big democratic era, and kerry one of the richest men in the united states. what are we talking about here? i don't get it the hypocrisy here blows the top of my brain right up. i'm with you, neil, who is the one in four, assume it does make a difference. why would it make any difference at all? i'm looking at dagen, but i don't know for sure. dagen. >> well. >> one thing that was written about editorial page of the great deal, president obama's message is that economic growth comes out of the middle class and that prosperity comes out of the middle class, which is so upside down. the class, middle class is developed from economic growth and prosperity and kind of illustrates the class warfare that the democrats are trying to set up. it's like focus on growing the economy, people want to work hard. make it easy for them to start businesses and work hard and then keep what they sew. keep what they create. >> you know, charles, and tell

you something, that i don't know if i'd want a president-- >> maybe abraham lynn done and. >> a highly paid lawyer. >> you're right. and calm down, i was making analogy, but i do think that something we often don't think about, would we want our president especially in times leak this, would be wealthy? >> listen, the underlying message here is not necessarily wealth, it's if you look at some of the pain ads, they're effect i have. >> the inference that it's ingotten gains. >> when they say mitt romney walks into a company. fires everybody and walks out with 10 million or whatever it was. and it's not necessarily, they go over the top when they start attack being wealth and saying, anybody that makes more than $250,000 a year is a, you know, greedy fat cat. where they hit home runs, i think, is on the fairness

issue, because that strikes even, you know, people that lean to the right. they have a problem with wall street making money, getting bonuses when they're getting screwed. >> neil: well, that's showing up in internal tracking surveys, why do they keep doing that. and even again, like the bill clinton telling-- adam. what do you make of that. >> well, i'll take it a step further, i mean, first of all, americans have always admired wealthy people, i agree. and especially people who earn their wealth. you know, people like bill gates or steve jobs, they created something and they got wealthy, that's great. >> family-- >> essentially. >> what's that? >> well, the issue is, charley started to get at it with fairness. the issue is inequality. this is not by the way a partisan issue, we're at a weird time in our country's history where there's more income inequality than there ever has been before, the democrats are talking about that. the republicans are not. i think not only is it an

effective political message, but an important message as well. >> neil: well then you want to be aware if you're in a glass house to put down the rock. and when nancy pelosi was bemoaning off shore accounts and lo and behold we discovered, charles, that she had her own off shore accounts and investments, not that there's anything wrong with any of the above. i'm saying, you don't stand up, you know, and scream that you are this great virtue or this pair gone of just perfect. >> dave: yeah, nancy pelosi, the one who took all of these private, you know the jet sets and taxpayers expenses and family is involved with private equity and investments. but here is the thing-- >> and someone has to be ripping mitt romney is a poor congressman with not two dimes to knock together. >> and try finding one. >> here is the thing and i don't like the idea that adam is talking about, this income inequality idea either. the country was the could he

efficient, and rate countries with economy the close e-one is north korea. the bottom line, we try to keep making excuses, all of this is-- >> north korea is the-- >> the between north korea, the co-efficient is-- >> what about the inequality of nearly half of america. >> thank you. >> where you're going. >> where it depends on some sort of federal payment to get-- every year, like, even including medicare, and then you also have nearly half of americans pay no federal income tax, we have all of these people relying on the government and all of these people not paying a dime. just as one example. that's inequality. >> should your set of facts, you know, an and nothing you said is inaccurate or wrong and then i can, you know, i can list 10 or 15 things where big operations or rich people take advantage of the tax code, get federal, large-- >> one way out.

how about adam. >> all of it's true. >> like general electric. >> it's all hypocrisy, and jim immelt the economic advisor to this president, getting the tax breaks for the company. >> exactly what i'm talking about, i'm not arguing with that. >> how about the fact that warren buffett one of the president's advisors, talks about the millionaire taxes and buffet taxes because he gets all of these-- >> all of these are good examples, but ben stein i want to get back to the point we started here, why vilify wealth, and by and large, that's not the case with the well-to-do in this country and i don't know why we rip it and why we're surprised when a poll comes out three out of four people have no issue with it. >> because envy is a huge part of human nature and the democrats are trying to whip up envy, as fast as they can. they're trying to whip up

facial fear as fast as they can, with the nonsense about the voter registration. >> do you think it's working, ben? >> is the approach working? >> i think-- and it's working and i think that charlie was exactly right. a private equity is the only real target. >> there's a strong, there's a strong sense in in country that wall street got out of control and doesn't make anything, neil and i partly agree with that and the american people partly agree with that. >> neil: you're lumping wall street in with everything else. i'm just saying, let's say that's the case and you are indeed one of the four who feels this way which i long suspected. [laughter] >> then, then, what you're saying the only way -- i'm kidding. but the only way to rectify is is to screw the rich and have them pay a lot more taxes so you could forcibly narrow that gap. >> it's not a question of destroying the rich, it's a question of evening things out. >> didn't you hear dagen a second did ago who said we

