ring, bell. thank you. so there are not a lot of people doing anything with money. after labor day it will get better. it's nice having everyone gone. cavuto is coming up. i'll see you tonight on fox report. what does it say when less than 3% of federal workers want to join obamacare. why dr. ben carson says it's done now. time to pull the plug on it now. welcome, i'm neil cavuto. a survey of federal workers show 3% want to join the healthcare exchange. all this as unions that demanded it now despise it. congress and staffers are getting special exemptions from it. dr. ben carson predicted it but it's a bigger mess than you thought. what's going on?

>> it's awful. people in the irs don't want any part of it either. like you're walking down the street and see a bunch of people running out of a building and there's a shadow figure saying come on in here. >> neil: you're opting not to. >> they're opting not to. what is interesting is the president loves to talk about the fact that with this bill, there will be no lifetime limits on the amount of money paid by insurance companies that you can stay on your parents insurance until you're 26, preexisting diseases will not preclude you from getting insurance but i agree with that. most people would agree with that. >> neil: depends if you like your kid but i digress. go ahead. >> well, the other hundreds of things in the bill people don't like. he never talks about those. he talks about the fact republicans want 30 million people not to have insurance. this is demagoguery. i hope everybody will look it

up, peel appealing to the emotions of people. a classic politician stuff. we need people interested in solving problems, not just the upper hand in a political fight. >> neil: we come back to if it's so good, those who are close to it would want in on it and they're not. 97% of federal workers don't want anything to do with it. unions that don't even want to be part of it. obviously something's changing. >> even the irs. >> neil: what's going on? >> who is supposed to be in charge of enforcement. the fact we're talking about putting the irs in charge after the things they've been noted to do, is there anything that even resembles common sense left in our country anymore? i think maybe we need to go out and find farmers and plumbers

and policemen and put them in charge. they would come up with things that made more sense. >> neil: i'm going to address this later in the show but you brought up a good examples of everyone running out of the stores. it's loot restaurant owner who won't eat his food but will foist it on you. that's telling me something. the owner doesn't like it, congress doesn't want anything to do with it. federal workers, more than nine out of ten want to be as far away as they can. the american public can assume wait a minute, we swallow this, we're getting snowed. >> if maybe the people who are pushing this could just step back for half a second. swallow their pride, say you know what? can we do something else? i think everybody else would be willing to join them. i don't think we're going to be having big demonstrations saying see, you were wrong and we were i-we're bigger than that. we can solve this problem like

rational human beings. >> neil: do you think -- you mentioned what the president said about republicans defining themself about what they're against but they want to deny healthcare to 30 million americans. you reframed it in an interesting way. we can't be for somebody that abandons our healthcare system. that's the gist. whatever the attempt to get healthcare in the hands of those who don't have it, you can't upend what is -- was arguably the world's finest healthcare system to do it. there's got to be a better way. republicans have not found a way to say that. what do they risk if they can't? >> well, they will be able to say it. because there are a number of ideas out there. the health savings accounts work well. look at the medical savings account system in singapore and how well that works. we can do these things with much less money than we're spending

now. and i've talked to a number of members of the healthcare caucus in congress and there are very smart people there. they will put something together along with those of us in the medical profession and other interested people. we're going to get this done. this is not a battle between republicans and democrats and independents. we're talking aboutlet healthcare of the american populous. i peel to people to stop listening to the demagoguery and listen to logic. >> neil: it will come back to republicans want to torpedo this but have nothing in its place. should republicans have something or stripped down simple version ready to go but they're keen on defunding this thing now? >> well, i think we already have -- when i say we, i'm talk those of us interested in solving this problem. already something ready to go.

and i don't think it's wise to take it and put it out there right now because then all of the energy will go to trying to destroy that. i think we need to be focused on finding a way to unfortunately deteeth the obamacare so we stop hurting the american people. you know, we need to be talking about making progress. this is only a small part of the problem but it's a big part of the economic situation that we find ourselves in. it's having an enormously detrimental effect on hiring. the largest number of jobs are part time. 70% of the new jobs. this is not beneficial to our economy. if even -- the people who want big government were smart they would realize if we do the things that grow the economy, they would have more money than they have now. >> neil: you're right. those part time -- you're right.

