aluminum fourth place. this rose is nowhere near as beautiful as you are. >> for that you deserve that. brenda: let me tell you something. you are not going to see this on "cavuto on business." "cavuto on business." [captioning made possible by fox news channel] neil: don't you hate it when it happens, you tell all americans a your massive healthcare plan will not cut benefits and the top money watch dog says, well, yes, they will kind of. that is kind of what happened this week. so, before they rush the bill through should we be wondering about other surprises that could be in there? i'm neil cavuto and we have ben

stein, charles payne, adam lashinsky, lee gallagher. >> i would be surprised if there were not other surprises. it is like iran is building a nuke. ok, we know. neil: that was a fox news alert. >> here is what is really scary about this. everything from the cost, how we are going to pay for it, and then the medicare advantage thing, i think, obviously has a lot of seniors up in arms. even this thing, the one thing i'm worried about is reneging on the drug companies. they were browbeat into coming into the deal and more than likely congress will extract more money from them. neil: we should explain there are democrats who say the $80 billion deal with the drug companies they don't approve but the leadership says it can fall apart. >> i think the drug companies will be asked to fork over more. neil: ben stein, what do you make of this?

>> what i'm worried about is the fact this president seems to have very little regard for truth. the fact that he said he would have the plan without affecting the deficit is a lay. the fact that he said he was going to read the budget line by line to cut waste is a lie. neil: you sound like joe wilson. >> this man has very little regard for the truth but i'm worried about his disregard for the constitution. we had a problem with max baucus saying he was going to investigate humana because they dared to criticize the bill. that is an attack on the first amendment. that is very, very, very serious. neil: the so-called gag order they are still pushing that even though we had the c.b.o. report said much of human man that's claims were accurate. where is all of this going. will it seriously disrupt the deal if not jinx it? >> this is far from the final product. there are 500 amendments that i

think they are trying to pass in the next few days, which is an impossible task. any employer that doesn't provide insurance has to aa government subsidy for anyone that gets the subsidy from the government. so they have to pay what the government has to pay the employee. but of course the employer will have to pay a lot more for a low income, single mother, single parent than somebody who that has -- who has a spouse so it discourages them from hiring low income. neil: so you are against it? >> i think that is one problem with it. neil: that is a fox news alert. >> i disagree with the medicare advantage. that is costing more and was originally intended to save. neil: but you are part and parcel of what is going on. when you get people on right never big fans and people on the

left saying we don't like what we see as well as this effort on the part of some democratic kangmen to -- congressmen to criticize the drug deal that usually not a good sign. >> i'm happy to sit here and praise nitpicking. neil: you were not for nitpicking a few weeks ago, my trend. >> untrue. i don't remember what instance you are referring to but i'm a professional nitpicker and i thought in that spirit i had point out a few things i found in the bill that are kind of smart. one is the exchanges provide for a high deductible young invincible concept. that is smart. get people who don't want to get health insurance into it but don't make them pay a lot. it cuts out co-payments in the exchange idea for preventive healthcare. that is smart. don't make people pay out of

their pocket. remove dis siincentives to get checked up the so there are some smart things in the plan. that is what we are doing. neil: you are telling young people to feel bulletproof that they have to get insurance and they will are to get it because it won't cost them as much. an order is an order is an order, is it not? >> yes, i mean the government does require us to do certain things. you know, the militia is out in the west and the crazies find out that we have to -- neil: but it is the government dictating to people. ben stein, go ahead. >> sir, the constitution is not a nit and for the democrats to say you are not allowed to criticize the plan if you are in the healthcare that is an extremely serious issue. that is the most serious issue so far. neil: charles? >> if he were a prosecutor they

would be called prosecutor torl overreach. >> we are talking about the first amendment. the drug companies have a right to put the sorry out there. to muzzle them you want the government to be that all powerful and omnipotent. they are going to save four or five hundred billion through waste, fraud and abuse. that is not nitpicking. another $80 billion on the drug companies is not nitpicking. the bigger items are not nitpicking. neil: i would like to get your thoughts on this, whether it is nitpicking or growing over constitutional issues, the fact that both sides are doing it, liberals and conservatives, in the middle you have the c.b.o. kind of rescoring a lot and max baucus holding these raucous forums where they are having like how thshout downs.

