you didn't wear any red, white and blue. what happened? >> you did it for me. charles: next time you better wear the red, white and blue. "forbes on fox" is next. >> wal-mart under attack for supporting part of president obama's healthcare plan but did wal-mart kill an outright government takeover of health? let's see what this is all about with steve forbes whose new book is a must read. also here elizabeth mcdonald and kneel weinberg. with quentin hardy and the rest of our crew. america's biggest private employer september the president a letter saying it backs the mandate for big companies to provide healthcare to all

workers. neil, you have said this will help squash the push ward government provided healthcare? >> i think business is seeing a socialist future and it is scary. the last thing they want is a government program so they are saying gee, if the turn here to a government program is for us to have to give healthcare to everybody, then i guess we will do that. we will swallow and just have to go on and do it. >> quentin, what say you? >> i think it is a red herring. i don't think the government intended to take over healthcare 100%. wal-mart gets a pretty good deal as it stands, only 53% of their workers take wal-mart's health plan. that compares to 63% of companies in general with 200 or more employees. wal-mart has 36,000 employees on medicaid. if they can hold that kind of program while others have to sign up they get an advantage. >> steve, if wal-mart covers everybody, does that force out this public option socialized

medicine? >> no. it is like neville chamberlain. it will just buy time. the government will push for a takeover. that is what this independent health insurance company or government owned health insurance company is all about. that is how they hope to do a takeover and government mandate is part of that because they dictate what you must include. so, one way or the other backdoor they are going to want a one-pay are system. >> mike? >> going to a complete corporate control over people's welfare just compounds the problems that we have now. what we need is an option so that if i don't like what my employer is offering i can go to my government and get a better deal. it is all about choice. that is it. we don't want total government healthcare or total corporate healthcare. we just want a choice. >> this will lead to less choice because the companies like wal-mart will dump their employees into lower plans, they will not have access to doctors and doctors can't afford to pay the reimbursement rate.

that will dump the cost on to the private plans where those people will get high premiums and ultimately the private plans will be driven out of the market because of the competitive advantages of the public plan. >> what we are talking about is wal-mart. yes, 52% of the workers are covered. they are trying to decimate their rivals who cover fewer peop people. so we are talking about lower quality h.m.o. that would come in the mandate where people would have to pay higher taxes for the healthcare rationing. by the way, it should be noted the president as senator wanted a single pair system. >> quentin, why did wal-mart get together with its former arch enemy union and send this letter to the president? they are embracing the opposition. >> the national retail federation would like to know a, too. they were totally blind-sided by this and let out a press release that basically said "what?"

the goldwater institute identified pretty well. wal-mart was pushed into having healthcare for the workers and charge maybe $400 a month in some cases for a wal-mart worker. that is more than they can afford. wal-mart manages pretty well and now puts the screws to its competition. the targets of this world, others of -- other retailers who have to go out and now provide healthcare and compete with what wal-mart has will be under pressure and they will probably have to do something more expensive. >> i think it is a question of keeping your friend close and your enemies closer. they see what is going on on capitol hill and they will try to come up with a plan that they can live with and which will put their rivals at a competitive disadvantage, having to compete with wal-mart. >> if mike and others want competition you don't have the government. the government wipes out competition. why not allow consumers to buy across state lines and equalize tax treatment between individuals and businesses?

why not let small businesses pull together to get a better price? that is the way to get competition. >> mike, you said that the government creates choice. does it? >> it would be a choice and a very freedom-enhancing choice. part of the problem now is the individual freedom of a worker. you can't just leave your job if you are already offered health insurance to say a private contractor. if we have a government plan that is universally accessible if you want to change years you never have to worry about it. >> there was a big reaction to that. >> freedom enhancing would liberate a lot of u.s. employers to dump their employees on the government. we saw the blue cross/blue shield in the 1960's dumping the worst series on to the u.s. taxpayer. >> john mccain had it right. instead of going to a national plan we need to go the opposite

direction namely set up a system where individuals can buy their own healthcare, where companies will compete and you get real competition. >> isn't that what wal-mart is doing? if the wal-marts cover all of their workers that is private enterprise. >> why shouldn't the workers own their own plans that employers can finance those plans like you do with t.i.a. kref. mike doesn't answer the question why not allow people to buy across state lines. >> that is the way to go. an employer mandate is a low quality h.m.o. that people have to pay higher taxes for and it would be healthcare rationing. you won't get the service that -- the benefits that you need. >> we already have rationing. you need the largest risk pool to bring the cost down. that is the population. >> look what happened to the

