queried -- loophole? we have been working on this for quite some time. the amendment was introduced in may this year. we have a broad coalition that you will hear from today. what is unfortunate about the process that has been followed in terms of the introduction of this amendment is that there has not really been meaningful opportunity for that coalition to sit down with the author of the amendment to really talk about the consequences of this amendment and to really understand what it will do to workers here in san francisco. while i understand the intent and i get appreciate the fact that there is an interest in making something happen and doing something about this problem, we have to make sure that whatever we do does not actually create the problem -- does not even make the problem worse, which is, i think, unfortunately what is happening today. someone said to me that the net effect of this amendment is that it makes healthy less -- healthy san francisco less healthy. in the interest of whether we

these aren't just loopholes. it has to do with the fact that they're taking advantage of silly subsidies. you knock out those subsidies and those subsidies are there -- many of them, most of them are bad and it's things like paying farmers not to farm and subsidizing high fructose corn syrup because adm are good lobbyists, you go after those and you raise revenue. >> don't you want to do that as you lower individual taxes. you close loopholes and you give money back to people so they can spend and spend rationally. >> well, i think -- well, i don't care about that. if you start doing it piecemeal, then you are raising taxes. >> neil: i guess i'm the only one in scoring a deal here. if part of the deal is we go after democrats and say you show no flexibility on some of these social programs and the like or in entitlements, we're going to show a little bit of willingness to open up on revenues, not to increase tax rates. i agree with you. bad move. but close the loopholes so that some who aren't paying taxes pay th

the way he square that is closing loopholes, which is what he proposed. this is not history, it is not hypothetical, israel. > -- it is real. >> club for growth is what pat toomey -- >> i retract that and i want to amend and extend my remarks -- >> rome was people who argue for scarcity. grover norquist argues that this was a play by the republicans. we are now paying 15% of gross domestic product in taxes. that is the lowest percentage in 60 years. 60 years ago, there was no medicare, 60 years ago there was no medicaid, 60 years ago there were no cost-of-living increases under social security. 60 years ago we did not have a $700 billion defense budget. the reality is that anybody -- no rational person believes that we can do anything about this debt without tax increases -- >> but i just said to you -- >> of a substantial nature. >> >> this week on "inside toomey has proposed a substantial increases. >> they all have plans that increase loopholes, but they had revenue increases as well -- >> you are missing the point. yes, you have to have that, and repu

in his loophole-closing issue. that is $30 billion a year. we're talking about a need for $4 trillion over 10 years if we are going to make a dent in this. even with the sequestered amount, that is the amount that will come in to be cut if there is no agreement. $1.2 billion. >> increase, but not nearly enough. >> let me just say this in closing -- i wish to the super committee could agree on things the way we do here. last word. see you next week.

in his loophole-closing issue. that is $30 billion a year. we're talking about a need for $4 trillion over 10 years if we are going to make a dent in this. even with the sequestered amount, that is the amount that will come in to be cut if there is no agreement. $1.2 billion. >> increase, but not nearly enough. >> let me just say this in closing -- i wish to the super committee could agree on things the way we do here. last word. see you next week. many tourists come to italy because of its past. but milano is today's italy, and no italian trip is complete without visiting this city. while overlooked by many, milano has plenty to see and it's a joy to visit. fashionistas love milan's world-class shopping zone, a neighborhood called the quadrilateral. this elegant high-fashion district was the original beverly hills of milan. overseeing the shopping action are the exclusive and elusive penthouse apartments with their plush roof gardens. since the 1920s, this has been the place for designer labels. in this scene, the people-watching is as enter

that is because the current legislation -- there is a loophole.s clarification does a lot of harm. it does not address the issue, which is the integrity of providing health care for our workers. we always hear the dichotomy of health care and jobs. this is always being hung over our head when we talk about workers' rights. whether it is minimum-wage, health care, tax incentives. it is a false dichotomy. we cannot incentivize the denial, the cap on health care. although we are promising in the legislation that there will not be the nile -- denial, it is hard to enforce those rules. everyone who works under contract knows that the more rules they are -- more rules there are, the harder they are to enforce. the real rules for this is that there is no health care caps. for the public service workers, please continue -- please support the original supervisor campos legislation. president chiu: thank you. next speaker. >> president chiu and board of supervisors, thank you for your hard work on this effort. i am an operations manager with home sweet home

