Fox Business
Expand
Browse All Video
Watch Live

You're watching...

Stossel - 11/15/12 - Four More Years

Details

  • Description

    Stossel and guests speculate on what President Obama's second term will be like

  • Duration 41:14
  • Date

Clips

Also in this playlist...

Latest Video

Auto-advance: ON

Auto-advance
View All

Transcript

This transcript is automatically generated

Or more years and what's gonna.

What is my crystal ball say about things like they -- one.

I inhaled.

Critical look -- what will happen to energy knowledge.

-- excessive dependence.

On foreign energy source us.

Who will Obama point to the court will this regulation -- grow bigger.

I'm told that we're going over a cliff avoid the fiscal cliff but actually it's nothing compared to the real -- What will we -- in four more years.

-- -- -- -- ready for the next four years 'cause I've got my crystal ball I could see what's gonna happen.

First over the next few months pundits will scream about the fiscal cliff.

That's a series of tax increases and budget cuts that'll automatically go into effect January 1 -- congress works how to deal.

Will day.

Yes I conceded a year politicians will meet and then they'll hold press conferences and -- and predict disaster.

And then they'll reach a deal right before the end.

It won't solve much it'll just postpone the reckoning but they'll congratulate themselves and the media will move on to something else.

America however we'll continue to go broke.

-- too cynical.

Now it's probably worse -- that says my next guest congressman Ron Paul.

Congressman predict the future.

Long -- in the future looks pretty good lot of people are waking up.

And now that but we have today isn't workable -- in the short run the people in charge are going to admit they're not going -- that there were bankrupt.

Committed -- they won't admit that we're on the verge of a major major change in our society.

So -- will keep putting -- aside and not.

But then well eventually probably destroy the dollar -- a dollar prices -- will be forced to remain -- it change our system of financing.

But it could be pretty big I mean not I think it through debt won't be anything quite is that is -- -- the Soviet system collapsed but a lot of change you have to come.

Because I think it's true bankruptcy would mean that we no longer can maintain an empire unaware of -- we no longer can maintain.

Promises of entitlements with 222.

Trillion dollars so we have to face up to reality.

But I think I agree review don't expect gas all the solutions to come on January 1.

They're going to have some doctored up proposal and people.

We'll announce it in the stock market may go up.

That ultimately.

We will have to face up to you know be excessive spending and there's an excessive size of government not not for a little while yet.

-- that's sequestration law on January 1 was designed to acknowledge the politicians unwillingness to make tough -- here's how.

Jim Angle of fox reported.

The fiscal -- was crafted to be -- -- tasteful officials would do any and everything to avoid it.

So all you don't think they'll.

Say -- we don't wanna cut this money for the military domestic spending we're finally got on cut entitlements make -- Real decision.

They assume that they -- -- so -- -- that they wouldn't accept it.

I don't think they did anything they're not even talking about cuts they're talking about.

Cutting you know a trillion dollars over ten years a hundred billion dollars if they're -- -- in my real concert -- about.

Cuts.

In baseline budgeting let me stop you explain baseline budgeting and I hate it when you politicians talk that way because no person whose normal understands that what you mean -- that.

If I'm got to cut it means I spend less next year when you guys do what it means.

Give me take that we have already written into the next ten year budget.

Automatic increases so if you're proposing let's say.

A 1000000010 billion dollar increase for next year any kind of -- -- -- -- basis.

They're cutting 10%.

They're not -- -- they're only increase -- nine billion dollars -- 1010 billion dollar so it's all that it's it's done on purpose than people get confused.

And it cuts don't need any thing cuts mean only nibbling away at the proposed -- -- In this way that's the reason nothing ever happens.

And they got away with this for a long time because both sides whether liberals or conservatives -- different reason they wanted to spend money.

And there was a lot of wealth of the country they usually can get get along with -- okay will raise that milk subsidies and to back sub region will vote for used one vs the other.

