tv Making Money With Charles Payne FOX Business March 20, 2018 6:00pm-7:00pm EDT
charles payne is here now with "making money." take it away. charles: thank you very much, emac, i'm charles payne. facing a crescendo of questions as political leaders call for aggressive inquiries into whether the tech giant failed to stop improper access handling user data. biggest decline in four years as investors worried about the scandal and what could happen to the company's business model. states attorney generals from massachusetts and new york sent a letter to facebook demanding information about personal data that ended up in the hands of the firm cambridge analytica. fox has confirmed. facebook officials will meet with aides, not members with the house judiciary committee as early as tomorrow. and co-founder and ceo mark zuckerberg remains silent through it all, as lawmakers are looking and demanding answers. to my panel now. fox news political contributor
russia aren't accessing it. they have a duty to make sure people's data is not compromised. charles: eric, the bottom line is when it comes to facebook or social media, these guys are trying to sell ads, trying to sell data, and they're saying we're not a media outlet, we shouldn't have to abide by certain rules but no doubt that the point, they have opened up a can of worms for themselves and there will be some kind of additional regulatory scrutiny, right? >> well, it will be interesting to see whether the regulatory scrutiny actually happens. certainly, it's a negative environment, and they are in the data business, that's what they -- that's how they monetize, and it's interesting, they still weren't adhering to any kind of policy. they were giving researchers access to be able to ultimately get access to everyone's data. it will be interesting how they play it. what i suggest they do, if they're going handle this short
of regulation is get a commission have, some kind of data commission for security, bring republicans and democrats onto the commission and try to at least get it so government doesn't regulate. what i don't want to see is europe using this as some kind of bat to hammer american companies, i think that's a concern, too. but they need to protect americans in this process. charles: the eu will use this to extract money out of all of the companies one way or the other. that's for sure. tammy, it is sort of interesting situation, though, because how much government do you want to invite into the situation, we trust them more than we trust facebook, google and the others? >> we talk about agencies don't follow their own sxrurls willing to lie about what they're doing. cambridge analytica is the main company people are talking about, people pushing it with
the trump connection. the guardian is reporting hundreds of companies potentially, certainly reports that it was the obama administration, that it was multitude of companies that had complete access to the data, and that facebook looked the other way. so this is going to be the investigation. what did they know? did they choose to not care? atgoreized as a breach. nobody had to hack into going to get the data. this is where we're talking about regulation in this age that we've not addressed yet. when you have that information, first also is privacy really dead now is when the obamacare website, when the anthem, when all kinds of places were hacked, at what point, but the issue is did facebook lie to the users. charles: you brought up cambridge analytica, ceo was
suspended, associated with the undercover recording released this morning. very incriminating recording and doesn't necessarily connect dots back to our election. beverly, we for a new orwellian world. and let's face it, part of that is on us, right? we put our information out there voluntarily. we have allowed a handful of companies to know more about us than we been ourselves, and saying hey, protect us from ourselves, i guess. >> it makes us under whether or not we should log in our information. the fitbit that many of us are wearing on our wrist. if our data can't be protected. i want to say to this point as well, when it comes to data, when we're looking at advertising, this is a new way to advertise. not wrong for the obama campaign or trump campaign to have some data to send out campaign ads. that's how we do it through social media. seeing in facebook in addition to the privacy breach here, we have a company that seems to