part time workers would not be eligible for healthcare under the present system. doctor, good having you again. >> always good to be with you. >> did you ever ask why congress should get exemption from the law? there's a member of congress asking the same and shelly moore caputo is refusing to accept the special treatment. if congress voted for this and it's the law, congress should part of this. congresswoman, it's a novel concept, trying to live by example here but very few colleagues concur. does that trouble you? >> i'm going to put in legislation in september saying congress cannot receive a subsidy for obamacare. it's about fairness and about holding lawmakers who made the law accountable. if it's good enough for the american public, it should be good enough for us to be treated the same way we would be if we

were the general public. under these provisions that the administration put forward we would get a special subsidy. i don't think the american people want that and i'm going to encourage my colleagues not to accept it either. make it so it's not the law of the land. >> neil: what is interesting about your position is you were never a fan of this but you seem to say if it is the law of the land, unless we strike it down, we have to live with the pudding we're foisting on the american people but particularly those who championed this cause, they don't want anything to do with it which scares me. i'm saying, well, you pushed for it, now you're pushing it on me but you want nothing to do with it. should i be worried? >> i would be worried. we've already seen the president push back deadlines, make provisions for businesses. we passed an exempt to the individual mandate to try to push back on that a couple weeks ago that he doesn't find acceptable. he is setting up a tiered system

where members of congress and businesses and insurance companies have a special part of his marquee plan yet the fairness is that every day american citizens going into the exchange will not have access. that's unfair. 7 million people will use their -- lose their employee sponsored healthcare. it's a mess. i have voted to repeal it 40 times. it's a train wreck but i think the last thing we need is congress getting a subsidy to make it easier for us or for the rest of the congress. >> neil: amazing. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> very good having you on the show. >> thank you. >> you send other open mail at your own risk. google says you have no right to expect privacy when you do. is that true?

the great outdoors... ...and a great deal. thanks to dad. (gasp) nope. aw! guys! grrrr let's leave the deals to hotels.com. (nice bear!) ooo! that one! nice! got it! oh my gosh this is so cool! awesome! perfect! yep, and no angry bears. the perfect place is on sale now. up to 30% off. only at hotels.com at humana, our medire agents sit down with you and ask. being active. and being with this guy. [ male announcer ] getting to know you is how we help you choose the humana medicare plan that works best for you. mi familia. ♪ [ male announcer ] we want to help you achieve your best health, so you can keep doing the things that are imptant to you. taking care of our customers.

taking care of her. and the next thing on our list is bungee jumping. [ male announcer ] helping you... now that's what's important to us. it's a reality check. i had my reality check when i'd be sitting there with my friends who had their verizon phones and i'd be sitting there like "mine's still loading!" i couldn't get email. i couldn't stream movies. i couldn't upload any of our music. that's when i decided to switch. now that i'm on verizon, everything moves fast. with verizon, i have that reliability. i'm completely happy with verizon. verizon's 4g lte is the most reliable and in more places than any other 4g network. period. that's powerful. verizon. get the nokia lumia 928 for free.

(announcer) at scottrade, our clto make their money do more.re (ann) to help me plan my next move, i take scottrade's free, in-branch seminars... plus, their live webinars. i use daily market commentary to improve my strategy. and my local scottrade office guides my learning every step of the way. because they know i don't trade like everybody. i trade like me. i'm with scottrade. (announcer) scottrade... ranked "highest in customer loyalty for brokerage and investment companies."

>> neil: forget the government's snooping into email, should we worry about google? the company argued gmail users should have no expectation of privacy but it extended to those who receive the email who are not gmail users. heather hanson says google is right. before a statement from google, i'm confused about where google is coming from. i'm saying i can't figure it out. >> think about t spam, they have to have spam filters on stuff. they have to have virus filters. it's a part of regular course of business, there's an express

contract when you sign up. terms and agreements is they're going to go through some of the stuff. it's part of the privacy policy. >> neil: if you gmail me i'm caught up in the same thing and never signed up. >> there's case law. >> neil: don't give me the lawyer stuff. i didn't sign up for it. >> there's case law that says you have signed up for it. >> oh. >> every time you send and email you have given implied consent because they're going through it for the spam, for the visors. there are filters. >> neil: you're such a good lawyer that you lost me. i'm not a gmail user. you email me, i open up, read the email, now i'm part of the gmail contract. >> most people are part of it. you and the person who sent it. we're not talking about viruses or spams, we're talking about google going into the email and it's offensive. >> and heather will trample on our rights.

