`

tax cuts

Dispelling Recession Myths

Are there any economic indicators that are pointing towards a recession? Is the left actually blaming corporate tax cuts that have led to growth as a bad thing and the reason why we haven’t had a recession already? How can any economist claim they have the date or year of when a recession is coming? CNBC contributor, Jim Iuorio joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

No Spin Zone On Booming Economy

Is this a tough day for the left to spin the April jobs numbers that beat the estimates again? Where can we still be doing better? Is the opioid epidemic keeping people from participating in the booming economy? Is there anyone out there that Trump can nominate for the Fed Board that the media and Democrats wouldn’t smear? Fox Business Contributor, Scott "The Cow Guy" Shellady joins Dan and Kristen McQueary to discuss the April job numbers.

Related Content

Is Capitalism More Important Than Democracy?

Mayor Pete Buttigieg, presidential nominee, says capitalism has let a lot of people down. Has it? Compared to what other economic system? Why are Democrats running on repealing the tax cuts that benefited over 94% of the country? Chief Economist for CNN and Fed Board of Governors nominee, Steve Moore joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

Framing 2020

If the situation at the border is in fact a crisis, what should we do about it? Is political jargon getting in the way of coming up with a solution? Is 94% of people getting a tax cut considered a good outcome? Is calling a candidate a socialist a smear? Former Chair of the DNC and Fox News contributor, Donna Brazile joins Dan and Carol Roth to discuss.

Related Content

Condolences On Tax Day

Why aren’t people realizing they received a tax cut? How does Illinois have all this government but still come out as the worst state for taxpayers? What are we getting for our money in Illinois? The Capitalist Pig, Jonathan Hoenig joins Dan and Carol Roth to discuss.

Related Content

Safety And Security Messaging Heading Into The Midterms

Will “Beautiful” Ted win out against Beto O’Rourke, “a highly overrated guy?” Is Trump blowing smoke on promising more tax cuts? Are women across the country unhappy with Trump’s bluster but happy with his accomplishments from a policy perspective? Senior political correspondent for the Washington Examiner, David Drucker joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

Democrats Encouraged The Mob

Will the Kavanaugh confirmation be good for economic liberty? Was this a watershed moment for the Republican Party? Did Democrats not only tolerate but cheer on mob rule? If more Republicans win their elections should we be prepared for a second round of tax cuts? Did the Janus decision affect the Democratic Party’s fundraising by force? President for Americans for Tax Reform, Grover Norquist joins Dan and Amy to discuss. 

Related Content

DC Press Corps All Of A Sudden Cares About Taxes

Is the economic impact of tariffs the only tax the DC press corps cares about? Where’s the fair and complete analysis of the tax cuts? What about the impact of tax hikes on personal, corporate, and capital? Why is Trump still misunderstanding the meaning of trade deficits? CNBC Contributor, Jim Iuorio joins Dan and Amy to discuss. 

Related Content

Happy Days Again?

Should profitability be driven by market competition or government selection? Have we already reached the high water mark on GDP growth? Are we going to make it to a zero tariff trade agreement? Before we discuss tax cuts 2.0, are we still waiting for good things to come from the current tax cuts and deregulation? Fox Business Network’s Scott “The Cow Guy” Shellady joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

“Sugar Economics”

Is this the best economy ever? Were the tax cuts and deregulation enough? Not according to the worker productivity numbers. Is Kudlow right to say tariffs are a lever to reduce barriers across the board? AEI's Jim Pethokoukis joins Dan and Amy to explain.

Related Content

Trump “Insults” Allies With Tariffs

Good news: federal headcount is going down. Bad news: tariffs are going up. Is the lower corporate tax rates changing the game for American workers? Do trade wars hurt the enemy or the people in your own country? President of Americans For Tax Reform, Grover Norquist joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

Obama Era Jobs Report

Does the low unemployment rate really mean anything? Do CEOs have more confidence but no numbers to show for it? Is it going to take more than a year for the tax cuts to start kicking in? What’s going to fix the leak in the Fed? Fox Business Contributor, Scott "The Cow Guy" Shellady joins Dan and Amy to discuss the April jobs report.

Related Content

Tax Cuts Work! Tax Cuts Work!

Are the successes of the tax cuts still being underscored by the media and the Democrats? Job Creators Network Foundation is launching a nationwide bus tour to educate voters on the benefits of the tax cuts, to thank legislators who voted for the bill, and to urge Democrats to reconsider their campaign promise on repealing the cuts. President Elaine Parker joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

Boogeyman Politics

The strategic advice after the Illinois primary election is centered on which state is best to move to. Is the Democrats message in the 2018 elections going to be, “the government knows how to spend your money better than you do?” Is the circus like behavior surrounding Trump going to detract from substantive policy discussions? Congressman from the 6th District, Peter Roskam joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