i look forward to a manageable and survival solution to the loophole.have been going up around and around, and some of the solutions have been unsustainable for my business, and some have been unacceptable for the employees. i am happy to hear and see something we can live with. no solution presented prevents or mandates that an employee in san francisco joined healthy san francisco. they all can do it regardless of what might benefit is. i encourage any of my employees that i cannot give full-time health insurance to to join healthy san francisco. they can use their hra funds for that or not. that is their choice. i cannot make it happen. there is a perpetual conversation about a level playing field and the intent of the law. original intent was to provide health care access. i am in full favor of that. i do whatever i can. an unending pot of money that might pay for part of an appendectomy will not hurt as much -- will not help as much as an encouragement for employees that need it to use those funds to join healthy san francisco or get a policy with

he said he wants to close tax loopholes and tax breaks.ry benefit if these loopholes were closed. >>> per this is the amazing thing. the treasury would take in more than we take in from actual income taxes. the amount of money they leave on the table -- >> what? you can't just throw that out there. are you saying that if the tax loopholes were closed, there would be more revenue than the revenue that currently comes in from income tax? >> that's right. there is more of what they call tactic expenditures that is treatments for everything from capital gains to second mortgages to close every one of those. the amount of income that would be taxed, the treasury would take in more money from the closure of the loopholes than we take in from income tax. >> why won't they go with it? >> grover norquist. there has been this anti-tax pledge and everybody understands it. we won't raise taxes. the second part of the pledge said we won't close loopholes unless we can reinvest the safetyings into lowering taxes for generally wealthy people. you have th

but not what his original intention was and how congress wrote the bill. >> jon: he feels there's loopholes that make it difficult to recognize. he feels now it's that obscenity rule i'll know it when i see but it's not as clear. it's been watered down. it seems like -- i mean, would you -- let's back it up for a second would you say it's a valid criticism of congress that lobbyists through the power that they exert on legislators often take clear cut legislation and muddle it to the point where it's difficult to impose. >> let's inlarge the issue from there. >> jon: i don't want to be unfair to congress. they are at 9%. you don't want to kick someone when they are done. >> we were at 40 when i was there last ear time. >> jon: that was a solid d. >> we were thinking how can we get more? as you see what is happening now at the supercommittee. >> jon: sure. >> there's a process. we did not have the 60 votes in the senate. we could not write everything clearly the way we might have if we have the 60 votes. you have to compromise. >> jon: you said the supercommittee. as an outside observer who

the list goes on and on in terms of loopholes for corporations, the capital gains tax. all those could be brought back to levels a decade ago and you would see this economy generate revenue that it needs in order to create real jobs and you'd also see the stability that i've been talking about. >> congressman, you mentioned the progressive caucus will be rolling out an economic and jobs package in the coming weeks. what specifics are in that package? also, can you talk about what are the chances that any of these provisions can even get through congress? >> we are counting on a very significant factor in terms of our proposal getting a fair hearing and an opportunity for people to cast a vote on it. we're counting on the factor of public opinion. we're counting on the factor that the public in general are going to see this not as a symbolic gesture, but a very concrete gesture. we're talking about saving $5.70 trillion over 10 years. we're talking about specific issues. emergency jobs to restore america, infrastructure bank, buy america first, speculation tax, veterans

i am glad we are moving a few steps forward, but i do not think it closes a loophole. it may be titan's it a little bit. for that reason, i will not be supporting the legislation today. i want to recognize the efforts of our colleagues. it is a very tough issue. i want to be careful when we talk about jobs. that is such a hot-button issue and everyone cares about job growth and not losing jobs in the city. reducing our minimum wage would also create jobs. i want to be careful when we use that as an argument to argue on behalf of legislation. we need to think carefully about what kind of jobs we want to grow and create in the city. healthcare is a vital part of that. you never done for many members of the public. it is a heartbreaking issue to hear about many of our low income residents who do not have access to health care and could have prevented illnesses or untimely deaths if they had health care in place previously. i want to thank everyone. i will not be supporting this today, but i appreciate the efforts around it. supervisor wiener: i think we have a good-faith

