188. when the impeachment process vote said yes, we were down 180. now 20 minutes later we're down 164. i don't think impeachment had that big of an impact on the market. more like trade did it i. neil it is yours. neil: thank you very much, stuart. happy halloween, everyone. ♪. that is scary music because this phase one trade deal, phase one maybe not done. china pulling a michael myers on halloween, spooking markets, taking a hatchet to the hopes of a long-term trade deal. weak manufacturing data that added to the terrorizing fears. are they justified? [laughter]. we'll see. two hours here, not everything

will be in black and white or scary. that is where we stand, down 169 points. stuart said this has more to do with the trade front. that things are not progressing. chinese overnight, essentially getting nasty, it might be phase one and done if we get that. that is president is a little impulsive. we're not thinking we'll make progress for anything else getting done. president directly not responded to the criticism outside the fact hoped the deal would be scored although the chile conference it was supposed to scored and deal written on won't happen in chile. it will happen somewhere. they hope it happens pretty soon. get the lead from john layfield and rebecca waltzer. what do you make of how the chinese suddenly shifted ground here? i think that has more to do with the selloff and why 28 dow stocks are down than anything happening on the impeachment

front, so far deemed much more political than substantive, what do you think? >> i think this is much more political. china is walking a very fine line realizing they have the with growth since 1992. almost 30 years. they must do something about the president while he is president. they see what is going on. they may want to outrun him or live him so to speak. phase one is moving forward. we have indications from china and president trump and tweets and others phase one is looking like a deal. i'm optimistic that this president is in it for the long haul, that it will happen. neil: john layfield on the impeachment front thing, it is interesting that the vote was 232-296, largely along partisan lines, that this isn't the process to impeachment. it is a mouthful but i'm surprised by the number, the 232 number.

what did you think? >> i thought it was right along partisan lines, which it shouldn't be. they're arguing over process here. nobody is arguing whether there is right or wrong. very few people. they want to get the facts. they're arguing over the process here. 100% partisan vote right now which is a shameful for our congress to go through something as important as, so many implications to the united states as impeachment of a president and doing it along partisan lines. neil: looking at economic fallout, i'm not debating whether grounds of impeachment whether they're fair or not, but if it drags on. could lead, what steny hoyer was saying house number two democrat, last week, wrap this up before the christmas recess in the house, i assume he is talking about a impeachment vote. that lands this into early next year in middle of caucuses and primaries. you have six senators running for president right now, who

would have to attend those trial hearings. what do you make of that? >> i'm sorry. neil: i apologize. i wasn't clear. rebecca, your thoughts on that? >> that's okay. obviously this is a very political process, although there should be due process as lawyer tell you the way it has been handled so far is awful. it is political, we've seen very few impeachments before but they have been more bipartisan if there is such a thing as bipartisan impeachment but the fact this is very political. the markets don't like uncertainty as we know. short-term traders make money on uncertainty, there are trades to be made, look as china situation as an example we need a pretty much that is strong and the country behind him. an impeachment process does not bode well for that particular thing. so, i think that you know, we've got to get this resolved and as fast as possible. neil: you know, jonathan, the other side of that is, an this

trade thing, it delays the chinese even wanting to go, to something more involved and to get beyond phase one because technically we haven't written off the phase one deal but they're not quite sure of this impeachment thing goes. we're emersed in it here. all they know it is very confusing over there. >> look at it from china's point aside. i believe rebecca is right, they're killing the clock. look what president trump promised for trade deal. promised a manufacturing renaissance. we had manufacturing recession. he promised trade deficit would to down. it has gone up. he promised america would be more intigrated. look with rpac which is trade deal including with india. china is becoming more intigrated. america is becoming more isolated. losing the house in the last election. look at impeachment process going on, promise of 4, 5, 6% gdp we're growing two last year which is exactly what obama grew at from 2011 to 2017, china sees

significant weakness in the united states in my opinion. i believe china will slow the clock, push it out as far as possible sensing something will happen with the president and they're sensing blood in the water. neil: 28 of dow 30 component are off particularly apple with better-than-expected earnings report and positive guidance yesterday. that stock up close to five bucks a share right now. meantime, trade issues notwithstanding, maybe what telegraphs some chinese remarks overnight was comments made by secretary of state mike pompeo just yesterday. take a look. >> chinese economist party is offering its people in the world entire different governance. leninist rule and everyone must act in the will of communist elite. that is not a future i want. i think it is not a future anyone in this room wants.

it is not a future that other democracies want and it is not a future that the people of china, freedom-loving people of china everywhere don't want this model. neil: some, at least speculated here, liz peek earlier on with maria bartiromo, that sort of was the opening salvo to which the chinese got a head's up, wanted to sort of respond. they did. things are really nasty right now. we've seen moments like this before. again people are selling firsts asking questions whether the two sides come back together to resume talks a little bit later. former ambassador to china under president barack obama gary locke. ambassador, very good to have you. thanks for taking the time. >> good to be with you. neil: so, ambassador first off on what the chinese are now saying, let's say in response to what the secretary of state was, was relaying, that they're not fair players. they're not straight shooters.

and no trade agreement is going to quickly address or change that. what did you make of it? >> well it's true. china has a totally different cultural history and way of life and a very different political system. it is becoming more clear over the last several areas that under president xi xinping it is becoming more authoritarian and so these differences i think will continue. the question is whether or not the china, chinese leaders will compartmentalize the criticism by the united states and the world view about china's politics and, culture, history, and still move forward with a trade deal. so i'm still hopeful that we will get some sort of a limited trade agreement over the next month or so. it will not be far-reaching. but china also knows that it is in its own economic self-interest to at least avoid the escalation of the trade war.

the only problem is, that the agreement so far that has been announced, tentative agreement, simply calls for no further increases in the existing tariffs in exchange, china will resume purchases of some agricultural commodities. but for the average american household, we're still going to be stuck with these existing tariffs, unclear whether or not the tariffs that the president proposed for december will still go into effect. but the net result is, that the consensus by the business journal's, newspapers, "wall street journal," the new york fed, is that the american household is paying on average over $1000 more per year with all these tariffs that are already in place. neil: do you think, if not for this trade war, we would be doing a lot better? the president has argued that we would be doing a heck of a lot better if the fed didn't raise rates as soon as quickly as it did. it unwound three of those rate

hikes by cutting rates three-times, third time this year, that mate be it for a while but that is contributing to this environment, what do you think? >> well there are some things contributing to the slowdown of the economy, not just here in the united states but also worldwide which also affects the quon -- economy of the united states. a lot come back to tariffs we imposed not just on china but all over the world. i don't think tariffs are a good way to approach some of these economic issues. legitimate economic issues that we have with china and many other countries. but, tariffs lead to a trade war and in a trade war there are no winners. there are only losers, losers on both sides, especially the consumers. certainly the american consumer is feeling that. neil: well the consumer has a funny way of showing it right? if they were really retrenching they would be not buying. if they were concerned would not

having a aggressive holiday spending plan born out in some of these surveys. what do you think of that? >> well, obviously the consumer spending is propping up and driving the u.s. economy right now but reality is if you have $1000 less in your pocket, that is $1000 you could have spent on more purchases or vacations. neil: no i understand -- >> or retirement, thinks like that. neil: i'm trying to say if it was real mood dampener, they wouldn't plan increase spending tune of four to 5% last year. that might point out to your point maybe, but what do you make of that? that shows extreme resilience in the face of a lot of stuff, right? >> obviously the u.s. economy is still very, very strong. it is slowing down as some of your previous guests indicated. but consumer confidence is still pretty good and good thing. otherwise the economy would be in much dire straits. neil: all right. always a pleasure having you ambassador. thanks for taking the time.

