neil: before i leave you the big data tomorrow we're looking at the granddaddy of all them all tomorrow. the jobs report expected 189,000 jobs added. unemployment rate 3.6%. still showing good progress. probably will not happen exactly like that. here is charles. charles: thank you, neil. i'm charles payne. this is "making money." the markets are dressed up in red and report that china is potentially souring on new trade deal. before you panic, buckle up, watch the show. there is nothing spooky about the avalanche of guidance from important american companies. your hard-earned money powered the results. you should be asking, is it too late to invest? my panel has the answer for you. house voting to make the impeachment inquiry against president trump is official. congressman andy biggs is with us to tell us why he think it is

a sham. all that and more on "making money." ♪. charles: how many millions of americans find themselves every morning drinking in starbucks, say one of those machky -- machiados, posts on facebook? maybe you're one of them. if you don't own the stocks, they can still be great invests f the answer is yes, we'll find out from our expert david dietze, point view wealth management and mitch rochelle. these companies have been around here for a long time. they use it. it is ubiquitous in our lives. many people are not in the stocks mitch. >> you mentioned important word. those are consumer products. maybe starbucks is more tangible than the others. the fact of the matter they are ubiquitous. we see them and touch them every

day. the future of commerce is through these type of platforms. it makes sense through the gdp print. all about the consumer. making sense these are lining up. charles: consumer came in better than expected. income up more than savings at 3.8%. not only consumer powerful, making more money than they have made in a decade, i think they're being very smart. they don't get over their skis. when we have the big months in retail, they pull it back but they're doing it on their own which i think means that these numbers like we saw could continue. >> i think that makes sense. memories still fresh of 2018, 2009 downturn. i think consumers are being careful. they're not building up consumer debt. that is one of the reasons i'm optimistic moving forward. the big debt we saw generated a decade ago. i think consumer strength can go further and longer than anyone is thinking.

charles: one of the things we saw with the earnings period with apples, facebooks, googles, amazon, mitch, they're spending a lot of money for the future. i think that is a good sign. unfortunately wall street from time to tame takes it at negative. facebook up to 43,000 employees. up 20% from a year ago. that is mind-boggling f i'm an investor i see that commitment to the future that is positive. what you do i this? >> you saw that with amazon next week. the spend on technology is huge. we focus too much on cap-ex, traditionally look for cap-ex spend. the new cap-ex spend is technology. when you break numbers down that is what companies are spending on. the question will they have less employees in the future which could be a drag on the economy? charles: the irony as they're building it they get more employees. amazon is 750,000 employees. that is mind-boggling.

the old host office used to have that amount of employees. gdp number was okay. structures getting hammered. i think a lot of that is the oil and gas industry, ip investment by businesses still through the roof. it is mcdonald's of the world saying hey we'll not build brand new mcdonald's per se but when you walk in there, the whole joint is wired and you will be out in a split second. >> the takeaway is spending on technology. everyone realizes the new technology tools are being developed. if they want to stay at cutting-edge they need to incorporate them. that helps consumers. it keeps costs down. real wages are going up very nicely now. >> one other thing you don't see in the numbers. investment in employees to train them for the new technology. that is a big, big spend that corporate america is dealing with right now. charles: gentlemen, both of you, david, mitch, stay right here. i want to go to the white house where president trump is trying to reassure phase one of the

china deal is still going to be signed pretty soon. after there was a report that china was on the fence about the agreement. blake burman is here with more. blake. reporter: phone calls with the u.s. and china trade attempts at the deputy level continue today and there are scheduled calls tomorrow at more senior level between robert lighthizer and steve mnuchin and liu he. there is question when the question when the phase one deal between the u.s. and china could be signed and where it might be signed, considering the initial location, apec is not going to be happening. the president acknowledging a open question mark earlier today in a tweet which he wrote the following, quote, china, usa are working on selecting a new sight of signing of phase one of trade agreement. about 60% of total deal after apec in chile was canceled due to unrelated circumstances. the new location will be announced soon. president xi and president trump