i'm not sure we will get something. i think that the odds have dramatic canally come down. i have to agree. if you look at the baucus proposal, it is -- what he was trying to do is appeal in a bipartisan level add it is so bipartisan that everyone hates it. everyone is finding things they don't like about the bill. neil: but when you are pushing 400 to 500 amendments to make it acceptable, say half of them got through then it is nothing like the original bill and both sides are still ticked off. >> it is a huge issue and the american public is losing patience and that may get in the way. neil: ben, your ultimate prediction where it goes? >> just leaf the darn thing -- leave the darn thing alone. give poor people money to buy a bare bones policy and leave the rest of us the hell alone. neil: sarah a palin has told

president obama she knows how to stimulate jobs in america. first joe biden stimulated i mean by stimul

weapons of mass destruction. back to "cavuto on business." neil: the real world or fantasy island, joe biden gushing over the $787 billion stimulus plan and saying -- then as he wildly dreaming, ben? >> first of all, it is interesting his wildest dreams are about fiscal stimulus. but i'm fascinated by this because the amount of money that is being pushed into the economy by the stimulus package so far this year has been less than half of 1% of consumer spending if you believe the government's most optimistic projectses. there is a -- projections. there is a very built story in

the "wall street journal" saying the stimulus package had not worked at all. i don't know where mr. biden is getting his data but he is a loyal servant. that is what vice presidents are supposed to be. he is loyal to his boss and i don't think we can expect more. lightly to the truth is too much. neil: especially when the stimulus hasn't gotten out but there are other economists who do point to stimulus as stimulating things. but the debate can ensue forever. your argument is that a lot of what we have seen improving would have improved any way through just the economic cycle. >> this is the 34th or 35th time where we have been in a scram and came out -- jam and came out. neil: i think the 33rd but the last two were dicey. >> it is the business cycle. i think what the vice president is doing and karate movies they called this the drunken monkey.

he has this reputation for putting his foot in his mouth. so he uses it as a reverse psychology he said something he was not supposed to say but it was a compliment on a program. it is triple reverse psychology. l leigh knows where i'm going. neil: i think i understand. >> here is reality, the sick, sad reality of the stimulus and why they should not take victory laps. it wasn't designed to work until right before the 2010 elections if you look at how the money will be funneled out. neil: that is a cynical look. >> i think the escalating unemployment numbers are low-hanging fruit for people to say this isn't working but economists agree it did blunt the affect of the downturn. it is hard to say what would have happened otherwise. >> i don't want to cut you off but -- >> you cut me off >> they usually say it worked in convention with the fed, never say the stimulus about itself.

>> the infrastructure and a jobs are starting to get off the ground. i do think -- it is a lot less than they hoped initially. the initial figure was something li like three million jobs. neil: adam? >> there is something that says success has many fathers so there will be jobs created from the paralysirograms. we have seen signs saying this is thafrgs to your stimulus dollars. a lithium ie chronology bkr -- get and spend the money. it is just government spending. i don't know if it is a good or bad idea. neil: they should be careful of those signs because i see them soon and i see them in new jersey and your stimulus tax dollars at work and these dudes are not doing anything. i just say be careful

publicizing this. charles, what happens now? people will look at this and say government action is what got this improvement trend going and they are going to use it to double down with more of the improvements? >> that is if the public believes it is working. this week another 550,000 filed for first-time unemployment claims. they extended the benefits to another 27 weeks. it is hard to keep telling people who don't have jobs that everything is honky doror y dor. neil: employers pay for the benefits when they are extended. >> everybody pays for it. government has no money. government has no money. it is all our money and should we be spending it on ridiculous highway bypasses we don't need? highway bypasses we don't need? neil:

brought to you by the u.s. department of health and human services. >> occupation. gladiator. >> did you kill last week? >> no. >> did you try to kill last week? >> yes. >> this is your last week of unemployment insurance. either you kill somebody next week or we will have to change your status, you got it? neil: i bet he wishes he was living in america today. they are attack i they are tacking on 27 more weeks. are we the land of never-ending

handouts? >> yes. and anyone feels bad for anyone not working but you see where we are going toward the welfare estate and you have to be careful not to fall prey to it. if you are unemployed it would be where you are waiting for the state to take care of you and it is something that can happen to anyone if you wait. if you are out there not working to the point of the clip, you are not working for the job every day you are being sucked in. >> unemployment is the single thing that diwirs this from evey other downturn. if we don't continue to help people will fall in poverty and it will have a far greater harmful effect and when things come become employers are going to add back hours before they add back people so we are in a desperate time. neil: i understand what you are saying. but to charles's point that he sees a trend.