>> thank you. neil: in the meantime here, the house has gone fast as you heard already. the formal rules what would be a trump impeachment inquiry. it is not an inquiry vote as much as it is a process vote. the idea is to get the republicans involved but this is buy and large along partisan lines. democrats like it. think it is the right thing to do. republicans don't, think it is the wrong thing to do. stay with us.

neil: if it does happen that way, it goes to senate, can you think of any of your republican colleagues right now who would go along? >> if it does get overhere obviously we have a responsibility under the constitution to hear the

argument but i think the way this case was constructed, the way that the house has gone about it, is going to make it very, very difficult to see this as anything but a partisan play by democrats in the house who have always had in their hearts and minds a desire to try and impeach the president from the very first day he took office. neil: all right. and as he was kind of hinting at here, the very next day the house went ahead and improved this means which they can keep the impeachment process rolling here. it was along partisan lines here but 232 yeas for it. hillary vaughn on capitol hill. the significance of that. hillary. reporter: this means the impeachment inquiry is not winding down, it is ramping up. two democrat voted against the resolution, setting ground rules for impeachment inquiry moving forward. those two democrats, congressman jeff van drew from new jersey and congressman colin peterson from minnesota.

this vote happened after democrats have been conducting dozens of closed doors interviews in the basement of the capitol for weeks. this means democrats can bring witness interviews from the basement into public view in a public hearing. but we heard from a lot of house republicans on the house floor today, that called this probe a soviet style sham. >> are we gathered in the final moments before we depart for a week, to fund our government, to pay our troops? are we gathered today to prove a new trade deal? that answer would be unanimously no. more subpoenas than laws. that's the legacy. reporter: we heard two major issues, with republicans about these ground rules. first, it doesn't allow them the ability to subpoena witnesses. second, that it doesn't give the president due process. republicans also continued to complain their questions were

shut down by adam schiff in the scif, something that house speaker nancy pelosi addressed on the house floor saying it is not true. >> the decision has not been made. that is what the inquiry will investigate and then we can make the decision, based on the truth. i don't know why the republicans are afraid of the truth. reporter: also reacting to the vote saying in a statement this, nancy pelosi and democrats unhinged the illegitimate impeachment proceeding does not hurt president trump t hurts the american people. they want to render a verdict without giving the administration to mount a defense. that is unfair, unconstitutional, fundamentally un-american. neil, just because house democrats can hold public hearings, doesn't mean closed-door depositions in the basement of the capitol are over. one is happening with timothy morrison who was answering questions from house impeachment investigators.

neil. neil: thank you very much, hillary vaughn. it is a great fund-raising vehicle for the president. the trump campaign fund-raising off of this has been off the charts, spearheading a lot of that effort, former small business administration administrator under president trump, linda mcmahon. she has super-pac running ads in the districts highlighting impeachment. good to have you. >> hi, neil. nice to be here. neil: this is rally is, can you tell you what you've seen? >> our fund-raising at america first, our super-pac, when nancy pelosi announced that we were moving forward with this impeachment inquiry, the inquiry in the next seven days we raised $7 million. that is almost a million dollars a day. neil: versus what was it prior? >> fraction of that. if you look at the last quarter what is going on with fund-raising, with the rnc, with the, with the trump victory, with the trump campaign, they were like $45 million.

it was more than they have seen in a quarter like that. it is really quite amazing how the base is rallying. in fact i think 300,000 new voters who came in and, donors who came in during that past quarter for the committees. so that, that speaks i think volumes to how people are rallying behind the president. neil: democrats are doing a lot of fund-raising off of this. i get the politics part of it. linda, i wonder where all of this goes? i still can't see the president getting impeached certainly in the senate. he might in the house given these numbers. this is like getting the ball rolling in that regard, but do you see this situation casts a pall on the president through the election year? they're going to say, democrats are going to say he is the impeached president? >> well i think that is what they're going to try to say. i certainly think we have a president who comes out swinging all the time. he is just, he is umdaunted by

this kind of criticism. he attacks and charges because he knows he is in the right. it will clearly not put him down. neil: did he telegraph to you, this is draining me, non-stop? whether it is non-stop, whether legit or not, did he ever hint to you or say, i can't deal with this? >> no. i think his frustration was we're not getting done what we can get done. look what he did do in spite of all of that? look at where the economy is today. look at where the jeb reports are? wages increasing since he came on board. all positive things done under this president in spite of all this trying to pull him down. he keeps plowing through the frustration is, how much more could he have gotten done? how much further could we be along without all this hagging around his neck? neil: when you were working with him he would always criticize or

often criticize the federal reserve, that it made things worse, tightening when it did. reverse ad lot of hikes, three of them this year. the the federal reserve comes back, critics say if not for your trade war, uncertainty it caused we wouldn't be cutting right now. who is to blame? >> i think the president clearly stood up, he ran on this, you know, getting a thank you trade deal with china because they have been picking our pockets for so long. he ran on that. he clearly stood up to it. what better time is there to challenge unfair trading partner when you do have a strong economy? i think that is what he has done. he stepped in. he kept at it. we'll see where it goes. neil: do you worry, we're hearing bellicose talk, almost like professional wrestling. we're hearing a lot of talk, we'll not go beyond phase one with you. we don't like it. back and forth. back and forth. it is one and done, phase one thing, nothing else?

>> phase one would clearly be improvement. i think there will be more than phase one. i want to see phase one get signed. i want to see the agricultural products moving into china. i want our financial people -- neil: do you think the chinese make good on their promises? >> i certainly hope so. i'm optimistic they will, because their economy is hurting so much. i think they're trying to balance out where they are. there are those who would say, china can do a little wait and see game. meantime their people are hurting so much. their economy is clearly declining. you know with every day. so i think that -- neil: factories are not going well. >> i think we'll see a lot happen over the next few months. i do not believe the president is going to be removed from office. what our polls have showed us, especially in the swing states is that, those polls do not want to see the president removed from office. and they're underwater in those areas. i think it is going to be -- neil: going to be interesting. >> a strong election.

president trump will win again in 2020. neil: we hall see. linda mcmahon. food seeing you. >> thank you, neil. neil: we have a lot more including elizabeth warren not really admitting "medicare for all" will cost the middle class anything. but she did hint that it might cost them something else, jobs. after this.

♪. >> economist at university of massachusetts amherst told kaiser health news earlier this year that could result two million jobs lost. he said those would mostly administrative positions, insurers, doctors offices. he said that politicians who want to move toward that system, "medicare for all," have to think about what a quote, just transition a fair transition would look like. what would that look like for you? >> so i agree. i think this is part of the cost issue, should be part of a cost

plan. neil: i didn't understand that. but i think what elizabeth warren was trying to say is, this economist who suggested "medicare for all" could result in a loss of up to $2 million is technically right. how she would avoid that, that is kind of the open-ended question here. former reagan economist art laffer with us now. art, i didn't quite get where she is coming from. what she is not doing, what bernie sanders already has, to say to pay for all of this, you will have to widen the tax pool for the middle class. he argues they will end up getting more than they're paying taxes back, net-net. they're better off. she is not doing that. why do you think that is? >> the jobs this person says will be lost are inefficiencies will be made up for by universal medicare. they won't need those jobs, because those jobs built into the higher costs. i think the economist is incorrect on the total thing.

there may be some efficiencies and cost savings because of accounting, everyone has the same insurance plan. but the real cost of the economy, this is a huge transfer payment in the system. and you know, government spending is taxation, neil. and when they do this "medicare for all," it will mean that taxes have to go up in one way or another on the producers and workers. the benefits will be paid to people who didn't earn them. didn't pay for them. so you will find a huge loss in jobs from the economy as a whole, not through some sort of efficiency gains. you will find a very serious loss in the economy as a whole, much bigger than two million. i think. neil: i don't know if you had a chance to read, my friend, greg ip's column in the "wall street journal" saying that the impact that republicans hope to have gotten from the tax cuts hadn't materialized. it had very short term, i'm using the term, nicotine effect, spurred a lot of investment and activity, but it kind of pooped out and that republicans now are

on defense explaining a tax cut the democrats say went disproportionately to the rich. how do you think they should answer that? >> i just don't think the democrats or republicans understand the tax cuts at all. the tax cuts have been spectacular. they're working right now, with the 1.9% growth rate, latest number, given the rest of the world is doing so badly, if we had not had the tax cuts seriously we would be down to half a percent growth right now over the period from the third quarter of 2017 through to today, we've added about almost a trillion dollars worth of real bdp because of tax cuts and tax cuts and regulation. that is ongoing trillion lasting every year, it may get larger if our growth rates stay above the eurozone and the rest of the world which i think they will. it has been great for the economy, just great. neil: hoping to catch you at a weak moment, what a disaster

those tax cuts were. no. maybe another day. >> forgive me. neil: this is why you get the medal of freedom, young man. art laffer, thank you very, very much, historic figure in all things economic and business, money, taxes. twitter banning political ads. raising eyebrows because jack dorsey is putting ideology over investors? really? ♪

what i love most about being a scientist at 3m is that i'm part of a community of problem solvers. we make ideas grow. from an everyday solution... to one that can take on a bigger challenge. from packaging tape... to tape that can bond materials to buildings... and planes. one idea can unlock a breadth of solutions. at 3m, we are solving problems that improve lives.

