thanks for doing this. suffering for the show. we love it. connell: one of a kind, jeff flock. melissa: sure is. that does it for us. "bulls & bears" starts right now. we have the strongest economy that the united states has ever had. we have the highest stock market. we have broken the record, i think 109 times for highest stock market. our country's doing phenomenally well. unemployment is the lowest in 51 years, soon to be the lowest in history. so a lot of great things are happening. david: president trump touting the strong economy again today, but 2020 democrat elizabeth warren is sounding the alarm with a stark prediction that another financial crash is imminent. wait until you hear what she says the president and congress have to do right now to stop it all from happening. hi, everybody. this is "bulls & bears." i'm david asman. joining me today, gary kaltbaum, kristina partsinevelos, jonathan

hoenig and liz peek. here's elizabeth warren's dire prediction, in a post she titles quote, the coming economic crash and how to stop it. warning lights are flashing, whether it's this year or next year, the odds of another economic downturn are high and growing, end quote. warren goes on to lay out some of her own plans but ultimately calls on the president and congress to regulate the financial sector and reduce middle class household debt. so are we really on the brink of an economic crash, or is she just trying to scare people and push her own economic agenda? what do you think? >> david, this is an incredible example of misinformation gone wild. this piece that elizabeth warren put out has a whole lot of facts and statistics, none of which in the aggregate really meet the conclusion we are even close to recession. for example, i could go paragraph by paragraph. obviously i won't. she talks about how household debt is at a record level. household debt grows when the economy is growing and guess

what, household assets are also at a record level. over the last several years, the balance sheet for the consumer has improved. i could give you ten examples of why she has basically alarmed people about the state of the economy, why, because she is viewed as more savvy on this, she's more pro-regulation, she knows more about regulating the financial sector than most of her rivals. this is her way of getting attention and kind of going back to the playbook that brought us all to know elizabeth warren during the financial crisis. >> fox business alert, i'm actually agreeing with some things she's saying. corporate debt is out of hand. household debt is out of hand. hold on. hold on. hold on. interest rates are being manipulated, rigged low by all the central banks. but the one thing she does not mention is the government debt. $22 trillion of debt foisted upon an unwary taxpayer and trillion dollar deficits. she blames trump in a little missive but says nothing about

obama, $9 trillion of debt under him. listen, debt is going to end up killing the goose eventually. i don't think it's imminent but she is right, it is something that has to be watched and looked at and the fact of the matter is, the central banks have been enabling it across the globe and it is worrisome for me. >> i was just going to say, i think gary hit the nail on the head here. look, elizabeth warren might be right but not for the reasons that she says she's right. it's not, you know, private debt or even unregulated capitalism that causes booms and busts. it's always government intervention. you could go back to george bush in the ethanol boom/bust that he created. we are seeing it now with everything from minimum wage to increased regulations of financial services companies and the internet. if you want to know what's going to cause the recession, it's not greedy wall streeters, but it's intervention in the private market gaerand gary, the federa reserve is a big part of that as well. >> liz, the fact the economy is growing at 121 months, you are seeing unemployment we haven't

seen at levels since 1969, more jobs than people are searching for it at the moment, the stock market up almost 20% year to date, all of these positives. however, we are in a moment of expansion unlike any other where inflation is relatively low, 1.6% on average. it's very difficult to pinpoint the risks. economists are scratching their heads. i think it's concerning that global manufacturing is down for the first time in three years. the interconnectedness of firms all across the united states and the globe is great because that means that certain sectors won't perish but at the same time, it's something that's not going well that can affect the bond market, too. none of you guys have mentioned the bond market. >> elizabeth warren mentions that. >> she does. and it's been totally debunked as a predictor of the recession for about the last ten years it's been a very inaccurate measure. you could go through point by point. gary, to your point, corporate debt is very high. if you are a ceo and looking at selling stock which is expensive in terms of your rate of return