censor conservative and conservative messages. when we talk about regulation do, we want the government that targeted conservative groups through the irs to regulate facebook, and facebook is really just an extension of what we're seeing which is shutting down dialogue among americans, and i think that's another disconcerting part of facebook. charles: no doubt we heard from former obama staffer brag that facebook was okay with them manipulating this data, harvesting the information. the same way cambridge analytica did because they were on the same team. if we're going to have universal rules out there, we better hope they apply to everyone. >> yeah, you have messina doing this with the obama campaign. what really concerns me overall with, all of this, charles, is there's one person, one group that has access to the most up-to-date data on everyone to manipulate their lives, control power, and that's facebook, and the concern i have is the fact
that you have this anti-conservative set of sentiments that are coming out of the silicon valley offices over there and you combine that with the concerns about the fact that they are playing defense on the fact that they elected donald trump in essence because the platform was so useful, and what may they do in 2018? what could they do in the presidential elections, and how will that data get used? how will we ever know? and that's the concern, and that's where we need to really look closer, and if that means regulation on some level, and helps conservatives, then i think that needs to happen. >> it would be actually, this is a good point about whether or not existing regulations for media companies would apply to facebook so we know what it is they're doing. that we have to report in the same fashion. charles: they have pushed back against that tremendously. >> this is not new, we understand the regulations, apply them to media. they could be applicable to
facebook, of course, they don't want to. it would affect the bottom line. these are the conversations we have to have. >> absolutely. charles: beverly, do you think we will have them? will it be another one of these episodes in america where social media, particularly facebook is front and center with almost everyone sort of concerned and still, you know, nothing really happens? >> well, i hope something does happen, but i hope it's not in the form of heavy-handed government regulation, it's more important for people to be aware what can happen to privacy. there is also the individual aspect to this that each one of us has to make sure we're not putting information in places that can be hacked. so that's what i hope this leads to. let's be honest when it comes to d.c., all it takes is the next news story that buries all of this. charles: breaking news, this is from fedex ceo fred smith on the company's earnings call. smith saying, quote, we're very thankful there are no serious injuries from the package that was detonated earlier here at fedex ground facility.
fedex provided law enforcement extensive evidence from advanced technology security systems designed to protect our teammates, customers and the communities we serve. we'll be right back. it's easy to think that all money managers are pretty much the same. but while some push high commission investment products, fisher investments avoids them. some advisers have hidden and layered fees. fisher investments never does. and while some advisers are happy to earn commissions from you whether you do well or not, fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management. let your inner light loose with one a day women's. ♪ a complete multivitamin specially formulated with key nutrients plus vitamin d for bone health support. your one a day is showing. on the only bed that adjusts on both sides
to your ideal comfort, your sleep number setting. does your bed do that? it's the last chance for clearance savings up to $800 on our most popular beds. ends saturday. visit sleepnumber.com for a store near you. stay at la quinta. where we're changing with stylish make-overs. then at your next meeting, set your seat height to its maximum level. bravo, tall meeting man. start winning today. book now at lq.com ai'm begging you... take gas-x. beneath the duvet, start winning today.
your tossing and turning isn't restlessness , it's gas. gas-x relieves pressure,bloating and discomfort in minutes !! so we can all sleep easier tonight. the dual adjustability of the sleep number bed allows each of you to adjust to your ideal level of firmness, comfort and support... your sleep number setting... for your best. sleep. ever. in the morning, you'll discover the amazing effects the bed is having on your sleep quality... your sleepiq score. and snoring? does your bed do that? only at a sleep number store where queen mattresses start at just $899. and, it's the last chance for clearance savings up to $800 on our most popular beds. ends saturday. visit sleepnumber.com for a store near you.
