to it than that. let's go to blake burman at the white house with more. what are we looking at here? reporter: yeah, it's going to be a couple different priorities that the president is going to roll out here next hour as it relates to his new immigration plan. on the one front he will talk

about what he wants to see at the border. on the other, he will talk about the need to move to a merit-based immigration system. let's start with the border, though. here's what the president is going to call for. building new wall, of course, as you know that is his single biggest priority. but it will also call for modernizing ports of entry, closing asylum law loopholes, updating the legal process and expediting the adjudication process for those with legitimate asylum claims. the president also wants to move to merit-based immigration and have a system that is based off of four categories. an immigrant's age, proficiency in speaking english, if they have an employment offer and their educational background. now, this plan will not tackle the issues of temporary workers, ag workers and daca which is a very, very big issue for democrats. on the latter part, daca, here was the press secretary sarah sanders and the white house's explanation. >> it's a divisive thing. certainly something to discuss

and look at and address, but this plan is focused on different part of fixing the immigration system and we would like for people to not reject it before they even sit down and really learn about it. reporter: officials over here at the white house call this a good faith effort that the president is putting forward. they also say that part of what this plan is trying to do is coalesce republicans behind it, but that is only half of the equation, as we know here in washington. democrats, for this to ever make it to law, and it's got to get to legislation at some point down the line, democrats would have their say but they are very, very skeptical already. watch. >> the president's immigration plan will be received with skepticism. the president needs to roll up his sleeves and face the reality of immigration rather than make speeches to his loyal supporters. reporter: little bit of criticism from senator lindsey graham, an ally of the president, a republican, who is

also rolling out his immigration plan, as he says with the white house is putting forward is not meant to be law. he is imploring the president to work with democrats. good luck on that one, i guess. right? neil: here we go again. blake, thank you very much. the read on all this and where it goes with the former i.c.e. senior attorney. john, democrats have already said this is dead on arrival. so the impasse looks like it will continue, right? >> yes, neil, i think that's unfortunately in the political structure that we're in right now, the democrats aren't going to give the president any sort of wins, even though shifting to a merit-based immigration system is a fantastic idea, in theory. i think the democrats could get on board if what you did was add merit-based visas to the existing family and humanitarian visas we have now. but what i have seen from the president's plan is he is going to take away huge categories of family-based immigration and replace those with merit-based. that's where the democrats disagree. i'm sure they will be able to

find some sort of middle ground after 2020 elections that they can all come together and modernize our immigration system which badly needs it so we can compete with the world. neil: you know, maybe they are frustrated, that is democrats, because it really did not address daca, the kids of illegals who are here through no fault of their own, they are in limbo and had he taken that on, there might be more openness on these other issues. what do you make of that? >> i think that's absolutely correct. the more comprehensive we can make some sort of immigration plan, where both sides get what they really want, the better chance we are going to have of passing something. but again, no one wants to give the other side any sort of victories so i don't think it's going to happen any time soon. but if the president puts daca on the table, he puts the dreamers on the table, he puts the temporary protective status of people on the table and says i'm going to help all of them, i'm going to create a way that all of them can become legal, in a different way than they are now, and we are going to do immigration reform as far as merit-based and getting away from family based, i think that

could definitely work. but that's not what the president is putting on the table right now. neil: are you surprised the president isn't polling well on this subject? for good or ill, you could say he was leading the charge to address the crisis at the border. there is indeed a crisis at the border. jeh johnson, i talked with him yesterday, barack obama's homeland security secretary, told me a number of times there is a crisis there. but he's not benefiting. >> he's really not, and i think that's two-fold. the left is never going to agree with any of his policies and they don't like the language he uses when he refers to immigration reform in general. and the right doesn't think he's doing enough. he's not stopping the crisis at the southern border. he's not building a wall. he's not accomplishing the goals that he has promised to the right. so he's somewhere in the middle and both sides are angry at him. that's why he's not polling as well like he is on the economy, where he is accomplishing many great things. neil: now, the improving economy could compound his problems with immigration because the better we look, the more people want to come here. two months in a row of 100,000 plus migrants wanting to get in

here, right? >> yes, that has a lot to do with it. we have many poll factors like jobs and a thriving economy but we have a lot of pushback from central american countries, northern triangle countries that people are fleeing because there is no opportunity, there is crime, there is no security, there is no safety. we have to address all these issues if we want to solve what's going on at the southern border. neil: exactly right. thank you very much. good seeing you again. >> thank you, neil. neil: it was an unprecedented move, the president of the united states issuing an executive order that pretty much said of chinese concerns largely that might be meddling in the telecom arena stop it, i order it and if i see you doing it, we are done with it, and you. the impact after this. i switched to liberty mutual, because they let me customize my insurance. and as a fitness junkie, i customize everything, like my bike, and my calves. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