But now the treasuries there the country's bankrupt they won't admit it and that's why there's so much so much anger and frustration.

Because it's hard to divvy up -- There's none left the -- up.

Thank you congressman Paul.

The focus in the media this week is that if the automatic tax increases and four fifths of this -- this tax increases if they -- the spending cuts do happen.

The cuts cuts total 55 billion from defense 55 billion from domestic spending into the future that that will be terrible.

It's a nightmare -- word about -- because that's a total disaster which really will create chaos and drive our economy off.

The fiscal -- Really.

Of one of the people who teaches me economics says -- sequestration.

Might be okay that's Russ Roberts of the Hoover Institute.

So it's not this big core prices.

Well -- government spending was about three point eight trillion.

Three point eight trillion and -- gonna cut a hundred billion that's a deck chairs on the Titanic it's not really -- dramatic change.

And it might be good even if it's across the board of their actual cuts I think that'll be great and I think across the board as a way to -- like cut 1020%.

Across the board -- -- -- my druthers.

But I think across the board just chill it scares people music when -- let's cut the things -- were really in let's say the things that are really important -- that things are not so important.

That never works across the board -- releases -- all of its all -- solve crucial now the tax increases sounds scarier.

That's about 400 billion of course we have a somewhat to weather in the costs -- as much but we have a trillion dollar deficit we're already spending the last four years each year trillion -- -- we take again -- -- -- we're gonna raise taxes by 400 billion.

In one year.

Well we're already raising them a trillion in the future -- to -- the idea of raising taxes.

It's probably a good idea it says this spending that -- been doing is not a free lunch.

And not just raising taxes by eliminating the bush tax cuts they're not talking about let's even things out of date get rid of some deductions make the code simpler.

That wouldn't be bad -- tax reform be really great idea there's good tax -- -- as bad tax reform some deductions probably would be good to get -- up.

Some maybe not so good for the economy as a whole.

But certainly they give taxable vacation taking advantage of this.

Scary -- fiscal cliff.

Would be a good idea to prod congress into symbol -- and tax code and that would be good for the economy but civil fine means eliminating deductions and as I look at the list of them I can't see congress agreeing to them because it's deductions for pension contributions that the biggest mortgage deduction.

Earned income tax credit -- deduction for having children.

Charity.

And I I don't need this this chaos that I can give them not they're not gonna touch those what they could do is.

Put a cap on the size the total amount of deductions some -- -- -- that.

Romney suggested in -- campaign I think will be appealing to certainly to the Democrats -- may be to the Republicans.

That 20% of the budget and about half of fiscal -- spending cuts would come for the military -- -- here not.

-- specialists so let's bring in Ben Friedman of the Cato Institute Saul.

It's almost 10% -- I'm told it's terrible.

The Republicans are hysterical about.

Pentagon's hysterical about it both both parties are hysterical but it's it's about 10% which would bring us roughly back to where we were in defense spending in 2006.

Which adjusted for inflation adjusted for inflation which was not exactly a crisis here in the Pentagon so it's really a minor continent gotten very spoiled at the Pentagon had years of luxury and and big increases.

And so as soon as you cut the budget debate and they -- to -- Defense Secretary Leon Panetta says it would weaken our defense system be irresponsible.

Senators McCain and Graham.

These draconian.

Cuts -- present a threat to our national security and must not occur.

I don't think it's the best way to cut the defense budget sequestration but I think can be useful I think we need actually probably bigger cuts in the defense budget because we do -- -- so this will force us I think to make some choices.

I think -- -- -- do too much.

We try to be everything in the world we -- deliver peace and prosperity to every corner of the world pretending that every unstable country as a threat to us we have too many rich allies that -- defending the long ago developed the ability defend themselves so.

If we caught a -- we might have to reconsider some of that and prioritize more.

Now what President Obama in the debate talked about being able to save on things because the military was being forced pay for things they don't even want.

I was skeptical but looking -- up.

