it. anyway, we said today would be interesting to watch and it was. tomorrow we got the jobs report so the market bounces we'll see what happens tomorrow. melissa: up 122 points that does it for us. bulls & bears starts right now. president trump: medicare is under threat like never before. as long as i'm president no one will lay a hand on your medicare benefits. democrat healthcare proposals would put everyone into a single socialistic government-run program that would end private insurance for over 180 million americans. david: president trump slamming the medicare for all proposals by 2020 democrat hopefuls as he touts his own vision for healthcare, trump telling a crowd of senior citizens in florida that medicare for all is just a fancy name for socialism and no amount of money will ever make that work. hi everyone this is bulls & bears thanks for joining us. i'm david asman joining me is jonathan hoenig, liz peek, steve

moore and christina partsinevelos. and the president is signing an executive order to overhaul medicare today. here is how he laid out the difference between his plan, and what 2020 democrats are offering listen. president trump: almost every major democrat in washington is backed a massive government healthcare takeover, that would totally obliterate medicare. they want to raid medicare i think all socialism and among those who would be hit hardest by the socialistic takeover, are 24 million seniors, on medicare advantage. david: so steve, are voters as skeptical of medicare for all as the president is? >> well as a political matter i think this is a very very significant and effective attack on medicare for all. just say to seniors, look if you put all of these other people on medicare it's going to disrupt your own health insurance and we've shown and some of our poll ing that's a very effective counter to medicare for all. the problem is, i'm still

wondering what republicans want to do to fix medicare because the system has gone bankrupt one way or the other, david. >> i don't think people are very concerned about that, steve you and i are concerned and a lot of people looking at the numbers are but i think people are very happy with medicare and particularly medicare advantage. i think this is genius politics, because it also goes back to people's real distrust of obama and all of the lies that the democrats told people about obamacare and how you could keep your doctor, et cetera, so i think that this is an incredibly smart thing the president has done. i suspect we'll hear a lot about this. you used a keyword there politic s and that's exactly what it was today. it's essentially a rally for the president and you had people even chant "four more years" and we should highlight the fact that the president did rally against the fact early on in 2016 he would dismantle the affordable care act and come out with a new, entirely new proposal. have we seen that thus far? no, not really. david: we came close. there was one vote in the senate

>> but here is the big issue he's putting to the forefront right now especially because it is a key issue for swing voters. yes he was speaking in florida it's his base but overall this is a, i guess a way for him to make up for the wrongdoings or the fact they haven't really proposed a new healthcare policy david: again they had a proposal, it was one vote short in the senate that's what stopped it from coming in. let's bring in fox news medical correspondent dr. marc siegel all so dr. what is the president 's health plan exactly and will it work? >> well david, it's piece by piece. it's not one whole plan but i'll tell you something he ended with the words medicare advantage in the clip. medicare advantage is huge. it's expanding, you're seeing 1,200 more choices on medicare advantage this year alone, and decreasing premium medicare advantage 28%, since 2017. costing less, more options, you got to like that and for seniors , more price transparency , less surprise bills and more choice so that's the privatization of medicare.

that's actually been extremely popular and has been making money for everyone and saving seniors money. i like that he said that and by the way i can not resist an opportunity here to say that medicare for all is not even medicare, because when you go to extend medicare across the country to everyone, and you knockout the employer-based healthcare system, you're talking about something that ends up being so highly regulated and restricted that it's more like medicaid than medicare. it's not going to be the medicare that seniors no. david: jonathan? >> thank you for being with us doctor. aren't the republicans a little bit hypocritical here? if medicare is good if the president is fighting to save medicare, then to play devils advocate why not medicare for all, which is what all of the democrats are advocating for and the republicans say they love medicare so medicare is great, why not medicare for all? >> jonathan i think the answer is that the medicare he's trying to save is the one with again, more private options, a larger medicare advantage, more and

more expanded medicare advantage medicare part d, which wasn't popular when it was first passed under the bush years, actually, it has gone down in cost as well , more options with part d, more privatization of part d, more choices and drug prices. drug prices coming down. again, it's piece by piece here, and every piece i like. the price transparencies piece, the choices piece, the no surprise bill piece, so it's not that he's extending the medicare as you know it. it's changing medicare into something that's more workable and let's not forget the most important piece of all, me as a practicing physician medicare pays me less. medicare for all will pay me 40% less, not to mention what it will do for hospitals who are already used to eating it on medicare and getting less money, if they lose privatization, private health insurance, some of them are going to go belly up >> doctor i think that's the key point that you just made. people i say oh, medicare is cheaper than private insurance, that's because private insurance subsidizes medicare if you get rid of the private insurance

