tv Bulls and Bears FOX Business March 16, 2014 1:00am-1:31am EDT
difference is good. that is the show. see you next week. show, show "fox and friends.", >> cooking with me lucky charges. did you get that? pulling out the executive hand, to force more overtime pay. >> today i will use my pen to give more americans a chance to earn the overtime pay that they deserve. if you go above and beyond to help your employer and your economy succeed, then you should share a little bit in that success. >> some job creators are saying this overtime push will push workers to the unemployment line. are they right? hi, everyone, i'm brenda butner. this is "bulls and bears." here they are. the bulls and bears this week. welcome to everybody. so, john, an executive order on
overtime is that going to send workers overboard? >> yeah. look, the problem here is we have an administration that has been hardly ineffective. but to their credit. they got a very inept congress to deal with. so you are not getting anything done in washington, d.c. right now. they don't have a jobs plan. we washed the middle class. we will be losing since the 1990s. we are a million dollar less than in 28 when the president took over. the jobs we've added have been lower paying jobs. we do not simply have a jobs plan. the only jobs plan they have to the companies that cash on the ballot sheet. we want you to use that cash to hire workers you don't need or they're telling people that are paying minimum wage, we want to pay a little more. we want these people to move up to the middle class. there is no middle class. look at what's going on in west texas and north dakota. you don't have to put any type of measure in, because there is plenty of jobs. this should be left done to the individual states. you should not compare tup lo to
mississippi. we have a national agenda. this agenda is not about workers, it's about all states pure and simple. >> sasha, why should governments tell business how to run their business? >> well, i mean, it says in and it has ways going back to the industrial revolution. it's the laws we have. it's counterintuitive to think would send more people to the unemployment lines because what it would, in effect, do, is have an employer hire somebody else that could avoid extra overtime. it just doesn't make any sense. but the overtime is not, this isn't a new idea. the threshold is not a new idea. what the president wants to do is raise the threshold through mass inflation. >> gary, is that true? is that the way you read it? >> i don't. i don't know how many times we have to go back to the well with essentially, it's a parts controls argument. we have been through it with
minimum wage. we have been through it with price controls and we had the gas price controls back to our nixon's time. it doesn't work, you can't force the market to do what it won't do. i go es in obama's mind, he thinks, you know, these fat cats in these companies are sitting there hoarding all these billions of dollars themselves. that's not how it works. when a company pays more wages in overtime, they have less profit. those profits are used by the company, they're used by the company in the form of retainers, either giving the money back to shareholders with dividends. they grow the company further down the line. it's not that they're sitting there, oh my gosh, we won't have champagne on the yacht tonight. it shows a basic misunderstanding of how businesses work. to think you can come in and just tell companies how much to pay and when. >> and that profits might be bad. now, to sasha's point, this might lower the unemployment
rate because businesses want to avoid paying overtime. so they hire more workers. >> it's definitely about point. that's the problem with targeting the unemployment right, you don't want to fix them, because what all that will do is take us further the decree by executive order is that you work them to 30 hours, which is what you are doing if you hire more workers. it actually will lower the unemployment rate. if you work over 20 hours, we have no unemployment. everybody is coming to scramble to find new people. that's not good unemployment. it's friends stupid unemployment, you are throwing out a company to hire people. look, the whole notion of overtime is kind of a weird strange, it's not obama. bush sure did get rid of it than increase it. it doesn't make any sense, it's hard for the government to move the profits from the company to the laborer by decreeing whether it's minimum wages or time-and-a-half or whatever.
it doesn't work. >> tracy, is now the time, an embarrassed shaky job market for the government to be reaching into businesses? >> i think the whole thing, betsy, the obama administration has to utter the words over time when there are people unemployed and the average workweek hasn't really increased all that much over the course of this so-called recovery. people are barely working 40 hours. so what country are we begging for overtime? if that was the case, brenda, that would mean the economy was gun slinging, moving forward. we got so much work to do, we need to pay overtime. we are not even close. they are living in la-la land down there. >> sasha, what do you say about that? >> again, this is really about indexing a law that already exists with wages. so if this threshold, we are talking about this thresh had, it's basically, who can be
exempt from overtime. you are saying someone who makes $25,000 ought to be -- the idea is that you raise that higher, because that person is not a white collar worker. whether or not you agree or disagree with overtime, that's a different conversation. but if you are going to have overtime, it ought to stay at the same rate of inflation. >> john, wouldn't this make workers make more, fewer managers, take them out of the white collar ranks and bring them down? which is not the the way to incentivize people? >> no, it's not. brenda, there is what happens when a bunch of ideologues that have never ran a business, they love what to do. it sounds good politically. but the billions and becomes of dollars that will be passed down to the workers who made that money. >> that sounds wonderful. >> that helps in a mid-term election. >> that has nothing to do with reality. most of these companies you are talking about are franchisees.