>> under federal law only one person has to consent. it's a federal wiretapping law. as long as i'm signed up, it doesn't matter. >> neil: here's the thing we got from google. i'm not even a lawyer. we take -- we use privacy and take it seriously. reports are untrue, we're industry leaders in security and privacy and no matter who sends a email to gmail users, protexts apply. it's back to the gmail nonuser who is responding to a gmail email that i'm worried about. >> correct. they have not agreed to this information. all this is completely violating the electronic communications privacy act. senderings and receivers are not agreeing. >> neil: when you start something -- they give you pages of documents that you have to click to use. if you don't. >> you can't do it.

>> neil: their ownerrous and we could take more time they say the same to the nongmail users? >> under federal court only one person has to consent. for state courts -- >> neil: but i didn't agree. >> you don't have to, i'm sorry. that's not what you want to hear. >> neil: you lawyers are so screwed up. you just -- get back to the way it is. >> that's the law. listen, google, the old c.e.o. of google said they ride up to the creepy line and don't cross it. that's a quote. >> neil: they crossed it? >> that's questionable. they haven't crossed the legal line. if the court wants to move that line and say both parties have to agree, if the statute wants to move the line, fine. >> neil: my issue about the line, and maybe google is within their rights but i would say, what does it say about this day and age that maybe to scott's old line, we have no expectations of privacy today. get over it. is that the case? >> it should not be but we're

getting to that area. but as was said about the crossing over the creepy line set by the former c.e.o. in 2010, you can't cross that line and they are. you need informed consent. if they want consent if people using gmail that's okay. >> neil: also, speak english. the company was likening to a statement to this is just like when you send a letter to someone through the post office. no, i don't buy that. i'm don't expect my mailman, unless he's norman bates, to read it. >> that's a bad analogy. >> neil: mine or google's? >> google's. >> i looked mine. we're off to the races. you thought that was twisted. >> i thought it was a bad analogy. but it's a machine that's scanning them for words so it's not as creepy as it sounds. >> neil: when you justify behavior by sighting fictitious

behavior me thinks you're wearing the google glasses too much. it distorts you. >> i don't disagreettes creepy. i feel it's legal and google's going to win. they filed a motion to dismiss and i think they're going to win it. >> i think the plaintiffs filed a strong opposition to the motion to dismiss and it will weigh in their favor. >> neil: we'll know but you can couch this by saying everything is done in your interest, right? >> it's free. it's part of the consideration of the contract. if you're -- a different story when you're not a gmail user. >> neil: do you think they all do this, they just don't -- google got the caught up in this but they all do is itt? >> yes, this is a normal course of practice for business. the electronic communication act says that these companies are allowed to do that because they have to have spam filters and virus filters. >> we're talking about something

different. sworn affidavits say they are not looking for words, they're looking as virus and spam. >> they get close to the line but don't cross it. >> neil: they crossed the creepy line. you have a generous creepy line. for email privacy, the email lunacy, did luis lerner hide her account? we have a man demanding answers on the other side of the break.

>> americans have a right to be angry and i'm angry about it. i will not tolerate this kind of behavior in any agency but especially in the irs. we're going to hold the responsible party accountable.

>> neil: remember that we usually don't alert ancient press conferences but we wanted to alert that to make the point what's happened since. it's been three months and there's no alert, no updates, no results of said investigation. the house oversight committee chairman darrell issa. if anything changed it's the fact this and a host of other scandals have been reduced to being phony. what do you think of that? >> when the president says phony scandals, never names one so i assume he doesn't mean benghazi, fast and furious and doesn't mean the irs where lois lerner has taken the fifth and we continue to see documents show it was for the an isolated incident in cincinnati but rather an orchestrated group, large group of over 200 organizations that were never given a yes or no on their

applications which left them incapable of doing what they were formed for. >> neil: what does lois lerner know. we learned she is using private email. it gets hairy. me thinks that maybe it's an attempt on her part or your committee's part to work out an agreement which she can speak. where does that stand? >> well, the committee decided based on counsel's advice and looking at case law she didn't properly take the fifth. in fact she testified as to a number of questions we had. we expect to have her back. but the in meantime we've been looking into the people she interfaced with and finding she was so a great extent a hub of other agencies, a hub that corresponded downstream to cincinnati and lesser individuals in washington but also upstream. i think the fact that this goes

to the office of the chief counsel, a political appointee, that begins to have us understand how critical she and why she might want to fein innocence. >> neil: there's talk the mainstream media is dropping this story because it's -- we know liberal groups targeted. i tried to the best of my ability to get liberal groups on to talk about it. normally if you have been talking about the irs you're itching to talking about it. now i have conservatives groups who are fuming but i figure if you're targeted bit government, you're angry and don't like the irs picking on you and you want to shout it out. they're not. i wonder if that was made up? >> it was to a great extent made up. here's the important thing, you can hear a lot of things in washington. the question is who will put out fact and cite specifics.