then there's nobody to subsidize the cost of medicare, but i think that you made a really important point, that for all of the idea that trump isn't doing anything about health care cost that's wrong. he has all of these programs that give people more choices, allow people to opt out of obamacare, and it sounds like what you're describing is very much an extension of that, of let people have other options to reduce cost. >> i think also, can i just weigh in? i agree that we're talking about political issues here, right? this is probably the number one issue, healthcare coming in in terms of policy, for 2020. i just think that this is an incredibly brilliant piece because trump is going to run against socialism. what is more socialistic than medicare for all? and as he starts talking about medicare being under threat from that, i think all of those older voters who by the way already vote republican generally speaking, they are going to be incentivized to come to the poll s. this is, i mean, i hate to say it but nothing is going to be done now that does not, we don't

talk about through the prism of the 2020 election and i think what you said is absolutely right. the more you can draw contrast between medicare and medicaid and all that. >> and let's not forget the money is coming out of the taxpayer pocket, $30 trillion in transition fee, start asking a working class person about that, whether they want that, and then the medicare that the senior has , and doesn't end up being the medicare they end up with and i forgot to mention, generic drugs being approved at an unprecedented rate which is finally flattening out prescription drug prices. >> the president supports governor ron desantis in florida in terms of importing drugs from canada because they are cheaper. do you support that as well? >> i do support that but i like better and i've said it here on this program, i like better the idea of export taxes. i don't want to have to play catchup, because the problemly is we can't vouch for the quality. and we're already having problems with contaminates getting into prescription drugs coming in from other countries where we've been talking about that all week with zantac, and

the blood pressure medicines i use. i like better export taxes to prevent the drugs, to prevent countries from gouging us in the first place. having said that if we can't get there, i think with ehave to do something to even the playing field. >> but that's being encompassed in the u.s. mca then? >> absolutely. is that? >> absolutely and i believe it would be across-the-board, with private insurance as well. i don't think it has to be only medicare. one of the things we always forget is when we talk about negotiating we're only talking about medicare and of course medicare negotiating across-the-board is going to decrease quality and we'll lose innovation that way so i'm not supporting medicare negotiating all drug prices. david: jonathan? >> doctor, the president also made a big point of emphasizing that republicans will protect individual's right to have healthcare even with a pre- existing condition. previously only democrats had talked about that. do you see any unforeseen consequences, doesn't that essentially constitutionalize healthcare as a right, if anyone can get a health insurance even with a pre-existing condition?

>> jonathan i think the president has been pretty connell: on this. i think he's always backed, well for the most part backed preexisting conditions but let me remind you there's another way to do this other than making everybody buy into obamacare, one-size-fits-all. that's that theory that in other words if you live in the desert you have to pay the same for flood insurance as if you live on the coast. i don't believe tax i'm a person that believes if you have a chevy we want you in the poll but we don't want you paying a ferrari rate. here is what i'm saying. david: good analogy. >> let me translate that, david loves analogies and metaphores. let me translate that into healthcare terms. it means high risk pools and instead of subsidizing a one-size-fits-all insurance, let the government pay for people who can't afford insurance, give them some policy, and reinvent high risk pools this time, properly funded. david: i've got to ask steve a question because the president was clear today he made a case to the people out there, to the voters saying look, it sounds nice to have all of this free stuff, whether it's medicare for all, or student loan debt

excused or whatever it is, but it just can't happen. there aren't enough taxes to pay for how much that would cost. you just you'd have to tax everybody 100% in order to pay for it all. do you think that message will get through? i know it got through to the seniors he was talking to. will it be through the majority voters? >> and liz is right. democrats understand that this issue of medicare for all is around their neck and it's not going to work politically and david, the doctor gets an a in economics today. you're fantastic on this stuff. you got it perfectly right. david: all right >> i want to end by saying that the pony express is not federal express. >> [laughter] >> the government can face it. >> i like that. david: another metaphor from the doctor. well forget healthcare, food, or clothes. the infuriating details of where way more of your hard earned money is going, and is it being put to good use? that's next.