These Abrams tanks the Pentagon says its whole game plan -- vehicle the army says they've exceeded their space -- -- power elevenths.

The army chief of staff warfare has changed we can't believe will ever see -- straight conventional conflict again.

And yet congress insists on buying and more these things.

Well that -- had -- not only.

-- -- her winning program that's like that it would have what happens is built somewhere looks politically important for the people from that state never wanna turn it off so.

That's film Ohio and someone in Michigan which has a lot of important numbers in congress so they did not keep saying buy more and more.

-- let's return to the big picture there they're talking about.

Cuts if they happen.

After the cut spending will still grow for the next ten years by one point 65 trillion as opposed to one point eight trillion.

Big deal.

I think we're sending a signal to the world.

They were not acting like grown ups were not sure we're not responsible and I think the greater summit in Washington to take the lead and say hey.

It's time to act like a grown up we spent three point eight trillion dollars it's not so much whether recovery with taxes and they're borrowing most important thing is I learned from on -- as.

What -- is spending the money on and I don't think we get three point eight trillion dollars worth of value.

From what we're currently spending -- we better not get from food stamps they're going up sharply it.

All the people received food stamps like them that's something worse than the government to us how but.

People are disabled.

Payments up sharply for that growing dramatically.

So the country -- safer all the time but more people kept.

Collect disability that -- has been liberalized hands of the courts have interpreted on ways to make it easier with people for people to go on disability.

And this what scares me the value of government guaranteed mortgages going through the roof.

-- -- being a little more cautious now I'd be more worried about the value of Spanish hands to state employees -- going to be very difficult for the federal government not to step in and and honor.

The promises that state governments have -- that's another probably four point.

Something trillion dollars for -- -- trillion dollars on top of everything else.

We've made too many promises we can't keep we've got -- somehow find a way.

To live a little bit closer to our means and to spend our money little more wisely thank you Russ Roberts and Ben Friedman.

Up next my crystal ball reveals some secrets about the -- -- And therefore he will get to a point mill liberals what -- that made.

Will tell you when we come back.

-- -- Before the election some libertarians said Romney Obama who cares they're both big government bureaucrats not much difference in what they'll do.

But one big lasting difference will come from Obama's appointments to the Supreme Court.

That could affect whether you get hired where your kid attend school whether you can protect yourself with a gun.

So which should we worry about or be glad about.

Let's ask -- is freedom loving judge standard of -- side of the do -- tonight worried.

Well.

Course you should weary and actually I I would have worried -- either of them appointing a justice of the Supreme Court and I would worry could form more.

With President Obama replacing retiring justices -- say that justice.

Ginsburg.

Who was not well was -- serious liberal.

And who's out there and here is lower -- we have.

Four justices in their seventies Ginsburg and Breyer 79 and seven before both liberal justice.

Well justice Ginsburg as -- said it's not well just -- probably gonna sit there for another ten years if if nature permits it -- for so if if you President Obama replaces justice Ginsburg will be with a person of like mind but perhaps figure -- forty years her junior.

So they'll vote voting would be the same.

You are removing a a rather shy.

Reticent.

On well senior citizen.

For a young aggressive.

Coalition building youngster.

And that's probably what what you're going to get you'll probably get someone like justice Sotomayor or justice Kagan who plans to sit there for another thirty or forty years.

And 3040 years is probably the norm now I have when that republic was created most of the justices were already passed the average age of -- they insert -- right sure right now as you know they serve for life and and and in the modern -- they have attempted to end -- their terms so far as they -- -- Control as during the presidency of -- of of president of the same party that got appointed them.

Obviously sometimes nature interferes it to the extent that this is a a free choice they will attempt to do that so I think you can.

You can soundly expect that justice.

So and Ginsburg will leave the court are one means or another in the next four years I don't expect any of the -- well I can't -- manager of justice -- justice -- will voluntarily go on to a presidential Abbas -- is 76 years old Justice Kennedy is 76.