View full transcript


Proft: Good morning, Dan and Amy. Poring over the election results from yesterday, this morning. And before we get to our friend, Peter Roskam, a couple more calls...Steve from Gary. Steve (caller): Yeah, kind of depressed. I live in Indiana, but it shouldn't matter. (Proft: Hey, THAT should make you happier.) The invasion is going to continue. I mean...did you notice down in Florida, all the parents that they talked to from that shooting...*accent* they all tawlk wit a Noo Yawk accent! *end accent* Yeah, that sounds like a FLORIDA accent to me. That's the problem...these people MOVE to get away from these liberal Democrat politics, and they move...and they take their politics WITH THEM. Proft: Yeah, thanks for the call Steve, I get it. I mean... Jacobson: Bad interpretation... Proft: Impersonation? Jacobson: Impersonation I mean. Proft: New Yawk accent? Jacobson: He coulda done it betta. Ya know? Proft: Like butta. Mark, in Joliet. Mark (caller): Hey, good morning, Dan and Amy! Dan, you've been trying to explain to people for the longest time that people in Illinois are losing their property through taxation. And then this morning, Amy kind of joked that she might want to move out of state. Well, if I were Amy, or anybody that works in Illinois, and wants to continue working in Illinois, I would move somewhere like Wisconsin, that has a reciprocating tax agreement with Illinois, as opposed to Indiana where I actually live, and we USED to have one, until it went away under then-Governor George Ryan. So, basically, I have to pay income taxes in Indiana, as a resident, AND Illinois, because I work there, I get whacked pretty good, especially when they raise the tax rate by 66 percent a half-a-dozen years ago and another 33 percent a year ago. So, my point to you Amy or anybody else, move to Wisconsin and pay...enjoy a reciprocating tax agreement while you still can. Proft: Hmm. Ahhh. Thanks for the call, Mark, although Wisconsin is a pretty high combined state and local tax burden, BUT not as high as Illinois', of course. But here's the thing; it's fun to take these calls right after the election, and all the calls we're getting are related to strategic advice as to where to live, not Illinois. Interesting. Alright, more on this topic, we're pleased to be joined by Peter Roskam. He was a state legislator, before he was a big shot in Congress, and he joins us now. Peter, thanks for being with us, appreciate it. Roskam: Good morning, guys! Nice to be with you, thanks for having me on. Proft: Good morning. So you're a Wheatonian...let's get your take, your reaction, your comment on the Republican Primary Election, starting up obviously with the governor's race on our side. Roskam: Yeah, look...I think the Governor squandered a consolidated effort by being so provocative over the past year or so with these policy initiatives that were just off-putting to a lot of Conservatives, and Jeanne gave a very impressive run, essentially ran an insurgency campaign. And you saw that manifest itself in a lot of different areas across the state. So, here's the thing that voters are going to have to decide all across the country in November, in House races, and just really up and down the ballot; should...Nancy Pelosi, for example, be entrusted with the Speaker of the House again...I think that would be a disaster...should Mike Madigan be given more authority and so forth up and down the line. And so, these are threshold questions that the whole country is dealing with, because this will be a nationalized...in a way, in terms of House races that are going to be competitive this Fall, and it continues to amaze me that people, with a straight face, can say "Oh, the solution in Springfield is let's double down for more!" So I think there's going to be a lot of interpretation of these numbers over the days and weeks ahead. Proft: Speaking of competitive House races this Fall, you had like SEVEN candidates vie to face you, you had this Kelly Mazeski or whatever her name is, apparently is the winner. You know they're going to play the Boogeyman Politics, right? Especially in this state. "Everybody is a schill for Donald Trump!" How do you assess your Democrat challenger and your race this Fall? Roskam: So, it looks like it may have been Sean Casten that won. (Proft: Oh really? Jacobson: Oh!) Yeah, this is a little bit late-breaking, so...whoever it is, it's interesting. They've all said they were COMPLETELY against the tax plan that went through. All right, so that means they want to take the bonuses back from people, they think those bonuses are a bad idea? Or doubling the child tax credit, they're not into that? Or getting rid of the Alternative Minimum Tax, which hit 30K people in my constituency, or lowering these rates? What's interesting is...what's interesting is they're basically just parroting Nancy Pelosi, and so Pelosi called the bill "the worst Bill ever", and Armageddon, and that $1000 bonus was crumbs, and so forth. That's gonna be the playbook, I think. And so, you know, I just think that there is a lack of clarity about how the economy actually works. And the notion of cutting taxes and giving people tax relief, and regulatory relief, and the things that the 6th District has said historically "These are the things we value.", those values are now under attack. And here's the thing; I think campaigns where you have two competing views of the world, two competing views of the economy, two competing visions of the future and the direction you think our