announcer: fidelity is redefining value with zero account fees for brokerage accounts. and zero minimums to open an account. at fidelity those zeros really add up. ♪ maybe i'll win ♪ saved by zero (groans) hmph... (food grunting menacingly) when the food you love doesn't love you back, stay smooth and fight heartburn fast with tums smoothies. ♪ tum tum-tum tum tums

when you're looking for answers, it's good to have help. because the right information, at the right time, may make all the difference. at humana, we know that's especially true when you're looking for a medicare supplement insurance plan. that's why we're offering seven things every medicare supplement should have. it's yours free just for calling the number on your screen. and when you call, a knowledgeable licensed agent-producer can answer any questions you have, and help you choose the plan that's right for you. the call is free, and there's no obligation. you see, medicare covers only about 80 percent of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. that's why so many people purchase medicare supplement insurance plans, like those offered by humana. they're designed to help you save money and pay some of the costs medicare doesn't. depending on the medicare supplement plan you select, you could have no deductibles or co-payments for doctor visits, hospital stays, emergency care and more. you can

keep the doctors you have now, ones you know and trust, with no referrals needed. plus you can get medical care anywhere in the country, even when you're travelling. with humana, you get a competitive monthly premium and personalized service from a healthcare partner working to make healthcare simpler and easier for you. you can chose from a wide range of standardized plans. each one is designed to work seamlessly with medicare and help save you money. so how do ya find the plan that's right for you? one that fits your needs and your budget? call humana now at the number on your screen for this free guide. it's just one of the ways that humana is making healthcare simpler. and when you call, a knowledgeable licensed agent-producer can answer any questions you have, and help you chose the plan that's right for you. the call is free and there's no obligation. you know medicare won't cover all your medical costs, so call now! and see why a medicare supplement plan from a company like humana,

just might be the answer. david: well they say the only things guaranteed in life are death and taxes, but a shocking new study by the duran o of labor statistics is revealing just how much we all have to pay average americans are now shell ing out more for taxes than they are for food, clothing and healthcare combined. the study says that on average, americans paid over $18,000 in taxes, but spent just under $15,000 for their basic needs, in 2018 so are we getting what we paid for? we know the answer to that. actually i looked at the numbers and i find them sort of hard to believe because we have a very graduated very progressive tax rate in this country and we know that half the country is paying no taxes at all, at least no income taxes so honestly, it's skewed by what the wealthier are paying. david: federal income taxes. >> okay, i'm sorry what the wealthy are paying i think

really skews the numbers but then i have to say david i also said to myself, what are we getting from government? we're getting security, we're getting utilities and in terms of local taxes and so forth and all of these things and the answer is i don't know that we're necessarily paying too much in taxes. i know that'll shock you. david: what! >> hang on. but, i do think it means we all want to be a lot more demanding about how the government spends our money, and no one really is. we don't really want that. >> how do you do that? >> well i think that you have to get voters worked up about the efficiency of government, what the government waste and all of the things that we yell about but nobody really votes that way. you know? >> if you live in a high tax state, david, those taxes are even much higher than the 18,000 david: tell me about it i live in new york. >> that's why people are moving to the low tax states but the other thing is when it's a federal income tax burden from the middle class thanks in part to the trump tax cut is actually pretty low. the biggest problem for middle class, you know david what the number one federal tax that

americans pay today? david: what? >> payroll tax. and so i think if the republican s are going to do a middle class tax cut, tax 2.0 they might want to look at shav ing that payroll tax, which is a big burden. >> and in taxes, just in large have gone up before the 1920s, taxes as a percentage of gdp were never above 5%. they haven't been below 5% since that same era, since the progressive era they are above 40% now. that's money out of the pockets of not only every working american, david but also every potential investor. those are jobs yet to be created and money out of people's pockets and if you want a free economy you need to cut taxes get government out of the way, we're going in the wrong direction for the better part of 50 years in this country. >> i want to just define steve you're talking about middle class. a pew research and i figured somebody would bring it up. middle class is 52% of the american population falls into the middle zone making on average $78, 442 the latest

numbers for 2016 however lower class which is concerning because 29%, one-third of the american population falls moo that category. they are only making about $25, 624 so it's everybody's point, when you have to pay these taxes , clearly it's a larger portion of their lower class income; however -- david: i would hazard a guess by the way that very few of those in that income bracket are paying anything. >> i'm not going to go into that but the concern maybe we need to raise too is the aging population, and the need for even more healthcare, and how that's going to weigh even more on the system too, so this is something we obviously have to think about in the medium and to long term as it's weighing heavily. david: let me push back on liz for a second because i'm shocked to hear to say we may be getting what we deserve or we're not getting what we deserve but we should be paying that much. what about the message to democrats who are proposing to tax more than what we've seen? >> okay, i think the answer is