. charles: facebook under fire as questions mount over who has a right to user data? customers are often in the dark how the data is purchased in exchanged. when it comes to the data that they actually produce online. here with me to break it down, the ceo and founder. let's talk about that, let's talk about how people's data, how it's collected, how it's controlled and how the bigtime companies with the massive
market valuations are making money off the information we voluntarily give them? >> so, many of the big organizations out there, the big data, the facebooks, the googles, then you have to add in there the experians, the axions, the equifaxes, are all making money off of consumer data. many consumers don't understand the implication of what's happening in the ownership of their data. we signed up for platforms like facebook, and like twitter and instagram and so forth, for access to the entertainment and the information that those platforms provide, but we don't realize that we're giving away a lot of information about who we are and what we do to somebody else to make money against. we believe that consumers have the right to their own data, have the right to be compensated for that data, and should be compensated accordingly nar information. that's why we're doing what we do. charles: are these companies, somewhere in the fine print
that we don't see, where it says, hey, once you click accept, you've actually given us the right to take and manipulate, not only take and sell your data but manipulate it in ways that may make you do or do things that you may not want as a consumer? >> yeah, consumers click the accept button on terms and conditions all the time without reading them just to get access. they have a lot of rights to your data, and you have the ability to read that information but nobody does, and people just accept it and decide, hey, we're going to go ahead and accept. that's what happened in this case with the app that was created on facebook. common for apps to be created on facebook and for those providers to collect that data. when that data is collected, there is responsibilities that the app developers have, in their contractor relationship with facebook about what they can and cannot do with the data. that's where the breakdown
happens. the partner used that information in the way they weren't supposed to in order to benefit themselves. charles: talk about people owning their own data. you have a product, bigtoken, that you say addresses this. people say why not, it's my information. how come i can't make any money off it? >> right, bigtoken, it's a novel concept. you own your own information, and if you want -- if an advertiser or a marketing company wants access to my information, they should have to pay me for that. at bigtoken, we're giving that consumer the ability to sign up, get their information into the platform, answer a variety of questions from lots of different partners and be paid for access to their data, and then through the blockchain be able to identify every time that information is accessed. so you as a consumer shouldoon oo. charles: chris, this is good stuff, we're running short on
time. let the audience, srax, you have been looking at my facebook page, i want to let you know this is good, and if it's too good to be true, people are going to be thrilled. thank you very much. >> thank you. charles: the trade war tensions with china. friday could be d-day. who's going to blink first? i think i've got a sign china just might. chris collins has his take on it next. and got an estimate in 24 hours. my insurance company definitely doesn't have that... you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance. (vo)intelligent technology one can help protect it.life. the 2018 audi q5 is here.
. charles: china's second-in-command seemed to blink on the looming trade war with the united states, telling reporters he hopes china and the u.s. will, quote, act rationally and avoid a trade war, days before the u.s. is expected to announce up to $60 billion in tariffs targeting china over alleged intellectual property theft. the question is should the white house meet them halfway? let's ask republican
congressman chris collins, representative, thank you for joining us. overnight, second-in-command in china made serious overtures in protecting intellectual property rights, no longer sharing trade with chinese partners, that's a good step, how do you see it? >> i couldn't agree more. president trump is a negotiators, has been his whole life, and he wins, the china economy depends on the u.s. consumer, stealing our jobs for decades. 20% of the world's population. they need jobs and they're going to get them one way or the other. they've never played fair, we're not talking about free trade. we're talking about fair trade, when they steal or ignore our intellectual property to provide jobs to their 1.3 billion people, we pay the price here, but they depend on our consumers for those jobs and the economy. so president trump is holding all the cards here, he knows
it. a trade war week win -- we win, no two ways about it. we have a negotiator who knows what's going on and they know he knows so, i really like the position we're in. president trump promised, made in america, make america great again, jobs in america. charles: let me just jump in. why are so many of our own colleagues on capitol hill in such uproar about this? they understand $375 billion deficit alone. trade secrets and intellectual property and seem so intimidated about doing anything about it? >> i don't know, they're hung up on the free trade piece, i haven't been, i come from western new york, we were decimated by nafta. it's all about fair trade. when someone is paying $2 an hour and we're paying 25 or $30 an hour, we're going to lose.
i was a strong supporter of the bat, the border adjustment tax that would put a tariff of 20% on anything not made in america. we've been in a trade war for 20 years and not doing so well. we have a huge trade deficit, so when it comes down to a war, as president trump said, when you're running deficits, we can make it here in america. we can make kitchen utensils, we can make underwear, we can make anything here, so we're holding all the cards, president trump knows it. great negotiator, and the chinese are up against it because we hold their fate in our hands. charles: right, congressman chris collins, good to hear someone with broad shoulders. >> charles, always good to be with you. charles: same here. want to bring in a panel, christopher bedford, and sarah westwood, white house correspondent. a report out just a moment ago today of paul krugman, one of
the staunch critics, chris, of president trump's proposed trade tariff. in 2010 proposed a tariff on all chinese imports, 25% and said it would not spark a trade war. wow, how things change when a republican makes the same suggestion, huh? >> that was incredible. i remember reporting that earlier today. paul krugman also said the markets would never recover from donald trump's election. he's been wrong time and time again, still wrong now. i assume his leaders will keep on eating it up. peaceful rise of china is propaganda straight out of mao's mouth, trump is the first president to take china seriously. the business community has been protesting the potential tariffs that are imposed on china over unfair trade practices, but it's worth remembering in 15 or so years ago, the business community, the googles, everyone else said the best way to free china up
and liberate its people is to allow us to go in there. in the years since there, xi is the most powerful dictator in china since mao. these u.s. company have made billions and the consumer has suffered. they say hold on a second, don't be hard on china. charles: sarah, there are industries, retail pushing back, it does 1.3 billion people to compete on a level playing field. what are you feeling right now, the winds blowing in washington, d.c.? >> i think there's been a lot of criticism of president trump's policy not well thought-out or not moving towards specific goals but president trump has laid out the broad benchmarks what he wants to see from china. wants to see china reduce $375 billion surplus, and he hasn't made a lot of specifications about how that needs to happen.