He's pursuing Justice Scalia conservative they aren't young.

And that only seven -- they are young 76.

-- but let's say we get for people are gonna be eighty years old let's say they all leave the court for whatever reason and President Obama picks Chuck Schumer -- Clinton Nancy Pelosi Barney Frank I'm gonna -- to Canada what -- is.

In the court what changes and where if if if President Obama literally were able to replace.

Justice.

Scalia and Justice Kennedy with people of like -- to the president.

That would change the balance on the court radically.

That would probably undue.

The Second Amendment and return it to the point where the progressives like it which is only the government.

-- -- -- This school choice.

I would think that -- be very little left of school choice that a progressive Supreme Court.

Would require you to go to the public school percent your children.

To the public school in the neighborhood where you live and where you pay taxes President Obama says even if your religious beliefs says abortions evil.

You have to pay for it's not just -- euthanasia and contraception as well the president doesn't care about that and I think he would appoint justices who agree with him.

What else but the court church we can anticipate.

That eight progressive court a court filled -- Sonia Sotomayor is.

And Elena Kagan will be an activist court.

That will -- very young enough to serve to the year 2045 correct -- that will look for ways to put the progressive imprint.

On the law of the land bad news thank you affirmed -- -- volatile -- -- next do you run a business create jobs.

My crystal ball says.

The next four years mean.

-- Look at that -- pressing shark.

Shows what happens after recessions happens to employment again and again hiring recovered after about two years.

But the current recovery it's the Red Line is much slower much weaker.

Well one reason is that employers now face thousands and thousands of pages of rules.

And it makes -- scary to expand because no -- even understands.

What those laws say even the lawyers who specialize.

In the nor understand that.

Betsy McCoy has heard complaints about that for businesses she's a health care expert has been following Obama's biggest new regulation.

Obama care.

She reads it so we don't have to.

Bob bloody as a businessman who makes the its -- well actually much bigger and fancier.

Ventilation systems that places like.

Restaurants used stuff suck away bad smells and gases that might blow you up so up you making money.

We are making money and in spite of everything we're still expanding but it's more difficult -- in this environment because of HR rules.

Human -- is rules you know which don't make any sense really even for the employees.

Uncertainty about taxes and other regulations that are coming into the marketplace for example Department of Energy wants to regulate.

Fan motors over five horsepower.

When we're already in -- highly competitive industry.

Are they they say they want to regulate them to make the exhaust fans more energy efficient they say it's necessary to carry out the purposes of part they want to think EP CA whatever that is.

To conserve the energy resources of the nation.

That's what theater and my costs -- out what does the industry just wanna make money.

We are constantly testing fans there's an industry organization has scientific approach to this and if you're already trying to make it more efficient because it'll help you sell fake absolutely.

-- talked about premarket John.

But they just don't get -- -- toll don't understand it and you've been in business for 35 years you've built your company from not think -- -- 700 employees.

It was different 35 years ago absolutely I mean compared to today it seemed like there was no regulation back -- certainly not at the federal level.

-- we -- some state things we had to deal with.

Now the federal government's going to be engaged in our health care after 25 years -- -- little self insured inefficient.

We don't need their help let's.

About that I have my own copy of obamacare that out of school I went yeah I'm not mine is much fresher than years because I didn't read mine but.

You've read that and what.

What do companies tell you -- -- -- all our mandate is one of the most -- And parts of -- this employer mandate -- Hit every employer with fifty or more full time workers have to provide health insurance.

And not just any health insurance it has to be the one size fits all government designed planned.

Which will cost about twice as much as what most employers currently offer.

So a lot of companies who have some high turnover they have a cheap -- these are mostly young people.

They're gonna have to get a fancier -- well let me explain what they're gonna do so.

Many insure many companies are going to simply stop.

Offering insurance McKinsey and company to the survey and found that over a third of employers.