♪ neil: nothing scary about apple or facebook. they're doing just find with china and everything else. but non-stop pressure continues right now. you heard already twitter is ditching political ads before a heavy political season that has a lot of investors raising concern. the company is taking a very different tact on this than facebook which will continue with such advertising, not really edit for accuracy, truth or any of that. so two different approaches. grady trimble has the latest how it is all panning out. hey, grady. reporter: twitter says it is doing this to stop the spread of disinformation on its social

media platform. it will allow certain types of political ads, including ones that encourage voter registration but here is some of the things it won't allow. ads that refer to an election or a candidate as well as anything advocating for or against issues like climate change, health care, immigration and taxes. twitter ceo jack dorsey announced the division yesterday on twitter. here is what he says. while internet advertising is incredibly powerful that power brings significant risks to politics where it can be used to influence votes to affect the lives of millions. also in his announcement yesterday, dak dorsey taking a thinly-veiled swipe at facebook which as you said decided to allow political ads and faced criticism for not rigorously fact-checking those ads. mark zuckerberg says he lands on the side of free speech. he is defending his company's position yesterday in the quarterly earnings. some people accuse of us

allowing speech because they think all we care about is making money. that is wrong he says. we estimate the ads from politicians will be less than half a percent of our revenue, next year. that is worth noting that is worth hundreds of millions of dollars for facebook next year. there is criticism on both sides. some people say twitter is stopping free speech. some say facebook allows it to go unchecked. this allows it to differ itself from other competitors, namely facebook. neil: grady, for the president what does this mean? does that mean any -- he will continue tweeting, very nature they're political. >> his tweets are political but, when he tweets out like he has done several times today, he is not paying for those. this refers specifically to the ones politicians are paying for to reach more people than people who follow them that want to see the content.

neil: but he has criticized, dumb decision. >> reporter: absolutely his campaign said the company will lose a lot of money in revenue because of this. neil: thank you, my friend, grady trimble. jack dorsey taking a swipe at mark zuckerberg. mark zuckerberg kind of taking a swipe back. dorsey for doing something dorsey feels that company is stupid. enter charlie gasparino. >> from a business standpoint it is pretty smart. it is free publicity. on the side of the angels, jack dorsey is. it doesn't cost them much money. that is not a big part of the revenue stream. neil: facebook says that as well. >> it's a bigger company. gazillions on their side. the number he, gave you the number. i will say this, we've been talking to facebook shareholders, major players that own the stock, trying to gauge their position on this, here's what they're saying, and they have good sources inside the company. they are saying that zuckerberg is facing a large degree of employee pressure to do something on these political

ads. what does that mean? neil: that unusual to put it mildly. >> employees do have a say in the company. they do walkouts. you see what they do in silicon valley. woke or walk they call them woke or walk? get the terms right. neil: woke. >> they boycott, put pressure on management. they're facing pressure. what shareholders are telling us they think he will compromise on this. he won't ban them all. he will create some sort of committee to weed out the quote, unquote, real fake ones. neil: still doing these political psas, vote, here is what you have to do to register. >> but real fake ones, ones that spread disinformation trump one that said, from the trump campaign that said something about biden's kid. i can't remember exactly what it was. it has been publicized. that sort of stuff would be weeded out. at least what shareholders are saying. facebook had no immediate comment. this is a tough time to be mark

zuckerberg. neil: democrats making a big deal of that. he could have easily said zuckerberg when he was up on capitol hill, that means they're not policing any of the big ones that you guys tell. >> it is fun to beat up zuckerberg. jack dorsey is very attractive guy. he is smart, good-looking. zuckerberg is kind of halting when he goes before congress. neil: has inhurt your career. you're rocketing. >> look at me. zuckerberg doesn't have the cool beard that dorsey has. i met dorsey -- neil: goatee is. >> dorsey is smooth guy. nice guy. neil: nice manner about him. >> he is really nice guy but, you have to side with zuckerberg on this. think of it this way. do people really -- liberals think this because they're so hooked on that the russians through ads somehow skewed the election to trump. really facebook, changed that much, that many votes? think of it this way.

information is so dispersed now, in the old days it was three major networks and three big papers controlled a lot of bandwidth in terms of political discourse. now it is so dispersed. it is not just facebook. it is everything. you're bombarded with information. because zuckerberg takes some ads does that mean people's minds are warped? i just don't think so. this is the case, why should i be the final arbiter? let everything happen. neil: it's a slippery slope, one man's judge on this is another man's critic. >> go back to aoc when she was, she was trying to crucify zuckerberg. she brings up "the daily caller" as an, sort of example of sort of far right or, might have said neo-nazi, compared to at-right commentary. "daily caller" is not the daily stormer. a conservative publication, for pretty mainstream conservatives. the a. c, far left loony progressive

she is, something like "daily caller," puts "wall street journal" editorial page, that is stuff speech should be regulated? that is the slippery slope right there. neil: republicans turned it around the other way would apply the same standards to questionable "washington post"? >> "huffington post" or -- neil: we're free to be discerning. >> you think you're walter cronkite, don't you? neil: you're an idiot. >> everybody needs to know this is inside joke. i think you're better than walter cronkite. neil: that is very good. good seeing you. you look delllicious as always. >> i ran before i came here. wind in your face, hair. neil: i feel that way jogging to the buffet line. >> wasn't that song -- what was that song?

valkryie. neil: this is a great costume you're wearing. >> called being on tv. neil: renegade reporter. he is the best in the business. we kid each other. i don't think you will fine one better. you can try. you will probably find one better but for now. >> take you five minutes. ♪ there are things we would change about work. and there are things we wouldn't. ♪ when work is worth it.

work is worth it. work can be closer to home... pay more... make us proud. careerbuilder. work can work. find your work at careerbuilder.com hi, my name is sam davis and i'm going to tell you about exciting plans available to anyone with medicare. many plans provide broad coverage and still may save you money on monthly premiums and prescription drugs. with original medicare, you're covered for hospital stays and doctor office visits, but you have to meet a deductible for each and then you're still responsible for 20% of the cost. next, let's look at a medicare supplement plan. as you can see, they cover the same things as original medicare and they also cover your medicare deductibles and co-insurance. but they often have higher monthly premiums and no prescription drug coverage. now, let's take a look at humana's medicare advantage plans. with a humana medicare

plan, hospital stays, doctor office visits and medicare deductibles are covered. and, of course, most humana medicare advantage plans include prescription drug coverage. in fact, in 2018, humana medicare advantage prescription drug plan members saved an estimated $7400, on average, on their prescription costs. most humana medicare advantage plans help you stay active and keep fit by including a silver sneakers fitness program at no extra cost. and, you may be able to save on dental and vision expenses, because coverage is now included with most humana medicare advantage plans. you get all this coverage for as low as a zero dollar monthly plan premium in many areas. and your doctor and hospital may already be a part of humana's large network. if you want the facts, call right now for the free decision guide from humana.