so whether that's china buying more u.s. goods, whether that's china lifting some of the tariffs that it puts on u.s. goods coming into china. that's something that trump is leaving up to the chinese to do. so really, president trump is using these tariffs as negotiating tactic much the way he tried to bring the steel and aluminum deal. pull out of nato in order to secure the defense commitments. he throws out something that sounds crazy, but can meet his relatively reasonable demands, then he backs away from it. charles: sane hasn't worked well over the last couple of years either? >> no, china has been laughing in our face for decades and no president has taken it seriously. remember when the soviet union was beginning to collapse, they had a choice whether or not to execute people on the streets and put down population and decided to crumble. china took the exact opposite
route. executed pro-democracy protesters in the streets, and now invite american companies to come in with good intentions, take use of massive ports and take their technology, they take their money, and hold them captive and push them out of the market. they're vicious competitors. charles: they have almost as many so-called unicorns as we do. catches up with a lot of the stolen technology and moving ahead. thank you very much, appreciate it. >> thank you. charles: texas getting tough on sanctuary city laws while waving bye-bye to the golden state as crime rates begin to surge. we've got the details for you next. (siren wailing)
(barry murrey) when you have a really traumatic injury, we have a short amount of time to get our patient to the hospital with good results. we call that the golden hour. evaluating patients remotely is where i think we have a potential to make a difference. (barry murrey) we would save a lot of lives if we could bring the doctor to the patient. verizon is racing to build the first and most powerful 5g network that will enable things like precision robotic surgery from thousands of miles away. as we get faster wireless connections, it'll be possible to be able to operate on a patient in a way that was just not possible before. when i move my hand, the robot on the other side
. >> sanctuary cities release thousands of criminal aliens out of our prisons, and jails and back into our communities. they go into those sanctuary cities when they see them, they go there, because they feel they're safe. democrats' priority is to protect criminals, not to do what's right for our country. my priority is the priority of my administration is to serve, protect and defend the citizens of the united states. charles: well, that was president trump today during a roundtable with law enforcement officials discussing the threat of what he's calling lawless sanctuary cities and the problem they pose for the entire country. this amid texas' recent
crackdown against sanctuary cities that penalize officers who do not cooperate with immigration authorities, the toughet state level immigration approach on the books. here now ken paxton who actually attended the white house immigration meeting. thank you very much as usual for coming on the show. first, share with us, the meeting, what did you learn, and what new about it? because we know that the administration is very focused on this issue. >> look, it was a great meeting because it brought people from all over the country together it. brought sheriffs from different parts of the country, we had congressman, senators, different a.g.'s there, general sessions there. it was a great conversation and what we need to do in the future. what i appreciate in texas is we're a border state and never had a president so focused on border security and protecting our citizens, and so it's certainly welcome as far as i'm concerned and for many of my
citizens. charles: and, of course, california also border state, a report out today, amazing, 143,000 people leaving that state last year. 3.5 million from 2010 to 2015, and one thing they point to is proposition 47, which is a crime bill that took felonies and made them misdemeanors. lot of people say you couple this with the lawlessness of sanctuary cities, you get the mass exodus, i'm sure you know because your state is receiving a lot of the folks. >> absolutely true. crime has increased as a result of illegal immigration because we track temperature though california doesn't track it, people are feeling theesques of it and will continue to increase as they condone illegal criminals saying in the state. charles: i want to shift gears, the big news in austin, this one at a fedex facility outside of san antonio.