Are already considering not offering ensures that a ten police cheaper it's just a couple does -- -- here's here's the point this.

Employer mandated plan adds a dollar 79 per hour every -- work to the cost of hiring a busboy York.

I'll wait frissora receptionist actually that the cost of hiring any full time employee but when you're hiring neurosurgeons a dollar 79 doesn't matter.

When your hiring entry level people it really does 2000 bucks a year turn out so employers.

Can stop offering insurance and pay a penalty and they will and -- only already have said they well that's right.

So here are people who were getting insurance on the job and had a full time job now they're already been reported -- cover your workers killed.

We're gonna try to continue -- our work covering our workers and -- self insurance but it's gonna raise the costs for us in for the employees.

So you may expand less hire fewer people absolutely expand with new capital and -- the government take your capital you expand less.

And this drives some people.

Offshore you say the components you -- motors Barings filtration all those manufacturers have moved offshore.

Many of them Haberman most in -- in this particular industries and if you think about it.

America should be able compete regardless.

Of labor costs with any country in the world because modern manufacturing uses machine tools.

But if you put enough regulation and enough trouble.

It forces he says not the cost of the American worker it's just the confusion a lot of things that cost the American worker at all.

Of course large unionized operations yes -- that's a big issue.

But for normal manufacturing modern manufacturing it's highly capital investment intensive.

And labor has to be highly skilled and now we have the most skilled labor in the free world.

Not -- this law you tell me says is that the employee cannot be asked to cover more than 9%.

Of their income and premiums would.

Percent of their household in -- I would tell nobody about this because this is gonna be a nightmare for you.

You literally as an employer will have to ask every employee what is your husband or wife make.

You emotional and our household income not just your employees' income.

So then if you're hiring somebody you may want to hire somebody whose wife -- husband makes more money.

So that you can ask them to contribute more to their health insurance this is eight -- -- And that what I would think would be the only hope for health care is if you get these health savings accounts these high deductible plans -- the employees.

Have a little more skin in the game and -- some of their own decisions.

They are gonna go -- -- they're not officially abandoned you know but the way the law is structured it's going to be almost impossible to get one all the plans are gonna be the same.

And the plant has to cover things like alcoholism treatment drug treatment psychiatry.

Contraception.

-- to get another politician in there they may band conscious -- you know you're.

Raising the president really interesting because women worked called off.

Contraception is guaranteed here it isn't.

This law says that your plan will include what ever the current occupant of the White House says you want to -- -- your health insurance and the next occupant of the White House may say something completely different.

Who wants the president making all those decisions for you.

-- they're trying to help Foster trying to protect people.

But I think the central problem is that individuals and and small companies make much better economic decisions in any government ever could and the government says well we're gonna spend another billion dollars here in a billion dollars -- -- We've got to get away from this so that business grows faster than government.

Or will have higher unemployment we'll have more stress on the middle class and that's exactly what you've seen for the last four years.

The moment -- government's growing faster than business I think -- thank you Betsy thank you propped up next.

What is my crystal ball or is it what is my crystal ball say about whether you.

That's right you there with the illegal substance what are the chances that -- -- -- -- bubble the next four years due to the drug war.

I inhaled.

Friedman.

-- -- -- -- To hear that.

-- -- the sound of handcuffs clicking on someone because every nineteen seconds somewhere in America someone's arrested for drugs have been nineteen seconds.

So what is my crystal ball show.

Well Colorado and Washington just legalized we what let me.

Let's S Theodore Dalrymple former prison psychiatrist who says drug laws were absolutely needed.

And that LSB of reason TV who says you kidding me these laws do more harm than good so.

What do you mean more harm than good well I think any dispassionate snapped analysis of the costs and nobody is just passionate -- let's put it this way any dollars and cents -- barely rational.

Cost benefit analysis of the war on drugs I think would come out and say that.

These laws to the extent that they do anything good the costs are much higher in terms of human suffering in terms of violence driven by black markets.