[spanish recording]

so again, using "para", you're talking about something that is for someone. ♪ pretty good. could listening to audible inspire you to start something new? download audible and listen for a change.

neil: i'm wondering what triggered this specifically. >> i can't comment on either the internal deliberations within the executive branch or the classified information that i've seen, but what i can say is we need to make sure we have a framework in place to guard

against any equipment or services coming into our networks that could present a security threat. that is one of the things as we emerge into this next generation of wireless networks, 5g as it is called, we need to guard against. i think this executive order is an important step in the right direction. neil: all right. that was the fcc chairman, ajit pai. when it comes to huawei, you will not, will not participate in our telecom arena and extending that to other chinese companies that might spy or disrupt that arena. to gene munster and the impact of all of this. what do you think? >> it's unprecedented to hear an administration come out this strong against a company, really, huawei at its core, but it mackskes a ton of sense. let me frame the big picture. 5g is a big deal. it will live up to its hype not just because it's 10 to 100 times faster than the current data speeds and faster mobile apps on your phone, it's because

5g is going to be the framework of the future of this next wave of tech. it will power ai on your phone, autonomous cars, smart cities, augmented reality. there's many opportunities that we haven't even scratched the surface of. because that's such a big opportunity, there's going to be investing in this step-up infrastructure. the old infrastructure goes away. lte and 4g, we have to bring in 5g. and that opens up the country, every country, to potentially some risk, some security risk, if that hardware that we're rolling out, in fact, could be used as an agent for another country like china. so that's what trump's doing. it makes a ton of sense that he would kind of highlight that. the u.s. has been on a campaign to get other countries to also try to ban huawei. one final thought here. this really sets up a battle i think between the u.s. and some tech companies in china trying to keep them in check as 5g rolls out globally.

neil: it's gotten to the point that huawei, in doing contracts with a lot of companies, has built in that we promise not to spy on you. that's actually a clause in there. so they are worried, china is worried, i don't know how this complicates trade, that's getting off-field hoareere but others argue huawei is so advanced when it comes to 5g, not to do business with them also carries risk of delay in implementing some of these new technologies. what do you think? >> so huawei's argument is this is going to set the u.s. back and separately that it's illegal for the u.s. to kind of go here. at the end of the day there are other vendors. there's nokia, samsung, other vendors, so i don't think there's any sort of material setback in the u.s. 5g plan if huawei was effectively banned. neil: the other thing i think about, like you say, the president might be well advised to do what he did, but it's a slippery slope, right. for perfectly sound reasons here, you are talking about

security and you know, infringement issue of mega scale but doesn't that open the door for presidents or governments, period, to get involved in business activity? >> yeah, i think there's even a bigger story going on, and probably don't need to go there related to what's happening with trade, but i think what we're seeing with trade is this is not a market event. this is a geopolitical event. what that means is that these two countries, u.s. and china, are really laying the groundwork for where they want to be in the next 25 years. ai and 5g, networking, aerospace, those are critical areas. i think what you're seeing here with these remarks from the president are some of the -- that bubbling up, about how these countries ultimately want to lay their future for the next 25 years and 5g is dead center at that intersection for the next few years. neil: gene munster, good talking. thank you. >> thank you.

neil: all right. are you one of those who streams or just watch one movie after another online? a number of movie theaters are taking steps to woo you back. one in particular is going to pull out any of the stops. robert gray has more on that, giving us a look from los angeles. robert? reporter: hey, neil, that's right. we are in l.a.'s west side, very posh neighborhood, lot of hollywood directors, producers, writers, stars live in the area and frequent this particular location. they have gone really upscale where every seat in here is a leather recliner. we will take a closer look at that. also, in talking to analysts, talking to the ceo, they were both talking about what they call the netflix fallacy where you think it's big screen versus big stream but actually, a lot of people who watch netflix the most are also people who like to go out to the theater to watch. >> you see content, we see it either at home, or at a theater,

but you need to have a theater that has the amenities for them to have an excuse to go out of their home. reporter: so the excuse here they are looking to build is this very upscale experience, soup to nuts, if you will, where you have these all leather recliners similar to ones you will find in nfl stadium vip areas that go all the way back and of course, you can order gourmet food and drink all with the touch of a button. they have waiter service bringing it seat-side so they will really hoping to do this to keep buoying the box office. if you take a look historically, you can see last year, record returns, almost 11.9 billion was the box office haul, but attendance actually peaked 15 years ago and it's been in somewhat of a downtrend. so they are offsetting fewer people coming in by charging more at the door and trying to sell other amenities as well. neil: so the ticket prices don't change as much as the other goodies you get while you're there, right?