so it has nothing to do with the multinational company. it has something to do with the mom and pops who have to hire a 40-hour a week employee. it's not realistic to hire and employee and work 40 extra hours. you have a manager. the way it works towards the end of the week, you say, hey, i node more work, business is good. that's a good thing. a lot of managers enjoy that overtime. companies, the big companies, are simply going to hire contract labor and get around paying overtime anyway. this has nothing to do with real life. what america needs is very simple. america needs jobs. this does nothing to help. the only thing i question whether it's going to work. again, i think there is a role for government. the kind of thing, what would happen if they would lower the wages first of all, if they need 50 hours, they will lower your wages to adjust to the fact they have to give you a higher wage for the effect e extra ten
hours. it's not going to lead to more wealth. e gel of it is. i will say because of obamacare and epa act, you almost have no choice to do this. >> that act discourages hiring new people because they have health insurance. now you want to hire the existing workers, they've have to make that difficult. it's a tack on. >> when you work overtime, you are exhausted. people gain weight, they smoke more, drink more. now we got more health care problems. look, i think there are way bigger issues that they should be pac u talking about down in d.c. >> that's because none of us get overtime. it's a very important thing for workers. >> brenda and i will both tell you, there is an overtime here. >> okay. there is overtime. >> 50 hours. >> i'm sure you felt it. the winter wallop wrecking roads. now cash-strapped states may put a hole in your wallet to help fill those holes in the road.
headlines, log on to fox news headlines. prepare to pop your top. because all those potholes popping up from the wicked winter may do a wallop on your tires and wal ets. more cash strapped states comparing the growth. gary b, we already pay enough. so not a penny more? >> exactly, brenda, the healing
cry is my gosh, we need to raise these taxes to pay for our roads, actually, we already raised a lot of money t. problem is when the federal government gets ahold of it, they divert it to silly things like magnetic leavetation trains and bike paths. not that they're silly, if you try to fix the roads, they are. ferrys, you know, racial profiling. you'd be surprised the things that this money goes to. every other government slush fund. it doesn't get spent where it is. when it does get spent, the government paid it inefficiently. why you had the bridge to no wore. the big dig which was $12 machine overbudget. brenda, if we want to fix this, there are two ways. you can private advertise it like they did the highways in northern virginia, which i would be in favor for. if you want to government to run it, just use a user fee, used in the transsponders. a lot of us already have in our
car. >> sash what do you think of those ideas for the people who essentially use the roads to pay? >> you are still paying for it. if you have a toll road, right? i have those ez-pass, too. if you have a toll road, you pay in that way as opposed to gas. i don't see what the difference is. we know, do we all feel like we pay enough already? absolutely. is there enough transportation and infrastructure funding? no. we know that because nationwide, bridges and roads are falling apart. so the reality is, you can't just sit on the sofa while your house falls down behind you. >> if the money is not going to repair the road, that's the whole issue. we are paying, but it's not going there. >> i mean, that would depend state by state or federal. like gary b said, he was talking about federal. i totally agree with it being at the state level. as a taxpayer, i don't want to
pay federal funds. >> if you live in a state like new york in california, you are already paying 70 cents a gallon. i can't believe it. there is a huge difference between a gas tax and the toll roads, because i often pay both and i had nails and flat tires because of roads in this area. look, it's all about what gary b said, i would by gladly to fix the potholes if i knew well they're going to get fixed? they're not. they're going to some congressional slush fund that apparently pays for friday night dinners, i think. who knows where it goes? if we knew it was being used properly, but it's not. >> jonas, your take on this. >> why would somebody in sunny miami where they have no potholes want to pay this for new jersey's lousy roads? >> you take on new jersey every week, mr. miami. look, i'm for all kind of taxes that are not in exact with the
law. the government will waste mooin money and misappropriate it and do big things, regardless of where the tax money comes from. so i would rather than raise it from sales taxes, gas taxes, that have no income tax to say the person who does the income, that's a difficult to collect tax. the gas tax costs less in collection. it will save the government that money. the federal gas tax, they have been raising that forever. obama doesn't have the nerve to do it. he should. that doesn't cost the revenue. tax a guy to mix fix new jersey's problems. >> the problem sheer not how we get the money to the government t. problem is the government, itself, it is a net. you want to go state by state? how about all 50 states and one freg federal government. lotteries were sold in the southern states, they were to fund education. it went into the slush fund just like gary b. said. i am for using tax completely. i think if you fly you should pay for the tsa, i think if you