in our case at chairman camp of the ways and means committee and i looked into it, we did find a number of progressive groups came up in the search but as far as we could tell they were granted a yes or no which means they either got approval or had the right to appeal or change what they were proposing. >> neil: and wasn't the key issue they got it more quickly. conservatives were left stewing to this day in fact but not them. >> exactly. we have groups as of today still haven't received an answer. they're over three years and they were asked inappropriate questions. i think being asked four your donor list, being asked question after question related to political activities when the law is clear they have every right to do political activities and you have every right to keep your donors list private. particularly when you consider they keep calling these tax exempt organizations. they don't pay tax on gifts

received but the individuals who give money do not get a tax deduction. that's important because this is a category, not a charity for the most part. 501c4's were targeted because they wanted to be advocacy groups. >> neil: you're right. they're individuals and pay taxes. let me ask about where the administration is going with its own investigation. the argument was it was going to get to the bottom of what happened here. the targeted groups, out of cincinnati, washington, whether it involved lois lerner, and then i'm hearing they couldn't name the investigator, couldn't cite his progress and all the groups targeted don't remember a phone call or inquiry from said investigation which raises my doubts again as to whether an investigation is going on. >> the only investigation going on is the administration, even when we don't ask for documents

correctly related to progressive groups, gives them to us. they drop the key words we want a search, add key words that give them progressive groups and send that information. this is a real scandal. had has nothing to do my opinion with the president but it happened under his watch. it's the best -- >> neil: wait a minute, you say did i'm sorry but you're saying it's not involving the president. those who are. >> that's it. >> thinking it led to him, you don't think it does. >> one of the challenges of my committee is not overstate what when he know. it goes to the chief council's office. we follow the facts. the terrifying thing is even when it doesn't appear to be to the president, it seems impossible to get him to care out his promises and get to the bottom of it. that's one of the challenges in washington is how can you trust somebody that even when they say it's wrong and they want to fix

it will not cooperate. that's our committee's problem and why we continue working but why many are frustrated it's taking so long. everything is on -- we'll give it to you after subpoena and a lot of time. >> neil: a light of fighting back and forth. good to have you. >> thank you. >> as if the irs wasn't in enough trouble now it's accused of bullying mom and pop stores sending warnings to small businesses. nothing scarier than a letter from the irs. >> that's right. it feels like they imply there's wrongdoing from the start when you get the notice from the irs. what's going on is an estimated 20,000 moms and pops businesses and small businesses across the country have been getting a letter from the irs. your team reached out to one of them, one small business owner in chattanooga, tennessee. he said yes, he did get the letter and he was told he

underreport his income to the government. then he was asked to justify it based on what he is seeing in his cash and credit card receipts versus the irs information and only had a month. this is a scary letter that people are getting. >> neil: so it's intimidating and at the very least, bad optics. small business guys say you're assuming the worst with us and you have done nothing to help us, so bad timing. >> yeah, bad timing. the other thing is it doesn't say the dollar amount of what they're supposedly underreporting so they have to go through records. some small businesses feel it's a fishing expedition. >> was it random? >> a 2008 piece of legislation a housing bill, said the irs could get access to credit card and debit card information so the irs is matching information with the small business tax returns and at the same time with all the government spending going on, the irs is under

pressure to do more to close the $300 billion tax cut meaning underreported incomes to the agency, so the irs is going after cash businesses and small businesses. now, i spoke to a tax accountant who said some businesses have underreported. some businesses do owe money to the irs. but the fact is they are basically giving them a month to answer and they could then see an audit. this is -- >> neil: a lot of these guys don't have accounting departments. it is mom and pop. >> that's right. >> thank you very much. we're going to have some of those small business guys on tonight on fbn and how they're fingered an don't like it because between the rules and regulations and healthcare and the delays for employers on healthcare for the big guys but not those guys, they're feeling under duress and want to talk to us on fbn tonight. how bill and hill are trying to deal with -- well, that.