there is no obligation, so call the number on your screen right now to see if your doctor is in our network; to find out if you can save on your prescriptions and to get our free decision guide. licensed humana sales agents are standing by, so call now. neil: is this auto industry trick-or-treat? there is no strike at ford, auto worker, uaw striking a deal which tends to mirror what is offered to gm. it could extend to chrysler fiat. hard to say. if anyone knows what is going on, my buddy jeff flock who has details. what are we looking at here? uaw likes ford better, what can i tell you. six weeks, three days, in fairness as you point out, pattern agreement. they hashed out hardee tails with gm. follow the pattern at ford. no strike at ford. those guys are still making

vehicles as we speak. we expect the pattern to be same. signing bonus to come back in, maybe not as big as gm. you know, the uaw really likes ford better. why? look at numbers from mexico. gm versus ford. gm made 81,000 vehicles in mexico. ford made 24,000. they make a lot more production down there. ford employs more workers in u.s. than gm does. they have not closed plants or moved high-profile vehicles to mexico like the chevy blazer. that one really rankled the uaw. i hate to put more of a fine point on it that i just did. uaw gets along better with ford than it does with general motors. holler at me at gm. neil: wondering how does it work then? say gm was the first target case but it doesn't necessarily hold

that it will be the first one concluded, right? but they do take roughly the same deal and go to each automaker? >> they do, right. that's been a long history of operating that way. and but as i said, ford was never going to get struck. i don't think. it was never a target. whereas gm would be a tougher one. that is the one you want to do first. then the rest follow in progress there. neil: all right. jeff, thank you very much, my friend. jeff flock, dressing as himself this halloween which is a good move. the dow hitting a new session low. we're down 260 points. the view, earnings are good, you have a chicago biz survey hit a four-year low. a lot of people are getting increasingly concerned what china meant or implicated overnight when it was responding to some tough talk out of the secretary of state it might be a phase one deal and done. we don't like the way this is going. we don't like the president and

how volatile he has been. in the back and forth continues. remember phase one part isn't done by any means. more after this. here, it all starts with a simple...

hello! -hi! how can i help? a data plan for everyone. everyone? everyone. let's send to everyone! [ camera clicking ] wifi up there? -ahhh. sure, why not? how'd he get out?! a camera might figure it out. that was easy! glad i could help. at xfinity, we're here to make life simple. easy. awesome. so come ask, shop, discover at your xfinity store today.

♪. neil: don't blame apple for today's selloff. it would be a heck of a lot worse without it. apple is near another all-time high. yesterday the company reporting that iphone sales are slowing just a little bit. wearables are certainly popping. it is, services business is on fire. tech analyst eric shipper with us. showing apple life obviously behind the iphone. ray, do you buy that, there is more to the company than the iphone? it is obviously trying to send a signal, not that the iphone is

bad, what do you make of it? >> neil, definitely. we probably underestimated how the watch business would be. how wearables would play a role. wearables is the first step. it will take them into health care and payments t will take them into all other areas related to this wearable ambient computing piece that is happening right now. this is 230 million units of wearables from watches to bands, that will be sold in 2019. neil: do you get a sense, eric, when the company was talking about, you know, giving very good guidance to the holiday season, next year, do you buy that? >> i actually think that you're going to see a surprise in terms of the growth. i think that the market is actually getting the stock. look it is highly valued right now, neil, in terms of you know, the current projects. i think that you know, you have what is been a cycle where the products not really come through. you have other ancillary revenue

streams, that ultimately will have some keels. ceilings. this is a hardware company. the product will come through in a big way next year, meaning the phone in which it will surprise to the upside and ultimately, look, there are some other interesting things on the horizon. you can also see an apple change the model entirely, where we go now entirely to what is a pay per month in which you get your updated iphone every year. you're paying a monthly subscription like you would on apple tv for instance. i think that is also a possibility. but even without that, i think the product is going to surprise next year. you're beginning to see that in terms of the valuation. neil: folks at quicken are doing the same thing, ray, rather than get a whole new quicken program every year, it is a subscription service. you update, get all that, you get the software.

that is a little bit different than the hardware product. that seems to be the wave of the future or is it? what do you think? >> that is definitely the trend. we've gone from products services, to experiences, out companies. a company that sold hardware is selling services and subscriptions, right? these changes happening everywhere in the industry. what eric was talking about, makes a lot of sense. the whole bundle for $50 per month. a phone, apple tv plus subscription. you get payments. the ability to play arcade. you will get the watch, right? there will be bundles that will start popping up. neil: wondering too, eric, for technology in the aggregate this could mean. we're worried about the consumer on a day like this, not the investor but environment still seems pretty support i have of retail season, maybe surprisingly strong one, what do you think? >> i think you will still see people and investors will be

rewarded because people will be shopping. technology is still going to be hot this cycle. it is hard to know ultimately over the next couple of years, given the trade war and certainly we're at the tail end of the cycle, but you know, innovation attracts. certainly the innovations that continue to come out are going to be compelling to consumers. also be productivity benefit, you know, be benefits to consumer side too. all of which i think, suggests you're going to see continued economic activity on the consumer side. neil: gentlemen, thank you both. have a wonderful halloween. i don't know if you're trick-or-treating, whether this will be costumes you're wearing. you look great. be well. thank you very much. >> thank you. neil: which leads me to my halloween themed here, ghastly development on the trade front. is a long-term deal a long way away? so much so it is going to take a

hatchet to the trade deal itself? a hatchet, okay. delivery drones, or the latest phones. no commission. no matter what you trade, at fidelity you'll pay no commission for online u.s. equity trades. at fidelity you'll pay no commission i'm working to make each day a little sweeter. adp simplifies hr, benefits, and payroll for magnolia bakery, so employees like sarah can achieve what they're working for.

quadrupled their money by 2012? and even now many experts predict the next gold rush is just beginning. so don't wait another day. physical coins are easy to buy and sell and one of the best ways to protect your life savings from the next financial meltdown. - [narrator] today, the u.s. money reserve announces the immediate release of u.s. government-issued solid gold coins for the incredible price on your screen. these gold american eagles are official gold coins of the united states and are being sold for the price on your screen. - pick up the phone and call america's gold authority, u.s. money reserve. with nearly two decades in business, over a billion dollars in transactions, and more than a half a million clients worldwide,

u.s. money reserve is one of the most dependable gold distributors in america. - [narrator] today the u.s. money reserve is releasing official gold american eagle coins at cost for the incredible price on your screen. these government-issued gold coins are official u.s. legal tender made from solid gold mined here in america and fully backed by the united states government for their gold weight, purity, and content. do not delay, call now to purchase your gold american eagles for the amazing price on your screen. gold is now on sale at prices unseen in years and this year could be one of the greatest gold-buying opportunities of all time! call now while vault inventory remains. as one of the largest u.s. gold coin distributors in the country, the u.s. money reserve has proudly served hundreds of thousands of clients worldwide. don't wait another minute, call now to purchase

your american eagle coins at cost for the amazing price on your screen. neil: all right. they may be trying to spook the president. this whole impeachment thing or at least to get the process going is not the reason where the markets are spooked. there's a lot of drags there that have more to do with an economy or signs in some pockets, particularly the chicago area, is it slowing down more than thought, and the uncertainty around exactly what the chinese think of president trump, which is not repeatable. it's a family show. so we're on that. we are also trying to get the latest what next in this impeachment drama. who better to do that than our resident capitol hill expert,

chad pergram. what happens now? reporter: the question is when do they start with open hearings, when do they release the transcripts of some of these depositions and what happens next. there was a seminal moment just a couple seconds ago from doug collins, the top republican on the house judiciary committee, where he says you know, look, if adam schiff wants to be the special prosecutor in this case, which is where, you know, a position the democrats have taken, he said we ought to be able to question him the way the house judiciary committee questioned ken starr, the independent counsel that presented the case against president clinton. ken starr actually testified in the judiciary committee in november 1998. that kind of shows you how tenuous this is for both sides, how revved up both sides are, how partisan it is. listen to this from the house floor, both leaders, house speaker nancy pelosi and kevin mccarthy a few minutes ago. >> the argument they've been making on the floor is not real. this is a sad day. it's a sad day because nobody comes to congress to impeach a president of the united states. no one.