mortgage market. that is what government does. >> we want decisions made by doctors and patients. >> the private industry has something for a pool. it is assigned risk. you tell the companies if you want to be in the business there is a certain number of people who are sick, you have to cover them, too. >> quinten, last word to you. >> you let people buy their own insurance. that is fine but they won't have collective pricing power like wal-mart or the government. that means they will have to pay more and that will be a lot of wage pressure. people will have to be paid more money if they are buying their own individual policies. >> i lied. last word to steve. >> when you have real competition look what has happened to food prices. smaller and smaller part of our budget. why can't we get that productivity in healthcare? liberate the patients. don't enslave them to the government. >> would you reduce the cost though if individual workers owned the policy? >> sure, you have competition just as the real price of

automobiles have come down offense the years, food has come down. the real cost of memory has come down. competition works. >> you would have to get rid of state mandates. >> yes, but if you don't want to buy a policy in new york, buy one in michigan. allow them to shop across state lines. you can buy a suit over state lines. why not health insurance? >> that is the last word. turns out the president's $787 billion stimulus is going to cost people a whole lot more than that and that is great news for america?

♪ you're not the kind of guy that makes the girls all sigh ♪ two for three?! ♪ and they never turn their heads and look when you walk by♪ ♪ cause it's the little things that mean a lot ♪ oh, thank you. you're welcome. what a nice young man; my goodness. ♪ it's what you are... ♪ ...not what you've got.

i better get out of here. hooey.

stuart: looks like that $787 billion price tag for thrust is not the real price. a new report shows taxpayers may be on the hook for billions more. a little known part of the plan has uncle sam helping pay struggling states to borrow big money. and mike says that is great news for all of us. first of all, mike, we are talking about this build america program. so, states borrow a lot of money and the interest is partly paid by the federal government. right? you love it. >> i love it. bigger, better, spend, spend, spend. get us out of this mess.

california, sixth largest economy in the world is teetering. you can't let it go under. if we have billions for a.i.g. we don't care we can step in and help our absolutely vital states. >> one sin doesn't deserve another. the states have been bingeing for years and raising taxes. now we will subsidize them more? they get a subsidy with tax-fairway bonds. -- tax free bonds. in california they have a problem. they need to enact a flat tax. >> quentin you have to admit this expands the $787 billion stimulus because you can borrow money against it and leverage up. it will cost more than the original plan, isn't it? >> that may be so and i don't see how we have much choice. this week we report something very interesting. we may finish the year or the

decade with 13 million more in this country and the same number of jobs. i can't manual a more decisive verdict on the bush years but it is obama's problem now and he has to do something about it. the private sector is on its knees. no bank loans, can't grow, can't hire. you saw the unemployment numbers thursday. the government has to do something to stimulate it. if that means that south carolina has to take government money to improve the appalachian trail, so bbeisobeit. stuart: in oregon they borrowed $1 10 $110 million to build a golf resort in a town where there are more cows than people. >> just because bush was reckless, his administration, was reckless with government spe spending doesn't mean the obama administration can leap. it is not just a golf course. we are talking about the district of columbia is using taxpayer money to refinance their own reckless spending via more debt.

the u.s. taxpayer pays 35% on the interest on the bond. it is outrageououtrageous. it is so nerve recking for the fiscally responsible to see what they are doing. >> i was in japan when i saw her what you do when you pay to dig holes and fill them back in. it encourages governments to waste money. it is absolutely a bridge to nowhere. stuart: that is a fair point, mike. you are encouraging the waste of money, politically connected products. adding to the national debt. all kinds of of pork will be financed, yet you are in favor of it? >> there's a lot that need to be done. the infrastructure is falling apart. stuart: we don't need more pork? >> we need bridges that don't fall down but if systemic risk means anything we need to avoid

municipal bond defaults because people bought them as safety nets. >> it is not the u.s. government problem. it is the state and local officials that let bridges and highways fall into disrepair. they didn't make the choices to fix them. >> liz used to complain about the unfunded mandates. >> i never did. don't put words in my mouth. i don't know what you are talking about. >> in terms of the best way to help municipalities is get the economy moving. that means getting the credit system moving again and having the dollar strong and stable and how about cutting tax rates. it worked before. instead of having the government try to do t. we will pull ourselves out of this just as we did in the 1980's and 1990's. >> in new jersey we have nine out of 10 jobs created in the public sector so guess what is happening to unemployment.

it is going down. this is a death sentence for fiscal responsibility. stuart: last word to quentin hardy. >> you have got to get the american consumer moving again. if you think unemployment is bad now try taking away the government jobs and see what happens over the next six months. stuart: i will attend that golf resort in oregon and outnumber the cows somehow or other. call it an inldz day tax revolt. thousands of protesters rallying right now and more than a thousand tea parties across america. why all of those protesters were right. and forget your tax dollars. cash strapped governments are cash strapped governments are going after hi, may i help you? yeah, i'm looking for car insurance

that isn't going to break the bank. you're in the right place. only progressive gives you the option to name your price. here. a price gun? mm-hmm. so, i tell you what i want to pay. and we build a policy to fit your budget. that's cool. uh... [ gun beeps ] [ laughs ] i feel so empowered. power to the people! ha ha! yeah! the option to name your price -- new and only from progressive. call or click today.