dad. how did you get here? i don't know. [ speaking in russian ] look, look, look... you probably want to how did you get you can get a fabulous hotel without bidding. think of the rubles you'll save. with one touch, fun in the sun. i like fun. well, that went exactly i as planned.. really?

and my family moved es, straight to chicago. d america is the only country i have ever known. senior year of high school, i was promoted to city court staff commander, i held the rank of cadet brigadier general. i was head of chicago rotc. i want to be a us citizen and i want to be a marine, i'm gonna be a marine, because i care. i care about this country. i care about those around me, i care about my family, my neighbors. you know, i do want to give back,

i believe one hundred percent in what this country stands for. let me earn it, you know, let me serve. i just want an opportunity, i just want a chance. to, to show everyone out there that, i am, american and that i will honorably serve this country wearing a marine corp uniform. i appreciate the kind introduction. >> hillary camp fired up over anthony weiner tripping up. >> do you know what her role in hillary's 2016 campaign will be? >> i do. >> what will it be? >> i'm not telling. >> weiner said he was kidding when he talked about his wife's future gig. so much for the clintons staying away from the race. >> we are 100 miles from that

race and everyone understand we're not going to be involved. >> neil: usually we get bill involved saying we're 100 miles away he means a million. my next guest says this guy is like velcro, the clintons keep getting stuck. it's ironic that a president who at the time was considered teflon bill, nothing bugged him. now this is stick to go his wife. or is it? >> yes, i think that's what anthony weiner was doing, even though it was a little nidal hasan, he was trying to as it. >> shall ha ha, he was showing he's still in the know and relevant with the clinton family. with bill clinton -- he has no qualms about endorsing people running for mayor but in the new york race he distanced himself majorly. >> i love that line, we're 100 miles. so do you think this race in the end affects anything or anyone? i think we as journalists, not

you but you're absorbed in the campaign. that we're years out and maybe an issue that comes up in the midterms next year, but a stretch. >> yes. i don't think anthony weiner's going to come out and -- if hillaryry makes a run for 2016, i don't think anthony weiner is going to come up near that. but to assure it, that's why bill clinton is saying they're going to be 100 million yards away from this race. it doesn't help anyone. especially what wiener weiner, aka carlos danger, is accused of is sexual inappropriateness so you don't want that even anywhere near the clintons because of what bill clinton used to be involved in. >> neil: right. he didn't have a tag name. right? >> let me ask you, i'm curious about everyone who is -- hillary is inevitable as the democratic

nominee. i think i remember 2008 saying the same thing. if true, barack obama wasn't an also ran challenger, he had a lot of heft behind him but he was dismissed. it was hillaryry's nomination to lose and she lost. i guess does she look a good from afar but when the campaign is on, she's far from good and someone else could emerge. >> somebody else could emerge but the racket is around hillary clinton. i've done tons of shows and they want to talk about 2016. >> we get it wrong all the time. >> who the g.o.p. will put up. >> journalist said jimmy carter was going nowhere. they get it wrong all the time. >> but i mean what people are talking about is the hillary clinton run. there's nobody as of -- >> neil: you don't understand. i don't dismiss she's going to run. i dismiss the notion she's going to get the nomination.

>> looking around, whose out there, who is it going to be? nancy pelosi in harry reid? >> i'm telling you she will not be the democratic nominee. >> i think she will be. >> all right, i'm telling you, watch it. pam, remember this show. remember this moment, if i'm wrong, destroy this show, destroy this moment. anyway remember when this democrat calls opponents of the president's healthcare law racist? this democrat quickly became a republican. what is he will -- albert is saying now that harry is upping the ante? my doctor and i went with axiron, the only underarm low t treatment. axiron can restore t levels to normal in about 2 weeks in most men. axiron is not for use in women or anyone younger than 18 or men with prostate or breast cancer. women, especially those who are or who may become pregnant

and children should avoid contact where axiron is applied as uneected signs of puberty in children or changes in body hair or increased acne in women may occur. report these symptoms to your doctor. tell your doctor about all medical conditions and meditions. serious side effects could include increased risk of prostate cancer; worsening prostate symptoms; decreased sperm count; ankle, feet or body swelling; enlarg or painful breasts; problems breathing while sleeping; and blood clots in the legs. common side effects include skin redness or irritation where applied, increased red blood cell count, headache, diarrhea, vomiting, and increase in psa. ask your doctor about e only underarm low t treatment, test.