we come here to do the work, make the future better for our children, for america's future. we take an oath to protect and defend the constitution. >> history will ask you when you cast this vote, when you cast a vote to justify something that has gone on behind closed doors, i want you to ask the historian and answer the question, what do you know that happened there. reporter: it was interesting after the vote, i asked house speaker nancy pelosi about what, in fact, is next and she immediately tried to pivot to legislation. she talked about the usmca at her press conference. she talked about trying to pass the usmca and getting that into a negotiated form that it can move across the floor in the house of representatives. she said quote, we have a working farm here. she wants to kind of walk and chew gum at the same time. in other words, be able to focus on legislation and try to bring that message to the public, it might just be a message,

frankly, and also do, you know, impeachment in the background here or in the foreground. does impeachment trample all over those legislative issues. that's going to be a very narrow tightrope for democrats to walk. they are going to try to portray themselves, frankly, as doing both. it would be a win for both sides, frankly, probably the most bipartisan achievement of president trump's presidency if he's able to move the usmca. democrats wonder does nancy pelosi said she didn't want just a nafta plus, that's good for her members to get something renegotiated on nafta, but will impeachment, you know, kind of muscle that out. that's the question. as we speak, we are waiting to see just what is the timeline, when do they actually go to these open hearings. there's a lot of people here who don't think they can get that even initiated by thanksgiving, which means you would have articles of impeachment prospectively written maybe in december, then maybe put those on the floor just before christmas. that is a very similar model to what we had in 1998. neil: it sounds to me when all

is said and done and getting past the theater, the house is well en route to impeaching the president. reporter: that's a question i asked house speaker nancy pelosi and others because you hear some of the evidence that adam schiff brings and some of their argument and they say no, we are going to be very careful here and let the evidence take us where it does. and some people say wait a minute, you have practically indicted the president. by the same token, i asked mitch mcconnell, senate majority leader, just tuesday when they put up these big defenses of the president, they are supposed to sit as jurors in a senate trial. have they already kind of crossed the line and can they be impartial jurors. i asked mcconnell that question. he didn't really have a very good answer for that. when they put out these criticisms as to what house democrats are doing as they try to impeach the president. neil: we shall see, my friend. thank you very much. chad pergram on capitol hill. no one follows it better. so could a longer impeachment push for presidential hopefuls, particularly six senators who are running for president, could it cost them time, valuable

time, at that, on the campaign trail to be in washington? senator john kennedy had an interesting case to make with me yesterday on this very subject. take a look. you think this entire process is actually gone amok on your part, meant to help joe biden? >> i'm not accusing anybody of anything. i'm just saying it's been my experience up here there are very few coincidences and i know with the iowa caucuses starting in february, you're going to have senator warren, senator sanders, senator klobuchar, senator booker, let me go down the list, all of them are going to be in the senate six days a week, monday, most of the day, monday through saturday. now, you don't have to be mensa material to figure out who that helps. neil: he's a colorful character. i was so tempted to say that doggo

doggone. sorry. anyway, to turning point usa contributor rob smith, laura fink and dan gelcher. laura, if he's right, he's not the first one who positived a situation who could favor joe biden who doesn't have a day-to-day job like u.s. senator, and senators who would have to be there for this impeachme impeachment, it advantages those who are not actively working. what do you think? >> i have to go back to my southern kentucky grandmother who would say that dog don't hunt. neil: i sound a little more connecticut saying it. >> but i do think that what we're seeing, obviously their absence from the campaign trail is always something incumbents need to face where joe biden is a retired vice president, doesn't have to face that. however, it also gives them a stage to showcase their skills. think of kamala harris in a senate trial really having the opportunity to showcase her skill set.

so i really think this is really about the early states, it's about seeing the trajectory of people like elizabeth warren and pete buttigieg who are moving up and then bernie, who is sort of in stasis and joe biden who has been struggling so we will see if the trend lines continue but right now, i imagine they will. neil: what do you think, tom? or rob, i apologize. >> what do i think? i think when i was looking at nancy pelosi making that speech, i was waiting for her to squeeze out a tear. you know? neil: jaded young man. >> it seemed so dramatic. she probably didn't enter 40 years ago wanting to impeach somebody but they obviously want to impeach the president right now. what i think -- neil: you think that ship has sailed? how we leave the dock doesn't matter as much as where we're going? >> and i really do think that the average american, going into an election year, i don't think again, this dog hunts for the average american. independents do not like this by a 13-point margin. most people see this as naked politics. this is all about the 2020

election. i didn't like all of this drama when it was about the mueller report. i don't like it now that we are doing this impeachment stuff, the sequel is not as good as the original and the original wasn't even that good. i don't think this works. neil: here's what i have heard. i mean, for all the talk about these democrats who won republican districts, what had been republican districts, they wouldn't vote to even entertain this, the vast majority of them did, that would alarm me if i'm president trump. >> i don't really think president trump has to be alarmed by what we see so far. the reason that i say that is because this is going to be an extremely partisan exercise. evidence aside, we haven't seen any of it. i can already predict he will be impeached in the house and will not be removed from office in the senate. neil: like the clinton thing, it will get done in the house but it won't be completed in the senate, but the difference is bill clinton wasn't running for re-election afterwards.

his poll numbers went up, you are quite right. i'm wondering for the president what the impact will be with that label impeached president if it comes to that. >> i actually don't think it's going to affect him because it plays to the story he's trying to tell about the democrats. neil: it's a cabal? >> they don't care about my accomplishments, anything i do, all the great things we have been able to get done so far, it doesn't matter to the democrats. i will point out something else. let's look at how the market is reacting. we see the market is dipping today but i don't think that has anything to do with what's going on. neil: i think this is separate. >> so what the market is saying, nothing is going to change. i think that's an indicator of, you know, it will be stable meaning nothing happens. neil: don't point at me. it scares me. >> i want to get my point across. neil: all right. what do you think? >> you know, i think right now, it's halloween and all that's left for the republicans are to

cry fair is foul and foul is fair. they have gotten a process argument taken away from them. they have gotten the whistleblower's complaint has not been corroborated taken away from them. now we actually have to lay bare the facts which are that president trump withheld strategic important military aid from an ally so he could get an investigation into his opponent. you have decorated officials like lieutenant colonel alexander vindman, like bill taylor, that are coming to corroborate those facts to say they were disturbed by this. i think -- neil: so you would like to give it more time to flesh out? >> frankly, out of all of the witnesses, the number of them that agree with some layer of that sentiment -- neil: you think that's a problem? >> i do. i don't think -- where i am not able to agree with my co-panelists is that it's not expedient for democrats who would rather be talking about kitchen table issues. neil: would they really? [ speaking simultaneously ] neil: they were so consumed with hate that it blinded them. i'm not justifying it then or

now or criticizing it then or now, just saying this is overriding everything. i'm wondering to the degree that it lingers into the primary season, maybe later, who knows. that's a problem. >> i think it will go later. i think the trump derangement syndrome has gone so far that they do not believe that to your point, they are telling the president's story for him. when he says fake news, when he says the democrats are out to get me, when he says they don't want to talk about any of the good things that have happened during this -- neil: but are you worried that more this drags on, the more comes to light and the more unseemly tweets or other things, the more strong-arming it appears the president does to get his way, not saying it's high crimes and misdemeanor but he's hurting himself. it's not democrats hurting him as much as him. >> you know, i think that there are some things that are definitely not advised some of the time, but what's happened all the time -- no, seriously. >> some of the time? >> there are some tweets that are not advised some of the time, some statements that are not advised some of the time but what happens every single time

is the media comes back around, twists things, push them and they actually tell his side of the story, i think. i have seen it happen over and over and over again. neil: you are saying the markets don't care? >> the market doesn't care because the market doesn't like unpredictability. neil: they just like money. >> they like money. neil: they love -- >> we have a lot of volatility. >> also the highest numbers. part of the reason bill clinton stayed as popular as he was, was because of the economy. that overrode the whole impeachment process. i think donald trump stands to be in the same position. neil: richard nixon wasn't so lucky. he would have gone either way, i think. it helps to have the economy. >> in that case, richard nixon had republicans out of the gate that were against him. right now, it is drawn along party lines completely. neil: they didn't come out of the gate. howard baker, some of these others came later on. goldwater came later on.