will do the signing. now here is what i can tell you, charles. multiple administration officials i spoke with as of late this morning said they have not heard where the meeting could take place, the location, though i'm told the mid-november time frame to have phase one on paper is still on track. if they want to stick to the timeline low gistal issues that they might have to identify a spot in the upcoming days. the white house doesn't seem too concerned with the sudden change in apec. >> while apec was canceled yesterday it has not negatively impacted our conversations with china at all. i spoke with the trade team, the great larry kudlow, you know who i spoke. he told me the talks are growing very smoothly. reporter: spokesperson for china's commerce ministry saying they are moving forward well, saying quote, the economic and trade teams of china and the united states maintained close communication and consultation

work is progressing smoothly. the two sides will continue to promote consultations and other work as originally planned. you alluded, charles, what the market took notice of this morning which is that bloomberg report which led to retreat in the markets. that report cites chinese officials saying that they aren't necessarily sure the entirety of this trade deal, phase one, phase two, could come together. they cite past actions from the president, that is how he has in the past sometimes backed out of deals. then of course there are the structural issues in phase two that are the more complex challenges. charles. charles: blake, thank you very much. manufacturing data missed by a country mile in chicago. the biggest miss in 39 years. wall street was looking for 48 which i thought was a high number. still contraction. let's start with china first.

these sort of reports, i remember the reports were coming out ahead of the 70th anniversary of communist party and all the massive sabre-rattling, it wint happen, mitch. we ended up at least an verbal agreement on phase one. >> we have verbal agreement. the thing to remember we have politics in our country and they have politics in their country. not everybody is on board with the united states. structural changes, air quotes, are not in phase one. there are ip theft and are incorporated there reality some of the people in the party are not on board with that. charles: that is to be expected. their politburo is pretty big, a lot of folks there. i think xi himself and his direct representatives have continued to suggest this phase one is going to be done and they're committed to at least negotiating a phase two. by the way, south china morning press came out after the

bloomberg report to reiterate as much. >> absolutely, charles. i'm skeptical of the bloomberg report. i want to know which chinese official. so-called interested bystander. depending on question you ask someone you can get the answer you want. no one thought a comprehensive deal which we need ad ad decade or longer be easy. charles: are we seeing potential tariff hikes off the table before december 15th? >> they want all tariffs off the table. charles: sure. >> i think december 15th one is one, leverage is the the october 5% increase was taken off. reality is, tariffs are being used as a battering ram here in negotiations. so the trump administration will not pull them away anytime soon. charles: this would be taking away something that didn't go into effect. wall street would love the idea. >> that is hitting consumer products directly. >> wall street is very focused. i don't think anyone is expecting a complete,

comprehensive package anytime soon but if we see we're making progress and suspension of the september 15 talks, that will work well. if everything is rushed too quickly, people would be skeptical whether it is thought out. charles: toggling channels. one financial network bringing back the recession talk after the manufacturing report. i want to ask you two questions from the audience. i thought it was interesting. first about impact of federal reserve and their cuts. 51% said no impact. 31% said there would be positive impact. they were asked about the increased tariffs and effect on business. 56.5% there was little, little negative impact an. only 26% said there was major impact. these questions suggest they're more concerned with the fed than they are necessarily with tariffs by the same token as manufacturing part of our gdp declined specifically over last

50 years. >> the thing i worry about with headlines and surveys they have a lot of headline quality to it. you realize the algorithms kicked in when they saw the chicago pmi. charles: biggest in 39 years with the sell programs. >> no question about it. if you compare actual purchases between the ism and pmi, actual purchases are stronger than the surveys suggest. some weary of surveys. i don't think you should make too many decisions. charles: we have to go. is this a sign we may be slipping into recession. >> it is not helpful. over 300 s&p 500 companies reported earnings, only 32 used recession word. i take a lot more comfort from what management sayings than anonymous surveys. charles: i love hearing from management with a company with real boots on the ground. dave, mitch, thank you very much. >> all right, charles. charles: the house voting on the impeachment measure this afternoon. i will get reaction from arizona congressman andy biggs.