or issuing debt at 3% or 4% or something like that, you are goefb obviously going to take the debt route and it's cheaper. that's why we have such a mountain of corporate debt at this point. it doesn't necessarily mean it's dangerous. kristina, yes, we have a very long in the tooth recovery here. this is unprecedented, right? record level. so yeah, economists are saying well -- >> let me push back a little bit on kristina. you can pinpoint the risk, it's staring you right in the face. let me finish. $250 trillion of government debt around the globe. this will not be able to be serviced when all is said and done. this year, $550 billion of our tax dollars, the first $550 billion is going towards interest. if this trajectory is not changed, there is inevitability and unfortunately, both parties have been doing nothing about it, both parties are head in the sand why, because spending is the mother's milk for them and

makes everybody happy. david: i have to ask about her solution to all of this, which is more government spending. as gary said, she doesn't mention government debt and you look at all of her free tuition, more subsidized housing, subsidized rent which seems to be new, doubling the minimum wage. what about her solution which seems like more of a problem? >> on both sides of the spectrum, when you propose a moderate solution, it doesn't get votes, it doesn't get talk on television about it. that's what she's doing. she's providing the left answer just like on the right side, they do the same thing, and to your point before about debt being cheap, if anything, we should be concerned like gary has raised that this financial system is addicted to cheap money. >> wouldn't -- >> thank you. >> wouldn't the moderate solution be some cuts in government spending? david: ain't going to happen. >> that's something we never think about. david: equifax reaching a settlement over a data breach

that affected over half of the country. the settlement doesn't go far enough, say critics. >> there are a lot of companies out there that are holding very very sensitive data of consumers, and i hope this case sends a strong message to those companies that it doesn't pay to underinvest in data security. -driverless cars... -all ground personnel... ...or trips to mars. $4.95. delivery drones or the latest phones. $4.95. no matter what you trade, at fidelity it's just $4.95 per online u.s. equity trade. lick fast like a cookie dough ninja. apply that same speed to the ford hurry up and save sales event. for the first time ever get 20% estimated savings on select ford models, plus earn complimentary maintenance through fordpass rewards. it all adds up. don't you love math? so get here asap because tasty deals and summer

go fast. get in or lose out on 20% estimated savings on select ford models, plus earn complimentary maintenance through fordpass rewards.

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? there are a lot of companies out there that are holding very very sensitive data of consumers and i hope this case sends a strong message to those companies that it doesn't pay to underinvest in data security. we are doing what we can within the bounds of our existing authority, but we have called on congress to give us additional authority so that we can provide greater deterrence. we do want to make sure that we're not bankrupting the company or making the company go out of business. we want to make sure it does have the funds and the resources available to protect consumers

going forward. david: ftc officials on their decision to fine equifax over a 2017 data breach exposing personal data including social security numbers of nearly 150 million americans. equifax settling for up to $700 million. the states and agencies in what could be the most ever paid over a data breach. even before a court approves the settlement, critics are saying the fine just isn't enough. some even suggest criminal charges. kristina, is this slmentettleme slap on the wrist? >> yeah, of course it is. if you look at the offense for every person, kdo you know how difficult it will be to prove? if you are just an average person sitting at home, you got your identity, your driver's license, all your social security stolen, you have to prove that one, it was stolen and sold on the dark web, and then make that connection. so far, they haven't found any cases of it actually being sold on the dark web, which makes it

so difficult to prove. maybe you can get $125 back if you had credit monitoring, you can opt for that, but -- >> yeah, you have to show damages. >> exactly. >> that's the problem. a company isn't just a piggybank for you, consumers or the government just because, what is it, $100 million? this is another money grab. david: this is warren's bureaucracy. >> this is, should we have life imprisonment? maybe a firing squad. >> they're responsible, though. if you made a case, if you made something and poisoned me, you are responsible. >> you can prove damages. you are on the floor writhing. who has been damaged here? i don't even know. i actually don't know. >> let them bring the lawsuits. this is just another example to blame what is unregulated business but the cfpb, the ftc, what is it, the occ, this company is regulated into the ground as it is. that precipitates and encourages a lot of this. >> how did the cfpb get their

mitts on $100 million here except the democrats are worried that this is not going to get funded and basically republicans are going to starve this beast. i don't know how they ended up with this money. i don't see them engaged in this investigation. it's sort of a puzzle. david: lot of bureaucrats for $100 million. >> exactly. >> first off, talking criminal is nuts. it's not like the head of equifax was in a boardroom saying how do we get hacked and have to pay big fines. i'm not a big believer in total regulatory environment too much but this seems like should have been in the billions. this is some serious stuff here. this was a serious way the company did not get the job done. their number one job is to protect the people's information and did not do it. i would have been happy just to hear the word billion but nobody cares what i think at this point in time. and there's no doubt in my mind they have some pretty darned good lawyers negotiating this out. >> to your point, they knew two months prior to being hacked