are closing loopholes and credits, getting rid of them, is that a tax hike to you? >>guest: no, not to me, raising taxes, that sends jobs overseas because question not compete. closing loopholes and making the system more fair, that is reforming, that is fixing a problem and a lot of republicans you will see at the table willing to talk about that because we did not come here to vote "no," all day but to fix what is going on. >>neil: from this perspective of the c.e.o., we just wait the clock out, a perception, if democrats will not budge on entitlements and republicans will not budge on revenues maybe for fine reasons on both sides, we will need the election to sort this out, and by inference that means that you wait 18 months before anything gets done. if that is the case, at $4 billion a day, we will be piling up a lot of debt. >>guest: that is crazy. i hope we don't do that. we senator it to the super committee process because we had a testify time finding an agreement, and we need that super committee to give us a bill, and everyone needs to sit down and see if

and they have offered to close loopholes, to take away credits and deductions. but the problem is as the democrats will not talk about one cut of a program. the general accounting office has given us hundreds of programs that waste trillions a year and we cannot talk about cutting everything. so there is the contrast, if you look at what is happening this greece and italy and europe, the united states in some ways is worse off than they are because we have federal debt. they don't. we have debt our state level. and municipal debt. >>neil: and we will be busy printing money. you were annoyed at republicans who offered tax hikes, revenue enhancers and closing loopholes and credits. without any guarantee on the other side to address spending or cut a single program. if, senator, the other side, the democrats, were to counter the tax loophole thing with cuts on the growth often times would you be on board with that? >>guest: well, i would look at anything they came out with because i respect the republicans on this super committee immensely. i did not vote for it be

and those kind of loopholes are present to close at any time. but there are other provisions of code that are not loopholes and were intended to give a break to a particular activity they are trying to encourage and eliminating those things are increasing the tax burden on the american people and why favor raising taxes at a time when america is trying to get the economy going again. >>neil: very gad to see you again, be well. we will explore this a lot more tonight on fox business network the implication of what day win of a romney administration would be like. he wants to hit with a blitz of attest and a lost executive orders and there are a lot of people saying, wait, wait, wait, cool it on that. more ahead on that on fox business network. a day of action turning into a day of rage in new york as occupiers swarm the city. ♪ i wish my patients could see what i see. ♪ that over time, having high cholesterol plus diabetes... or high blood pressure... or family history of early heart disease... can put them at increased risk for plaque buildup. a

republicans don't want to see loopholes closed unless they're offset. as we know the path that you've discussed, you can overlay bowles-simpson and the gang of six, we know the path. what we need them to do is go big now. right now what's troubling is you're starting to hear voices for both parties say let's do the minimum and kick the big deal until after the election. china would be laughing at us all the way. we're self sabotaging when it comes to dealing with really difficult problems. >> they would be laughing if we don't get it done. john avlon, thank you. >>> still "outfront" newt gingrich surging in the polls. will new revelations about his dealings with freddie mac stop the momentum in his track. we have a new number for how much he was paid. >>> bizarre details about a mother whose child is missing in washington state. the website she might have signed up for just before he disappeared. >>> the man who allegedly fired two shots at the white house arrested in pennsylvania today. ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] everyone deserves the gift of a pain free h

republicans don't want to see loopholes closed unless they're offset. as we know the path that you've discussed, you can overlay bowles-simpson and the gang of six, we know the path. what we need them to do is go big now. right now what's troubling is you're starting to hear voices for both parties say let's do the minimum and kick the big deal until after the election. china would be laughing at us all the way. we're self sabotaging when it comes to dealing with really difficult problems. >> they would be laughing if we don't get it done. john avlon, thank you. >>> still "outfront" newt gingrich surging in the polls. will new revelations about his dealings with freddie mac stop the momentum in his track. we have a new number for how much he was paid. >>> bizarre details about a mother whose child is missing in washington state. the website she might have signed up for just before he disappeared. >>> the man who allegedly fired two shots at the white house arrested in pennsylvania today. ♪ ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] everyone deserves the gift of a pain free