country should go...I think those kind of campaigns are INCREDIBLY invigorating. When they're about IDEAS, and they're not about personalities. And I think that these two ideas are gonna be on display, and I think the ascendant view, the invitational view, the view that values GROWTH, is the view that resonates in the 6th District. Jacobson: Well, as a Congressman, I feel like you're always running for office, because of the two-year terms. But Sean Casten, he's a Downers Grove businessman, who is running on climate change, so are you prepared for that fight? Roskam: Yeah, I mean...look, I am delighted to talk about ANYTHING up and down the line as it relates to policies. And I think, yeah, there's a...I fought for the restoration of Great Lakes funding, for example, in terms of making sure that the money is there to be cleaned up appropriately, to keep the Great Lakes safe. I fought to bring back $22M to Chicago for cleanup. So I think that the 6th District is interested in environmental stewardship, they're interested in a balanced approach to things, they have zero interest, in my view, at least a majority, has zero interest in the type of Draconian approaches that just hinder economic growth and don't give people opportunities. Proft: I gotta say, I'm looking at the Tribune site, which was allegedly updated at 6:09 this morning, and that's about five minutes ago. And they still got Kelly Mazeski up by 260 votes (Roskam: All right.)... Jacobson: Oh, so now I guess you don't have to WORRY about Climate Change! Proft: No no! What I'm saying is I think we have another Dewey Defeats Truman moment! Yeah, the Tribune is stepping on themselves again maybe, wouldn't that be fun? Roskam: Could be, could be! And there were some data problems last night with some of the websites, so... Proft: Yeah, yeah. So, you're kind of framing your race, now frame kind of the national...the national climate that you're going to face, that's beyond your control, starting with the President, and why don't we start, because there's been so much action there since Deputy Director Andy McCabe was fired, everything under the rubric "Russian Collusion", and with the House Intel Committee basically saying "No Trump Campaign operatives colluded with Russia," BASICALLY saying that, and then this furor around McCabe, and then Byron York asking a good question, "Well wait, if Manafort and Gates and Flynn didn't collude with Russia, well then WHO DID and can we get to the bottom of this in the not-to-distant future?" How does all of that play out and impact November? Roskam: So the...I don't know how it impacts November. I think the thing to keep in mind is just...keep an eye on where the investigation is, where it's going, and what is the fruit of the investigation and headlines in churn? So, we know that there's practically NOTHING that can be done that will satisfy the national Democrats right now, there's no point where they're going to say "You know what? It was looked at, you're right, turn the page." They're just not going to do that. So I think cooler heads have to look and say "What is the fruit of the investigation?", and the fruit of the investigation has to manifest itself soon, in terms of action and not just churn. And I think there's gonna be a lot of folks that are going to be saying "Hey! Get this done, bring the cases. If there's an allegation of collusion with the campaign, bring it! If not, turn the page!" Roskam: Are you afraid that all of this Stormy Daniels stuff...now we've got a Playboy model... Jacobson: It's "The Porn Star and The Playmate", Dan! Proft: Yeah, well, and it's not limited to them. Then you've got that Summer Zervos, whose case is moving forward, a lower cour...well, a District court essentially, rejecting Executive Immunity in that civil manner of defamation case. I mean, are you worried at all that a bit of the circus-like atmosphere around Trump with some of these individuals, and some of his past behavior, at least alleged behavior, detracts kind of from all of the substantive matters you were just discussing? Roskam: Yeah, it's not helpful. You would much rather have the focus be on the issues of the day, great principles that we were talking about just a couple of minutes ago, and not have it be distracted with all of this other drama. But, there's an irony, here. And that part of the irony, I think, is a national party, the Democratic Party, that has said for decades "Presidential misconduct has nothing to do with the capacity to lead!", now is sort of MARINATING in this. But listen, I'm not about to defend the activity that is being alleged against the President, if true, it's troubling. But that said, the irony, it's just palpable. Jacobson: How do you feel about Andrew McCabe being fired...two days before he was supposed to retire? Roskam: Look, I think...if it was an effort...to stick it to him, I don't know enough about the backstory, if there had been some back-and-forth drama. I just don't know enough about the details to be able to comment well on that. Proft: All right, he is Peter Roskam, Congressman from Illinois' 6th...he'll face a... Jacobson: He'll face who? Proft: Well, I mean he's gonna face SOMEBODY, whether it's Mazeski or Casten, either one they're gonna put somebody up and they're gonna come after Peter Roskam, you can bet that in this cycle in this state, so suburbanites better be on notice, and rally to help our friend Peter in the General. Peter, thanks for joining us, appreciate it. Roskam: Thanks guys, great to be with you!