that was when they were exposed to all this. >> if you look at support for the impeachment inquiry, the trend line is moving, not in a direction that favors trump. the more information that the american people have, the less that it smells like roses to them. and it's hard to -- neil: but there's a difference between national polls and individual state polls. >> i can show you numbers that say target states that republicans are targeting that impeachment is not popular in 17 states. >> we also have not had the public phase of this process. so i think that's when we are really going to start to see that penetrate. when we are all talking about it and we actually have to weigh what was done as opposed to process arguments and circus rodeos with crashing confidential scifs and all the drama that is done to distract. >> i have to make one point. we have already all been talking about this. i think sometimes when you are on cable news sets and this is what you do, you lose sense of what the people are talking about or watching. 2% of america is on twitter. most of america is not in this conversation right now.

i think it's because they are not interested. i don't think they will be interested in six, seven months down the line any more than right now. >> i think some polls would disagree. neil: polls -- [ speaking simultaneously ] >> or talk to your neighbors. you guys are out there. we are all in the cable news stations. i have a republican father and democratic mother. they are a great litmus test. [ speaking simultaneously ] neil: we have a lot coming up, including this tit for tat going back and forth with china but it is not stopping blessedly taylor swift. ♪

♪ there are things we would change about work. and there are things we wouldn't. ♪ when work is worth it. work is worth it. work can be closer to home... pay more... make us proud. careerbuilder. work can work. find your work at careerbuilder.com no, just a sec. what would it look like if we listened more? could the right voice, the right set of words, bring us all just a little closer? get us to open up? even push us further?

it could, if we took the time to listen. the most inspiring minds, the most compelling stories. download audible and listen for a change. anna, do you yes! those plans? i just wanted to show you something i've been wor... ♪ james r. and associates. anna speaking... ♪ james r. and associates. anna. ♪ [phone ringing] baker architects. this is anna baker. at northwestern mutual, this is what our version of financial planning looks like. tomorrow is important, but you're ready to bet on yourself today. find an advisor at northwesternmutual.com.

beyond the routine checkups. beyond the not-so-routine cases. comcast business is helping doctors provide care in whole new ways. all working with a new generation of technologies powered by our gig-speed network. because beyond technology... there is human ingenuity. every day, comcast business is helping businesses go beyond the expected. to do the extraordinary. take your business beyond.

neil: all right. brexit might not suit some brits to the t. we are getting word the president says there might be circumstances where the u.s. would be precluded from doing a trade deal with the uk. boris johnson, as you know, has called for december 12th elections to sort of force the issue and said you know, we've got a big trade deal pending with the united states and that would just be comfy cozy and all is right, don't worry about it. i think that's the president's way of saying don't count that proverbial trade chicken. china is casting doubt on a long-term trade deal as fed chair jerome powell at least for the time being is casting some doubt on future rate cuts. if we are to sift through all of this stuff, trade, it is going to be a very big issue going forward and a lever for the

markets. >> no question about it. we have seen how uncanny it is that this china trade -- neil: never fails. >> any time any news comes out, the market reacts immediately and drastically. so i think there's going to be a lot of pressure on president trump right now related to what's happening with impeachment and other things. he has got to get a china deal done. neil: the fact he hasn't trashed the chinese in response because they actually personally trashed him, saying he's volatile, he's impulsive, you know. >> were they wrong? neil: i'm asking you. >> okay. neil: i'm kidding. but it was odd that normally, he would leap at responding and he didn't. nasty, i'm saying. >> i think he's moving a little more cautiously with the chinese right now because the stakes are getting bigger. he really has to get something done. re-election may very well hang

on the result of that. he's already backed off from we're not going to have this huge deal, now we're going to do it in phases. that to me is playing into what the chinese want. let's slow this down and let's do it in pieces. i don't like how it's going right now. neil: but anything is better than nothing. i hear what you're saying. then there's taylor swift. beijing's rift is continuing with the pop culture icon. the singer is going to perform in shanghai next month, but i guess it's ruffled some feathers thinking wait a minute, what are you even doing here, right? >> you're asking me? i want to say something first of all about china. neil: i was going to ask dan. i don't think he knows. >> who's taylor swift? >> i think taylor swift, much like the trade deal, is going to go from bad blood to shake it off to bad blood. that's like the relationship with china. we are in the shake it off phase of negotiating the trade deal. neil: you didn't offer any of that. >> we are in the shake it off phase of the chinese trade deal.

we will be back to where we started. trump will have made sound and fury all signifying nothing while people who make automobiles in ohio and soybean farmers in iowa are the ones that are going to have to suffer, not to mention the volatility in the stock market. neil: it sounds like you're not a fan of the president. i'm just taking that leap. >> well, his policies. neil: i see. what do you think? >> about this taylor swift thing, entertainer hypocrisy all over again. taylor swift is supposedly now this big activist, after staying out of politics for a really long time. she made that video you need to calm down, we are all trump supporters, we are toothless rubes against everybody that was not white or christian or whatever in the country, but now, faced -- neil: i forgot about that. >> that was her entre into activism. now faced with a place that has actual human rights violations that is actually interring people, she's going to take a paycheck there.

some are so ready to bash america but as soon as when something comes to china and their pay is at play -- neil: wasn't this arranged a long time ago? >> it was arranged a long time ago but if she truly wanted to be woke, she could have walked away from it. >> she turns out a lot of people to vote. she does a lot of voter engagement. she's got a lot of talent and changed the entire industry with online streaming and got a lot of artists a lot more money because of the way she was able to use leverage. neil: someone bought her stuff so she lost a lot of money. >> i love how everybody's favorite person hes to bash taylor swift but the reality is -- neil: the woman has a voice from heaven. we have a lot more coming up. not only the latest on this sell-off where we are building up steam on that, and these fires going on in california. they hope they are getting some control over there. after this. does your broker offer more than just free trades? fidelity has zero commissions

for online u.s. equity trades and etfs, plus zero minimums to open a brokerage account. with value like this, there are zero reasons to invest anywhere else. fidelity.

but dad, you've got allstate. with accident forgiveness they guarantee your rates won't go up just because of an accident. smart kid. indeed. are you in good hands?

neil: all right. the california wildfires are still going on and adding up as well as the cost of them. susan li in california with the latest. what's it looking like there now? reporter: well, right now we have ten fires blazing still across the state of california, including one in simi valley. we have firefighters there working hard to protect the ronald reagan international library. thousands evacuated, 7,000 in that area and only 10% of that blaze being contained at this point. and really being hampered today by high wind gusts which continue to fuel a lot of these big fires. now, here in northern california, meantime, the kincade fire which is close by is now 60% contained. we had thousands being evacuated from this region. right now we are in sonoma close to napa as well and some returning back to their homes, back to their livelihoods here in wine county. this is soda rock winery. about a week ago this was standing tall but as you see a

week later, just a few days later, in fact, it's now burnt to rubble. speaking to the winery owners, they like others across this region returning to see what might be just dust of what their lives used to be, obviously clearly devastated. >> this is where the soda rock winery tasting room was located, specifically right behind us, this was an office and this was like a seated tasting lounge. behind that was our main tasting room which is right there behind the stone and behind that, there was a big ballroom. reporter: now, for the winery itself, according to the owner, it looks like the 2019 vintages have been destroyed. california is very important to the entire u.s. wine industry. it accounts for 80% of the wine output. in fact, it's the fourth largest global producer of wine. this is a very important part economically as well, because tourism also generates billions

of dollars for this area, around $7.5 billion comes from tourism which hasn't really recovered back to 100% levels after the 2017 tragic fires as well. so this 2019kincade fire is probably adding to the burdens of those that live in this region. neil? neil: susan, thank you very much. susan in california. by the way, remember bernie sanders a couple days ago was saying the more people would hear about his programs, the more they would be won over to those programs and he included west virginia democrat joe manchin. we are not able to get bernie sanders but we were able to get joe manchin. it's not quite the way bernie sanders presented it. after this. car like i treat mine.