we are sort of seeing, ben, this notion that you will only buy a car if the government helps you buy it. only buy a house if the government gives you credit with the $8,000 and what could be $15,000 credits that could be open to pretty much anyone. we expect and eventually wait for the government to do pretty much everything. >> well, it is an interesting thing. we are essentially by unemployment insurance paying people to be unemployed. leigh's point is correct. we cannot let people who are unemployed sink into poverty. but if we told people you don't get it, they would demand $15 an hour jobs would accept $9 an hour job. i see that. they won't accept a lower paying job. that is one thing that prolongs the downward part of business cycles. but compassion as leigh rightly said demands we help but it is a

serious rigidy. neil: where i drew a distinction between compassion is providing for someone out of work versus someone who wants to buy a car or a house to a vacation house. i think there you start drawing the line but the government does not. >> this is one of those instances where you chuckle when i completely agree with you. we have two many of these ad hoc promis programs that are handouts or temporary measures to help because somebody in the government was trying to think of something. the fed is trying to phase back the purchase of mortgage-becomed securities so there are -- mortgage-backed securities. neil: if the charles is like me, if you invite me to your party i'm the last guest to leave, i'm getting pay-per-view when you and your wife are asleep and i'm not leaving your house. so i think the government is like that. once they look around and say we

are telling banks what to do, we will start dictating where at the do the retreats, how much to pay the secretaries they can't get out. when they say we are staying a little while that is like me at 2:00 in the morning on the second pay-per-view in your home, i'm not leaving. >> and you will miss what could be a great life outdoors. that is what i worry about people can't get out to ben's point but adam brings out -- neil: they don't get out because they are waiting for you to provide. >> and they get used to it. it is votes. that is why it is happening. we are a compassionate country but there are a lot of things that will -- neil: leigh is shaking her head. >> i'm not saying this is just out of compassion. unemployment is tied to foreclosures which is tied to consumer spending. without those we don't recover. so, if people slip in poverty there is a economic argument for sustaining it. neil: is there a economic

argument for cash for clunkers or home credit? >> you can argue that. neil: i can give you credits for sending your kid to private school. >> we were in a consumer spending freeze so that front-loaded purchases that might happen next year. neil: leigh, it is a cook book and we are all on the menu. when we come back we are handing outheair in your home can be

two to five times more polluted than the air outside. smoke, germs, viruses, allergens, pet dander, even smelly and potentially harmful voc compounds can actually be floating in the air you're breathing! but now you can clean that air with the incredible oreck xl professional air purifier, and bring fresher, cleaner air into your home. call now for no interest and no payments for one-year! the secret to oreck's effectiveness is its patented truman cell filter. only oreck has it. the oreck air purifier constantly moves the air in the room through its powerful six-stage filtration system. its electrostatic plates capture many impurities such as dust, allergens, bacteria - even viruses -- then puts clean air back in the room. with hepa filters, you could easily spend hundreds of dollars on replacement filters in just five years. but the permanent oreck truman cell is guaranteed for life and should never need replacing. just rinse and reuse! how clean is the air in your home?

try my oreck professional air purifier in your choice of black or silver for a full 30 days risk free, with free shipping! if you don't breathe easier, sleep better, wake up more refreshed, dust your home less and simply enjoy the benefits of fresh, crisp, clean air, just send it back. it won't cost you a dime to try it. i'll ship it to your home at no charge, and you decide to return it, i'll even pay to take it back. you've got nothing to lose. you'll also receive my amazing refrigerator purifier! it destroys bacteria so food stays fresher longer. plus i'll send you my 2-in-1 cordless electrikbroom, a $100 value, yours to keep even if you decide to return the air purifier. call now to clean the air in your home for 30-days risk-free with the oreck xl professional air purifier.! pick up the phone right now and give me a call! you'll be glad you did. call the number on your screen or visit

oreckcleanair.com. order now! neil: we don't need handouts. all you need are stock picks. >> long-term play weatherford. all will go up and these companies benefit the most. neil: adam, what do you think of that? >> i like it. i'm glad charles brought it to my attention. but they need to expand beyond north america and that will be a

challenge. neil: what are you doing, adam? >> abbott laboratories. i just looked for something that is growing. wall street expects 10% over five years. not too expensive and 3.5% dividend yield. neil: mr. stein, your thoughts? >> i like abbott labs. i use their ear drops and they work well and i love stocks that pay a high dividend. i think everything adam knows the market knows. >> that is for darn sure. neil: that was a mean thing to say. ben, what do you like? >> i like e.e.m. everything about it is in the market price, too, but asia continues to surprise with its growth. south america has been more resilient than we thought. africa more resilient than we thought. i can that the developing economies still have a long way to go. their balance sheets as nations are much better than ours. >>