reporter: the ticket price here, $27 is the max end, triple the national average. ten bucks more than really anything else showing of interest in the neighborhood. i was doing comparison shopping last night. neil: they better throw in pepperoni with that, my friend. thank you very, very much. good stuff. robert gray. he eats all healthy, california. it is what it is. meantime, the president's just saying he hopes we don't go to war with iran. that was encouraging. there are a lot of signs right now that we are getting closer and closer to some hostilities that even our allies are saying whoa, whoa, whoa. after this. ♪

i have heart disease, watch what i eat, take statins, but still struggle to lower my ldl bad cholesterol. which means a heart attack or stroke. could strike without warning, pulling me away from everything that matters most. (siren) because with high bad cholesterol, my risk of a heart attack or stroke is real. ♪ repatha® plus a statin seriously lowers bad cholesterol by 63%. and significantly drops my risk of having a heart attack or stroke. do not take repatha® if you are allergic to it. repatha® can cause serious allergic reactions. signs include: trouble breathing or swallowing, or swelling of the face.

most common side effects include runny nose, sore throat, common cold symptoms, flu or flu-like symptoms back pain, high blood sugar, and redness, pain, or bruising at the injection site. i won't let a heart attack or stroke come between me and everything i love. neither should you. tell your doctor to lower your ldl and reduce your risk with repatha®. pay no more than $5 per month with the repatha® copay card. neil: all right. a remarkable rally going on today despite the fact that things with china still don't look good. which is a precedent shaker there. gerri willis at the new york stock exchange with why that is. gerri: that's right.

walmart with a terrific earnings report this morning beating expectations. the number a lot of folks were focused on, same store sales numbers. sales are up 3.4%, expectations were 3.1%. that is the best first quarter showing in nine years. also, higher e-commerce sales, up 37% quarter to quarter. last quarter, they were up 43%. the other thing that was really interesting out of this report, the cfo on a conference call saying prices for shoppers will rise due to higher tariffs. they are saying they are working on what they call mitigation strategies. let me tell you the company that's figured out mitigation strategies, cisco. that stock up handily today on a report last night that beat on both the top and the bottom line. the company saying they have figured out the secret sauce to dealing with these tariffs and the conversation over tariffs. they are raising prices and they have moved contract manufacturing out of china all

together. they make networking equipment. the other thing they have done, they are sort of like a microsoft in that they moved to a services model so less industrial equipment, more services and that's working for them. they are experiencing, as you can see here, their biggest one-day gain since february 215 in three years. big quarters for walmart and cisco and the dow enjoying the results, up 250 points. back to you. neil: thank you very, very much. again, stocks doing this despite what's happening with china. that's a precedent breaker there. again, fundamentals look good like earnings, in the case of cisco and walmart. then there's what's happening on the oil front. you would think with heightening tensions between iran right now and the united states and now escalating to much of the world that oil would be running up, up and away. it's not. why is that?

that's been contained throughout this crisis. just like it was contained throughout the venezuelan crisis. american gas association president on all of this. what's going on? >> good to be with you. you're right, the market has priced in what was a slow burn of chaos for venezuela. they have seen iran coming and so they priced some of that in and the waivers for exports didn't come around and they figured that out. but now we are seeing some things heat up in the strait of hormuz with some sabotage of tankers and some drone damage in saudi arabia. but the real news is that america is inoculated because we are producing so much energy at home. that's good for our consumers, our families, our businesses. we aren't seeing the chaos we could have seen even ten years ago. if you harken back to 2005 are hurricane katrina and hurricane rita when we didn't have venezuela, we didn't have iran, we didn't have sabotage and gasoline prices went to $4.50. neil: you're right. >> then we were importing two-thirds of our oil. today's the only 20%. we are in a much better place

today. neil: what is it these days, a little over 12 million barrels a day? >> that's right. that's where we are today. that's amazing, right? neil: that cushions the blow, i get that. i suspect maybe the rift with china, the fact it could lead to a global slowdown might be playing a factor there. but play it out for me. what do you see happening? >> i think we get two things at play. we've got tariffs that are making some of the infrastructure that we need for our energy revolution to succeed being more expensive. we need to resolve that. and china is a huge market for us, for exports of oil, gas and other things. we need to come to a conclusion. it's not impacting our ability to export gas today, but we don't want it to stay forever, because the other side of this story, that's good for families and businesses, is that we are almost 100% independent in natural gas. so we can heat our homes, power our homes and not worry about what's happening in the middle east. that's a double win for the united states right now with oil and natural gas. neil: so for people traveling