that there was a security flaw and they only revealed the information three months after it happened. that needs to change. the honesty level needs to change and companies need to react a lot quicker which -- david: by the way, how do they make money, not only are they having to pay up $700 million which isn't just chicken feed, by the way, but they also have to provide every single american with six free credit reports for seven years, every american will get free identity theft services for seven years. i don't know how they make money going forward. >> well, it will have to be more creative. the thing i just want to stress here time and time again, this is not an unregulated marketplace. these national credit reporting agencies, that's actually a government monopoly unto itself. they have to be licensed by the government. it's the world unseen. we could have a whole type of credit consumer, a whole type of credit consumer environment if government just got out of the way and stopped -- >> the really interesting question to me, there have been

so many data breaches, what does this mean for all the department store data breaches and all the data breaches -- david: it ain't going to be the last, could a.i. revolutionize the nfl? details of one company that's working with the nfl to flag when star players are being overpaid, some by millions of dollars. broadcaster and former cincinnati bengals wide receiver cris collinsworth is the majority owner of pro football focus. he's here to tell us all about how it's going down with the league and the players union, next. stay with us.

can't see what it is yet.re? what is that? that's a blazer? that's a chevy blazer? aww, this is dope. this thing is beautiful. i love the lights. oh man, it's got a mean face on it. it looks like a piece of candy. look at the interior. this is nice. this is my sexy mom car. i would feel like a cool dad. it's just really chic. i love this thing. it's gorgeous. i would pull up in this in a heartbeat. i want one of these. that is sharp. the all-new chevy blazer. speaks for itself. i don't know who they got to design this but give them a cookie and a star. while managing your type 2 diabetes- why think about your heart? lower a1c helps, but type 2 diabetes still increases my risk of a fatal cardiovascular event. and that's why there's jardiance- the first type 2 diabetes pill that offers a lifesaving cardiovascular benefit for adults who also have known heart disease. it can significantly reduce my risk of dying

from a cardiovascular event. and it lowers my a1c, 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, now what do you think? while my a1c is important, there's so much more to think about. ask your doctor about jardiance today. there's so much more hey! i live on my own now! i've got xfinity, because i like to live life in the fast lane. unlike my parents. you rambling about xfinity again? you're so cute when you get excited... anyways... i've got their app right here, i can troubleshoot. i can schedule a time for them to call me back, it's great! you have our number programmed in? ya i don't even know your phone anymore...

excuse me?! what? i don't know your phone number. aw well. he doesn't know our phone number! you have our fax number, obviously... today's xfinity service. simple. easy. awesome. i'll pass. david: are nfl teams paying some of their star players too much money? the league is now turning to artificial intelligence to help figure that out. pro football focus is an analytics company majority owned by former cincinnati bengals

player and nfl broadcaster, cris collinsworth. they are testing out a new system using a.i. in order to advise the nfl on players' salaries for all of the 32 national football league teams. early results are showing that some teams are actually overpaying star running backs and other players by millions of dollars. cris collinsworth joins us now in a fox business exclusive. great to see you. thank you for being here. how does it work? >> basically, we do the work for all the national football league teams and 62 college teams as well. effectively, what we do is we break down every player on every play and every game. we have this treasure trove of data that we work with, and then we have four data scientists that work here along with 500 people that are doing various things within the football world. so within data, we have more than we can possibly know what to do with, right?

so we have specific alleys that we go down and we try and discover things that sort of fall into the category of who knew, you know, who knew that running backs aren't as valuable as cornerbacks in the national football league, so positional values, how you pay them, we now go, we team with aws right now as our partner and we are taking all this data and throwing it into these massive computer systems and it's starting to come out with breakdowns on which positions are the most valuable, how much should they be paid, how much should you pay the quarterback this year for the first time, we're seeing 16% of the salary cap going to quarterbacks for the first time. so a lot of different things going into this. >> cris, gary kaltbaum here. how are the agents looking at this or taking this? have you been getting a lot of phone calls from them? are you going to be doing straight business through them also for them to get a better idea of what they can negotiate with?

