>> bye. [captioning made possible by fox news channel] brenda: poor, healthy? our lawmakers must think so, because the healthcare bill on the hill sure is, well, full of it, shall we say? billions of tax dollars are reportedly ready to go for, get this, jungle gyms, farmers markets, street lights, and walking paths. they say it will all promote healthier living and drive down healthcare costs. but someone here says they're full of it. hi, everyone, i'm brenda buttner. let's get right down to it. the bulls and bears this week, gary b. smith, toe bin smith, pat dorsey, eric bowling, along with democratic strategist, sarah flowers. welcome to everybody. ok, eric, bottom line, is pork in the healthcare bill good or bad medicine for the economy? >> honestly, i'm sick and tired of government telling me how i'm going to work and play, and

now i'm going toer and sismse the bottom line, the healthcare bill was supposed to address the availability of healthcare and the cost of healthcare. it really wasn't supposed to go and tell me when i'm going to work out and whether or not i should go buy, you know, a squash that toe bin -- >> don't start calling me squash. a brenda: we're not going there, ok? air, the argument from supporters say this does exactly get to the point of the cost of healthcare, because it's prevention. >> it absolutely does. this is prevention. what we're calling pork here, because it's a nice buzzword, really is prevention. it's the tactics of how you make a healthier community. and in the end, how you save dollars. we're talking about creating jungle gym as soon as that kids can go outside and play in communities where that doesn't exist. a harris poll of 1,600 parents of 2-year-olds to 12-year-olds said that 41% of them said that the reason their kid didn't get enough outdoor time was because they didn't have a local community park to go to. it's not about when people like us should go to the gym.

it's about actual families in middle america and the resources that they have to live healthy lifestyles. brenda: the problem here, where's the carrot? where's the stick, toby? >> with all due respect to our strategist friend, she's completely missing the whole economic point. in the united states, 20% of the population consumes 80% of the healthcare bill. that is an absolute fact. it's not little kids playing on the jungle gym. and the problem with this whole idea of prevention investing -- by the way, it's always an investment, it's never an expense. if you don't have a carrot and stick -- if there's not a financial incentive and disincentive to use this, the irony of the who will thing, the healthiest people are the ones to use these prevent i have things, and it doesn't help them at all because they're already healthy. it's absolutely the wrong way. >> here's the financial impact. >> we're not talking about kids. kids don't consume healthcare. 20% of the people in america -- >> children's hospital association says that 137 million dollars is wasted every

year because of obesity-related illnesses. >> oh, easily. >> with asthma attacks that could be prevented if they lived healthier lifestyles. it's a small part of a big problem. brenda: i want to let pat get in here because he has an interesting perspective. pat? >> well, we are the fattest nation in the world, and that's a fact. you know, 33% of americans are clinically obese, and obese people do consume more healthcare in terms of diabetes, in terms of heart-related costs, and you're right, toby, those kids aren't consuming healthcare. but if they become obese and grow up, then they do consume a lot of healthcare. you know, will people just go out and use these jungle gyms without a financial incentive? that's a debatable point. but an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, and if you couple this with something such as smokers pay more on their shelt insurance than nonspokers do, but the point is, if you don't do that -- if you do that and they don't have the resources available to exercise, you need both parts of it, and so this is at least

a step in the right direction. brenda: i don't know. is it, gary? are you going to get any kind of return on your investment here? >> well, yeah. i mean, the return on the investment is the congressmen or senator, whoever got that park built and, you know, had that, you know, the people hired to put it in, they're going to be happier and they're going to get re-elected. that's what this is all about. you know, the people sitting in congress, they don't really care about the health of the american population. i mean, that's ridiculous. look, when people were growing up in the 1920's, 1930's, 1940's, 1950's, there wasn't all these fancy jungle gyms and stuff. what my parents said was get out of the house for eight hours and don't come back and go play. >> yeah, just as you were born in the 1920's, gary, i don't see how that applies. >> oh, it's not? well, then you know what? it's the parents' responsibility to make sure kids are healthy. it's not, getting back to eric's point, the government's responsibility to coerce and push people into a healthy lifestyle. look, the american people want

to be obese, well, too bad, but that's their choice. >> how is building a jungle gym going to help an obese adult? >> how is it coercing someone, gary? >> well, you're using resources from the people diverted into what the government thinks is good. let the people keep their finances and spend it on what they want. >> it's not coercion, gary. >> that's a word point. you lose a word point, gary. >> but is this, eric, an example of the healthcare bill is kind of out of control, as with almost anything congress does, the stuff -- >> rangel said this week that they're going to start taxing -- they're going to add a surcharge to anyone that makes over $500,000 a year, then $750,000, they are just doing everything they can to make this thing bigger and bigger and bigger, and they still can't provide healthcare for everybody. and why in the world does a jungle gym going to help an obese adult? >> but the thing is we're