polling shows, weirdly, that americans are fairly content with how much taxes they pay. not necessarily the most wealthy or at the bottom end but generally speaking i'm sure you looked at these polls over time, americans feel that it's about right and i would kind of agree with that. i think when you start talking about huge increases to wealth taxes, and hugely-higher income taxes and so forth, the wealth tax would mean some people are paying 100% of their income to the government. that's outrageous, and there are incentives and so forth. david: jonathan very quick. >> haven't we been conditioned over generations? the size and scope of government has grown so much. that's why taxes are so high. david: we got to wrap it up, gang. good discussion. we're going to be talking about this more, no doubt. agriculture secretary sunny purdue, out with a big warning for the future of family farms, a fifth generation wisconsin dairy farmer is here to sound off, coming next. as a struggling actor,

i need all the breaks that i can get. at liberty butchemel... cut. liberty mu... line? cut. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. cut. liberty m... am i allowed to riff? what if i come out of the water? liberty biberty... cut. we'll dub it. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ performance comes in lots of flavors. ♪ (dramatic orchestra) there's the amped-up, over-tuned, feeding-frenzy-of sheet-metal-kind. and then there's performance that just leaves you feeling better as a result. that's the kind lincoln's about. ♪

to the wait did frowe just win-ners. prouders everyone uses their phone differently. that's why xfinity mobile let's you design your own data. now you can share it between lines. mix with unlimited, and switch it up at anytime so you only pay for what you need. it's a different kind of wireless network designed to save you money. save up to $400 a year on your wireless bill. plus get $250 back when you buy an eligible phone. call, click, or visit a store today.

david: is there a future for the small, american dairy farmer agriculture secretary sunny purdue says maybe not speaking at the world dairy expo in wisconsin, purdue warning farmer , "in america, the big get bigger and the small go out. i don't think in america we, for any small business, have a guaranteed income, or guaranteed profitability" here now is a fifth generation wisconsin dairy farmer at the event with secretary purdue so jerry i have to ask, how did the secretary's comments hit you? >> oh, there was nothing about what he said that surprised me. he's expressed this sentiment before. >> so jerry, it looks like there have been hundreds of

farmers going out of business over the last several years, going back some time i gather. have most of those farms been sold to somebody or been bought out by a bigger farming enterprise, or are they just going under? >> oh, it depends a lot on the situation. some guys sell their cows and continue to farm, maybe beef cow s, cash crop, other guys that are really strapped for money with debt, they will sell. >> but i mean, are there big companies in your area that are kind of taking up a lot of smaller operators? >> in my area, in my immediate area, it's mainly just other farmers that are expanding that are taking on extra land. >> okay. >> in my immediate area, there

are large, more corporate-style dairy in my region but in my immediate community it's mainly other farmers taking on the extra land. >> so liz to your point actually the u.s. agricultural department said that in 2018 there was 3,000 farmers that actually went bankrupt. so we are seeing this continuous issue, but on this show, we often talk about free market capitalism, and shouldn't we just let this happen? without government intersection and we're speaking about government intervention what about the sub say diplomats being paid to the farmers to offset the losses from the china tariffs? if anything, and i was looking into this because i remember last year i was covering the farmer's business network. you have a situation where farmers are given money for the losses they don't even need to prove their losses from the china trade tariff. they just need to show their production rate. so jerry, this question is directed at you. what are your thoughts with

government and the sub say diplomats that have been paid not farmers to offset the losses from the china trade war i guess you could say? >> my personal opinion on it is that government don't even come close to making a dent in what we've lost through the trade wars and the loss of markets, and the decrease in prices that we've seen. >> jerry what do you want washington to do, if anything, to save these family dairy farms >> there's a question, actually -- >> i mean, what can be done to solve this problem of the disappearing family dairy farmer >> something that we've been working hard in various farm organizations, and i know i'm working with the wisconsin

farmer's union, farm bureau is now on board is the idea of supply management, and a new tool for our american farmers, to manage our supplies, so we get out of this continuous cycle of it was actually a joke that secretary purdue made at its town hall meeting in madison that dairy farmers when times are good, they milk more cows, and when times are bad they milk more cows, and it's not funny to us. we know this, but if this is the only tool we have, to make more income, without a better tool, like supreme court play management and when that question was posed to him, he said absolutely not. one thing that the secretary did say that was greatly appreciated was that we don't, farmers don't want handouts.