>> neil: remember this? >> it comes down to the race of the president of the united states which causes people to disconnect and step away from the substance of the bill. >> neil: that was enough to get my next guest to switch from

democrat to republican. what is he saying now that senator harry reid is refusing to apologize for this in. >> it's been obvious they're doing everything they can to make him fail. i hope, i hope that it's -- i say this seriously, i hope that that's based on substance, not the fact he's an african-american. >> we've got louisiana republican senator albert gillry with us. what do you think of harry reid's remark? >> a morass of malarky. it makes a good american sick to hear someone saying that kind of humbug. some people have only one card in their deck and it's the race card. these people just insist on playing it again and again. it's divisive, it's stupid actually. >> neil: senator, what do you think of the way he couched it, not stating is outright saying i

hope they're not doing this because the president's african-american, you can kind of have it both ways with a statement like that, right? >> i don't think so. i thought it was clear. it's race baiting clear and simple, playing the race card clearly. i was just disgusted to hear that. when my mother heard that -- my mother's 104. when she heard that first comment by the head of the louisiana democratic party she called me on the telephone, 104 years old, lifelong democrat and said i hope you're not involved. i don't want you associated. i don't want our family associated with anything as foolish as this. this is absolutely foolishness. >> neil: good for her. there's that kind of prevailing view, even in the mainstream media, where those who challenge the president do so because in their gut and heart of hearts,

they don't like an african-american in the white house and it just sticks in their craw and they find any way around it. but essentially it's to mask racism they have in their hearts. what do you think of that? >> i think that's humbug. i have been since eisenhower, i have criticized every american president, every single one. they've always been white and i've always been black and no one has accused me of being a racist. some of the things i said about president bush were terrible. i as an american have the right to criticize every president based upon his policies, the things he does. this president has given us more than enough to criticize. we don't need to be concerned about his color or who his father was. some of his policies are devastating to america. that's what we criticize. >> neil: do you think the

president has an obligation to shoot down a negative or in other words, go back and say no, no, say what you will of the republicans who don't like my agenda, i don't think it's racially driven, or would that be akin to the guy who says you're wrong, i haven't been beating my wife or stopped beating my wife. there's nothing to be gained by the president saying anything, or should he? >> he's never been shy about injecting race into issues or himself into racial issues. this is a situation where he should step in and say this is foolishness, divisive to america. i want everyone to know that this is -- that's nothing to do with mice race but -- my race. criticize my politics, no one's going to call you a racist. >> neil: senator, how have you been treated since you switched parties? >> by republicans? >> neil: anyone. >> they warmly accepted. by my constituents, warmly

accepted. by most democrats, my change has been warmly accepted. members of the democrat party, the hierarchy, they've been fairly nasty to me. i received bad names and threats and all that sort of thing. but you know, when my lord sends me out to walk through fire, he puts asbestos pants on me. >> neil: senator, you always speak your mind. i know i had to say that to the left and right but great heat wave you on. >> it's always a pleasure to talk with you. >> neil: be well, sir. your kid moved back in and you want to empty the nest. how do you know, how to time when that kid has to go. ♪

you're not made of money, so don't overpay for at insurance. geico, you're not made of money, see how much you could save.

no, not zombies, your kids. young adults are moving back in with their parents at a record rate and not moving out. are they overstaying their welcome? according to a new study, parents feel the college graduate should hit the road after five years. robi ludwig who assisted with this study. >> i worked with coldwell banker, and i was so shocked at the changing mind set of both the kids and parents that there was really a growing acceptance of kids returning home and for a long period of time. and that both the kids and the

parents liked it. >> even the kids who were working? >> yes. >> not one thing, a student laying on the couch, this applies to even kids that are working, get out after five years. >> right. my father said to my mother get her out of here. but what we're finding is there are two groups of millenials returning home to live with parents. the one that lives at home with purpose, there's an exit strategy. >> what does that mean, live with purpose. >> means they're paying rent, looking job, they're saving their money so that they have some financial stability, they may be purchasing a first home, get married upon leaving the parents' house. >> say hypothetically you have a daughter one out of five of those. does it count? your point is that it depends what the strategy is, but there's got to be a strategy. >> there has to be a strategy. >> so as a parent, what do you say, now -- >> it is the job of the parent