always treating the symptom and not the problem. you know, the actual problem, we've talked about for months and months, is, a, you have people month who have these health benefits they don't tax, so therefore, they spend money like they don't have it because them don't care. and then you get doctors who get paid per treatment, and they get more money to treat. those are the two problems this. does nothing to deal with the problems. >> what about those who don't have the healthy society? >> and reduce cost of drugs. subsidize instead of jungle gyms. >> charge less healthy people more money, and guess what, maybe they'll be incentivized. brenda: sarah, they're saying this doesn't get to the point. it's not really prevention, because you're just -- if you build a jungle gym, people aren't necessarily going to come. >> no, this is the definition of the tactic that go as part of prevention. it's giving people tools to live a healthier lifestyle. it's creating communities that promote health, which, in turn, create healthier people who consume less healthcare.

it's a long-term strategy, and it's one small part of, as you mentioned, a very big bill. >> it's like treating alcoholism with a juice bar down the corner. it's not going to work. >> prevention over the last 50 years has been the gigantic sink hole, because unless you have -- if you stick to have people do it, those unhealthy people won't do it, and the healthy people get healthier, which is hilarious. >> the point of the jungle gym is to train a new generation of healthy people, the people who are sick and obese right now, that is a different challenge. >> to train these people -- why does the government have to intercede and solve this problem? all a the government is putting money back into communities, and that's where the money should go. >> well, the government shouldn't take the money out of the communities and decide where it goes to begin with. let the people decide. >> why don't they start showing movies in my community, too? i don't have enough movie theaters. can we get that? because i'll walk to the movie theater. brenda: all right, that's good. pat, you ought to drop a few

pounds, you know what? on those jungle gyms. all right, bailed out banks paying back uncle sam with interest, which means a dividend check for you, right? not so fast. barney frank has a better idea of what to do with your money. having to go in the middle of traffic and just starting and stopping. having to go in the middle of a ballgame and then not being able to go once i got there. and going at night. i thought i had a going problem. my doctor said i had a growing problem. it wasn't my bladder. my prostate was growing. i had an enlarging prostate that was causing my urinary symptoms. my doctor prescribed avodart. (announcer) over time, avodart actually shrinks the prostate and improves urinary symptoms. so i can go more easily when i need to go and go less often. (announcer) avodart is for men only. women should not take or handle avodart due to risk of a specific birth defect. do not donate blood until 6 months after stopping avodart. tell your doctor if you have liver disease. rarely sexual side effects, swelling or tenderness of the breasts can occur.

only your health care provider can tell if symptoms are from an enlarged prostate and not a more serious condition like prostate cancer. so have regular exams. call your doctor today. avodart. help take care of your growing problem

ok. oomph. i'm a mommy. i love kids! i'm responsible, loving, nurturing. oooph. momma's coming, baby! [panting, grunts] ah! ah! ahhhh! all: mamma! [baby dinosaurs laugh] sid: [laughs] ha ha, no, stop, stop. >> from america's news headquarters, hello, everyone, i'm jamie cool beefment it's a symbolic and historic event, our nation's first

african-american president delivering a major speech in ghana, africa. president obama hailing africa as an important partner in world affairs. >> i've come here to ghana for a simple reason. the it 1st century will be shaped -- the 21st century will be shaped by what happened not just in rome or moscow or washington, but by what happens in akra, as well. >> the president and the first lady will be touring cape coast castle, a former slave trade centering. that happens later tosmede and a bailout for small businesses could be in the works. the obama administration reportedly working on a plan that would give some of the $700 billion in bailout money to small business owners. keep it right here on fox. those stories and much more throughout the day. i'll see you in 30 minutes. brenda: good news, america. the government so far making $6.7 billion in interest from banks repaying bailout bucks. so we can all expect a check from uncle sam, right? wrong.

congressman barney frank may have other plans. >> this is a bill that would expend that $6.7 billion to deal with the ongoing foreclosure and mortgage problems we still have. a brenda: so gary b., you say that's not his money to give away, huh? >> exactly. i mean, the hubris of these people like barney frank to think, a, they can originally spend the tarp money however they want, and b, when, you know, by the grace of god some of it's actually paid back, spend it again how they see fit, it's just unbelievable. look, he wants to give money to people who can't pay their mortgage. well, you know what if i'm sitting there and get money, do i have more or less incentive to go out and get a job? this is just ridiculous and big government all over again. brenda: eric, actually they're loans and they have to put up their houses as collateral, so i mean -- >> but here's the point, though. the money that's coming in, you said it in the open there, brenda, is interest.