i have repeatedly said on this show fed chair jerome powell needs to work on his communication. by the same token wall street has to stop whining after hearing something they don't like. i think we're seeing the maturation of the fed and wall street. i will explain next. ♪. so ...how are you feeling? on a scale of one to five? one to five? it's more like five million. there's everything from happy to extremely happy. there's also angry. i'm really angry clive! actually, really angry. thank you. but what if your business could understand what your customers are feeling... and then do something about it. turn problems into opportunities. thanks drone. customers into fanatics change the whole experience.

alright who wants to go again? i do! i do! i have a really good feeling about this.

charles: jerome powell is starting to shift his language and indicating that the main job of the fed will be to assess conditions rather than to act to sustain expansion. meanwhile president trump reacting to quarter point rate cut with a tweet saying people are very dis.ed in jay powell and the federal reserve.

fed called wrong too fast, too slow. fed put us at competitive disadvantage. china is not the problem. we will win anyway. i want to bring in university of maryland economist peter morici. what is interesting when they changed language in the fed statement, the knee-jerk reaction was, eh. then the market rallied. maybe it showed powell is getting better communicating what he wants to do. maybe wall street is getting better without all the knee-jerk instant whining and selling. >> two things, powell got it exactly right yesterday. very good performance. i think wall street is starting to understand the man, what is between his ears, how he is approaching the job. what wall street needs to know how the fed will make decisions. powell has made that clear. we would know what triggers a rate increase or rate reduction. but within that is a very wideband. not much will happen between now and end of the year, or likely early next year. charles: is your takeaway we

should buckle up for low rates for a very long period of time? >> i think so but not forever. you know, in europe they're starting to become disenamored because those negative interest rates really harm banks. here they don't do us a lot of good. there is a lot of excessive lending among b-rated companies, just above investment grade and c-rated companies, the junk bonds. i think we're probably going to out grow this syndrome thinking low rates work because below a certain level they don't. they have no effect. charles: there are two other things, i didn't hear people hit it a lot in the q&a session. what i want to ask you, peter, quantitative easing that is not quantitative easing. the federal howing the balance sheets to repopulate. i think we could take out old high points on fed balance sheet and it won't take long? >> my feeling it really doesn't matter. the fed has to hold a lot of bonds because of size of federal debt and what europeans are

doing. that is the first thing. the second thing, that the banks already have a lot of excess reserves. the basic problem, the fed started paying interest rates on excess reserves in 2018 and then extended that courtesy to money market funds, hedge funds, all the rest. as a consequence, the banks can pay a passbook rate of .1 of a percent. checking account rate of .3 of a percent and get one 1/2 from the fed. they don't want to lend out reserves or dot repo market. charles: i hate that. they're getting paid not to lend money. >> the fed says we need to put money in the system. they do. the banks sit on it. there is better solutions. stop paying them interest. only way they make money is to lend it out. that they lose money if they don't. we need to look at digital currencies. we're no longer trucking around gold bullion and coin and silver certificates. time to acknowledge, a bank as sort of checkbook money is

anachronism. we should be able to open checking accounts at the fed and the fed should be able to impulse the system directly with the treasury. charles: that is much more complicated thing. the first point i like lending to main street and bringing back the toasters, peter. thank you very much. we'll delve into the other why. thank you. >> take care. charles: the direct slap at facebook, we have the latest. impeachment process moving forward with a house vote to formalize the probe. what is next is it we're live at capitol hill right after the break. han worry about how to pay for long-term care. brighthouse smartcare℠ is a hybrid life insurance and long-term care product. it protects your family while providing long-term care coverage,

should you need it. so you can explore all the amazing things ahead. talk to your advisor about brighthouse smartcare. brighthouse financial. build for what's ahead℠ brighthouse financial. most people think of verizon as a reliable phone company. (woman) but to businesses, we're a reliable partner. we keep companies ready for what's next. (man) we weave security into their business. virtualize their operations. (woman) and build ai customer experiences. we also keep them ready for the next big opportunity. like 5g. almost all the fortune 500 partner with us. (woman) when it comes to digital transformation... verizon keeps business ready. ♪