>> agents are some of our best friends and worst enemies. no matter what the negotiation is, you've got the teams that take all the positive attributes that we assign to the players, and you have the agents, you know, who will take the other side of that equation. what we see are a lot of massive debates with our data, and sometimes people are friendly about that, right, depending on which side of this thing you're on, but i'm not sure that there's any contract negotiations going on currently that don't involve pro football focus and exactly what our data means to that particular player. >> so the teams are actually using your data now in ascribing salaries to their players, and what does the union have to say about this? >> well, no, let's make it clear, we've got contracts with all 32 nfl teams and every one of those teams use the data in various ways. so now what we're trying to do

with this next step with aws is basically just take this thing on for the next level and say okay, we know what the evaluation of the player was based on all this data, now what is the valuation of that player. >> i see. kind of translate it into dollars. >> correct. that's the reason you need big computing power and you need partners in this thing. i mean, we have 500 employees, but this is a full-time gig now, trying to say all right, we have $175 million salary cap, what of that should go to the quarterback, what of that should go to the left tackle or the pass rusher, and that's what we're doing. >> it's kristina partsinevelos here. some argue that big athletes, switching out of football, lebron james as well as christian ronaldo aren't paid enough because of their media value. you listed all the data looking at how the players play, but what about the media value, their digital impact, their social impact? >> i think all that's a factor

but i don't think that's what we are going to be doing. we are trying to do the very simple process of as a football player, and their production, what have they done on the football field and what are they worth on the football field. if you want to get into their social media value and selling tickets, i think that's a subjective thing for the team. >> it's jonathan hoenig. to kristina's point, isn't that ultimately a big, it's an investment for a team to make. they pay these people a lot of money. aren't things like the leadership they might bring to other players on the team or the merchandise sales that they will inspire, doesn't that ultimately play a lot into whether that money is a good investment or not? >> yeah, no question about it. we don't deny any of that at all. i think what we're trying to do is simply stay on the football side of that equation. lebron james is going to sell a lot of tickets that other people wouldn't be able to sell, the same way that aaron rodgers, who is now at 16% of the salary cap, russell wilson, 16% of the

salary cap, we have never seen a team win a super bowl with a quarterback over 13% of the salary cap. so those are some of the numbers that we'll be looking at as far as trying to figure out exactly how they make money off of that player in other ways. that's up to them. >> i'm wondering if coaches could begin to use the same system that you have in order to call plays from the sideline. you know, you look and see what a particular player does, given a certain condition and weather and certain data. is it conceivable, and some people worry about it all becoming too computerized, that coaches could use this data from the sidelines to call in plays? >> they are actually doing that. decision making is a huge part of this. we now know that for the most part, nfl coaches have been too conservative over the course of their careers. doug pederson in philadelphia won a super bowl with taking a

lot of chances in that season. think back to the philly philly, the philly special on the goal line going for it on fourth and one in that super bowl. so yeah, it's exactly what we're doing. we're calling that system but we're breaking down the decisions whether to punt on fourth down, go for it, kick a field goal, go for the touchdown. unfortunately, the coaches don't have access to it. you're not allowed to have computing systems on the field. it doesn't mean they can't print out all those situations and have them on a piece of paper up in the booth and study them in that way. but in many cases on television now, i'm going to know what the math says about going for it in certain situations and the coaches won't have access to that decision. >> what about helping my fantasy football team? i am so -- i'm beside myself here. >> lucky for you, we have a consumer side of our business and all that data in a slightly

watered down version can be yours for $39.95 or $199.95. we would love to have you into our family main we wiand maybe sort of slide you one. >> you mentioned colleges. obviously that would have nothing to do at least at this point with paying players so that is just again sort of an aid to the coaching? >> yeah, no question. i think positional value, like in the national football league, you have running backs aren't quite as important as they would be in college football. in college football, we still have some dominant teams that are physically just better than other teams, so running the ball's a little bit more of an important factor there. in the nfl, it's all about the passing game. it's the quarterbacks, the receivers, the pass rushers, the cornerbacks have much more positional value than, say, the running backs do. david: cris collinsworth, what a

pleasure to have you on. thank you so much. fascinating discussion. best of luck to you. >> thank you. appreciate it. david: thank you. well, spending showdown inside the beltway. the white house and congress nearing a deal on a massive government spending plan that could be announced as early as today. we will have the latest live from capitol hill coming next. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. nice. but, uh... what's up with your... partner? not again. limu that's your reflection. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪ dto experiencer gthe luxury you desire on a full line of utility vehicles. at the lexus golden opportunity sales event. lease the 2019 rx 350 for $389 a month, for 36 months, and we'll make your first month's payment. experience amazing.