make a big deal of the fairness of the rich paying more, but make no issue of the fairness of half of this country paying no income tax at all? >> we should make sure that those, the people who should be paying income taxes pay income taxes. >> oh, my goodness. >> neil: you're answering like i'm the obama people, so you're okay with this sort of warped double standard on what is fair? >> i don't think it's a -- i don't think it's a double -- i'm not advocating their position, i mean, if people don't make hardly any money they shouldn't pay income taxes, i agree, i agree with that. >> neil: go ahead, charlie. >> i think that the rich should pay more, and i am a for the paul ryan tax reform. rich people will way more and close the loopholes and. >> neil: already are. >> i'm with you, charlie. >> you get rid of loopholes and deductions and everybody would be paying at least something. >> the so-called rich people. top 25 percentile pay more

than before the bush tax cuts and carrying this country singlehandedly and everyone else is getting welfare and food stamps, it's a bogus, bogus thing and hope the american people reject it. >> neil: i know exactly how you feel, charles. and buying a car taken on a joyride for two months, return it for your money back. general motors is doing it. but guess who is still paying for it? ♪ ♪ i want to go ♪ i want to win [ breathes deeply ] ♪ this is where the dream begins ♪ ♪ i want to grow ♪ i want to try ♪ i can almost touch the sky [ male announcer ] even the planet has an olympic dream. dow is proud to support that dream by helping provide greener, more sustainable solutions from the olympic village to the stadium. solutionism. the new optimism.™ ♪ this dream

fiber one. uh, forgot jack's cereal. [ jack ] what's for breakfast? um... try the number one! [ jack ] yeah, this is pretty good. [ male announcer ] half a day's worth of fiber. fiber one.

>> we're live interest america's news headquarters and i'm jamie colby. dangerous new developments out of the syria to tell you about today. fox news confirming u.s. intelligence believes the regime will be moving some amounts of chemical agents, possibly including deadly sarin nerve gas, raising fears

the regime is planning to use weapons against their own people. coming up we'll have more on what it means and what if anything the u.s. can do to stop it. the son of actor sylvester stallone has died. finding body of 36-year-old sage stallone inside his home. no foul play, but he was the oldest of stallone's children and included in two films with his dad. including his debut in rocky 5. and i'll send you back now to cavuto on business. have a great day. >> all i want is a refund. >> refund? refund? are you crazy? refund? refund? refund? refund? >> easy. >> refund. [laughter] >> refund. >> well, you won't see that scene on a lot this summer

because general motors just started offering a 60 day money back guarantee on all new chevy cars and trucks. and that, as you know, that taxpayers are still on the hook for about a third of the company's outstanding stock and just to break even the government would have to sell those shares around 54. i think they're now around 20. charles? now. >> dave: it's actually remarkable, but i've got to tell you something that no one is talking about, heralding how great the automobile industry is doing, by the way shall the average car is 11 years old. they should be doing pretty good right now. and oh, and forget about it, the loans that they're giving out. plus, here is the thing they're losing market share big time. >> gm. >> if you strip out fleet sales, particularly to government. retail sales 8% higher. volkswagen was up 34%, honda up 48%, toyota up 50%, and-- >> toyota was in the tank last

year, charles. >> and they're starting to lose market share again and we are on the hook. over 30 billion dollars, the largest unfunded pension liability of any company in this country. >> because we are on the hook and own a chunk of this puppy still. >> i love the 60 day money back guarantee, if they can get those models out-- >> they're not going to make good on it. i don't see them-- that's what we say, and thanks. >> and bailout-- and speculate on the price of gm stock, and same as a big part of the industry that,ed would out extremely well. we can all hope that the money back guarantee works and the stock price. >> you argue it worked out extremely well. >> i think it does, yeah. >> adam. >> furthermore is doesn't matter what we think of the 60 day money back thing works or not. >> whoa, whoa, whoa. hello, go ahead. but my point is that even the

government shouldn't have an opinion on whether or not. let gm run its business. we should hope they'll do a good job of running their business, but it's not our business. exactly how they-- >> it is our business, you know why? we've promoted bailouts that's working and set the tone for the next bailout and on the hook over 30 billion dollars and-- >> no, but i guess, this is steams adam strikes a brilliant point and then leaves it, but i think that it's powerful. if you're going to stick by something with a 60 day money back guarantee, you're standing by your product and of course, you better hope like hell the product is worth standing by. but that's-- >> and the other thing he said for a change, he said, was the fact that we've got to let them run their business at some point. i know the government owns them and we, the taxpayers are in it, but at some point you've got to -- got to be hands off. i will say this, anybody who says the auto bailout is working out is crazy, this is not. and it's a little too soon to say this thing is working.