>> we'll inform congress on the very difficult decision we have to make in the future whether to impeach the president.

that decision has not been made. that is what the inquiry will investigate. then we make the decision based on the truth. i don't know why the republicans are afraid of the truth. charles: democrats pushing ahead with impeachment inquiry, voting to formalize the probe, setting up an epic clash that could last for months. hillary vaughn with us live from the hill. hillary? >> charles, republicans are celebrating the fact that the only only bipartisan post was against it. two democrats defected. jeff van drew and colin peterson are the two democrats that voted against it rejecting democrat plans for the impeachment inquiry. republicans stood on the house floor with scathing words for house intelligence committee adam schiff the way he is leading the probe behind closed doors in secret in a classified

bunker in the basement of the capitol. steve scalise calling it a soviet style sham. the top republican an house judiciary committee, doug collins said schiff broke precedent leading the probe through the intelligence committee. that schiff effectively neutered the judiciary committee in his opinion should be leading this probe. >> here is my challenge to mr. schiff. you want to be ken starr? be ken starr. come to the judiciary committee, be the first witness and take every question asked of you. [applause] >> folks, this ain't over. get ready the cloud is dropping will be dropping on their heads because process matters and substance wins in the end. reporter: house speaker nancy pelosi and lead man heading probe adam schiff pushed back gop claims blocking questions, blocking republicans

from asking questions and banning some of them from depositions. >> those that have complained about the lack of access to the depositions, most of the members who have been permitted to attend, failed to attend. the resolution will permit me as the chair, to begin releasing transcripts of the depositions. i think that you will see when those are released just what equal opportunity members of both parties have had. reporter: we're learning charles a group of house republicans will head to the white house later today to meet with the president. charles. charles: thank you very much. joining me republican from arizona, congressman andy biggs. thanks for joining us. >> thanks, charles, good to be with you. charles: the vote 232 democrats two nays, all republicans 196 say no. many point as victory for scalise. already the democrats made a huge mistake, this is obviously a partisan issue when historically these things have been bipartisan.

>> that is exactly right. the part of the error that ms. pelosi made should have had the vote not weeks ago but months ago when jerry nadler said he would open up an impeachment inquiry. instead of taking it to the floor, having a vote, trying to deal with it on a bipartisan fashion, it was always partisan and they started, let's be honest here, you have a group of people that were elected in the midterms, elected for the specific purpose that they said they wanted to impeach this president. so kind of put the bipartisanship right out the window quite frankly. charles: the resolution itself, what is it that republicans find so offensive about it, when nancy pelosi says this opens the process up to the general public? >> mr. pelosi is not telling the truth there, if that were the case, then adam schiff wouldn't have three days of closed-door hearings today, have a whole

weeks worth of closed-door hearings next week. what else is going on, if republicans want to subpoena witnesses we can do it, provided adam schiff gives the okay. if the president's president's counsel wants to be there if the clinton impeachment as nixon, provided adam schiff wants to be there. she is moving foreign affairs committee members, and oversight committee members out of the process. it is going intel down in the bunker. it will stay in the bunker. they will not let me have transcripts or any other member of congress. will not let you have them. not getting them out of the media. that is not transparent. that is not open. she doesn't know what the republicans are afraid of, how about this? we're only afraid of you manipulating things that are not true. we want the truth to come out. we want it to be transparent. charles: a lot of republican voters are pretty frustrated with republican party wondering if you all have done enough to push back. what exactly is the gameplan here. >> we continue to push back. we've done everything from, we