who used expedia to book the vacation rental that led to the ride ♪ which took them to the place where they discovered that sometimes a little down time can lift you right up. ♪ flights, hotels, cars, activities, vacation rentals. expedia. everything you need to go.

david: breaking news, shares of intel moving after hours. apple up a little bit as well.

the "wall street journal" just reporting that apple is in advanced talks to buy intel's smartphone modem chip business. this covers a portfolio of patents that's valued of at least $1 billion. the deal could reportedly be reached as early as next week. keep an eye on that. the white house and congress nearing a deal on government spending. hillary vaughn is live on capitol hill. hillary, things have been moving all day. where do they stand right now? reporter: david, sources familiar with the negotiations are telling us that they are winding down, the talks between house speaker nancy pelosi and the white house, over spending caps and a debt ceiling. in fact, a nearly final budget agreement was reportedly put on the president's desk last night, waiting for him to sign off on what treasury secretary steve mnuchin and acting white house chief of staff mick mulvaney have been working out with democrats. today, the president didn't seem to signal that budget talks were over yet. >> we're talking about it.

secretary mnuchin is talking about it. we're having very good talks with the speaker of the house, with nancy pelosi. we're having very good talks with chuck schumer and of course, with mitch mcconnell and kevin. kevin mccarthy. reporter: as the deal stands now, the white house is getting an increase in military spending, but not nearly the amount that they wanted in cuts to offset that increase in spending, a source close to the negotiation says that it would also put no restrictions on reprogramming money that they could use for spending items like a border wall which house democrats in the past have put roadblocks in the way to prevent increased funds being spent in that way. fox news is also learning that the deal would permanently end the sequester. that's something that people in both parties want and it would also suspend the debt limit until july 31st of 2021, well after the election. details of the deal include spending caps and debt ceiling deals for two years but the spending increases would be not just for military spending which is something the president has indicated is a priority, but

also spending in other places to fund things that democrats want. that's the tradeoff. house democrats are also scrambling to get this done before they leave for summer recess which happens at the end of the week. so we could see some language in the bill submitted tonight but so far, we haven't seen any signs of that yet. david: hillary, thank you very much. jonathan, what do you make of all this? >> it's frustrating. the republicans used to be a party of fiscal conservatism. but now it's rush limbaugh, even the president himself, they seem like they want to give up that mantle. there's really no talk of cutting entitlement spending, no talk of privatizing social security or doing away with this massive infrastructure boondoggle. both parties seem to be really interested in spending a hell of a lot of taxpayers' money and this bodes poorly for the economy moving forward. >> i think president trump is concerned enough about the conservatives in the republican party not liking this deal that in fact, he now is talking about

spending cuts if he gets re-elected. so the answer is there is no appetite for -- >> just for the record, he campaigned on cutting the deficit and the debt, getting rid of it outright. >> then he got there and found out nobody, nobody on either side of the aisle really has the fortitude to contemplate heaven knows entitlement reform. that's never going to happen. but even modest spending cuts, it just isn't going to happen, unfortunately. i think what they best can hope to do is slow the trajectory of spending. that's kind of unfortunately, a low bar. >> you know, politicians used to fight over raising the debt ceiling. now they fight over how much to raise it. you know, the word ceiling means not supposed to go above it, but that's been thrown out. the shame of it is they have the central bank, they have ratings services and economists all saying if we don't raise more debt, we are screwed. it's supposed to be the other way around. maybe i'm the dummy but economics 101 says the more debt