And in terms of the disruption of American foreign policy American education policy.

An American no medical policy because the law creates all these black market that's right because -- -- more problems haven't done that in contrast snow -- doctor dale ripple like Italy argue within because I agree with him -- -- you don't so why are we wrong.

I didn't agree because it actually had a lot of the problems of drug taking certain -- sort of -- -- out there in the got a -- for example the biggest drug problem.

In this country -- movement -- need to be prescribed.

Opiates.

Two million people have been turned into -- By.

Perfectly legal means and there are many other examples could not sic code own currency yes -- it comes in not confident government has not making.

Hundreds of thousands of arrests a year over OxyContin for doing -- over marijuana basically and that's that's where we need to be talking about.

Do we want to having massive federal and state and local project that we call the war on drugs.

Going on where it's filling up prisons where it is taking time away from other necessary.

Purposes and things like that all to say like let's say that there are some people get addicted to a particular type of drug.

That doesn't mean all drug should be illegal because that's not what the typical user -- we don't say because there are alcoholics.

We should get rid of who's we don't -- -- security gently tried that yet we did and it it did have some effects where it did.

Reduce the number of drinkers in the country but it faster it'll crawl lots at what -- financial.

When you look at the figures of or during the prohibition and I worked out -- murder rate for some -- murder rate went up injuring prohibition by 35%.

But it -- top in the years before instructed the same period by 85%.

Between 19119.

There's six he went up by 325%.

It's true that -- went down off the -- but I didn't have anything to do with what is it is pretty thin supposition.

The legacy of prohibition in the United States was.

Organized crime.

We know that the drug war has created a similar type of violent gang activity that is around the contraband to -- now let's talk about the next four years she got a couple states legalizing.

Beyond.

So called medical use right.

That's how old probation and two in some states that we're not gonna enforce this that's -- -- where it's gonna happen.

We're at the beginning of that -- Colorado -- Washington by large margins 5556%.

Of the people saying yes to legalizing all aspects of marijuana production consumption use what happens next for the Obama administration's a much more difficult question because.

He was against.

The State's getting the right to decide this type of thing.

The Supreme Court has ruled against the states in terms of medical marijuana -- -- federal law travails there is no reason to believe that Obama is gonna go gentle into this goodnight.

Which will be a lot more interest -- a lot more fun and a lot more laid back because of legal marijuana.

But I think you'll have to eventually -- I don't mind my guess is that he moved trying.

If he's a typical politician is I suppose he is.

To satisfy both sides of the same time in this what calls facility hypocrisy in that clip we played a President Obama saying.

You know I had an -- that was the point he's lag effect and that seemed died -- -- again a few years later what's he was president he got an on line question about.

Medical marijuana.

I don't know what this says about -- on -- audience.

But.

Hot hot flat and I just want I don't want people who think their this -- -- fairly popular question we wanna make sure that it was answered.

-- answer is no I don't think that it's a good strategy.

Through.

Grow our economy fell.

So -- -- I smoke -- yeah it was great laugh laugh ha ha but I'm gonna lock -- up this is one of the most cynical.

Dimensions of Obama -- say as a politician and he gets a free pass from people in the media and people who support him think he's on their side.

He -- no indication of that.

He's even upped the ante by running a campaign -- with one of the actors who went on to serve from from the Harold and Kumar French -- Iraq.

Let's play that -- and I can't believe that this was part of the official Obama campaign -- -- Barack.

Listen let me know you're more.

Okay good cause -- -- Everybody's.

We have to get this right standard stuff so far but then just remember that I'm trusting you.

Who is that in fact.

The president.

-- So again how how how what a joke he stole her guys I enjoyed their movies Harold and Kumar go to white castle -- left.

But he's locking up thousands of people that's right the -- being even you would support the war must think this is.

Well of course and the same thing that's happened in England ballooning and we don't -- -- -- People.

Full position for -- What happens is the politicians say they're very much regained its.