Related Content

DC Press Corps Silent On Farrakhan

Although there have been calls for the politicians who have been rubbing elbows with Farrakhan to step down, is the DC press corps continuing to ignore the story? Are the Democrats more worried about McCabe’s pension than they were about tax cuts for the American people? The first ladies of punditry, Diamond and Silk, join Dan and Amy to get a few things off their chest.

Related Content

Division In The GOP Over Tariffs

Are Trump’s proposed tariffs going to put speed bumps on economic growth? Is Jeff Sessions going to pay a visit to Chicago and address Tiny Dancer and Governor Rauner on their sanctuary state/city policies? Is the left going to cling to their anti gun agenda to win over voters in the upcoming elections? Representative from the 6th Congressional District, Peter Roskam joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

US News Ranks Illinois 50th In Fiscal Stability

How far will mainstream media go to disclaim the success and popularity of the Trump tax cuts? Are 50,000 high-income taxpayers on their way out of Illinois if politicians in Springfield don’t do anything to reduce the tax burden? How is that Illinois has poor public services and one of the highest tax burdens? CNN Senior Economist, Steve Moore joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

View full transcript


Proft: Dan and Amy, so since the noblemen and magistrates in Springfield are convening today to vote on all kinds of gun control legislation, I got a question. This guy in Oswego, Dave Thomas? You saw the story, Amy. Jacobson: Oh yeah. Proft: Man armed with an AR-15 helped stop a knife attack during an argument in Oswego. Dave Thomas witnessed the attack, went into his home and got his rifle and ordered the suspect to stop. "I ran back into the home, into my house, to grab my AR-15. I grabbed the AR-15 over my handgun, it's just a bigger gun. I think a little bit more than an intimidation factor definitely played a factor in him stopping." No shots fired, suspect got away briefly before police captured him, stabbing victim taken to the hospital is expected to recover. "The AR-15 is my weapon of choice for home protection," Thomas said. "It's light, it's maneuverable. If you're trained and know how to use it properly, it's not dangerous." And this is just a perfect example of a good guy with an AR-15 stopped a bad guy with a knife, and there were no lives taken, so all in all it was a good day. I'd say so. So does he get to keep his AR-15? Does he get to? Jacobson: Because he's over 21, sure. Proft: Yeah, okay. Yeah...alright. Jacobson: That's a story of a good guy with a gun! I'm glad we brought that story to people's attention. Proft: Yeah...and now 3/4 of the General Assembly will summarily ignore it. Steve Moore, switching gears, our friend Steve Moore, Heritage Foundation economist, Wall Street Journal columnist, joins us now to talk things economic. Steve, thanks for being with us, appreciate it. Moore: Good morning, guys. Proft: So, hey...Warren Buffett, I know he's got that underpaid secretary that he's always complaining about, who pays more...a higher rate of...on her income taxes than he does? Report out from Fox, $29B windfall for... Jacobson: 29 BILLION? Proft: 29 BILLION dollar windfall, BILLION, for Berkshire-Hathaway...so what do you think is fair, since he's a fairness guy, what do you think is fair in terms of what percentage of that he should give his secretary, Steve? Moore: Well look, a secretary's gonna get a big tax cut too, as well. I mean, let's say if his secretary makes $80K a year, she's gonna get about a $2K tax cut. I don't know if you saw the big study...this has been a mini-scandal that's developing, that the New York Times had an article yesterday saying that they found something...they...actually, they looked all over the country to find some middle-class, middle-income person who is gonna pay more taxes, who's paying more taxes under the Trump plan. They couldn't find anyone, so they...they...INVENTED a couple, and they...you know, with all sorts of conditions, they're sort of a "Where's Waldo?" type thing, to find the one person in America who's gonna pay more taxes. And, did you hear about this? So they, they have this, you know, John and Jay Taxpayer, and they said "Well, this person's gonna actually pay $3,000 MORE in taxes!" Well, it turns out one of the top tax experts at the University of Chicago found out that they made a big mistake, and this couple wasn't going to pay more in taxes, they were actually gonna pay a lot less in taxes. And now the New York Times has a lot of mud in their eye. We'll see if they issue a retraction...none yet. Proft: Well, first of all... Jacobson: Oh my...that's SICK! Proft: No, I think that's unfair to the New York Times, let me tell you why. We use composites for Obama's past girlfriends, we use a fictional woman "Julia" for Obama's re-election campaign that, fictional...(Moore laughs) yeah, you have Pajama Boy to sell Obamacare. We like fictional characters, and so using a fictional person to argue against tax cuts, however erroneously, that is, that is standard operating procedure these days, Steve! Moore: I mean, this was follow up from, I think, I believe it was USA Today, I might be wrong but it was one of the major newspapers...issued a similar "study", and I use that word with quotation marks around it, right before the tax cut passed that found one person, you know, that was living in Boston, MA, who had an income of $300K, and was living with his mother and didn't have a house and all of these things, and AHA! This person is gonna pay more taxes! It's like "He's left-handed, he's bald, he's dadadadada....", you know? But look, 90% of people are paying less taxes right now, there was a good story, a cover story, a front-page story in The Washington Post yesterday, Democrats are pulling back on the tax cut message, because they thought this tax cut would be extremely unpopular with voters and now they're finding out that the vast majority of voters in their districts kind of like tax cuts for businesses and families! Jacobson: Wow, so I mean, or...so, do we...do you think we're going to see even more tax cuts in the future? Because even my Democratic friends do like having more money in their paycheck. Moore: Well, you...look, I don't think there's going to be any more Federal tax cuts. I mean, I think the big issue, and this is a big issue for the state of Illinois...you know, we cap state and local tax deduction at $10K now. Many people, many many many people in Illinois pay a lot more than $10K in their property taxes each year...will there be a big tax cut coming from Springfield? Because, if there isn't...Art Laffer and I just completed a study...we think there are going to be well over 50K people in the next two years, high-income people, are gonna move out of Illinois, and they're gonna be moving to those wonderful destinations like West Virginia and Kentucky... Proft; No question. Moore: No, but they're going to Florida, they're going to Tennessee, they're going to Texas. Now, that's going to put an even BIGGER hole in your budget! Proft: Well... Moore: Right, Dan and Amy? Do you