the stock is at $20 a share. >> the factories are moving again, selling good products a lot of critically acclaimed cars. >> an and neil, generally bailed out businesses are bailed out because they failed. and to say that the company is going to survive the next ten years i think is the biggest-- >> you don't think that gm is going to be around. >> they bailed out. why not again? they're cleaned up-- >> and the cars, by a way, are great cars. ford and gm stand up very well compared to honda, the technology in them is awesome, and they just want people to try the cars out. >> and final word. >> it's a whole different company. cut the costs dramatically. cut the health care costs and a whole different company and talking about the future. >> you know what, ben, just when you think you could take him, you know, he goes teddy hearst on you. and when we come back, two

more companies a taking a hit right here because of what's going on over there and has the gang from forbes worried about a global slowdown and recession right now at the top of the hour. but up next, some democrats are very angry because republicans want to cut 16 1/2 billion bucks from food stamps. but i was thinking to myself, so, i didn't even know we spend that much on food stamps.

>> coming up. a new form to trim food stamps by 15 billion bucks, it just passed the house committee.

>> is it that democrats couldn't stamp out.

a house bill passing through committee including a measure to cut more than 16 billion dollars from the food stamp program, but that bill is unlikely to come up. and meanwhile, the cuts are never going to happen. ben, what do you make of it. >> i remember vividly long ago i had a girlfriend when i was a hippy, hippy, in santa cruz, she was an heiress, first thing she did was apply for and get food stamps even though she was a multi-million dollar heiress and lived off them well, ice cream and cake and that's what people do now. obviously, we don't want one person involved going hungry, but abuse and fraud in food stamps is overwelcoming and it's got to be stamped out. when i heard that figure, charlie payne about the 16 billion that republicans wanted to knock off, worked out to be a little more than 10%, and thinking, i didn't know we spent that much in the aggregate. what's happened, what happened. >> first of all, it's being promoted. and heard it on the radio,

listen. and when i ride into the city and i listen to wbls. every other commercial, got to get those food stamps and eat healthy. to ben's point it's so abused. >> wait a minute, you're listening to bls, rock or jazz. >> i mix it up a little bit. yeah, when they start going off and promoting the president too much, i have to change it because just-- it's like the worse disinformation campaign ever, but the bottom line is that this is being promoted to people and here is the thing i dislike, when i was growing up, there was a little bit of shame to having food stamps, if i was in the store with food stamps, and the next-door neighbor was, we didn't let anybody see and propelled people to get off of it. and now the government says it's not a big deal, and wall street stole the future anyway. >> and that lment has gone up 70% in the food stamp program, yes, you can blame the economy, but eligibility is

broadened as well. the point is if are' going to let it grow that fast, what point do you dial it back. >> neil: any effort to dial it back, you look like a callus s-o-b. >> it bothers that we're cutting a program and probably going back into a recession, and that i think is callus to do it now. to why not do it when, you know, when the economy gets going again? >> fraud is fraud. >> and this bill is reapproved every five years and it should be the food stamp bill and maybe five years have an intelligent debate about it instead the republicans saying cut it and democrats saying don't cut it. >> neil: okay, profound. [laughter] >> charlie and dagen, thank you both. meanwhile, up next, we told you about gm's money back guarantee. and our gang has a stock you won't be returning anytime soon. stick around.

www granger is significantly cheaper. >> what do you make of that pick? >> it is huge whole stealer and it is perfectly good . what does he know that the market doesn't know that is what i want to know? >> what do you like? >> i like rqi . rqi is a collection of real estate investments. >> you are betting on the turn around. >> there is a huge, huge and i think it will continue and pay excellent dividends. >> adam what do you think about that? >> ben is anti-call. i have no problem with it except that it is a call on the market. i would not have too much of it if you don't have that much

diverse. >> you never are going to want to return that. >> index fun. >> this is a good way to get into it. i would look for the best company. >> you thought that was gilly man. that will do it here still take what is happening over there is staying over there . think again. i am liz mcdonald filling in for david asbin . just this week two more big american companies. marriot and joining a list of names and quickly piling up. merge pern companies are taking a hit from europe. we'll go in focus with micah and rick and mike what do you

think. there is too much government debt. businesses are not expand entrepreneurs are not starting new businesses and unemployment is very high. i agree with mike that we have issuings. but i don't think europe will put us in a whole. experts make up only two percent of american gdp. if you see the u.s. banks pull back on lending we'll have problems. >> to victoria's point. then europe and china matter more on the u.s. economy. what do you think? >> i think we were so burned by the 2008 melt down that many people didn't