followed every rule, et cetera. what i would tell you that needs to happen is people who are in that committee, in my opinion, they need to do what adam schiff does. come out, tell us what the witnesses are saying. because adam schiff doesn't seem to feel bound to hole these things sacred in secret. so, we don't get that truth. but i will tell you what happened today, for instance is great example. morrison comes out of deposition, guess what, i wasn't concerned about whether there was something illegal in the phone conversation. by the way, the transcript looks accurate to me. that kind of undercuts five weeks of testimony, leaking by the democrats. charles: hopefully we get to the answers sooner rather than later. congressman biggs, we appreciate it. >> thank you, charles. >> we separate fact from fiction when it comes to elizabeth warren's platform. a big change for twitter could change the political landscape for 2020. the question everyone is asking, should facebook follow suit?

our political panel breaks it down when we come back. ♪. ssion. delivery drones, or the latest phones. no commission. no matter what you trade, at fidelity you'll pay no commission for online u.s. equity trades. strongve is one of a kind you'll pay no commission brilliant unbreakable ♪ engagement rings now 20- 40 percent off shop unique bridal styles at zales, the diamond store there are things we would change about work. and there are things we wouldn't. ♪ when work is worth it. work is worth it. work can be closer to home... pay more... make us proud.

careerbuilder. work can work. find your work at careerbuilder.com

charles: shares of twitter falling after the social media company announced it will ban all political ads next month. it is a direct slap at facebook who is under fire for saying they will not do anything to

stifle political speech. grady? reporter: facebook has come under fire because a lot of critics say it allows a lot of political ads with disinformation in it. twitter says, you know what? we'll do away with all political ads all together. we'll talk about ads that reference candidates or campaigns. or things like immigration or health care. we'll allow ads that encourage voter registration. twitter ceo announce the move in a tweet yesterday while saying internet advertising is incredibly powerful, that power brings significant risks to politics where it can influence votes to affect lives of millions. a lot of people came out in support of this decision including hillary clinton. she says this is the right thing to do for democracy in america and all over the world. what say you, facebook? then president trump's campaign manager, he didn't see eye-to-eye with hillary clinton, no surprise there. he says this is yet another

attempt to silence conservatives since twitter knows president trump has the most sophisticated online program ever known. if you look at facebook versus twitter on the stock market today, facebook is up on strong earnings. twitter is down on this news. it is important to note, charles, politicians will still be able to tweet. they won't be able to take out ads with political issues in them. charles: grady, thank you very much. joining me now, american university executive in residence capri calf -- calf far row and ford o'connell. why is this seen as more of a blow to republicans than democrats. >> twitter says they're protecting democracy and in reality they're trying to silence conserve activities and kneecap trump before the 2020 election because he has a powerful online presence. they have no problems taking ads from biased liberal media

outlets who essentially push more misleading anti-trump headlines to influence people than any political ad could ever do. charles: capri? >> i think that what we're seeing now is what packages before laid out. i think twitter was leery of being put in the same circumstance as facebook, being criticized for allowing essentially russian bots and others to come in and utilize the social media platform by paid advertisements to try to intercede in the -- charles: we'll still have the russian bots. there are still going to be bots. there will be quote-unquote fake news and all that stuff. >> i think they're just trying to minimize their liability here obviously it hasn't done well for their stock but i think they're trying to right the wrongs of -- charles: i will point out, this is a very small percentage of their overall business. they have got some other issues like monetizing their dwindling eyeballs. go ahead, ford.