we are offering to close loophol loopholes.se loopholes on those who are the wealthiest taxpayers. this is what the president has been saying he wants. we are willing to close those loopholes but we want it to be part of tax reform which lowers tax rates. only thing that's ever helped unemployment in this country was when kennedy lowered tax rates and when reagan lowered tax rates and unemployment was cut in half each time. >> the problem is that between now and tonl when the super committee has to come up with something, you can't have tax reform. i mean people have been trying to reform the tax structure for i don't know how long. and to then say -- which it seems to the world the congress is saying -- you know what? yeah, it is going to shake the world markets, sure, it might undermine the u.s. economy, yeah, there are going to be painful cuts across the board, but we just can't agree on how to go forward in an adult way. is that the picture of congress that people are going to get? >> well, you know, sequestration is automa

we thought that the better way to do that was to limit the deductions and credits, the so-called loopholes, derive the revenue that way and in doing so you could both reduce some of the rates and have enough revenue to actually apply it to deficit reduction. that amount was $250 billion. >> the bush tax cuts, though, i come back to, because real deficit hawks, many of them happen to be republicans, alan greenspan, former fed chief, michael bloomberg, now the independent mayor of new york, and democrats like peter orszag who ran the budget office for this president said let them all expire for everybody. for the rich, for the middle class, if you really want to get serious about the deficit, let the bush tax cuts expire for everybody. >> if you really want to get serious about the deficit, our country has to grow economically. we have to put people back to work. that's what creates wealth that can be taxed. we're not going to tax our way out of this. we need to grow. and you can't grow if you raise taxes in the middle of a recession. that's what president obama said when unemployment was at

loopholes, that would prevent these kind of practices? >> i think there's been such a strong argument made to congress by employers and retirement industry that these loopholes need to exist, and mind you they don't call them the polls, but these practices need to exist in order for the companies to maintain flexibility. this always seems to resonate, if you go to congress and say look, don't tie our hands with this, don't have burdensome regulation because if you don't let us pull money out when we need it, or put more money in than we need to when we want to, then we just won't have these plans at all. and that usually is a very effective argument to congress, even though it's not actually true. i hope that helps. >> it doesn't feel good. i understand what you're saying but it doesn't feel good. >> yes, ed. >> and you talk about what kind of research went into your book as far as what documents did you look at, you know, are those same documents available to retiree groups to dig into? >> yes. the only way you can did into this is throu

we're talking about a loophole that allows you to go to zero in taxes.t's unfair for us to sit up and say to a person making billions of dollars, we're going to allow you a tax increase -- or decrease of another $300,000 a year while they're going to take away medicare for people living on fixed income. that is not fair. what we ought to say is find a balanced way to do this. let's say to those who are fortunate enough to be in that upper 1% who had 275% increase in their earnings over the last 28 years, say come on, let's tone this down and put you where you were 28 years ago relative to the rest of the country. >> chris: let me ask you one other thing which the republicans say is unfair about the democrats. it's not your plan but the democratic plan that's out there would count hundreds of billions of dollars in savings from winding down the wars in iraq and afghanistan that would be applied to entitlements. isn't that a classic washington budget gimmick to count savings on money that was never going to know spent in the first place? >> it's much more

we think that loopholes should be something that are addressed. with not now?> congress has spent so much money, we are $15 trillion in debt, and under president bush the debt increased by $5 trillion and under president obama it has increased $4 trillion so we have a problem, a mentality problem. >>neil: you are saying stop this nonsense, democrats and republicans. >>guest: we need to be more sane about our spending, and do what other americans have done out there, and that has no tightening up of belt during the hard times. >>neil: thank you. forget occupiers now protesters ransacking and other businesses and holding a port hostage. size. innovation for all. ♪ ♪ small talk, big thoughts, gonna tell them all ♪ [ male announcer ] the most legroom per dollar of any car in america. from $10,990. the all-new nissan versa sedan. innovation upsized. innovation fo all. ♪ and this is the middle-class, the jobs that they create the goods to send to china so they can continue to work. so, really the protest is disappointing because the protesters occupy oakland protests