the initial reward was 115,000. it's 115,000 now. folks have to be petrified and terrified about this because it seems now to be totally indiscriminate with respect to targets. >> yeah, i think you're right about that. initially we thought they were focusing on certain individuals, when they did the trip wire bomb, that was purely random. made the investigation harder. with 500 federal officials there, 400 fbi, 100 atf, state police, my office and austin pd and schertz pd, there are a lot of people on this. we will resolve this relatively soon. we're working on a lot of information and ultimately will get this guy. charles: we're rooting for you. ken paxton, thank you very much as usual. >> have a great day. charles: back to california. residents have had enough. we always talk about the regulations and the other policies but another aspect is the reduction of punishment for
felonies, many are feeling that the state has gone through a tough time, and we see crime rates have gone through the roof. joining me to discuss, stephanie hamill and washington examiner contributor and tammy bruce is back with us as well. i know you spent time in california. you know all too well about the immediate impact after the proposition 47. the sheriff in san bernardino county said the violent crimes spiked immediately 20%. there were 33 murders up, 11%. just an immediate increase in violent crime. but it shouldn't have been a surprise. >> yeah, charles, i know a lot about it because i'm a resident in a sanctuary state. this is astounding, the numbers, and you just had on the a.g. of texas, he didn't get to go in the numbers of texas. we have the criminals that shouldn't be in the country in the first place that are committing crimes over and over
again. president trump said it nicely, he said that our cities need to be sanctuaries for americans, not for criminal illegal immigrants, and what the left tries to do, they try to sugar coat and put a spin on it. they use the word sanctuary to make it sound so nice, but really the sanctuary just benefits the criminals. what happens is that law enforcement can't step in -- i'm sorry, law enforcement is preventing i.c.e. from stepping in with a detainer and they can't come in, they can't, you know, initiate the process to send the criminal illegals home, that is it. that's the sanctuary. charles: the cities also are magnets in the very first place because they know that there's a harder time for them to actually ever leave but they don't stay in the cities, there's a problem for the entire country. >> it is. our system of laws, we're an imitative society, if you will. we look to our laws for signals about what we approve of, what's appropriate. and this signals of course, that being careless is all right, when they used fines and
jail time for drug offenses when it comes to the horrible tent cities and the homelessness that exists, it's driven by drug abuse. you see the patterns here. and, of course, the people who are victimized by the increase of crime that is fed by drug abuse to some degree is also the law-abiding, hispanic communities who are affected by this. so all of this talk from liberals about caring about people of color and being able to raise people up, they're condemning those same individuals and these are policies that can change that we've seen different opposite policy work in the past, and now it is just a collapse of one of the most beautiful states in the count gee a lot of people don't realize, california was the state that started the three strikes you're out thing. they built 25 prisons and 25 years and mostly people of color they stuffed in there. prop 47 is away of assuaging their guilt. coming up, stocks ending on a high note as investors wait
for the fed chair, jerome powell, his first news conference tomorrow, everyone is waiting with bated breath. i'll walk you through it when we come back. they appear out of nowhere. my secret visitors. hallucinations and delusions. the unknown parts of living with parkinson's. what plots they unfold, but only in my mind. over 50% of people with parkinson's will experience hallucinations or delusions during the course of their disease. if your loved one is experiencing these symptoms, talk to your parkinson's specialist.
these rollicking sessions for social media stocks as facebook continued to stumble over explanation over the way it handled customer data and personnel change there. people don't know what the heck is going on. and twitter facing their own issues as the israeli justice minister issued a statement that, quote, terror groups have switched to twitter because facebook cooperates with israel. that stock took a bigger percentage hit. there is a bill in israel that would allow authorities to remove social media content. while those stocks were dominating the headlines, investors stuck with technology, they shifted over. they went to software and semiconductor names on the software side, adobe, red hat had a similar session. then of course there is amazon, it remains in a lane of its own zooming ahead always looking ahead with new highs in sight. overall consumer discretion was strong.