think Springfield, the people of Springfield, get it? Will they pass a tax cut so people stay in the state? Proft: No. No. No. No, not with the current leadership, because they don't care! They've been chastened by the electorate, the electorate loves what we're getting here. And, you guys, you and Art Laffer, put together that Rich States, Poor States ranking every year. (Moore: Yep!) And it's interesting because US News just came out with their ranking of the states by a bunch of categories and the ones I want to focus on...Fiscal Stability and Quality of Life, where Illinois is, not unlike it routinely is in your surveys, Steve, 50th in Fiscal Stability and 47th in Quality of Life, and Quality of Life has everything to do with Fiscal Stability. Moore: Well, it also has to do with things like the quality of the schools, (Proft: Yeah, right.) the fiscal situation such as the tax burden, the quality of public services and they're all bad. And I gotta tell you, two or three weeks ago I was visited by the...what's her name, Jeanne...the woman who was running for... Proft: Jeanne Ives. Moore: ...yes...and I was EXTREMELY impressed with her! And you know, everybody I know is...there's a buzz about...I don't know about Illinois but around the country there's a buzz going on about Jeanne and how this conservative who has free-market conservative solutions to the problems of Illinois...I don't know, is she catching on there? Because there's a real buzz around the country about her. Proft: Well, that's encouraging to hear. I think she is catching on, although again the Illinois Republican Party is the Junior Partner to the Chicago Democrats, so... Moore: *laughs* Jacobson: Nice analogy! Proft: So, you know, there's been a bit of a headwind, bit of a headwind she's running into, but appreciate that perspective, Steve, as usual. Just one thing on the rankings though is...you...speak to the Rich States, Poor States ranking that you do and...and the methodology and kind of the meaning for...for families. Moore: So, I'm trying to remember...I know Illinois is in the Bottom 5, I think Illinois ranks...47th...so you're not as bad as...take a bow...you're not as bad as Maine, and you're not as bad as New York, and you're not as bad as California. But, things are bad there, and you know, your tax burden is through the roof, you have poor public services. Here's the thing: You get poor public services, AND you pay a lot of money for that stuff! So it's the worst of all words. Your regulations are too high, and as I've said SO many times on your show over the years, Dan, Amy...until Illinois becomes a Right to Work state, where workers have a right to join the Union or not join the Union...you know, a lot of businesses just will not move into a state that is not Right to Work! That's another way that the dominoes are falling all around you! I mean, Michigan is now a Right to Work state, West Virginia is now a Right to Work state, we're working on Ohio, Wisconsin's Right to Work. I mean, you're gonna be an island of Forced Unionism, and that doesn't work for the state! Jacobson: Oh, you're not making me feel very good about living in Illinois... Proft: No. Although the Supreme Court could help us... Moore: I love Illinois! I'm a Chicago guy! I love Chicago, I think it's one of the greatest cities in the coun...in the world! You know, it's being ruined by politicians in Springfield, and you know, people around the country get it. You know, Madigan has run that state...the Governor doesn't run Illinois! Right? It's run by Madigan! How long has Madigan been there, 30 years? Jacobson: Somewhere around 37... Proft: More or less...he gets a lot of help from Establishment Republicans though, Steve, as you know. (Moore: Haha! Exactly!) That's the problem. Moore: YOU NEED A REVOLUTION! Jacobson: We need Jeanne Ives! Proft: The Janus case, Steve, the Janus case could help do for Illinois what the politicians won't, can't it? Moore: Sorry what was that? Couldn't hear you. Proft: The Janus v. AFSCME case? The Fair Share case before the Supreme Court? Moore: Oh, that's a huge one! And the Liberals are going crazy, because I think the Liberals know they're going to lose that. This is about whether people should be forced to pay Union dues, government employees. I say no, if you don't want to be in the Union...look, if the...the First Amendment talks about Right of Association, right? You're ...you have the right to associate with groups you want to. But, the First Amendment also says you have the right of NOT associating, if you don't want to associate with some group, you can't be forced to. And in the case of Unions, even if you don't want to associate with the Union, you're forced to. And that's why I view this strictly as a First Amendment case. I'm not anti-Union, if people want to join a union and pay dues, and have collective bargaining, I don't have a problem with that. What I do have a problem with is forcing people who don't want to be in the Union to pay dues, especially when the money is going towards political views that they don't agree with. I mean, 40% of Union households voted for Donald Trump, but yet the Unions are out there trying to destroy Donald Trump! Proft: Speaking of Trump, he announced he's running again in 2020... Moore: What a shock THAT is! Proft: Yeah, right? But as he's...as he's putting his Cabinet together, you want me to put in a word for you for Treasury Secretary, or what do you want? Moore: Mmmm...yeah, Cabinet Secretary would be either Treasury Secretary or Commerce Secretary, so I could reverse the STUPIDEST thing that Donald Trump has done since he's been President, which is these idiotic steel and aluminum tariffs, which are actually going to COST American jobs, because it makes everything that we produce in America more expensive and less competitive. So President Trump, if you're listening to this show, DO NOT GO FORWARD WITH STEEL AND ALUMINUM TARIFFS, you're going to actually hurt the manufacturing base that you're trying to rebuild. You agree with me on that, right Dan? Proft: I do. Jacobson: But you're actually also going to hurt the consumers, because...canned vegetables...everything that is canned that we buy, those prices are gonna go up. And beer is gonna skyrocket, Dan, so get your 24 cases of Miller Lite right now! Proft: I...uh...only drink (?). Moore: Well Amy, you get your A in Economics today. This is all going to be pushed onto consumers, just to make things more expensive. And think about this; automobiles, manufactured products, machinery, all that is made of steel. How are we going to compete in global markets when we're using steel that's 20% more expensive than any other country? It just doesn't make any sense, even from a jobs perspective. Proft: All right, you persuaded me. Secretary of Commerce Steve Moore... Jacobson: Yes, I'll do that! Proft: The only problem is that I don't believe the Secretary...the Department of Commerce should EXIST, so we're gonna have to traverse that, but... Moore: *laughs* I'm with you on that! Proft: ...Steve Moore, CNN Senior Economist, Heritage Foundation, Wall Street Journal. Steve, thanks for joining us, appreciate it. Moore: Take care guys, have a great week!