we want fair prices and we want fair opportunities and we'd appreciate our government to act on our behalf, to enforce anti-trust laws, to enforce country of origin labeling, to help us have a competitive stake in the marketplace, and not be the price takers that we currently are. david: jerry we wish you the very best. our hearts go out to you. there's nothing like the small american farm. it's really the life blood of america. thanks a million for being here appreciate it. house speaker nancy pelosi pushing president trump to work with congress, while democrats try to impeach him, will he do it? we're going to ask republican congressman tom reed coming next >> when the president says that he can't do anything, that he has the threat of impeachment or the consideration of impeachment , i hope he doesn't mean he doesn't want to work

together. fact is, every insurance company hopes you drive safely. but allstate helps you. with drivewise. feedback that helps you drive safer. and that can lower your cost now that you know the truth... are you in good hands? (groans) hmph... (food grunting menacingly) when the food you love doesn't love you back, stay smooth and fight heartburn fast with tums smoothies. ♪ tum tum-tum tum tums

with tums smoothies. with tough food, your dentures may slip and fall. fixodent ultra-max hold gives you the strongest hold ever to lock your dentures. so now you can eat tough food without worry.

fixodent and forget it. (bobby) you're concerned that it's going to cost you money.ouble, (ben) to this day, i only paid what i had to pay for the device. when i go back, everything is covered. there's so much you're missing by not having hearing aids. (avo) we'll find you a hearing aid that fits your lifestyle and your budget. at one of our 1,500 locations. get special anniversary savings and your chance to win a seven day hawaiian cruise. call 1-800-miracle to schedule your free hearing evaluation.

david: house speaker nancy pelosi urging president trump to work with congress all while democrats try to impeach him. the speaker wants to find common frowned on big ticket items like lower drug prices, infrastructure, here now is republican congressman tom reed, so congressman what is the likelihood any of this will get done?

>> well i'm the eternal optimist so i'm hopeful that we'll be able to do this, but maybe this will start with the mexico canada agreement david because if nancy pelosi is sincere about doing work, we already have the votes in the house and the senate to pass this. nancy pelosi just has to show some good faith. put mexico canada on the floor, that may break this log jam that the impeached crisis or political circus is causing in regards to getting things done for people back home. >> congressman i agree with you that this is one of the most important things we could do to help this economy right now, is pass u.s. mca. two questions for you on that. number one, where would you put the odds right now i get asked this question every day from investors, what are the chances that nancy pelosi some time in the next six months brings that to a vote and the second question is how many republicans in your caucus do you think would vote for the u.s. mca? >> well yeah, the odds of her bringing it, obviously, there's going to be pressure on her now with the impeachment political

circus clogging up the pipes, so maybe that pressure will build and the odds increase, but you know, this is something that shouldn't be this complicated. the votes are there both overwhelming number of votes in the republican caucus will pass mexico canada and you got to remember some of these districts that make their majority up are democratically held that are going to have to be held accountable if they say we couldn't even get a vote on mexico canada. so you don't have any doubt if this comes to the house floor you have very little doubt that it will pass? >> i guarantee you if it was given to the house floor as is right now, it would pass tomorrow. >> congressman it's jonathan ho enig. congress has responsible for oversight, but also legislation, and to steve's point, he's got trillions of dollars on the sidelines waiting for these trade deals to actually get put through, so can congress, whether it be nancy pelosi or the republicans, do its job and allow the economy to flourish, because the ism number at all of these other economic indicators are showing that trade is having

an impact on the economy. are you and congress aware of that that not getting trade deals done is hurting people's bottom line? >> you are speaking right to nancy pelosi and i'll echo the same message. this is hurting real americans. you just heard jerry. that dairy farmer on your show talk about, you know, his farm struggling. mexico canada is the opening door for those family farms to thrive for generation, and that is why we need to pass this and you bring mexico canada to the floor i guarantee the votes are there, but nancy pelosi is going to be putting politics, in front of people's interest in my humble opinion for at least the short-term future. >> to continue on that point, i think trade between all three countries is up to almost $1 trillion so it is a valuable negotiation package and we need it to go forward; however in march, just this past year, six months ago you had nancy pelosi and several other democrats say that the reason why u.s. mca is not going forward is because of the labor the working conditions in there, and the lack of

protection for workers increasing wage, et cetera, and working conditions, so do you feel like that is really the hurdle, if so are you hearing anything about it and are they meeting behind closed doors because i'm just curious as to why it's taking six months to mitigate this problem. >> so there's been extensive conversations between nancy pelosi and the white house to resolve these issues on the labor environmental standard, and you also saw good faith action by mexico for example, that institute legislative fixes to address the labor concerns raised by the democratic party. everyone's acting in good faith, mexico, canada and the u.s. to get to yes and the bottom line is we are there, in the u.s.. unless nancy pelosi continues to say "no" because politics is driving her agenda. >> so now, i think the politics are a little complicated though right? because one texas representative went home, and he acknowledges that not a single question came up about impeachment, the only questions that were asked were about the u.s. mca, so i think that the president and