it's not principal. we're still not getting paid back. it's like if i owe toby, you know, $1,000 and i give him $5 a week, he's not paid back yet. we're not paid back yet. brenda: well, it's going against the debt. >> well, here's what they should do. whether it's interest, repayment of the loan, it should go towards retiring the debt, unprint the money that they printed in the first place. brenda: well, that doesn't happen. there's no money to do that. >> unprint the money. brenda: pat, is this the best use of the tarp repayments? >> i'm trying to figure out how to unprint the money in my wallet. that would be an interesting strategy. no, this is probably not the media -- in all seriousness, a lot of these programs is sort of, you know, help people who can't pay their mortgages right now. they honestly haven't worked very well. and sort of the hierarchy of fiscal needs. i would say this one ranks pretty darn low right now, and paying down some of our debt is probably a more arble use of these funds. brenda: toby does, this make

the housing problem worse, too? it has another consequence. >> well, what they're missing here is, you know, people pay their mortgages back when they put 20% down. we know all that factually. when you have a good down payment, you're paying it back. for the people who dent do a down payment, guess what, they're not paying their mortgages back. refinance the fact that they don't have any equity in their house, we're seeing 60% to 70% of these loans go back six to nine months down the road. i mean, what's wrong? i feel like gary, what's wrong with them failing, getting out of the house, and having somebody buy it who can actually afford it? what a concept. brenda: i got to go to sarah. you heard all the guys, what do you say? >> put jungle gyms in the back. >> well, i think this is a response to the frustration that was noted earlier that the programs that the banks are currently engaging with with people who are struggling with their mortgages aren't working fast enough, and that there is a bigger problem. and it's not simply that there are lots of people lining up who could buy these houses. we can't see the mortgage values of whole communities and

whole neighborhoods go under, so we need to keep people who reasonably could take the short-term loan and pay it back in the future and give them a little bit of a break in staying in their homes. you know, we had the fortune to bail out the big banks who caused the problems, and now we need to have some moral conscious tons help out average folks. brenda: many of the serpts, gary b., do say we could bail out the big guys, why can't we help the little ones? >> well, look, i wasn't in favor of bailing out the big guys,, so you know, please, i'm certainly not in that camp. but to sarah's point, thank god we the efficient, effective united states government to the rescue again. they've done such a great job over the years fighting poverty and, you know, healthcare, and stuff like that. you know, thankfully they'll be there to rescue us against from ourselves. >> well, look at the hope mortgages. the hope mortgage, it was supposed to be refinanced, $240,000 a month, they did five. they did five.

>> this is part of the problem, and i think that's where you're seeing barney frank's frustration come from. >> but you're hitting it right. this is what started the problem in the beginning, people who couldn't afford mortgages taking out loans, failing on them. it brought -- remember subprime? that's how this thing started. you're actual opening it up for subprime ii. brenda: quick response, air a. >> let's not pretend like the individual got into this situation themselves. the banks were the ones who made the mortgages. >> through barney frank. >> and individuals have no responsibility. >> now we need to make sure that neighborhoods and communities across the country don't go under as six or seven houses on the street are foreclosed on. >> can i get in on this program? because i'm tired of paying them. >> no one's feeling bad for you. brenda: sarah, thanks so much for being with us. we appreciate it. thanks, guys. coming up just 15 minutes from now -- you'll like this ritzy resort, hopefully so, because you just paid for a $700,000 retreat there. no, not for you. for government workers.

to lower bad cholesterol but your good cholesterol and triglycerides are still out of line? then you may not be seeing the whole picture. ask your doctor about trilipix.

if you're at high risk of heart disease and taking a statin to lower bad cholesterol, along with diet, adding trilipix can lower fatty triglycerides and raise good cholesterol to help improve all three cholesterol numbers. trilipix has not been shown to prevent heart attacks or stroke more than a statin alone. trilipix is not for everyone, including people with liver, gallbladder, or severe kidney disease, or nursing women. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you are pregnant or may become pregnant. blood tests are needed before and during treatment to check for liver problems. contact your doctor if you develop unexplained muscle pain or weakness, as this can be a sign of a rare but serious side effect. this risk may be increased when trilipix is used with a statin. if you cannot afford your medication, call 1-866-4-trilipix for more information. trilipix. there's more to cholesterol. get the picture.

brenda: g.m. emerging from ñcçñ

brenda: so what company gets out of bankruptcy but needs $50 billion from uncle sam to stay out? your company, the u.s. taxpayer-owned general motors. eric says that's $50 billion good reasons for to us get out of g.m. for good, huh? >> well, here's what g.m. has

become. basically a welfare program that happens to build cars. unfortunately, look, here's what you end up with. you end up with g.m., $50 billion, $80 billion in the hole who can't compete with ford, they can't compete with honda. the bottom line, is bend, the same old car company, the same old cars that people just don't to want buy. by the way, the only ones benefiting from g.m. right now, the u.a.w. and the c.a.w., canadian workers. brenda: pat, do they have a shot? >> i actually think they do have a shot. i mean, they're not going to pay back the full $50 billion because they're never going to be that profitable, so let's just write that off right now. but we need to stop anchoring on the g.m. of 50 years ago. the company has shed a lot of debts. its labor costs and healthcare costs have come down considerable. the cars are actually pretty darn good. the malibu beat the camry in every test out there. the trick will be convincing american consumers that they've changed, that the cars are better and actually worth taking a look at. that is a wild card. whether that happens, i don't