>> what i was going to say that is not entirely true. this is not just about foreign interference. 2020 democrats want trump's twitter handle taken away from him. when we look very carefully, what you see overall, democrats are for censorship. they don't want to have to argue out in the marketplace of ideas anything they don't like. >> they can easily still do that. can easily still do that as you well know by utilizing their twitter handles. there is no evidence that twitter is going to take away any politician twitter handle. therefore they can engage in public discourse and, free will. charles: the point ford is bringing up is intriguing, in a sense there are calls for presidential candidates to remove president trump from twitter. >> that will not happen. that is not the same as paid advertising. charles: president obama is calling out fake activism. or fake activists. shutting someone down is exact

opposite view and it is not being woke. >> this idea of purity and you're never compromised, you're always politically woke and all that stuff, you should get over that quickly. the world, the world is messy. if i tweet or hashtag about how you didn't do something right or used the word, wrong verb or then, i can sit back feel pretty good about myself, man, you see how woke i was, i called you out? [laughter]. that's not, that's not activism. charles: capri, some are saying this is direct shot at elizabeth warren and some of the other candidates in the democratic primary? >> i think it is more, president obama taking a shot at everyone right now within the democratic side. i think trying to bring us back to our roots and say look, we're not doing ourselves any favors. i think that folks such as myself, others i would consider as mainstream democrats, agree with president obama that, you

know, it is one thing to you know, be inclusive. another thing to be too cute by half. get mired into the political correctness which is so convoluted, we're missing the point. charles: right. >> that isn't activism. that isn't bravery. that is just a distraction. charles: capri, thank you very much. ford, we've run out of time, my man. i am sure you will dm. i will get your answer during the commercial break. speaking of which, later in the hour jerome powell talking up the labor force. there are worrisome yellow flags that are emerging. what you need to know ahead of tomorrow's jobs report. did elizabeth warren say the cost of "medicare for all" could be millions of lost jobs? wait until you hear what she had to say. next. [grunting]

[maniacal laughter] gold. gold! right, uh...thank you, for that, bob. but i think it's time we go with gbtc. it's bitcoin exposure through

a traditional investment account. nice rock. it's time to drop gold. go digital. go grayscale.

charles: presidential hopeful elizabeth warren still hasn't released her plan how she is going to pay for "medicare for all" but she might be preparing her base this will not be an easy fix as many were led to believe by agreeing with one economist who actually suggested that the plan could kill two million jobs. >> even supporters of that approach within the health policy world have said that likely would mean lost jobs in some form. politicians who want to move toward that system, "medicare for all," have to think about what a quote, just transition, a fair transition would look like? >> i agree. this is part of the cost issue and should be part of a cost plan. charles: her acknowledgement comes as a bipartisan budget watchdog report released this week finds health care reform can't simply be funded by higher taxes on the rich. i want to bring in "wall street journal" editorial page writer jillian melchior. according to the paper, jillian, "medicare for all" could be funded but you would have to do

a 32% payroll tax or 25% income surtax, or 42% value-added tax. you could double all the individual and corporate taxes. and you could actually, this is one i love, do 80% reduction on non-health federal spending. people's social security check would be 18 grand to 3600 and troops would dwindle from 1.2 million troops to 32,000. which plan would you take? >> that is the problem with free lunches. they're not quite as free. we keep hearing this will be on the 1%. rich are not paying fair share. if you raise the income tax to 100% for people, individuals making over $204,000, it still wouldn't be enough to cover the 32 trillion-dollar behemoth. this is just "medicare for all." this isn't "green new deal." not any of the other aggressive government expansions these democrats are pitching. there is a huge myth we'll finance this on the back of the

wealthy. absolutely not. this will affect every middle class american. charles: this comment we heard though from a couple days ago when she agreed, i think it is part of the cost issue and should be part of the cost plan, two million good paying american jobs. i mean you start to wonder, this is the collective right? this sounds like real deep sacrifices made by the few for the many kind of talk we rejected as a nation for a long time. >> that is not surprising. what is it, 1/5 of economy she is proposing completely organizing. we need to talk about how radical the proposals are, what the implications are for this. it is frustrating she is intellectually dishonest about this. bernie sanders is saying this will be tax on middle class, we can argue the merits. she is pretending it will not raise costs on middle class households. >> i think she says lives saved equals this much money, therefore we didn't cost you