there are a few names recently thought on their way out now moving toward new highs. best buy, tapestry, i thought the name was corny, this is the old coach. they call it tapestry now. since they changed the name. the stock is on fire. industrial names enjoyed a good session. boeing had a great day by a company hurt by tariffs, and 16.5 billion, the street was looking for 16.16 billion. earnings $3.72 against $3.11, and management offered strong guidance. initially the stock up 11 bucks. something didn't go right on the call, as you can see it is coming down. of course, tomorrow it's all about the fomc decision and the maiden question-and-answer session for jerome powell. street looking for 25-basis-point now and two more this year. i think it can handle four, of course, if the data is right, but more importantly if the fed is careful not to admit they're
going to do four before signs of evidence of inflation. let's talk about the fed and the market with jeffrey cleveland, a chief economist. >> hi, charles. >> how you doing? >> doing well. charles: what i found fascinating is jerome powell around for a long time, with the federal reserve for a long time. before that with the carlyle group, now he's a mystery, a question mark. all of a sudden the guy known as a dove, people think he has the talents and he's the ultimate hawk. >> i don't think he's a haushgs but he has struck a different tone than we saw with yellen and it's a welcome tone. instead of talking about headwinds that the u.s. economy faced, he's recognizing they shifted to tailwinds. a fiscal policy boost. we've got the global economy firing on virtually all cylinders, we think we'll see global growth top 4% this year, charles, so that's a good set of tailwinds for u.s. growth.
that's the tone he came out with at the congressional testimony, and i think we'll hear more of that tomorrow. charles: jeffrey, he's going to have to be careful not to spook the market, right? in other words, he's optimistic and maybe, you know, will he see inflation? how does he articulate that, hey, i'm with you, i'm not going to ruin the party, and only going to do what i have to do? >> well, i think the market now has adjusted to the three rate hike scenario, that is almost fully priced in. what's not priced in, charles is a four rate hike scenario. at the start of the year, that was seen as a very far-fetched scenario. maybe a one third chance now in the eyes of the financial market. he could stick to the three hikes and i don't think that spooks the market. if he does introduce the idea of four or, charles, if we are going to see tomorrow not just jerome powell speak but we'll see new economic projections
from the new fomc, wul see all the dots, and if the dots, the median members sees four rate hikes this year, that's not priced in, that could cause volatility. charles: jeffrey cleveland, as usual, great stuff. >> good to see you. >> critics are questioning whether public roads are ready for self-driving cars after the fatal crash in arizona. my next guest drove cross country in a self-driving tesla and he has concerns. he's going to express those next. mom you called?
questions about whether or not public roads are ready for self-driving cars. with me in a fox business exclusive, the drive's editor at large and founder of the human driving association. the human driving association, are you fighting back against the robots for us on our behalf? >> well, the human driving association was originally almost intended to be a joke. i was just so annoyed, i thought the propaganda around sel self-driving cars which are not here yet and i don't think are coming soon. we support the fair and balance deployment of self-driving technology. charles: you do understand, though, that they're going to probably be deployed sooner rather than later. listen, i remember two years ago reading articles about five years from now or whatever, and you know, then you saw the acquisitions, the mobilized and everyone is doing tests everywhere all around this country. you know, but you're concern is
we're not prepared for it as a society and maybe the technology won't be prepareed? >> let's be serious, we're going to see self-driving cars, cars without steering wheels or a person in the front probably in the next five or seven years but in places where it is easy to deploy them, places like arizona. i don't think they are ready any time soon. charles: ultimately, though, if this is the case, my hypothesis is this, there will be a point where we'll have mass distribution or deployment of these autonomous vehicles, and might actually be illegal for humans to drive because we're so unpredictable, could we ever see a place like that perhaps 10 or 15 years down the road? >> i think it's unlikely ever in our lifetimes in this country. the deployment of automation in technology is one where technology is seen as a means