adp helps airtech automotive streamline payroll and hr, so welby torres can achieve what he's working for.

neil: a lot to talk to you about if you indulge me on this bernie sanders thing, would you support his agenda? >> absolutely not. it's not practical where i come from. bernie keeps saying medicare for all. i said bernie, we can't even pay for medicare for some. i said right now, the trust fund is going to go broke by 2026 and these are people who paid into it and earned it. now you want to expand it. what happens. it doesn't make sense at all. neil: all right. joe manchin, west virginia democrat, i think saying about bernie sanders that dog don't hunt. really horrible impression, isn't it. what he's referring to is the fact that medicare for all, it's not all it's cracked up to be and we can barely afford what we've got right now. what do you think? >> it's very clear at a price

tag of $30 trillion over a ten-year period, we can ill afford to do that. there is not enough wealth in the country to be able to cover that. now, i do give bernie sanders credit, because he's at least come out and said hey, people's taxes are going up, the middle class taxes are going up, and this is how we are going to pay for it. net-net for the middle class, you're going to pay less overall. you will get more back, but at least he's saying it with elizabeth warren, she hasn't put her plan out there but she's pushing this medicare for all pretty hard. neil: -- does seem to be reemphasizing the middle class won't pay more. is she locking herself in a corner? >> when you look at our country which has twice the health care costs of any industrialized nation in the world, that's hurting businesses, hurting individuals, at the kitchen table, and it's taking up 18% of our gdp. if you don't look at that from a business perspective and say that's trouble, we need to do something about it, then you know, you're not going to last

long. neil: she's not not saying that. what she's saying is to get the ball rolling, she will leave the middle class out of it. >> i think what's important to note here is democrats are addressing health care with a variety of plans and republicans, we have crickets. when they controlled congress, crickets. there's no health care plan, it's just repeal obamacare, repeal obamacare, when in fact the affordable care act, a lot of trump supporters in deeply red states are supportive of that. why? because it expanded access to care and lowered costs. we need to keep that ball moving forward and advancing what obama started. neil: if you think about it, democrats gained in the house on that issue. are you worried that it happens now? >> i'm not worried. you know with trump supporters in bluer states are not all about expanding the welfare state for illegal immigrants. that is the part of this conversation nobody ever seems to talk about. when we talk about medicare for all, free college, free this, free that, the average voter knows that number one, the rich aren't going to pay for all this stuff. number two, their taxes are

going to go up and number three, their taxes are going to go up for this plan and they are also going to be financing illegal immigrants. more illegal immigration. i think it's so disingenuous of all the democrats that are saying this not to put that out there. it is very disingenuous of elizabeth warren to go out to these people and say this is going to be great without having a way to pay for it. neil: let's get past that. if your bumper sticker is medicare for all, people go yeah, i hear medicare's great, don't you think that's a marketing problem? >> it's a marketing problem that people love medicare? a marketing problem that people love the affordable care act? neil: when people are holding up medicare, 150 million americans, whatever, their private plans and all, i jumped out for this? i don't think so. >> it is in how you sell it. elizabeth warren has proven to be -- [ speaking simultaneously ] >> means you have single payer, it means -- it's the third rail

of politics. you can't cut medicare because seniors -- neil: no, you're upping the ante for everybody. >> absolutely. that -- [ speaking simultaneously ] neil: that sounds like brussels productiviti sprouts for all. >> i think medicare for all is really the shiny object that's out there. i think when people hear about it and they are not familiar with all the details and what's really involved, hey, maybe that sounds like it's going to be cheaper, it's going to be better, and our politicians on both sides of the aisle are not concerned about cost because nobody's talking about cutting anything. we are all talking about spending more, spending more. donald trump included, right? our federal deficit is rising at the same pace it was with president obama. so my concern is, as people get caught up in the marketing of medicare for all as something that's going to be so great, not be concerned about how to pay for it. neil: whether you agree or

disagree with what barack obama, he said health care for all. he didn't say medicare for all. he said health care for all. i think medicare carries a negative connotation. >> ultimately people want health care and they want it cheaper than they've got it now. they know they are paying too much and aren't getting covered, they know the risks are high. you know what they hate? they hate insurance companies. neil: they also hate the idea of having to jettison that, pain though it may be for some, i've got something, it seems to be working, i can kvetch about certain aspects of it, but i think it beats what this woman is talking about. >> if you go forward and lean into that fear, it would be then we will never end up where great britain or canada is, where their populations absolutely love their national health care coverage. >> you can't compare to grit britain and canada. come on. we have a vastly larger population. >> and different accent. neil: there is that. we will take a quick break here. when we come back, wariness about companies going public

beginning with wework. after this. ♪ i don't know what's going on. i've done all sorts of research, read earnings reports, looked at chart patterns. i've even built my own historic trading model. and you're still not sure if you want to make the trade? exactly. sounds like a case of analysis paralysis. is there a cure? td ameritrade's trade desk. they can help gut check your strategies and answer all your toughest questions. sounds perfect. see, your stress level was here and i got you down to here, i've done my job. call for a strategy gut check with td ameritrade. ♪ car vending machines and buying a car 100% online.vented now we've created a brand new way for you to sell your car. whether it's a year old or a few years old, we want to buy your car. so go to carvana and enter your license plate, answer a few questions,

and our techno-wizardry calculates your car's value and gives you a real offer in seconds. when you're ready, we'll come to you, pay you on the spot, and pick up your car. that's it. so ditch the old way of selling your car, and say hello to the new way-- at carvana. the end might not be as happy as ayou think.end. after all, 4 out of 5 people who have a stroke, their first symptom is a stroke! but the good news is you can rewrite your ending and get

screened for stroke and cardiovascular disease. life line screening is the easy and affordable way to make you aware of undetected health problems before they hurt you. we use ultrasound technology to literally look inside your arteries for plaque that builds up as you age- and increases your risk for stroke and heart disease. so if you're over 40, call to schedule an appointment for five painless screenings that go beyond annual checkups. and if you call us today, you'll only pay $149-an over 50% savings. read it again, papa? sure. i've got plenty of time. life line screening. the power of prevention. call now to learn more. and now for their service to the community, we present limu emu & doug with this key to the city. [ applause ] it's an honor to tell you that liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need.

and now we need to get back to work. [ applause and band playing ] only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ neil: all right. these could be the first signs the initial public offering market is facing a little bit of a crisis in the light of the wework debacle. gerri willis at the new york stock exchange on that and much more. hey, gerri. gerri: that's right. you know, we have been talking about wework. that company's transformation from hero to zero capping a pall in the initial public offering market. i asked an expert what everybody is asking down here, what's next for ipos. what is going on in the ipo market, and what is the nyse doing to try to get it going again? >> the ipo market is still

strong. you have seen investors shift their focus or shift weightings from rapid top line growth of companies and shift that weight to increasing focus on profitability or a pathway to profitability. so while we have seen that shift take place, it has not closed the ipo market by any means. in fact, we have a robust pipeline of companies set to come to market november and in q1, q2 of 2020. gerri: in fact, he told me more unicorns will be listing at the exchange, wouldn't tell me who or when they're coming. now, while new offerings that have already come like uber, smile direct and peloton continue to languish, their shares are down, he is also pursuing what they call direct listings where companies don't raise cash, they get access to public markets. i think you can see their website here. he's also chasing specs, special purpose acquisition companies that come to market, then invest like sir richard branson's virgin galactic on monday. you guys did that interview. bottom line, ipos outperforming the broader markets,

