there are people who like paul volcker who really squashed inflation by his actions.ive a damn what the market felt needed to be done to maintain the integrity of the dollar. >> right. david: is it true that the fed is paying too much attention to what the market is doing? >> i think there are some differences of opinion on. that i don't agree with that i, by the way was trained by the same man that trained paul volcker. i'm very much a strollerrite. i think we should -- volckerite. i think these zero interest rates and massive monetary accommodation distorted markets. these valuations are very, very high because hurdle rates are so much lower because interest rates are so much lower. eventually there will have to be an adjustment. the real thing is, whether the real economy, putting people back to work, keeping inflation under control and propelling the economy forward towards greater prosperity, that's what i worry about, and i am less worried about the money-changers and whether or not we'll disappoint some of them, as long as it doesn't lead to crippling the econo

everyone thought we were running out of oil and going to go to $100 to then reagan came in with paul volcker. they kille killed the terrible inflation of the '70s. oil went crashing down to $10 a barrel an average 20-$25 per barrel. it's like putting a virus in the computer. you don't trust about of money. what it means is you get less investment, investment is less productive if you buy existing things rather than things in the future. investing is risky enough but if he don't know what it is you get a 100 cents a dollar for a fact it may not pay off for five years, seven years, whether you get back 80 cents, 20 cents combat at the more uncertainty which is why we have been stagnant, dead in the water by our historic standards. so that's why we wrote the book "money." educate about money. money represents value. and gold is the best way to fix that valley. if we understand that then we can move ahead and get back to the kind of growth rates we had before 1971. obviously, there a lot of other things we have to do, but experience shows us if you don't get the money right in terms of a fixed a

going back to paul volcker, he goes -- he had a monumental problem in the 70's and 80's and dealt withpolicy. an bernanke dealt with problem with an overdose of accommodative policy. >> let me do a quick data check here. >> good news for housing. home depot's and those top earnings estimates. ♪ >> good morning, everyone. merck surveillance. i'm tom keene and with me is scarlet fu and adam johnson. , fisherve the battle versus fisher. stanley fischer is defending low rates for longer. dallas fed president says take away the punch bowl. mccarthy, he lives for debates like this. we have all become a bunch of fed geeks, i admit. who is right? which fisher? >> i think stanley fischer is right and the fed will keep rates lower for longer. i think they will start raising rates at the beginning of next year. some of the hawkish presidents want to pull that forward. tohink it's probably going happen later, because it's going to take that long for the fed to a comp was what they want to accomplish before they are raising rates. -- to accomplish what they want to accomplish before they are raisin

we got paul volcker, lots of other changes in the u.s. last two years. obama facing a republican senate and republican house would be, would be hard-pressed not to give in on a lot of these issues. i think he is a weakened president already and i think he would be much, much weaker next two years and we get a lot of changes you and i both really desperately want to see. stuart: real fast, did you once say on this program a republican sweep would give us 20,000 on the dow? was that you? >> i don't know if it was i but i think it will be a very high number. stuart: okay. >> i think at 20,000 on the dow is clearly within range in the next four or five years. and i'm very excited about the prospects of this country and this economy and especially as it pertains, stuart, to the global economy. everyone thinks this stuff internationally is all just military and political. it's not. the u.s. is weak. that is why we have all the problems abroad. stuart: you know, you are the best guest to open up the show on a monday morning. th cool. >> thank you. stuart: pleas

paul that after the volcker years. >> even though the month-to-month job numbers jump around a huge amountng at a lower level than they were before the great recession. >> what does this mean for policy in washington? you have to sit on a house in the oval office. >> i play tennis with them. advise a president in a complacent time, that is different. there is no sweat. >> there is tremendous amount of sweat. you are trying to work with congress. >> how can he blame congress? >> let's get a final topic from chris. what will you look at as a leading indicator? >> i want to see a spike. i want to see more fear come into this market. i feel better buying stocks when we see more people selling them. let's look for a reversal day. higher close. >> thank you for joining us. >> are you buying after yesterday's selloff? ♪ >> good morning everyone. it is job state could we have news from israel. >> the fighting has erupted again in gaza. the cease-fire was announced last night. it is over now. hours after it began. minutes, we have headlines that an israeli soldier has been abducted. the army of isr

i do think the complexity of the issue of the volcker rule and the push-out's help, there was also an amendment to the bill that was adopted by paulcanjorski when he was here that does give the feds the power to order the divestiture of ordering any segment of any particular institution, if it has gotten out of hand and doesn't have appropriate control. so i do think there is room for subtlety in there. but i don't think glass-steagall does it. if glass-steagall had been in effect it wouldn't have affected aig. nothing in glass-steagall would have kept them from saying we owe $100 billion, we don't know how much we owe and how to pay it off. we couldn't have stopped people from 100% securitization and making bad mortgages. these were new things that needed to be regulated in a new way. >> thank you for that response. you know, the housing market has seen some signs of recovery with foreclosure rates declining. home sales rising, and equity creeping upward. do you think that dodd-frank had an effect over the housing market or just over time the housing market has corrected itself? >> well, we have had an effect. and i am surprised