any. it will be interesting. jillian, thank you very much. >> thank you. charles: wildfires continue to rage throughout california. economic impact is growing. we're talking lost businesses, lost homes. we'll look at the economic toll to the state already in a precarious financial position. ♪. ♪ ♪ (thud) (crash) (grunting) (whistle) play it cool and escape heartburn fast with tums chewy bites cooling sensation. ♪ tum tu-tu-tum tums

thbecause with nband after thleague pass on xfinityr. you can watch the out of market games you want- all season long. and with the all-new xfinity sports zone, you get everything nba all in one place- even notifications about your favorite teams. watch the dropped dimes, monster blocks, and showstopping dunks. plus get instant access to your teams with the power of your voice. that's simple, easy, awesome. say nba league pass into your voice remote to upgrade for a great low price

- or go online today.

charles: the retail industry trying to find the footing with this economy. we've seen mixed results. "claman countdown" liz claman has a big guest to ask. liz. >> this guy brian dodge, you might not know his name but boy you know his push for the retail industry. he is now the very top of this group called retail industry

leaders, charles. he will come out swinging. he is very much an advocate for every name of his members. that would be all ones on your screen, walmart, target, gap, dollar general, best buy. he is annoyed. he wants to see the tariffs go away. we'll talk to him about what he sees for the holiday season. it could very well play how the stocks perform and between now of course between christmas and hanukkah. as you've seen, charles, apple's stock is responding quite nicely. nothing too dramatic but nicely to great numbers. here is the question, did tim cook reveal something on the call. where he starts to look iphones as almost recurring revenue source? people will be able to pay them off monthly? it is huge lay out for 1000-dollar phones. who knows what happens with the five f. we'll talk apple and coming show.

this apple watch, omg, it all ties in. the reason brian dodge got the gig at the very top of this organization, charles, he doesn't care who he offends, including the administration or anybody else. he is looking out for retailers. charles: can't wait to see that. my wife loves her apple watch. you had me at apple watch. liz, thank you very much. >> you bet. charles: make sure you stay with us. "the claman countdown" will begin in a few minutes. meanwhile firefighters in northern california, they are optimistic they have turned a corner in battling the wildfire however the costs throughout the state are adding up as more wildfires erupted. susan li there on the ground with more. susan? reporter: charles, 10 fires are raging across the state of california but here in northern california, we're in sonoma county. we're miles away from the kincade fire up until last week was the largest one across the state. firefighters tell us they have 60% of it contained.

back here at a winery i want to tell you the devastation taken place and felt by those that live in the region. a week ago this was standing tall as a tasting room. i'm literally standing on the roof of the winery burned down engulfed in flames as cain cade fire spread across 76,000 acres. forcing thousands to flee. devastation being felt by not only business owners and homeowners but those that are concerned about their livelihoods going forward. take a listen. >> it's tough for sure. heart break and devastation. it is surreal, it is overwhelming to see it all fall apart. it's tough. port part sonoma, napa make up wine country as we call it and california distributes $40 billion in wine every year. 1 1/2 billion goes to exports. in fact it is the largest wine

producer across the entire united states. fourth largest in the world. those that own wineries seen devastation have concerns about selling wine especially with some, including soda rock winery said their 2019 vintages were already destroyed in the flames. charles: wow, horrible story. susan appreciate it. despite better-than-expected earnings stocks are in the red in the final hour of trading. the all-important jobs report. will that ease investor worries about the economy and everything else. we'll preview it for you next. with value like this, there are zero reasons to invest anywhere else. fidelity.