this summer, what kind of gas price situation are they looking at? >> well, every summer, people worry about it because the demand is higher and we have different kinds of gasoline. we have every impetus to continue to produce at high levels. the question is, can we get the infrastructure we need to move this oil and natural gas around. we're a little constrained in texas. we saw a decision today on natural gas from governor cuomo who said no, you can't let your natural gas cycle go through my state to service the northeast. if i'm in the northeast i'm not worried about driving, i'm worried about the coming winter, whether i will have the natural gas i need to heat my home. infrastructure week in the united states, we need more of it. we need to build it for oil and natural gas. governors are standing in the way. we need to get things built. neil: well said. karen, great seeing you. thank you very much. >> good to be with you. neil: cornel west was with me a little while ago saying we have the money to spend right now. we are just spending it in all the wrong places. we can't afford the government we have now.

how are we going to afford even more than this later? >> no, i think the argument is that poverty, jobs with a living wage, women's rights, those are issues of national security in the same way the military issues of national security. ♪ play it cool and escape heartburn fast with new tums chewy bites cooling sensation. ♪ tum tum tum tums with new tums chewy bites cooling sensation. termites, we're on the move.24/7. roger.

hey rick, all good? oh yeah, we're good. we're good. termites never stop trying to get in, we never stop working to keep them out. terminix. defenders of home. at comcast, we didn't build the nation's largest gig-speed network just to make businesses run faster.

we built it to help them go beyond. because beyond risk... welcome to the neighborhood, guys. there is reward. ♪ ♪ beyond work and life... who else could he be? there is the moment. beyond technology... there is human ingenuity. ♪ ♪ every day, comcast business is helping businesses go beyond the expected, to do the extraordinary. take your business beyond.

neil: under democratic and republican presidents, our debt has piled up to the point it's $22 trillion. bernie sanders is a fan of raising taxes, particularly to upper income, dramatically to address that. you are for that, right? >> no, we got to keep in mind, my brother, from reagan to trump, we have been increasing military budgets continuously. neil: we have been increasing a lot of budgets as a percentage of gdp. you're right, all that spending has gone on. i don't make apologies for any party on that. but we can't afford the government we have now. how are we going to afford even more than this later? >> well, no, i think the argument is that poverty, jobs with a living wage, women's rights, those are issues of national security in the same way the military issues of national security. neil: all right. he was saying we can't afford not to do these things. he's making the case for

socialism but it does have a bad rap. of course, fox business is having a town hall moments from now with my buddy charles payne on that very issue. the "wall street journal" editorial board member dan henninger, georgetown university professor and independent women's forum fellow. kelsey, what comes back to this argument, capitalism versus socialism, depends how the question is worded. it's a stigma word, socialism. i guess you could argue so is capitalism these days. but when you leave out socialism and talk about the benefits of free education for all, college for all, medicare for all, and leave out the fact that that is socialism, it scores very well in polls and republicans would be wise to remember that and distinguish that. what do you think? >> right. well, this is why it's so important to not just talk about these big, broad concepts like socialism versus capitalism but actually press candidates and politicians on what they mean

when they talk about socialism, because a poll i just read found that only 10% of american voters viewed socialism as positive which should give you some encouragement but how do you square that with the platform of many of the 2020 democrat candidates right now with the massive programs like the green new deal, medicaid for all, free college, that quite frankly, we can't afford and i have to disagree with your former guest. we spend 50% of our gdp, of our federal spending on military versus health care alone which we don't have medicare for all right now. already accounts for over 28%. neil: i got into it in the interview with him, but having said that, dan, one issue that comes up is that he believes, cornel believes, a lot of other people believe, he's a big supporter of bernie sanders, someone like that could get elected, despite what you're hearing, there is more support

for this and quite a base of support for this, where he could win. what do you think of that? >> well, bernie sanders did well at least against hillary clinton in the last election, but that was when we were coming out of the great recession. a lot of the millenials who lived through the great recession, their job prospects were really quite awful through the eight years of the obama presidency. when economic growth really never got much above 2%. so that was the period in which socialism became to seem attractive to some of the younger voters. now after the last two years, cornel west was talking about good-paying jobs, the economy is producing good-paying jobs right now with wage growth growing. so i think the appeal, bernie sanders' appeal, socialistic argument right now, is going to have a lot less strength so long as the economy keeps going at the level that it is right now producing real jobs for real people, as cornel west suggested. neil: it's interesting, too,