Related Content

Is The Economy Overheating?

Could Trump’s import tariffs on steel and aluminum make the trade deficit worse? Do rising wages and more people working cause a rise in inflation? Are the people who say the economy is doing too well, the same people who claimed that a Trump presidency would destroy the economy? Is the majority of the country supporting the tax cuts now, despite the cries from the DC press corps and “crumbs” Pelosi? CNN Senior Economist, Steve Moore joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

America Is Open For Business Again

Did Trump take a well-deserved victory lap in his State of The Union address? NAFTA may need to be renegotiated and modernized but is Trump looking to do away with the whole agreement? Were talks about the budget deficit sorely missed last night? Are those on the left rooting against Trump also rooting against America? CNN Senior Economist and columnist for the Wall Street Journal, Steve Moore recaps the State of the Union Address with Dan and Amy.

View full transcript


Proft: Good morning, Dan and Amy. Trump State of the Union Address yesterday, He made it clear, from his perspective, that the era of economic surrender in the United States is Oh-va! Trump (from tape): America has also finally turned a page on decades of unfair trade deals, that sacrificed our prosperity and shipped away our companies, our jobs, and our wealth. Our nation has lost its wealth, but we're getting it back so fast. The era of economic surrender is totally over. From now own, we *glitch* iting relationships to be fair, and very importantly, reciprocal. Proft: Alright, fair and reciprocal trade. Are those words music to the ears of one Steve Moore, Wall Street Journal Columnist, Heritage Foundation Economist, joins us now. Steve, economic surrender is over...did you like that part of the speech? Moore: Well, good morning. I liked a lot of the speech. I loved the "America is open for business again", and this idea that we are going to put America first, in terms of cutting taxes, cutting regulations, in terms of making sure that we're the number one economic superpower in the world. And look, he took a victory lap, well deserved, the economy is booming under his stewardship, so that was all good. But uh, you mentioned the one area that makes me nervous about Trump's policies, Dan...congratulations. Proft: Well I'm in the market for a new washing machine. So that's why I had to mention it. Moore: So look, I think when you think about what could disrupt this incredible boom that we're on right now, I think it IS trade protectionism, and so it does make me nervous. Does NAFTA need to be renegotiated and modernized? Yeah, I think it does, it could be improved, but I'm worried that Trump may try to get us out of NAFTA. I'm worried about, you know, his talk about tariffs against other countries in the world, which I don't think is very good policy. But, on balance I think that was a great speech, Trump is...one of my colleagues, Larry Kudlow, calls Trump "a one-man Chamber of Commerce for the United States". That was a speech...this speech, and his speech is Davos...both were appeals to people around the world, and businesspeople, and people with capital, to come to the United States, this is the place you want to invest in. And you know what? He's right. Jacobson: And President Trump touted the low unemployment rates, but also reminded us that we're going to have more take-home pay. If we don't see it in this paycheck, we're going to see it in the next paycheck. But the Washington Post this morning is saying what he didn't talk about, in what they call his "Reagan-ist speech", is that he didn't talk about the budget deficit. Moore: Sorry...about the budget deficit? Jacobson: Yeah, there was no mention of that whatsoever. Moore: *laughs* Well, you know, yeah...and I have to say this about Trump, and I kind of agree with them...you know, for the last 30 years the Republican Party has been obsessed about the budget deficit. And look you know, I've been for a fiscal analyst for the last...when I came to Washington in the early 80s, I was, you know, one of the budget experts in town, I know this stuff back and forwards. Would I like to see a balanced budget? Sure. Do I want budget control, do I want to see a shrinking of the government? Yes. But, I think what Trump has done is...the Republican Party is now a party of growth, it's a party of prosperity. We put prosperity ahead of balanced budgets, and let the Democratic Party be the party of austerity. You know, it was amazing to me last night, listening you know to some of the commentary, and you know, I did some of these post-elections debates, and the Democrats are still railing against the tax cut! I'm like "Really? Are you paying any attention to what's going on?" I mean, they're actually going to say the tax cut isn't working, when you've got 100 major companies, from Exxon to Disney to Apple, to FedEx, you know, announcing major bonuses for workers, and all this money coming back to the United States? So, look, I like the fact that he's a tax cutter, that he's trying to make America the most prosperous place in the world, and so far, so good. Proft: Yeah, so I mean, they're not just railing against the tax increase, or tax cut should I say, they're railing against employment! They're unhappy about low unemployment! Moore: They are! I mean, they're rooting against America. The Left is rooting against Trump and rooting against America and rooting against the American worker. They don't want Trump's policies to work, which is pretty pathetic, actually. It's pretty unpatriotic to say, "Gee, we hope we can score political points by..."...they'd love for the American economy to crash! They've been waiting the last 14 months for that happen, and of course it isn't happening. I'm predicting, guys, that we're gonna hit 4% growth this year. The reason that we only got 2.6% growth this quarter is...I agree with my buddy Art Laffer, what happened is a lot of businesses delayed their, you know, delayed their capital spending and a lot of their capital output until 2018, because that's when you get the tax cut, that's when you get the lower tax rate. We're gonna see a very, very strong first and second quarter this year, we're gonna have 4% growth, we haven't had that in 20 years! Proft: Right, but let me go back to something that you said. I agree with you in terms of market positioning...the Growth Party vs the Austerity Party, of sorts, even though I mean...Democrats and Austerity, they'll...the Democrats will spend money like termites go through wood. But, here's the thing...ultimately, you can't grow, or you're going to cap out, you're creating structural infirmities if you don't deal with things like a ballooning debt and unfunded liabilities. Moore: True. Proft: So...? Moore: So let me say this. This was my line to Trump and a lot of the Congressional Republicans, when I...and in fact I just talked to the Senate Republican Caucus yesterday and made this point...yes, we're concerned about that debt and the liabilities, Dan, you're exactly right. But, you're not going to make any progress on any of those problems unless you get the economy growing. You just can't get from here to there if you don't have 3 or 4% growth, I mean, I've looked at the numbers. You could slash everything, but if you don't get the economy growing, and people paying taxes, and businesses expanding...you know, when businesses are expanding and people are making more money...guess what? They're paying more taxes. So the first step in getting the debt under control, and these unfunded liabilities that you're talking about, is to get back to a strong economic growth pattern. We only grew at less than 2% under Obama, and now we're at 3 and if we get to 4, that makes this SO much easier to solve! Proft: Well that's true, but you have to introduce that into the conversation, so it becomes something that is discussed and debated and moved forward, so for example your...the plan that you've touted, we've talked about many times on this show, the Penny Plan. I mean, that can at least be part of the conversation so that at some point in the not to distant future, there's actually movement on it. Moore: I agree, and in fact...look, I agree with 90% of what Trump said last night. I am not in favor of getting rid of the Defense Sequester, and the sequester...the great budget control we've had over the last six or seven years was the Budget Control Act, which put caps on domestic and defense spending, and it actually has made a difference. I mean, government spending as a percentage of GDP is actually much lower today that it was during Barack Obama's first term, or actualy, George Bush's second term. So, you know, let's keep the caps in place, let's have some budget discipline! I love the idea...for those who don't know the Penny Plan, it's really is an amazing formula...you just cut every government program by one penny in 2018, and then cut it another penny...that is, a penny for every dollar they spend. So you reduce spending by one penny per dollar in 2018, and then again in 2019, 2020, 2021, and guess what? You've balanced the budget. It really is that easy! It just requires spending control. You don't even have to slash spending! You just have to make sure the rate of increase is cut in half. Jacobson: Well, that sounds like a brilliant idea! Proft: Well there you go! That's why Steve Moore's proposing it, yes! Jacobson: So, President Trump yesterday had a number of people he featured that were heroes, but he also featured business owners, and I thought that maybe you took that to heart. Steve Staub, and Sandy Keplinger, who say they've seen a bump in their business this year. Did you like that? Moore: You know what? I loved that aspect of the speech. I think everyone agrees that the fact he had these amazing American heroes and he called them out, and it really punctuated every point he wanted to make. And I thought another great moment was when he called out that gentleman from North Korea, I don't know if you remember that moment. Proft: Ohhh...that was the best moment EVER! Moore: Yeah, it was awesome! And he basically said "Look, this is what North Korea is about! These people are tyrants, they're our enemies, they are killers, and they're killing their own people!" And anybody can...I don't believe they Left...they seem to want to appease Kim il-Jong (sic), rather than...we've gotta take their weapons away from them, it's the most dangerous thing in the world. So I love the fact that he did that, it was such an effective device to make his point, to show...you know, whether it's a businessman, or a victim of Communism or so on, I think he's almost changed the way that State of the Union speeches will be given in the future. Proft: He is Steve Moore, Wall Street Journal Columnist, CNN Senior Economist, Heritage Foundation Economist, Steve thanks as always for joining us, appreciate it. Moore: Okay guys, have a great week, take care!