there are zero reasons to invest anywhere else. it's an honor to tell you that [ applause ] thank you. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. i love you! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ charles: stocks are sliding as we head into the final hour of trading and, of course, we're waiting for two big economic reports tomorrow, the jobs report and the ism manufacturing report. the disappointing chicago pmi is the main drag on this session today, and it's the leading

indicator for what the national number may be in the morning. joining me now to discuss, keith fitz gerald and ron carson. keith, let's start with the jobs report. it was anticipated to be a relatively weak number for a variety of reasons including the general motor strike, and must maybe we're getting near to full employment. where do you see the implications for the market? >> these numbers are always more cooked than a christmas goose. i'm looking for a low number. if we getted bad manufacturing number on top of that later in the day, that's going to cause me concern, but a single bad number in isolation, not particularly a concern, but i do expect it low. charles: ron in. >> that pmi was a shock. that's the largest drop in nearly 40 year, and i think you're starting to see trade really weigh in on business owners and decisions they're going to make because you look at the backlog in new orders,

it's caused that to plummet. one data point isn't going to tank the market, but if we're starting to import some of the weakness into the u.s. shores from the rest of the countries, it's been immune to it. charles: the irony, of course, in this morning's chicago pmi numbers, employment actually went up. keith, i've got to tell you, and avp number, all the goods-producing numbers were lower. mining down, construction down, manufacturing down, and i love them. i talk about them as dirty finger nail jobs, right? sort of the main proxies for the heartland. and so it really makes this a nail-biter going into tomorrow morning. >> well, it does. you know, i share your opinion. i spend a lot of time on my motorcycle, in the car going around the country looking for the dirty fingernails because that's what makes this economy go. i think our statistics have gotten ahead of where where the

economy used to be, so they don't accurately reflect what's going on. i think, again, if we're going to be dicey, let's be dicey for the right reasons. how do we track the value of information technology, which is growing, and contrast this against the shift in job function, not necessarily jobs themselves. charles: so, ron, we get the number tomorrow, let's say it's something of a positive surprise like the avp number. wouldn't take much at this point. how does that impact the market particularly considering that the fed is watching? >> you know, i don't think it's going to have a huge impact. i think people are really sitting back saying what's going to happen with trade. people are making or putting off decisions because of trade. this morning we had the unemployment claim numbers, 218,000, that's the low nearly in a decade, and that's a leading indicator. so the employment situation is strong, but i tell you what, if we start having the idea that this trade is not going to be settled and we're going to have a trade war, i think that's going to put a huge, that's going to be a big governor on

any growth in the equity markets going to any higher highs. charles: real quick, ron, and i want to ask you also, keith, do you find it interesting with so much demand, with such a strong consumer that businesses are saying we've got to put things on the shelves? i mean, you've got to invest in cap-ex. i look this week, and the big tech names are doing it. if you start to skip on that in some of these key research and development things, you'll be behind the curve when the time is right. isn't this a big gamble on their part? >> yeah, i don't know if it's a big gamble. you're right though, charles, the consumer is strong. matter of fact, i expect to see wage gains actually outpace inflation again. so the consumer's actually doing well. and we're not talking about elimination of cap-ex, we're talking about just pending or slowing down or deferring for a little while. charles: keith, are we going to keep breaking out to new thighs or go -- now highs or go sideways? >> ron makes a very, very valid

point. i think we're twoirk to hang out here for a while. the algorithms, gotta clear the decks -- charles: well, you know, if we pause here at all-time highs, that's cool for now. guys, thank you both very much. always appreciate it. all right, liz, can't wait for your show. [laughter] i got it. the apple iwatch -- liz: yeah, that's right. i don't have one yet. should i get one? charles: i don't either. we're the only two people in the country. liz: yeah, because you roll with the rolle. i know you. [laughter] a downright frightening read on this all hallow's eve, and optimism over the phase one deal that was really just announced three weeks ago in the oval office drying up as china reportedly pours cold water on the idea of a bigger, beautiful deal ever getting done. is that true? well, retailers nationwide are bracing for the