Come as they maintain -- -- which prohibits it.

About the impact they've been trying to enforce -- -- the difference between the United States there's no reference in in Britain.

Two to enforce this you know that.

War on marijuana in particular in the ongoing federal war is not just wrong but it it is absolutely corrupting of the moral fiber of the country.

If you have the president making fun of of laws that he himself is prosecuting.

Hundreds of thousands of people -- arrested every year 800000 people for marijuana possession.

Alone.

This is not a laughing matter and it's about time that he catches up with the American people who over the past 101520 years.

Have moved to a majority of people saying that leave marijuana should be legalized.

That's the future and it would be nice to think that at least in this case.

Obama who -- -- hauling out stupid social.

Democratic ideals from Europe in the seventies is actually looking forward.

Thank you nick Gillespie doctor Dalrymple coming up what my crystal ball says about the next four years and there's some good news and here.

We double the production of clean energy across America the most important thing we can do.

Is to make sure we control.

Our own -- Two important ideas more clean energy and control our own energy.

It does sound important so -- that Obama got four more years what's gonna happen.

Jerry Taylor studies energy for the Cato Institute.

What's gonna happen -- Like clean energy took it could be cost competitive and affordable point is without the subsidies it wouldn't be there in fact is -- wind energy tax credit is disappearing this year.

Most of the wind energy projects -- just collapse without the subsidies that don't exist and they're only subsidies for reasons it's more expensive than the other energy for work we would need to subsidizes lavishly as we've that they wouldn't be there without the subsequent.

Control our own energy he sets.

Not sure exactly what the point of controlling our own energy is let's assume all of our -- came from -- Alaska or Texas.

If there's a supply disruption in the Middle East this could increase the price of our crude or just as much it's gonna increase their price of their crude or how about a shortage of some.

And -- foreign country -- off.

Well for angry foreign country cuts -- office sort of buying oil from that angry foreign country we buy oil from people who bought oil from that -- -- foreign country.

We play a musical a game of musical chairs we spiked from somebody else and we displaced customers them buy from that angry foreign country.

In nineteen -- three we had exactly that scenario we had an Arab oil embargo.

Andy didn't reduce imports the United States at all because this is a global market and somebody result of -- already results -- the somebody it's the same reason the -- embargo against the Soviets assembly nine didn't keep US grain out of the Soviet Union is an international market when -- sell the corn or soybeans or -- to somebody.

It's gonna go where the market dictates not where you like to go.

Front page of the Wall Street Journal this week the US full overtake Saudi Arabia as the world's largest oil producer by point one it may or may not we'll have to see but that's certainly good news and I enjoyed.

Reading about that because I'm old enough to remember president after president.

-- -- saying that they will bring us closer to energy independence for our country -- 1980.

By 1985.

By the year 20/20 -- They kept pushing it out.

Daria it's always just on the horizon when people worry about energy independence with the -- really worried about her imports in the main importance crude oil and even of these scenarios we're still going to be dependent upon foreign group.

And most -- we import comes from Mexico and Canada.

Hardly countries likely to threaten -- that the president also he takes credit for the boom in oil and gas production we have.

Increased oil production to the highest levels in sixteen years.

Natural gas production has the highest it's been.

In decades.

We assess -- like he made -- -- Well if I if I were offering a brief for the Obama administration I'd say this at least in screw -- up which is absolutely true he could have.

-- -- screw -- up by saying you can't drill here and this is off limits some.

We're not military build keystone swept up for the future you can say if you -- an advocate of Obama's policies in this regard that he's approved more permit applications -- the Bush Administration did -- improved more than five by quite a bit.

Oil production of federal lands is up more than it was during the bush administration and he didn't screw that up and there are regulations that he's imposed on hydraulic fracturing.

Which -- the industry doesn't care for but it hasn't done enough to strangle production production continues to go up.

So so far he's held a relatively benign position -- -- when he was in the senate.