you have, the worse things are off. we're supposed to go the other way. i must tell you, i gave up because when this president and mcconnell came in and said they were going to do something, they raised federal spending $250 billion a year and nobody said a word. here we go again. i got news for you. i will say it again. i don't know what number, i don't know what date but one time it's going to come home to you-know-what. >> big question marks over there. i think everybody is pretty much right on this, we know the debt ceiling, it seems relatively optimistic. i think the president needs to back this deal, he needs to be a big cheerleader, let's say, for it because we don't want another government shutdown come this fall. we want things -- david: i kind of like them. no, i kind of like them. >> i do, jonathan brings up the excellent point that nobody's talking about spending cuts. why do we keep increasing it? i know it's just unfortunate. we are a business channel, there are business people that are now in the white house and it's just spend, spend, spend. >> let me quickly say, people

shouldn't just think the downside is some type of potential collapse, whether it's looting in the streets and the atms don't work. the downside is prolonged slow economic growth. i would point to japan. japan has had three decades of big government spending and big government regulation. the infrastructure programs that both parties like. their economy has been moribund. >> the economy is so strong, this is the time where you do something about it. you do something about the debt and deficit. instead, they have gone the other route. 's the very simple. i will repeat myself for the thousandth time. government spending helps them out and helps them win votes. >> that's right. >> helps them be re-elected. they don't care about the taxpayer. david: we don't have a war right now. we do have extraordinary employment figures. we have never had job figures like this in my entire life. tax revenues are up. everybody said they would be falling. they are actually at record highs. the other hand is if things continue to go as well as they are going through the election, maybe the president will win a

second term if he gets it, he will be able to cut things that have never been able to be cut before. >> nah. i think president trump came into office and was convinced and i think he's right that the pentagon, despite the massive size of their budget, had really underinvested in weaponry and sort of updating our troops. so to get that money, he basically had to make a deal with the devil, democrats, excuse me, and basically allow increased spending on domestic programs, too. >> both sides are bad. >> noi. i'm just saying. >> to your point, there's no appetite. oh, i will cut spending tomorrow is kind of like i'll go on that diet tomorrow. david: bottom line, there's an election happening. we will be spending $2 trillion no matter what happens. that's got to be the end. coming up, iran continues to provoke the u.s. and its allies. wait until you hear what it is claiming to have done now. here's a taste of how the president is responding. >> frankly, it's getting harder for me to want to make a deal with iran.

because they behave very badly. they're saying bad things and i'll tell you, it could go either way. very easily. very easily. i'm okay either way it goes. (vo) the ant mindlessly marches on. carrying up to 50 times its body weight. it never questions the tasks at hand. but this year, there's a more thrilling path to follow. (father) kids... ...change of plans! (vo) defy the laws of human nature... ...at the summer of audi sales event get exceptional offers now!

david: oil climbing higher as tensions with iran escalate. iran just releasing a video of what they claim is their capture of a second british oil tanker last week. they're still holding hostages and now iran is claiming that they have captured 17 cia agents, sentencing some of them to death. here's the president's response this afternoon. >> that's totally a false story. that's another lie. they put out propaganda. they put out lies. let's see what happens with iran. we are ready for the absolute worst and we're ready for sense, too. david: joining us, luke coffey, former u.s. army captain director of foreign policy at

the heritage foundation. what is the breaking point for this administration, a red line, if you will? >> thanks for having me on. i think that the red line for this administration would be the loss of life of u.s. soldiers and u.s. personnel in the region. the president has made it very clear that he would like to see a negotiated outcome, a negotiated settlement to this, but as the president said, iran is not making it very easy for this outcome to actually happen. right now, i think we're in a period of time where tensions need to reduce, people need to perhaps take a step back and take a breath and then go forward from there. >> kristina partsinevelos here. to your point exactly, you just heard that sound bite from the president. when he calls, let's just pretend we are talking about people, you call somebody a liar and say well, prove it, isn't that provoking iran to do exactly that? we don't want deaths, we don't want bodies shipped over, videos of horrible things happening, and when you take that language, aren't you provoking them?