i love kids! i'm responsible. ahhh! [squeak squeak] stop, stop! ahhhhh! whoa! being a parent's a lot of work. sid: [laugh] ha ha, no, stop, stop.

if you could help prevent a fracture, wouldn't you? for your free kit, call now. stuart: you heard about this. you know those gift cards you have been meaning to use. you may want to use them soon. if you don't, you may lose them to the government. more than half of all states are already grabbing unused cards and now more than a dozen cash strapped states are looking to do the sam thing. >> what the state governments are doing reminds me of my 3-year-old finding another kid's toy and saying i can keep it because i want it. that is not the way it works. two weeks ago a federal judge in kentucky ruled the state abandonment law was

unconstitutional because the objective of the law was to raise revenue and not to reunite property owners with their property. stuart: neil, are you fired up in >> am i supposed to listen to childish lawyer. the analogy is to a child that goes to a playground and leaves his toy and goes home and if he is not responsible enough to take care of it let someone else take it. i think that is reasonable and in this case if you are going to receive a gift card and forget the money i would rather have the government use it than say that moan you were going to use to pay your mortgage i will take that. stuart: it is theft, it is theft. is that not right? >> you are absolutely right. it is a money grab. the legality and practicality are beside the point. for the government to impose expiration dates and confiscate what they deem to be property that is abandoned here is ridiculous and it is immoral. what will they say, i haven't ridden my bike that is theirs.

i have a leather jacket in my closet? >> do you ever get gift certificates from amazon.com. they have a one-year expiration date. if you don't pend it amazon gets to keep it. the government is not taking starbucks cards or barnes and noble cards, this is government money you were supposed to spend and you don't. if we don't do that, if the government doesn't take the money the way the private companies do these days, they are going to raise taxes. if that is your choice, i say take it from the negligent, what have you. stuart: we will have to get back to this concept that it government money and we are negligent but we will save that. >> they are architecting like companies. >> i would rather have amazon get the money than the federal government and what do they go after next? piggy banks? bottles you put your coins it? take our exercise equipment

back, unused suits? what is next? stuart: whose money is it? it is not the government's. you can't make that case, quentin. you can't. >> all i'm saying is they are acting the way companies act. use it or lose it. they are taking lead from the private sector. >> this is a total perversion of state abandonment laws. they were acted so that property wouldn't lie fallow. it is not so i can't use my gift card i want to use two years from now. no reason i can't hold it two or three years. stuart: a lot of them do not have an expiration date. i make that choice when i buy the card. the retail are makes the choice. why should the government come in and impose an expiration date? >> because two wrongs make a

right. in other words, they will take the money from somewhere and i would rather have them take it from people that are knowledge. stuart: this is tongue and cheek from you, i know you do not believe that. >> i do believe that. stuart: am i right again, lisa? >> you are right. it is abuse of the government's legislative power a copout. if you think this is a silver bullet it is crazy. >> they have a name for it. madoff did it. it is theft. >> the government has been stealing -- you think about it. you look at the obscene rates we pay for phones. this is something from the spanish american war. there are all kinds of of ways the government gets its hand in your pocket. >> that is why they ought to throw them in the born harbor and start over. stuart: i like that. when we come back, the three when we come back, the three welcome to the now network. population 49 million. right now, 1.5 million people are on a conference call. 750,000 wish they weren't. - ( phones chirping ) - construction workers are making 244,000 nextel direct connect calls.

1 million people are responding to an email. - 151 accidentally hit "reply all." - ( foghorn blows ) that's happening now. america's most dependable 3g network bringing you the first wireless 4g network. - sprint. the now network. - ( whoosh sound ) deaf, hard of hearing and people with speech disabilities access www.sprintrelay.com.

stuart: we are back with the best funds to own in the second half of 2009. making a special appearance is quentin. what do you like? >> i like being cautious in this environment. there are too many things left to know about the american economy. i don't think the financial sect sector's woes are fully known. the consumer led economy is in turnaround you have to hedge and be in the market so overseas markets you get a little protection against the weaker dollar and better bounce on the markets. stuart: so you are fund is

fidelity international discovery. >> it is not bad but it is fairly expensive. u. you can get be a index or e.t.f. for one-fifth the price. i like van guard total bond market. we did a story in forbes that said if you look long-term bonds are a better buy than stocks. they own a lot of corporate bonds and some government bonds. you get a hedge and it is probably going to be pretty stable. stuart: do you like that, mike? >> i think you are too young for a bond fund. we need some return right now. that why you go with royce value. up 5% a year over the last five, small cap value stocks will lead us out. stuart: quentin, what do you think of that? >> it does beautiful hard work but when one sector is hurt, everything in stocks is off. stuart: three funds, there you have it. you have to own them for the second half of 2009. that, regrettably is it for