drive, you should pay for it through a gas tax. the problem that everybody brings up that goes into the gem revenue. it's not being used on the roads. >> that is the problem. the problem is not the government raising money. the problem is the government. >> absolutely. sasha, what do you say is that issue? >> you know, we have the worst kind of government in the world except for every other one that exists, right? it is, there is going to be an ineptitude, absolutely. i think the fix for this is localizeing pot everywhere? do you see colorado is looking at making $6 million a year. >> is that because you are so high you don't notice the roads? >> you don't see the roads at all. >> we keep saying, well, it's the government. we're always going to have -- we aren't always going to have to dig deep. soosh sha rides the same road i do in northern virginia. that was a public partnership, the private part took on the bulk of the risk for that and
the state of virginia gets the bulk of the revenue or a lot of the revenue. they only have upside there. my gosh the whole turnpike system in our country started as private enterprise. it doesn't have to be government run. >> all right. >> that will have to be it. thanks, guys. they were the first union group to support then president obama. now they are ripping the president's health care law for riping into their wages and benefits, neil and the gang ripping into that at the bottom of the hour. up here first, from commanding the red carpet to taking over the border. a-list celebs, banning the word "bossy" when describing women. >> bossy. >> bossy. >> when i was growing up, i was called bossy. >> i think it's
. >> and roaring they are. female celebrities like beyonce, joining facebook coo in a campaign to ban the term "bossy" in the work place. >> i'm not bossy. i'm the boss. >> well, they say the word makes girls afraid to grow up and be leaders. right? >> look, if you are called "bossy" arthur good used to be called the other "b" word, because you can lead without being ob fox. you can lead without trying to
tear people's heads off. you can still be a ceo without being called bossy. >> i don't know, i don't mind being called bossy. john, is this the best way to get women in the corner offices? it seems like such a small thing. >> i think it is a small thing. i applaud them for doing this. i don't know why a company would not want a board of director to look like it's customers. in some retail places, 80% of the shoppers are women, yet 20% or less are ceos. too many times in our corporate world, we're hailing males as our corporate boards. i don't think that's an ad mirl quality to have in the year 2014. >> i'm with john. i think any time you get a conversation going about encouraging girls to lead and encouraging girls to be more competitive and assertive and that's not just okay. that's the way they should be. i think it's a good thing. you know. >> so what's the word "b"?
leave it alone. be proud. >> you can't ban "bossy." >> i think the idea that it's saying that you don't call a man bossy. you say that he's,0 he's demanding. i think the idea is that girls should be allowed to be that way, too. >> okay. i got to get the boys in here, jonas. >> our philosopher would counterthat by thai saying he paid the costs to be the boss. that's the direction this should go. we should want our women bossy, not say don't call them bossy. i like the concept, i think phaseing out the word. >> you just quoted the snoop bizle. i love that guy. >> gary b., you were married, you are married to a boss? >> exactly. my wife was the ceo of a public cooperation an ceo of a private company. i'm not sure any "b" word, bossy
or otherwise got in her way. if she said let's get rid of the word "bossy" she would have laughed. it makes women look weak. oh my god, bossy bothers us. could you imagine any man saying that? this is just silliness. >> okay. thanks, guy, and girls, thank you to sasha for joining us. >> thanks, brenda. america is spending a record breaking or record barking $56 billion bucks on their four-legged friends last year. that's enough to give you some tail-wagging profits. just ask. hello. . latte or au lait? sunny or bubbly? cozy or cool?
"meow" or "woof"? wheels or wheeeels? everything exactly the way you want it ...until boom, it's bedtime. your mattress isn't bliss: it's a battleground of thwarted desire. enter the all-new sleep number classic series. designed to let couples sleep together in individualized comfort. starting at just $699.99 for a queen mattress. he's the softy: his sleep number setting is 35. you're the rock: your setting is 60. that works. he's the night owl. his side's up while you're in dreamland. you're the early bird. up and at 'em. no problem, because you're in it together... keeping the love alive. and by the way - snoring? sleep number's even got an adjustment for that. crazy? only if sleeping peacefully with your soulmate is crazy. find your sleep number setting only at one of our 425 stores nationwide. you can afford a sleep number bed, you can't afford another mediocre night's sleep. know better sleep with sleep number.
. >> prediction, gary b., take it away. >> onlyson prime, guess what, most people don't care. i think the stock is up 20% on the year. >> john, do you care, bull or bear? >> bear. >> your prediction. >> forget gm, wayne rogers stocks soared up 20% on the year. >> what do you think of that? >> i'm a bear on board. >> tracy. my kids are on their phones all the time, parents do the same thing. put your phones down. >> jonas. >> okay. americans are spending $60 billion a year on these little guys. every smart retailer knows you want to get in on that, like coach, they have leather collars an leashs which this guy
deserves. >> he should be our mascot or maybe on the panel. >> you andjonas. >> all right. did big labor just deliver a big blow to obamacare? hi, everyone, glad to have you. neil cavuto. it was the very first union to endorse senator barak barak? >> people are working hard, they're doing the right thing and they deserve decent wages and decent benefits. >> so much for that, because now those very workers have ripping the president's health care law, where they say are riping into their decent pay and decent benefit. charles payne, what do you make of this? >> well, i kind of see at this time other way. i think president obama hit theen whys with a big