this issue of socialism but capitalism doesn't poll that well depending on the demographic group, i understand, but it has lost public support, about ten points in the last ten years. that's a point a year. what's going on? >> that's right. most people don't know how to define capitalism and socialism, each side. the left tries to make capitalism seem like something with greed, the right seems to make socialism seem like it's nothing but the old soviet union or venezuela. but one of the things that dan misses is that every recent poll i have seen shows bernie sanders actually beating donald trump in a head-to-head election. it's narrow, but despite the fact that he's the only proclaimed socialist in the race. i think what you said at the beginning of this segment is really important, that most americans like the kind of things that democratic socialists are for. they like the idea of a right to medical care, they like the idea of a right to decent housing, of education, that's good

education, that -- higher education, that their parents can afford. and they like the idea i think also of environmental protection, as the world is more and more threatened by climate change. so the problem of course is the "s" word got a very bad reputation, deservedly so. neil: you know, it's a very good point. kelsey, back to you on this point about socialist minded or capitalist minded, i do know we are running a big old debt. there's a big concern whether china starts selling off a fraction of that debt. it's still a big worry, that we owe so much that yeah, it would be wonderful to spend on any one of these priorities or a combination therein and taxing the rich or anyone else for that matter isn't going to get you there. but where do you see this going? >> well, americans like the idea of free stuff until you tell them the cost of all that free stuff. then the polling on all these different programs sharply declines. medicare for all --

neil: unless they're not the ones paying for it, right? if you take me out to dinner, i order two appetizers, three desserts, lots of wine because someone else is paying for it. but that mindset would change, would it not? >> but we have to be honest about what these programs are. we are not talking about small social programs. we are talking about government takeover of entire industries. when you have programs that massive, of course it's not going to be affordable for only the rich -- neil: they talked about being good fiscal stewards and you know, they were like drunken sailors, with their priorities. dan, i guess what i'm asking is, is this going to be a race about crunching the numbers for people, here's what you get, here's what you pay, or are we just going to gloss over that? >> i think we are going to have to get into those details, because those details are important. i mean, if we are going to propose something like medicare for all as the professor was suggesting, you are going to have to tax somebody to do that. those taxes essentially mean you

are taking productive capital out of the private economy, where it could be invested for productive uses, and giving it to the government to distribute it for these presumably good ends. the result of that, in my view, is that there's less investment, less job production, probably higher unemployment and then you have to spend public money to support people who don't have jobs. neil: let me ask real quick, i don't want to whittle you down, professor, but if bernie sanders were the nominee, you point to polls that you're quite right, accurately show him leading, maybe not as much as joe biden but leading donald trump. do you think he could win it all? >> it's possible. really depends on the campaign, depends how the economy's doing. with the economy, macro economy strong as it is now, it's going to be very close. if the economy takes a dip, as it very well could, cycles of the economy have not been repealed, then i think he will lose. any democrat can defeat him. but i think the point, you glossed over the issue of how to pay for this. or you put a lot of emphasis on it, i should say but the fact

is, you know the marginal tax rate in this country, when we were not a socialist country -- neil: you're right. it was higher. >> 90%. neil: the good old days, right? >> well, if we raise taxes substantially on the rich we can afford a lot that we can't afford now. neil: we shall see. guys, thank you all. that's exactly what charles payne will be getting into. your daily dashboard from fidelity. a visual snapshot of your investments. key portfolio events. all in one place. because when it's decision time... you need decision tech. only from fidelity. . .

♪ [spanish recording] so again, using "para", you're talking about something that is for someone. ♪

pretty good. could listening to audible inspire you to start something new? download audible and listen for a change. hey, who are you? oh, hey jeff, i'm a car thief... what?! i'm here to steal your car because, well, that's my job. what? what?? what?! (laughing) what?? what?! what?! [crash] what?! haha, it happens. and if you've got cut-rate car insurance, paying for this could feel like getting robbed twice. so get allstate... and be better protected from mayhem... like me. ♪ neil: capitalism alive and well at the corner of wall and broad

with today's heady gains. we're close to wiping out the losses we had on monday. remember intraday the dow was down 700 plus points. coming back booed time. good day for capitalism. good day for a debate it. charles payne is next. >> this is a fox business special presentation, live from new york city, "making money" with charles payne presents a town hall discussing capitalism versus socialism. here is charles payne. charles: what's up. what's up? you get a car. you get a car. >> good to see you. charles: thank you all very much. thank you all very, very much. hello, everyone. thanks for being here. this is a very special edition of "making money." it is our first for fox business a town hall on capitalism and socialism. we'll get questions from the live studio audience from just