Related Content

Elitist Nancy Pelosi Calls Tax Cuts And Bonuses Crumbs

Is Trump derangement syndrome leading leftist politicians and the media to actively root against America? Politicians become more powerful the bigger government gets, why then would Democrats advocate for sensible work requirements for government aid? CNN Senior economist, Steve Moore joins Dan and Amy to discuss the possibility of linking immigration and welfare reform.

View full transcript


Proft: Yeah...you enjoying your crumbs, you SERFS? That's what the House Minority Leader, and one of the richest members of Congress, had to say about the Trump tax cuts and these big bonuses that have been publicized at big companies, Comcast and others, as well as the savings that 80% of Americans are likely to see as the result of the Trump tax cuts. Mere crumbs, says Nancy Pelosi. Reporter (from tape): A number of companies are attributing the Trump tax cuts for being able to give higher wages to their employees, as well as being able to give bonuses to their employees. How do you respond to that? Pelosi (from tape): Well, the number of bonuses that were given...one of the bonuses given was already in a Union contract, and then they added *tape cuts momentarily* onto that. That same firm just told their employees that they were going to be laying off 1500 people, and if they wanted to save their jobs, they could all start working three to two hours in those communities. So, in terms of the bonus that corporate America received, versus the kind of crumbs they are giving out to kind of put the schmooze on, is so pathetic. Proft: *sarcastically* Yeah. That's just a schmooze they're putting on, that extra money in your pockets, just to schmooze. This is the attitude of the Left, because anything that devolves power away from government, and them by extension, and resources away from them which is the source of their power in part, they're not going to be on board for. And it's very interesting, the attitude they have towards corporate America and towards people who like places like Walmart. Jacobson: But aren't they "Corporate America"? I mean, their spouses have jobs in "Corporate America". Nancy Pelosi is bitter because they're going to be hit harder by this tax plan. Proft: They're exempt. Think about Walmart and McDonalds...make fun of the President. Chris Arnot, he's this...he's a photojournalist, who's traveled the country to document and talk to Trump voters, he focuses on areas like poverty and addiction, across the fruited plains. He sat down for an interview at the American Enterprise Institute, and he talked about the McDonalds Test, when it comes to advocates for the downtrodden who have no understanding, or frankly concern, about the lives that the downtrodden are living because it's really about them feeling good about themselves. It's not about helping anyone or appreciating their lives. Arnot (from tape): I guess what I've always said is, the thing I've learned about this in the last six years is...in aggregate, not specific there are different examples, but in aggregate, the people who are advocating for the poor the most often don't understand them on a visceral level, they don't understand the people they're advocating for, they don't understand their lifestyle, they don't understand the way they live, they don't understand. So I always use a McDonalds Test. A lot of people who advocate for the poor hate McDonalds, but McDonalds is essential, and when you're poor, McDonalds is ESSENTIAL. It's cheap food, it's GOOD cheap food, and it's also a community center, where people go to meet other friends and basically get free Wi-Fi, it's what...it's a place that people go to find community. Walmarts are the same way. When I want to find an immigrant...when I go into a new community and I want to see where the immigrants are, they're in the Walmarts. And yet, you know..a lot of people who advocate for the poor make fun of Walmart, they make fun of McDonalds. Proft: Yeah, they make fun of 'em. Walmart employees a million people. You know what Walmart's profit margin is? Jacobson: No, what is it? Proft: It's a very interesting piece about what people think companies' profit margins are vs what they actually are. You know that Walmart is a volume business, and remember the vision of Sam Walton was to make everyday goods more accessible for the poor, starting in Arkansas. Walmart's profit margin? 2.1%. 2.1%. So when you start artificially inflating the cost of doing business for high-volume, low-margin businesses, you start seeing people laid off, you start adding to the ranks of the poor, you start seeing people shut their doors. And that's what Nancy Pelosi and the Left doesn't want to concern themselves with. And it's disgraceful because Nancy Pelosi's position is couched in compassion, and that she's a champion for families working their way up the rungs, and she's just the opposite. Arnot probably wouldn't take my position the way I take it, but he's essentially saying the same thing; they have no understanding, and I'll add, they have no concern. These people...other human beings are MASCOTS to the Nancy Pelosi's of the world, they're the means to their political power ends. And that's their only utility for the Left. And we should speak with moral clarity on the subject in the political arena if we want to advance the flag and discard this caricature that's been created of people who believe in free minds and free markets. Like me and our next guest. Our friend Steve Moore, Chief Economist at the Heritage Foundation, Steve thanks for joining us, appreciate it. Moore: Hi guys, good morning. Enjoying my crumbs, I don't know about you guys. Proft: Yeah, yeah what about that, and the companies that publicize the bonuses they give per the tax cuts, they're just schmoozing? Moore: You know, I've listened to your conversation, and I'm writing my column on this right now as we speak, about one of the things that is happening in America is because of the anti-Trump derangement syndrome of the Left, they're now rooting against America. They want Trump to fail, they want the tax cut to fail, they don't want bonuses to low-income people, because that might mean if working-class people get bonuses and their lives are improved, they might actually SUPPORT Donald Trump! I've never seen anything like it, but I really truly believe, and I wonder what you guys think, I now truly believe the Left is rooting against America and American workers, they don't want the pay raises, they don't want the jobs, they don't want the improvement in our economy, the improvement in the stock market, because that makes Trump look good! Jacobson: Well when are