republicans have put pressure on democrats to do something, show that they can govern as well as harass the president, and don't you think that sort of changed the outlook here a little bit? maybe more favorable for getting this done? >> it could. i mean, obviously we're soon into this cycle on the impeachment circuit, but i agree with you. i think the politics is going to heat up because that's what i hear from folks, 40% one camp and 40% another camp but the people struggling are saying what the heck are you doing in washington d.c. get some work done, mexico canada exhibit a. david: well speaker pelosi clearly is being influenced by a lot of people on the left of the spectrum particularly on the way to the convention. would she strike out on her own, defy those people on the left who don't want to give donald trump any kind of win in order to help out the congress people from the purple states? >> i think that's the political pressure and she's a pro. she knows this business like the back of her hand, and she's going to have that political

calculation of looking at those majority maker seats on the democratic side, and i think that pressure and she has shown up until this impeachment inquiry, an ability to stand up to that hard left. i just hope she has it and we would have her back on the, i would have her back to get this done for the farmers that we represent and the people that we represent that are going to benefit from mexico canada. david: steve? >> we didn't talk about drug price controls, which is another big economic issue that could really shake the market. the republicans want to move a bill, that imposes drug price controls. >> i think that we want to get to the issue of reducing drug prices and price control is obviously something we don't support, steve on the republican side, nor myself, but i think there's packages coming through the senate that can move the needle on drug prices, surprise billing is also a piece of that conversation, and i think that could be widely received by the house in a positive way, if allowed to have an opportunity to have a vote. david: congressman always great to see you thanks very much for

being here again. come back and see us soon. that's great thanks david. david: thank you very much. elizabeth warren just releasing a sweeping labor reform platform , we're going to look at the impact on businesses, and the economy, coming next. announcer: fidelity is redefining value with zero account fees for brokerage accounts. and zero minimums to open an account. at fidelity those zeros really add up. ♪ maybe i'll win ♪ saved by zero if you have postmenopausal osteoporosis and a high risk for fracture now might not be the best time to ask yourself are my bones strong? life is full of make or break moments. that's why it's so important to help reduce your risk of fracture with prolia®. only prolia® is proven to help strengthen and protect bones from fracture with 1 shot every 6 months. do not take prolia® if you have low blood calcium, are pregnant, are allergic to it or take xgeva® serious allergic reactions, like low blood pressure trouble breathing; throat tightness; face, lip,

or tongue swelling rash; itching; or hives have happened. tell your doctor about dental problems as severe jaw bone problems may happen or new or unusual pain in your hip groin, or thigh, as unusual thigh bone fractures have occurred. speak to your doctor before stopping prolia® as spine and other bone fractures have occurred. prolia® can cause serious side effects, like low blood calcium; serious infections which could need hospitalization; skin problems; and severe bone joint, or muscle pain. are you ready? ask your doctor how prolia® can help strengthen your bones.

♪ ♪ problems. nobody likes problems. but why is that? at ibm, problems actually inspire us, to fix things, to change things, to push the world forward. which is why so many people who dare to take on problems work with ibm.

david: 2020 candidate elizabeth warren unveiling comprehensive labor reform with a long list of promises to close loopholes, change policies that she says keep lower middle class families from getting ahead in the economy. warren vowing to sign an executive order, day one of her presidency, requiring federal contractors to make a $15 minimum wage, prohibits states from adopting so-called right to work laws, and plans to back rules making it easier for you to organize workers so what would this mean for businesses across the country? jonathan? >> well but this isn't reform david. this is control. we always say elizabeth warren and socialism that's what this is. this is more government control

over private property, over private businesses whether it be wages, whether it's their ability to hire whom they want and in the fashion they want income the wealth con fisa court asian we've talked about that with elizabeth warren and the net result of course is socialism is that it fails to the extent its been tried, whenever it has been tried, that'll be the same example here with elizabeth warren, and that's why this woman gets to be president, and god help us when it comes to the economy and the markets. >> warren is doing this the day before a big event and she's speaking with the service employees international union that's tomorrow and they represent over 2 million security guards, janitors, health care workers, so you have the reasoning. you have all of the democrats fighting for the working class american. however jonathan, you are often, you're a big history buff and you talk about political liberties that are often narrow ly defined as the right to vote. doesn't that also include the right over one economic power in their own life and i know you can preference franklin roosevelt in 1944 and his speech