>> well, iran has been provocative since 1979 to the united states. and nothing since the iran deal was agreed a couple of years ago has actually changed iran's behavior. whether it's in yemen, in the gulf, in syria, iran has acted in a belligerent way. so a couple of off-the-hand comments from the president i doubt is going to change the calculus of the leadership in iran. >> gary kaltbaum. we have sent patriot missiles, b-52s, the abraham lincoln, a lot more troops there, and all we keep hearing is well, iran will never, ever go too far, but it seems like they keep poking us. now they're poking britain. are we worried they are going to do something real crazy and this thing is really going to escalate and then look out? >> well, this is the biggest risk. it's not that president trump or even president rouhani wants war in the region but the irgc navy

which is the maritime component of the iranian armed forces that operates in the gulf, they operate in a very decentralized manner. they report directly to the supreme leader. so there's a huge scope for misunderstanding, especially if you have a young ambitious irgc naval officer who wants to make a name for himself, and he does something stupid, it could spiral into a much bigger conflict. that's what we want to try to avoid. >> jonathan hoenig. thank you for being with us. thank you for your service. today, the president made a comment to the effect that he could win the war in afghanistan, but he was concerned about the potential loss of life. it's not dissimilar to what he said a few weeks ago when iran shut down the drone, he said he was worried about potentially 150 iranian deaths. do you think if this so far cold war turns hot, if there is a military conflict, do you think the president, i mean, look, war is an ugly business, tough business, does he have the fortitude to order strikes that could potentially kill iranians?

>> well, i believe if the worst case scenario happened and the situation required a u.s. military response, i'm sure that the president of the united states as the commander in chief would be willing to act. i'm sure that if we see what president trump did in syria, when he -- when the use of chemical weapons occurred, when the previous administration drew a red line and did nothing, it showed us that president trump is willing to use military force if he thinks it's in the u.s.'s interests. >> luke, question for you. it seems as though this administration has spent months and months trying to bring our european allies around to supporting us and reestablishing sanctions and going back to the negotiating table. certainly britain now is on board because they have been pulled into this thing. how can france and germany and other countries really stand by, if their allies like britain are under attack by iran?

>> well, france has already said they want to participate in a maritime security operation at the request of the united kingdom. i think we might see some room for maneuver by the europeans in the coming months, because they are in the process of forming a new european union commission. this will offer a fresh opportunity for europe to perhaps change some of their views and some of their positions as it pertains to iran and the iran deal. i can tell you, one of the optimistic things about the uk leaving the european union when they finally do in october, is that they will be able to have more of an independent foreign policy and a future prime minister boris johnson will be able to get more in line with u.s. policy because he won't have to worry about staying in line with the eu foreign policy, which is one of the lowest common denominator approach. david: let me just ask you, you mentioned that there might be some ambitious sea captain from the iranian side that takes

matters into his own hand, causes a conflict. that happened back in the 1980s. when we were escorting tankers and we took out a couple of ships that were iranian ships and they stopped their monkey business for decades. would we have -- would we have the same effect now if in fact, it did get hot and we shot up an iranian ship and no doubt that we would win that battle, but would that put them off or would things escalate from there? >> well, it depends on the circumstances, of course. but i would say generally speaking, it would probably put them back in their place. the situation for the iranians has not improved very much since the 1980s in terms of advancing their military capabilities, whereas the u.s. navy and our advances in our technology and our capabilities has improved greatly since that time. i have visited u.s. naval personnel in bahrain, where they are headquartered and i have met with u.s. commanders in the region. i can tell you, they are absolutely ready for any

contingency that it might be required or that might be asked of them if the iranians do something they shouldn't. david: by the way, we just have a tweet from the president. he just tweeted out quote, i am pleased to announce that a deal has been struck with senate majority leader mitch mcconnell, senate minority leader chuck schumer, speaker of the house nancy pelosi and house minority leader kevin mccarthy on a two-year budget and debt ceiling with no poison pills, this is a real compromise in order to give another big victory to our great military and vets. quick reaction, jonathan. >> the compromise on what, more spending. as i say, i just think back to the old party. i often think republicans are better as an opposition party. they were very effective in putting in the sequester and i think helping to propel this economic recovery that we have had essentially since obama. >> this is all leading up to an election. there's just no way anyone is really going to try and blow up the debt ceiling or anything else. david: luke coffey, thank you

very much for joining us. really appreciate it. sorry for the breaking news at the end there. good discussion. well, bernie sanders is now defending his campaign's pay package after staffers say they end up making less than $13 an hour but does his solution to the problem make the case against one of his key platforms? details coming next. 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. lick fast like a cookie dough ninja. apply that same speed to the ford hurry up and save sales event. for the first time ever get 20% estimated savings

on select ford models, plus earn complimentary maintenance through fordpass rewards. it all adds up. don't you love math? so get here asap because tasty deals and summer go fast. get in or lose out on 20% estimated savings on select ford models, plus earn complimentary maintenance through fordpass rewards.