of enhancing human intelligence. that's why in airbus and boeing, you see the pilots are highly trained, know how to use the automation for the optimal outcome. if you think ever technology as an end, as a goal of replacing humans, you're going to get a lot of pushback from humans and the fact that machines are perfect. neither are we. charles: i get you on that. i believe that they are less imperfect than we are. >> it remains to seen. charles: remains to be seen, but remember the futurists said we'll be freed up for greater things like using more than 10% of our brain. so this accident out there, everyone is putting their program on pause, we know that's only temporary. there are always accidents when new technology arrived whether it is airplane or train or the horseless carriage. so what's to stop these companies, because i see unmitigated dollar signs for them, and i just really believe
they're going to try to force this and whatever they can use their will and their financial resources, they'll make it happen? >> well, they're pushing hard to deploy the vehicles as soon as possible, and because there's no safety standard, no one knows what safe is. all we know as safety is humans are okay in this country with 40,000 deaths a year, but clearly not okay with one death. somewhere in between there is the equilibrium what we are prepared as mistakes from humans versus machines. they've handled this very poorly in the past. it is almost miraculous that tesla survived and almost unscathed from the accident several years ago, the tesla never claimed to be fully self-driving. you have uber claimed fully self-driving that should have been able to drive and see better than a human, and it didn't. the whole point of self-driving cars is they be safer than people. if they're not, why? charles: all right, great
point. we've got to bring you back real soon because this is the situation that's going to become more prevalent, obviously, as the tests get greater and they push because we both know they're going to push, they want to get these things on the road, and the ubers of the world are pushing harder than anyone else. thank you very much. appreciate it. talking about hypocrisy, three liberal millionaires warning you about the evils of capitalism. next. are pretty much the same. but while some push high commission investment products, fisher investments avoids them. some advisers have hidden and layered fees. fisher investments never does. and while some advisers are happy to earn commissions from you whether you do well or not, fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. ..
more dependable...le have discovered something stronger... longer lasting. in a chevy truck. and now, you can too. see why chevrolet is the most awarded and fastest growing brand the last four years overall. current competitive owners can get a total value of over eleven thousand dollars on this silverado all star when you finance with gm financial. find new roads at your local chevy dealer. charles: senators beings * and elizabeth warren teamed up with filmmaker michael moore on income inequality. >> the last 30 years the middle class of this country has declined while the oligarchy is on the rise. >> it's amazing the level of
greed. >> this effort to take over our government and make our government work better and birther for a thinner and thinner rich slice in america. charles: what do these three millionaires know about the average american who works paycheck to paycheck and would like to climb the cladder of success themselves? i just when i hear them and they say the solution is a higher minimum wage, livable wage. it's always the minimum. it's midwest ultimate we can bring out of the individual. it's always we'll make sure you get enough crumbs to satisfy you. >> i think this idea of income inequality focuses on the wrong thing. if fox said to me we have two
options. i make a million, you make $3 million. i'm going to take that $100,000. income unequality is the wrong thing to focus on. we need to focus on dynamic growth. charles: that's the rationale the democrats are using to push back on the tax cuts. >> they took it to an extreme when they said they were willing to vote against tax cuts for the middle class because people who were wealthy got a cut, too. folks at the top should be worried that the forces that got donald trump elected, the forces that propelled bernie sanders, all the air has not been let out of that balloon. 1.7 million people tuned in to
this crazy town hall and bernie sanders was to the right of the group. he says everyone who lives in the united states should have a trust fund from birth. the unrest in the country is so great unfortunately it's getting an audience. charles: what bothers me is the idea if you are an overachiever you will be punished, and if you are an underachiever you will have an incentive. >> obama with you didn't build that business, we did. one of the things congress picked up is a more positive tone. people are being told good work, keep it up. charles: do you think this will have an impact on the mid-term elections? >> there is a lot of people who feel they are forgotten.
they don't care if it's a billionaire leading them or a guy who made a billion dollars with a book about socialism like bernie sanders. charles: thanks for watching. here's lou dobbs. lou: good evening. these are our top stories. texas rocked by a fifth is motion in under three weeks. a package bomb exploded at a fedex distribution center near san antonio. no one was injured but investigators are no closer to finding suspect. house majority leader kea kevin mccarthy and steve scalise join the calls for a second special counsel to investigate fbi corruption and department of justice corruption.