, and the point i'm trying to get at is unions. the value of unions when you have unions does that not help improve your working environment and add democracy into the working environment to represent americans? >> well, we're actually a public not a democracy but the point christina isn't that governments shouldn't be involved with it. people have the right to unionize but with elizabeth warren, it's talking about government getting involved, giving union organizers special favor, and demanding that employers pay a higher wages than they otherwise could afford and the net result is what we're seeing in detroit with more strikes at gm, more problems with the union that's elizabeth warren's future for our economy. >> i think this is a sort of the back to the future nostalgia on warren's part when democrats were prospering because unions were prospering and the truth is globalization kind of destroyed that model, and the reason is that the high wage, remember when bankruptcy, when go into went bankrupt in 2008 or 2009 we all discovered that union

workers were making $90 an hour all-in. guess what that is not competitive when you have free imports of cars from japan and other countries where they pay much much lessor they have great automation so my view is that this is just elizabeth warren knowing she does not yet have the blue collar voter in her camp, and they are particularly worried about medicare for all and losing those health benefits that they fought so hard for, and so this is kind of her way to get back in the door there. i don't, i mean it doesn't make any sense to me. david: isn't it also about union money? >> yeah. >> well look, i mean, david, will you please give elizabeth warren my monday wall street journal piece, which shows that the average middle class worker under trump and two and a half years has gained $4,000 of income? i mean this is an astounding number. income is only went up $1,000, in eight years under obama. that's a killer number for democrats. there's been no president in modern times whose been better for middle class blue collar

workers than. the other thing that she's going to have a big problem is she going to go to these states like ohio and pennsylvania and michigan, well pennsylvania and michigan that have become right to work states and is she going to force workers to join unions against their will? that's a political loser. david: she said it was an executive order so maybe that's what the she has in-store. gang thank you very much, before we head to break let's see what's coming up on evening edit tonight with liz macdonald. liz: david we've got ken c. he is the acting director of citizenship and immigration services, and we're going to ask him about those big number, 800,000. david: well we know that ken cu cinelli is coming on the evening edward, we're sorry we couldn't hear liz, but we'll hear more from her in about 15 minutes. meanwhile national security or privacy breaking new details find out on the fight between the u.s. attorney general and facebook, that's coming up. breaking news. everyone uses their phone differently.

that's why xfinity mobile lets you design your own data. you can share 1, 3, or 10 gigs of data between lines, mix in lines of unlimited, and switch it up at any time. all with millions of secure wifi hotspots and the best lte everywhere else. it's a different kind of wireless network, designed to save you money. switch and save up to $400 a year on your wireless bill. plus, get $250 back when you buy an eligible phone. that's simple. easy. awesome. call, click, or visit a store today.

david: fox business alert setting up a big fight over national security versus privacy , attorney general bill barr is now reportedly asking facebook to delay plans to en crypt facebook messages. jackie deangeles has the latest. reporter: good evening to you david that's right a new request from the attorney general to facebook saying holdup on plans, for end-to-end encryption in messaging. now barr sites public safety as a concern according to the wall street journal. remember zuckerberg outlined new plans to protect user privacy, earlier this year. this was after the backlash over data breaches and facebook's role in the cambridge analytical scandal so would it seem unreasonable for facebook to add the end-to-end encryption and it

does make the messages for protected but is there a point where that becomes a problem? potentially yes it's a battle over security, that's barr's argument versus privacy. that's facebook's argument and think back to the shooting in in san bernardino. the apple iphone, the government needed to get into that phone and it couldn't and apple wouldn't help and eventually a third party did open the phone but should it be that hard when public safety is involved? in the case of facebook, barr made the request in an open letter also signed by a british and australian counterparts, the journal reports that letter will be published tomorrow and in this letter, barr asks facebook to hold off on encryption until it can find a way to give government access to the messaging services for those investigative purposes. "we are writing to request that facebook does not proceed with this plan to implement end-to-end encryption across its messaging services, without ensuring that there is no reduction to user safety and without including a means for lawful access to the content of

communication to protect our citizens ecertainly david, you can see where it is here and it also opens pandora's box is this just about facebook or will government want to access information from other companies as well? back to you. david: security versus liberty it's quite clear, jackie thank you very much. jonathan, with all of your libertarian background i can't imagine you being for barr on this one. >> david, facebook it's like they are damned if they do and damned if they don't. before the government said you're not protecting people's privacy. then facebook says okay we'll have encrypted messages and the government says oh, no, no, you can't have that level of privacy this is another way for government to get involved in a private business in a company offering a service that people want which is private messaging, hands off this is another example, whether it be facebook 's cryptocurrency which government has already said they want to put the kabosh on to the encrypted messages, the government has no role in bill barr and the rest of the administration should butt the