david: 2020 democrat socialist candidate bernie sanders is now responding to complaints from his own staffers that they are making less than the $15 minimum wage he champions on the campaign trail. field organizers who make $36,000 a year in salary are telling "the washington post" they often work a minimum of 60 hours a week. that ends up being less than $13 an hour. sanders says his solution is

quote, to limit the number of hours staffers work to 42 or 43 each week to ensure they are making the equivalent of $15 an hour but isn't this more proof that sanders' plan to raise the national minimum wage would lead to less work and more unemployment? >> of course it is. we have been talking about that for years. every time this issue comes up of a federally mandated hike in the minimum wage, we say it's going to cut jobs and it's going to cut down on the hours worked. bingo. i think this is like someone set up bernie sanders in this, because it is the most hilarious pushback to his push for a minimum wage. >> who knew that economics 1 101 -- >> exactly. >> look, it's everything we've talked about for every action there's an equal and opposite reaction. you foist a big expense to aunt mary and uncle bob's business and they are going to react to it with less people, less hours or technology. it is a gimme. >> which happened in seattle in

just the last couple of years, we talked about that, $125 less in terms of take-home pay. what's so frustrating is the lost opportunity. you have people who want to work, an employer who wants to hire them and the government gets involved and says no, no, no, that's discrimination against low income people the government says they want to help. >> to answer your question, these are contract employers so it's not really changing that much but yes, it does go against his own platform. if you are talking about hourly workers, because they would lose hours. the excellent example for this is what we talked about last week, restaurants unlimited, a chain in seattle that filed for bankruptcy just because of an increase in minimum wage. we are seeing some of these states increase 30% just over the past three years or so, seattle being an example, san francisco being an example, these are cities, but overall i do think, jonathan has actually brought up this point quite often, productivity. when you increase minimum wage, that does not mean that a salary worker's productivity is increased, therefore, can it be justified to --

david: you know how they arrived at 15 bucks an hour? the seiu, a union, they said it's very scientific. this is quoting him directly. he said $20 was too much, $10 was too little, so we decided $15. just shows you the arbitrary nature. >> the minimum wage should be zero, if people want to work -- >> i don't know about that. david: that's got to be the end of this segment. are you fed up and voting with your feet? a lot of overtaxed new yorkers are. they're ditching the city for a new economic paradise. will the exodus finally force lawmakers to wake up? 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. ♪ .. (woman) somebody would ask her something and she would just walk right

past them because she didn't know they were talking to her. (deborah) i just could not hear. i was hesitant to get the hearing aids because of my short hair, but nobody even sees them. (avo) our nearly invisible hearing aids are just one reason we've been the brand leader for over 70 years. (deborah) when i finally could hear for the first time, i started crying. i could hear everything. (avo) call 1-800-miracle to start your 30 day risk-free trial and schedule your free hearing evaluation today.

david: bucking the big apple. high taxes are causing new yorkers to ditch the city and head south to miami. the cost of living 10% to 0% lower in miami than new york.

>> money is mobile, people are mobile. we are seeing this not just in new york. but my home state of illinois. money is moving and people are moving to where they are being treated best. >> some people who make a lot of money can save $100,000 to $120,000. a residential unit in miami said we'll give you a resignation letter for all those workers. >> remember aoc's mother moved to florida to get away from high taxes. we only mentioned her mother. >> as john berner said zero point zero is what we pay in state tax and we love it here.

david: the last mayor to lower taxes was ruleie. >> the fist d was rudy giuliani. [♪] liz: president trump talking iran, and hong kong. this after iran seized two british tankers. we have u.k. audio on this latest tit for tat. oil prices continue to rise. to the 2020 race. just three months into his campaign. joe biden out with his first policy flip-flop on a kitchen