He voter -- -- law which exempted hydraulic fracturing from about six or seven different environment both for environmental laws and environmentalists in the congress today are trying to get you know to repeal those exemptions and the administration is not backing those repeal leopard but when he says we did this it sounds like he didn't always the truth is.

It was people discovering new ways to get more stuff out of the ground as a guy named George Mitchell and he was says he spent over a decade trying to figure out ways to improve on hydraulic fracturing and he hit the jackpot and that's what unleash the innovation.

The interest of the enemy is in 2007.

Are so 20062007.

Everyone in the market believe that natural gas prices were only gonna go higher and -- -- -- -- -- spent billions of dollars to move manufacturing facilities are the United States.

And the belief that natural gas prices -- never come down.

So when people say they know what the energy future holds they know what the energy winners are tomorrow is to remember -- cheap right on the eve of this revolution hydraulic fracturing.

Everybody was betting on high natural gas prices to -- -- time even corporations that were very Smart and had every incident try to get this right.

Spent hundreds of millions not billions of dollars in a bet that prices will continue to skyrocket and then.

-- traitor -- himself at television that the crystal balls are was so -- -- Or any place -- anywhere are even somewhat sympathetic to the president about a lot of these things but let me hit you with this when he says he's gonna keep doing what he's been doing.

Building wind turbines.

Building deal clean energy sources for the future.

I don't want to subsidize.

Oil company profits when they're making money hand over -- -- -- support the energy jobs of tomorrow.

Clean energy the jobs of tomorrow.

If if -- it if the technology like wind energy or solar energy of geothermal energy -- ethanol or what have you has economic merit it doesn't -- a dime of government subsidy.

And if it doesn't have economic -- no matter how many subs -- -- a Friday gonna get it.

After -- we've been subsidizing nuclear power for fifty years -- nuclear power still the most expensive source of conventional electricity on the -- We've been subsidizing ethanol now for several decades in yet ethanol still can't compete without those subsidies and industry would largely disappear.

Without all the government preferences we can create content in village industries if we wish -- if it makes us feel better but it's not going to advance these technologies any and if and until.

Innovations occur and they occur with the government's -- subsidize them or not we don't get any greater.

Progress in these regards as we we've seen it time and time again.

Thank you Jerry -- -- Cato Institute.

Coming up my crystal ball.

Well predict -- next four year.

Now that the election's over what oil for warriors -- If I look in the right magic -- I see.

Lindsay Lohan is back -- -- rehab.

Justin Bieber reaches puberty.

And the regulatory state will have grown by another 121000.

Pages.

Hey they do add another 75.

Pages of laws every week.

My crystal ball also tells me that health care will cost more and yet we'll have fewer choices.

Our national debt will be up to twenty really just after four years.

And then the mainstream media will say the Democrats didn't accomplished what they promised because they need more time and of course Republicans obstructed progress.

I don't think and need a crystal ball -- see that.

But wait let me turn this over.

There is some good news here in other future yes despite the reelection of a big government central planner good things will happen.

The crystal ball says that more states legalize week.

And then the Fed's cave -- stop locking up so many people.

Crime drops gang members find useful work drug use is no longer cool and taxpayers save millions I'm announced -- -- Married gay marriage expands and sell more Americans are -- School choice becomes the norm bureaucrats in unions couldn't stop it.

Parents demand that Americans read this book learn practical economics and so gas lines immediately.

-- Military spending -- -- but because the Pentagon had to ask hard questions like what is our mission America is now safer.

And we are richer because we have a simple flat tax and because people finally rise up and say.

These rules they can do what you promise they mostly stop us from doing good.

New things they waste our time its highest up on -- spider web of freedom killing red tape so we've gone -- I'll be -- complex tax is still so forty years from now.

We'll live without those in up prosperous.

Free country.

It says so right here in my crystal ball.

Hey it could happen.

That's our -- I'm John Stossel good night.

Load More