heck out. >> jonathan how did we know you'd come to that conclusion. i disagree with you 100%. i think when public security is at risk you have to be able to, the government has to be able to access these messages and there has never been a time in our country's history where phone tapping wasn't allowed, people weren't allowed to look at -- >> with a warrant though, liz. >> of course. jonathan, presumably you'd have to have a warrant here. it isn't just like they'd be going through everyone's phones willy-nilly but this is a case where if there's a kidnapper or a terrorist with a bomb and they know they are communicating with other members of their group via a message app that you cannot penetrate the government has to be able to access that. that's the end of the story and a pretty reasonable request. >> liz to your point if you have a warrant, they would be foot i'll because it's already encrypted and that means that they are not putting a back door so they don't put a back door that it's encrypted. so to jonathan's point i think

that you're going after a business, you're trying to get their information, people want privacy that's something that we're going to value in the future and if anything you can start using telegram because that en crypts all of their messages but to your point what they raise is the child pornography so jonathan when you have a world that is increasingly involved in a social media everything online is just in our daily lives, and child pornography trafficking going on ease facebook platform, do you not want to combat that? >> yeah, certainly christina. you're so great with the red herring, child pornography is illegal and it's terrible and should be prosecuted but that shouldn't be used as an excuse to violate the rights. to have a private encrypted e-mail if that's what they want to use. david: but the real question jonathan is whether or not there should be a back door in some of these encryptions, for the police, for the cia, whoever considers it to be a national or local emergency don't you think

if there is a warrant and a legitimate reason there should be a back door for authorities. >> david this technology has hasn't even been launched yet. david: you're avoiding the question which is not usual for you. if the technology is hammered down, should there be a back door for authorities to get in if they need to? >> i think that it is up to the judge to issue the warrants and i don't think it's facebook' responsibility to provide it that's my opinion. >> but suppose that there is a warrant and it can't be executed because of this encryption, that kind of renders the warrant moot . that's really the whole point. a warrant would only be issued if there was really a security issue of substantial importance and by the way i think that it's pretty crazy that facebook is so intent on privacy. david: quick, quick. to jonathan's point we trust the government to not take advantage of the back door. david: if i have to pull some

cash from the atm heading into the weekend what you should know before you go, details of random report, coming next. with sofi, get your credit cards right- by consolidating your credit card debt into one monthly payment. and get your interest rate right. so you can save big. get a no-fee personal loan up to $100k. 2,000 fence posts. 900 acres. 48 bales. all before lunch, which we caught last saturday. we earn our scars. we wear our work ethic. we work until the work's done. and when it is, a few hours of shuteye to rest up for tomorrow, the day we'll finally get something done. ( ♪ )

the day we'll finally get something done. it's been reported that there's a cyberattack on business every 39 seconds. ouch. i don't even want to think about it. comcast business has a solution. we go beyond fast with a cloud-based security system that automatically updates, so you always have the latest protection. phishing. malware. risky sites. it can help block all of that. it's one less thing for us to worry about. comcast business securityedge automatically protects all the devices on your network. call 1-800-501-6000 today.

david: plan ahead or prepare to pay up, americans will be shelling ut more than ever to get money from atm banks outside their network. is this the price we pay for convenience, should we regulate the charges. >> when reading the story, immediately, i thought it is about discipline. i never get charged because i always make sure i have cash or

i will walk 7 blocks until i get to a td bank, this affects lower income households, a lot of these banks are not in their neighborhood. i do think it is unfortunate. >> when you impose price controls, there will be shortages, there will be fewer -- atms if there are price controls, i want convenience of having an atm on every corner. >> the banks have been squeezed by the 0% interest rates, they are looking -- -- david: poor thing. >> this is one area, you would admit, there is a cop convenience. >> of course, sometimes you pay more. >> you used to have to go to the bank. this is a first world problem, you use a credit card, you pay service charge and get points.

>> answer is banks have to make money or they won't be label to lend -- be able to lend money, they are not making much on 0% interest rates. david: i would pay more for convenience, that is it for "bulls and bears" thanks for watching. we'll see you next time. elizabeth: president trump signing a new executive order he said will protect americans from 2020 democrat takeover of healthcare. >> senator elizabeth warren countering today with her plan to strengthening labor unions. watch out, how her big government he'l health plan woud slam the same unions. >> also how retailers may beat the big government democrats at their own game. walmart, cvs, walgreen, making health care cheaper. >> also debate on washington rules beyond recognition, republicans hollering thathe