we gonna start seeing a little more bump in our paychecks? Because President Trump said in February...is there a possibility it could be sooner? I just want a $17 difference in mine. Moore: You know, Amy...yeah, there was some discussion at the Treasury Department the other day on whether the IRS would be ready to change these withholding tables by...well I guess February's just a couple of weeks away now. It's coming soon, I don't know if they'll be ready by February, but certainly by March, and then people start to feel the additional pay that they get. Now, you know, for a lot of workers, that might be $30 or $40 additional dollars in their paycheck each couple of weeks. Now the Left will say "Oh gee, all you can buy with that is...a t-shirt," or something like that, or Pelosi will call it crumbs. But you're talking about, for the average worker with an income of $60K, they're gonna have about another 1500 or 2000 dollars a year in their paycheck, and that's a lot! It's not a lot to Nancy Pelosi, who has pools and jacuzzis and tennis courts and eight acres in northern California, but for the average person, an extra 1500 to 2000 dollars means that they can purchase health care, they can pay the tuition for their kids schools, they might be able to take a vacation. Those kind of things for an elitist like Nancy Pelosi, they're hard to imagine...it's hard for her to imagine why an extra $1500 really matters. Proft: The Work Requirement Option that Trump is giving state Medicaid directors...Bevin in Kentucky adopted it posthaste, excited about it, put out all sorts of messaging on it. Less excitement here in Illinois, as usual for anything that makes sense. (Moore: Yep!) But it seems to me that this is the lever for a larger national discussion on Welfare reform, particularly as part of a deal to provide permanent status to 800K DACA recipients. And good piece in the Wall Street Journal by Christina Rasmussen from the Foundation for Government Accountability (Moore: Yes! I saw her piece.), yeah, about no asset limits in 30 states to receive food benefits. So, is this a moment where immigration comes together with welfare state reform and Paul Ryan really leads this charge. Moore: I love that idea, by the way, of linking welfare reform and immigration reform. I'm all for immigration, I'm all for people who want to come here and work, but I think one of the requirements of an immigrant coming into this country, and I made this case about the people being talked about to be legalized who were here illegally, is no welfare. And one of the requirements of the people they may legalize under this new DACA requirement is "If you've been on welfare, no, you don't get to stay here!" And that's not being cruel, that's been our policy for 100 years with respect to immigration. The immigrants who came in through Ellis Island, my grandparents, if you came in and you were seen to be a public charge, you would be deported from this country! Now I know you probably think it's cold-hearted to say that people who have received Medicaid or Food Stamps should have to work to receive those benefits, but I think it's a very sensible policy, I think a lot of people on these programs are able-bodied. They're talking about able-bodied people who don't have kids, you know 24-year olds are sitting at home watching TV rather than getting a job. (Proft: Yeah.) Yeah, you know, it works by the way. Work requirements WORK! They worked under Bill Clinton, for goodness sakes, when we passed welfare reform, we reduced the welfare caseloads by 50% by getting people into jobs. But the Left, look, they don't want to do this because under, remember, under Obama, Dan, they wanted to sign as many people up for welfare as possible! They just...they saw it as a victory. The more people on welfare, the more people on food stamps, the more people on Medicaid, the more people in public housing SSDI, the better...the better it was for the economy, remember? They thought food stamps was a stimulus! Jacobson: Well, they're still doing that. I get robo calls all the time, because my kids are Hispanic and in CPS for Link cards, I also get robo calls for Medicaid, where I can go to sign up for it. So they're still promoting this... Moore: Yeah, they advertise it! You know, cmon! And the other thing, Amy, they try to do, and if liberals were still in charge they'd still be doing this, is saying "Look, there's no shame in getting welfare, you know! You help your local community!" Remember that? (Proft: Sure.) "You help your local community when you sign up for food stamps." (Proft: "Unemployment benefits are stimulus!") You know, we have 46 million people on those programs today! It's so outrageous, and I think it's a winning issue with the American people. We do believe in giving people a hand up, if they fall down, but not a hand out. That's what we've done with our welfare program, and by the way, Dan and Amy, you guys are right, you can literally take your PORSCHE and drive it up to the Welfare office and sign up for food stamps! Proft: Right, because it's about income, not assets. (Moore: Yeah!). Well how about, we're...since the Left is so...always so excited to adopt what's happening in Western Europe, how about this in Switzerland? Asylum seekers and migrants who have received welfare over the past three years will no longer be granted citizenship in Switzerland unless they pay the state back. Jacobson: Ohhh. Moore: Where's this? Proft: Switzerland. Moore: *sounding surprised* Well...well look, I'm in agreement with that. You go on welfare, you should not be granted legalization or citizenship. I mean, we can't afford to be bringing people into this country who are gonna go and...by the way, this is the first thing the Left does when immigrants come into this country. It used to be you got them integrated into the community, we got them into jobs, and they pulled themselves up by their bootstraps and made a better life for themselves. First thing that happens when immigrants come into a state like California, or unfortunately, Illinois...they sign 'em up for food stamps! Proft: Yeah well, dependency makes the government bigger and the politicians power larger, and that's the play. Steve Moore, chief economist at the Heritage Foundation, CNN economist and Wall Street Journal columnist of course, Steve, thanks for joining us. Jacobson: And Steve, you did a great job on CNN! Moore: Thanks guys, I'm gonna go have...I'm gonna go have my crumbs for breakfast. Proft: There you go! Jacobson: And he did a great job on CNN yesterday, he was in the hot seat and he handled himself very well, AND he joined us on our Turnkey Dot Pro Answer Line!

Related Content