know. but at least they've got a shot, because the cost structure is such that there is a shot at viability, unlike, say, two years ago where it was just a long path to oblivion. brenda: i don't know, you take away the $50 billion or you get out or say no to any future loans? >> frankly, i'd rather build the jungle gyms in people's back yards than go this route, because remember, the business model is still broken. when they were the most profitable and actually made billions of dollars in profits, 80%, 90% of their profits came from their finance division, home loans, making subloans, car loans. the only problem they really made was from s.u.v.'s, etc. now their business model, even with the costs cut out, they mack a very slim margin on their cars. you know, they're not selling s.u.v. else and the big stuff. and oh, by the way, they sold gmac, so they weren't going to go bankrupt, when they went bankrupt. what a fabulous company to invest in. brenda: they are a leaner organization, they pitched massive debt. they got rid of losing union contracts. isn't there something to be said for that side of the story? >> absolutely.

financially, they're in -- they have to be in much, much better shape. they got rid of all their losers. they kept the winners. but here's the problems. except for the -- except for basically a few of the top guys and the board, all the people under them are still there. and what those people lack, for better or for worse, was a vision. and even if they kind of get it, it's not like toyota and honda and ford are just going to look the other way and wait for g.m. to regain market share. so you got the same kind of tired thinking, and now they're way behind the curve regardless of the financials. i just -- i think they'll be going back in bankruptcy within a few years. brenda: do you think, though, will we, taxpayers who own it now, we'll get a better return on our investment if we hold it longer? >> well, certainly, i mean, the money's already been committed, ok? so i mean, if you just sort of pull the plug and shut them down now, you have no hope of getting any of it back. i don't think they're going to

be going back into the arms of the government in three years, per gary. they're not going to be profitable. i'm not going to be rushing to buy the i.p.o. when they come out. but do i think they're viable? they got a shot. brenda: quickly, are they going back into bankruptcy? >> absolutely, yeah, right into chapter 11. >> fundamentally flawed. this time they dissolve. brenda: pat, you don't think so, or do you? >> i think the odds are low. brenda: what about you, gary b.? >> 100%. brenda: ok, all right, thanks, guys. so talk about mighty mouse! that harvest mouse is back, and he's trapping $60 million from taxpayers thousand catch him and get a 20% gain. applebee's 2 for $20. it's refreshed, and ready for summer. choose one appetizer and two entrees for just 20 bucks.

2 for $20. it's real food at the right price, and it's only at applebee's. it's a whole new neighborhood.

brenda: gary b.'s up. >> brenda, cheap is still in. at least it is in our household, and ainge lot of others. rost stores is the way to play this one. it's few retailers that's doing great. i think it's up 25% by the end

of the year. brenda: i like that. >> a, it's had the run, and b, our numbers says that we are pulling back, that the consumer is going back in the bunker, so i think it's had its run. brenda: and what do you think you will do well? >> excellent segue. when the consumer goes back in the bunker, oil demand continues to go down. we saw the break of 60, i think we go down into the $50 range. d.u.g. is one of the e.t.f.'s to bet against oil here. go on twitter, though, so when you follow me, when we sell, it you sell it, ok? it's a trade. brenda: pat, should you even buy it? >> well, i would just note that every single one of the worst picks we had last week on the scoreboard was one of these inverse e.t.f.'s. i'll just leave it that. bend a. that means it's like a double down on the short. pat, your prediction, please? >> mckesson, distribution of healthcare products, such as drugs and whatnot, but more important willing, they have a

unit, about 16% of revenue, that does basically if she a, making hospitals more efficient, sort of this healthcare i.t. stuff. most of the companies who do that trade at much higher multiples. it's sort a hidden gem. the company trades at 12 times earnings and i think it's the fear of ready cal healthcare dissipates. you're going to get a lot more pop out of the stock. brenda: gary b.? >> well, i think it's going to drop from here. if you do like, it i think you'll be able to buy it cheaper than right now. brenda: eric? >> remember nancy pelosi's mouse was going away. guess what, it's not. $16 million slated for thatman mouse. guess what you need. you need aloft mouse traps. wal-mart, number one seller of mouse traps. >> i feel like johnny carson, i did not know that. that is wild stuff. brenda: prediction? oh! >> at least you didn't burn down the prop like did you last week with those damn sparklers. >> we expended our pyrotechnics >> we expended our pyrotechnics budget last week.