disappointing to renaissance capital which sees new issues, get this, up 28% this year compared to the s&p 500 which is only up 21%. neil, back to you. neil: thank you very, very much. i want to go to my buddy charles payne on all of this, the "making money" host. do you attach any significance if ipos cool, charles, to the overall market? that if you don't dive in the water, because you think the water is too cold, that could be telling you something? charles: no, i don't. in fact, i would -- neil: stupid question. go ahead. charles: i question the stat gerri just said. not hers, but you know, they are using the ipo price in the first day of trading, that's the only way these ipos are outperforming the market. if you take this first day of trading, that first tick where you start trading and where they have gone since then, it's been an unmitigated disaster. we need to call wall street out. they are taking companies public either far too early or far too late. they accumulate billions of dollars of private wealth on the

side. they do multiple offerings, 10, 20, 25 offerings, then they say to the public hey, we're worth $100 billion, you want a piece of the action? the public is getting smart and saying no, thank you. neil: real quick thoughts on the federal reserve hinting that it was a three-peat and not to be repeated, we will not see additional rate cuts. you believe that? >> i believe that they said -- jay powell said what he had to say yesterday on both sides. he did make it a point, though, to say that they are not wedded to any sort of script right now, that they will more or less be data dependent. i think the maturation of jay powell as fed chairman is getting better. i think the maturation of wall street and all their whining is getting better, too. we will talk about that today for the show. neil: i can't help but feel for powell, though. the president is always ripping him a new one and he's saying he's doing these cuts to respond to the uncertainty the

president's trade policies have created. the president goes around and says no, it's your rate hikes earlier that did it. where do you stand on this? charles: he's in a difficult position, no doubt about it. listen, it's tough when the president is aiming his barbs at you on twitter. by the same token, he made a lot of mistakes. the fact they actually cut rates three times this year, when the indication on the december 19th federal reserve meeting, the fomc meeting, they made it loud and clear everyone thought they would be hiking rates this year. instead we got three cuts. that's a de facto admission they blew it last year. neil: you think there is a de facto admission the president has to make, though, that the trade situation has compounded the troubles for the fed? charles: i'm not sure, you know, i think the president has to really be in the job for the american public, you know. there was an amazing report that just came out that talked about unfair china trade and the impact that it had on young men in this country that continues to this day.

the mortality rates, birth rates have gone down, marriage has gone down, household formation has gone down. we are talking millions and millions of americans and it lingers to this day. so i think he had a greater responsibility to try to curb that rather than to help the fed. neil: interesting. very interesting read. you're very deep, charles. charles: i love our conversation. neil: thank you very much, charles payne. he will be coming up in about 14 minutes. the dow down 211 points. more after this. chevy's the only brand... to earn j.d. power dependability awards... across cars... trucks... and suvs. four years in a row. since more than 32,000 real people... just like me. and me. and me. took the survey that decided these awards.

it was only right that you hear the good news from real people... like us. i'm daniel. i'm casey. i'm julio. only chevy has earned j.d. power dependability awards across cars, trucks and suvs. four years in a row.

neil: do you know that halloween is the second biggest money making holiday of the year after christmas. i couldn't believe that. but it is true. billions expected to be spent by the time this day is out. i have my august, smart panel

here to test their knowledge of halloween, why it is such a big deal and how it breaks down to be such a big deal. i think we're ready for this. >> i didn't study for this test. neil: like every test i had in college, i didn't study. question one. the amount that each person will spend on halloween costumes. is it, a, $21? b, $31? c, $41? d, $51? >> b. neil: you are correct. it is b. >> $31. >> 31. >> i'm a blue collar kid. i know that. neil: southern california blue collar kid. question two. are we ready? this is the amount that each

person is going to spend on candy. is it, a, $25. b, $30. c, $33. d, $40. a, $25. what did you have? >> i had c. neil: wow. [ speaking simultaneously ] neil: why did neil just spend $500 on reese's pieces. final question. here we go. this is the amount u.s. consumers will spend on halloween in total. this is across the country, everybody, all right? this is the total aggregate amount. here we go. a, 6.4 billion. b, 7.3 billion. c, 8.8 billion. the last one, d, $9.4 billion.

you were right. $8.8. >> unbelievable! >> does she have the answer key? neil: you know what's clear, she's in touch. >> on everything but the direction of the country. >> i know the people. >> clearly spending is not an issue for her. based on her answers. >> you know what's weird about this, can you ever remember a time, like when i was a kid, it was not the big holiday it is today, not nearly the number of adults got involved. it spread out, too, over time. i was traveling this weekend and you know, they have these events the week before for kids, trick-or-treating on main street or whathave you, and it continues. it's like an ongoing -- >> people will go out this weekend, too. the adults will. they will go out this weekend to celebrate. >> it's like the new valentine's day. >> right. >> i would have never believed people spend that much on

halloween, as you said, the second most, if it weren't for the fact that for months, i have been looking for my cavuto mask. sold out across the country. i could not get one. >> big demand. neil: you know what's still out there, the charlie gasparino mask. >> of course that's still out there. i wasn't going to settle, though. neil: an angry italian face. by the way, 80,000 people are signing a petition, speaking of halloween, to shut down this extreme haunted house in tennessee. have you been hearing about this? they are calling it a torture chamber in disguise. i don't know much about that. we were talking about it during the break. this thing is so frightening they actually have you sign 40 pages of paperwork and all this stuff? >> can i say i wish we could go back to the days of the old ghost on the rickety thing and you have the little actor kids that come out. these extreme haunted houses, you have to sign waivers and i guess you get fined if you scream or curse or something like that. neil: it must be really scary

because no one's finishing the whole thing, going through the house, right? >> that's right. no one's finishing. i will tell you something that is really scary is that on the side, the proprietior of this house is a wedding singer. can you imagine that? neil: this is a dumb question but what makes it so frightening? because a lot of people go on roller coasters and -- >> the allegation here is that it's a torture chamber. this has nothing to do with being a haunted house. look, from my perspective, i'm not going on any ride or entertainment if i have to pass a physical to be able to get in. i'm not the man i used to be. put it that way. neil: you rubbed elbows with the best. >> i got to say it's halloween and this is distressingly close the a horror movie, watching literally about these kids who saw this haunted house off this

abandoned road and go in, and it turns out the haunted house is an escaped mental patient and he killed all the kids. neil: a movie i saw years ago, the character reminded me of bernie sanders. get out of here. but he murdered everybody. >> i'm an '80s horror buff. neil: isn't this getting weird? the pace we're going, it will eclipse christmas. >> that's really amazing in my mind. i don't get it personally. neil: in southern california, how do they handle this? >> we love it. we love it. neil: what do you do? >> do i trick-or-treat? no. i did dress as wonder woman three years running. neil: so did i. it was embarrassing. >> i'm probably not going to dress up but i used to do blade all the time. it was a very easy costume. some black sunglasses and a tight shirt and everybody gets it. it's done. i don't have to do anything.

people get that it's blade. >> totally. >> or morpheus from the matrix. i wear the black jacket. basically black men with sunglasses. >> you're too conservative because you're looking at costs. neil: there we go. >> m going as elizabeth holmes this year which i know on this channel is very popular. i have my black turtleneck also a bargain, red lipstick and i'm going to make my voice very deep. neil: that's actually very, very good. it's a holiday for liberals, right? >> certainly is. >> it's a nightmare because we have this president. >> boo! neil: just trying to wait for the tweet coming for her very soon. more after this. driverless cars, or trips to mars. no commission. delivery drones, or the latest phones.

no commission. no matter what you trade, at fidelity you'll pay no commission for online u.s. equity trades. . .

neil: before i leave you the big

data tomorrow we're looking at the granddaddy of all them all tomorrow. the jobs report expected 189,000 jobs added. unemployment rate 3.6%. still showing good progress. probably will not happen exactly like that. here is charles. charles: thank you, neil. i'm charles payne. this is "making money." the markets are dressed up in red and report that china is potentially souring on new trade deal. before you panic, buckle up, watch the show. there is nothing spooky about the avalanche of guidance from important american companies. your hard-earned money powered the results. you should be asking, is it too late to invest? my panel has the answer for you. house voting to make the impeachment inquiry against president trump is official. congressman andy biggs is