to help their kid live independently. life is not free. you charge rent, it doesn't have to be a lot. you make sure that child is doing chores around the house, that they're looking for a full-time job or graduate school as their full-time job. >> what if the job they have is not going to be able to cut it for them. do you as a parent say now, financially i will pay for you getting the heck out and helping you out in the new. >> listen, if parents can do that, great, but there are a lot of parents that can't do that and they're spending their retirement money to help the kids and putting themselves in financial jeopardy. so you don't want that. >> the parents are saying what to the kids? >> i think they need to say you can stay here for a period of time but ultimately i want you to live successfully as an independent person. and that needs to be communicated because the 20s are important. it is not like you can throw away your 20s, say i'll be successful at some point because the choices you make influence

the choices you will have and the opportunities that you have. >> coldwell banker doing this, real estate, trying to connect, are they trying to do household formations? >> we were trying to study the buying trends and as a result of this boomerang generation, when were people buying first homes, when were people downsizing. was this delaying the process. i think the truth of the matter is it is taking us all longer to grow up, all of us. >> in europe, whole generations live together. >> yeah. >> maybe we're catching up with them. >> i guess. i guess. but you know, i think there's a point to everybody having their own home. there's something healthy about that, if that can be done. >> very good. doctor, good to have you on. >> always good to be here, neil. >> dr. robi ludwig. the health care law makes 97% of workers.

need a little kick? ooh! could've had a v8. in the juice aisle. and experience the connectivity of the available lexus enform, including the es and rx. ♪ this is the pursuit of perfection. it's a reality check. i had my reality check when i'd be sitting there with my friends who had their verizon phones and i'd be sitting there like "mine's still loading!" i couldn't get email. i couldn't stream movies. i couldn't upload any of our music. that's when i decided to switch. now that i'm on verizon, everything moves fast. with verizon, i have that reliability. i'm completely happy with verizon. verizon's 4g lte is the most reliable and in more places than any other 4g network. period. that's powerful. verizon. get the nokia lumia 928 for free.

we replaced people with a machine.r, what? customers didn't like it. so why do banks do it? hello? hello?! if your bank doesn't let you talk to a real person 24/7, you need an ally. hello? ally bank. your money needs an ally.

all right. i said it before, i am going to say it again. do not, do not eat at a restaurant where the workers won't because i don't know about you, but if the chief ain't tasting, i ain't buying. when i heard only 3% of federal workers are keen on health care, guess what, i wasn't keen on health care. and when i also heard that congress wants to be exempted from this, let's just say i lost my appetite for this because something here just doesn't smell right. the folks in the kitchen don't like what they're cooking up in the kitchen. they're fine slopping it on us, don't expect them to slop the same. and when unions who supported what they were cooking up in the kitchen now also want out of the kitchen, that's a lot of cooks getting out of the kitchen. and it ain't the heat. i think it is the food.

what are we doing like culinary guinea pigs? i tell you what, we're getting up and going and doing it now. they aren't eating the slop because they know what's in it. one restaurant owner wants out because she knew all along what was in it. i want out of it. and i love restaurants. it is clear this whole establishment, they're all out of their minds. i'm telling you guys, forget about the intricacies of the laws that don't add up and delaying the employer mandate and all this other nonsense. you could cut to the core of a program's problems when the people who came up with the program want nothing to do with it, when congress wants out of it, when unions who supported it are rejecting it. again, go into a restaurant and see the mater d that said i won't eat this. leave! why are you watching me!

put "the five" on dvr now and leave! where are we telling them to go, i have no idea. i am that angry. but common sense. no one in the kitchen is eating this food, why are you? why am i? why am i yelling? i could be hungry. tonight, 8:00 p.m., much more on this, fbn! hello, everyone, i'm greg gutfeld along with kimberly guilfoyle, bob beckel, eric bolling, and her barbie transcribing has a cup holder for vodka, dana perino. 5:00 in new york city i think. >> i want one! ♪ it is pure her he is ee. a rodeo clown chased by a bull as people cheered. fair officials condemned it and banned the clown for life. the president of missouri rodeo cowboy association also resigned and the bull executed by firing squad, just kidding. but why not? he did