[brownsfan]

This is an attempt to make lower income voters happy. Financially it’s a bad idea, but it may actually soothe some voters.

[HYPOCRACY]

This should also make the idiots on SC very nervous about ruling badly on Tariffs. Namely Roberts and his little lap dog Barrett.

[RWGinger]

Agree with your good point.
Sometimes ya gotta do what ya gotta do.

[V_TWIN]

Oh yeah, it’s definitely designed to offset the SNAP BS.

It’ll be interesting to see what is defined as “high income”.

[Sacajaweau]

It will boost all local economies...

Let people pay off their debts...just thinking

[volare737]

It’s crap. Another MEANS TESTING boondoggle. As if we don’t have that on all so-called good deals. Socialism-light.

[CodeToad]

“Financially it’s a bad idea”

Is it a bad idea?

The money came from the people paying higher prices of foreign goods and from the profits of companies bringing in these goods, so giving some of it back to thee people to spend is an economic stimulus and makes good sense.

[Dr. Franklin]

This is an attempt to make lower income voters happy. Financially it’s a bad idea, but it may actually soothe some voters.

It's a dagger to the Rat party and Free Traders who are pushing the Orange Man Bad schtick. The Welfare Queens will love Trump when they get their checks. Everyone loves free money. I know how well Trump marketed his casinos in AC. All of the grannies blowing their Social Security checks on the slot machines got a free $10 on their next trip, which most of them lost and a buffet meal with their Trump loyalty card. The man knows how to market himself. IF Trump loses the tariff case at SCOTUS, this will put political pressure on the Congress to amend the law with retroactive effect.

[millenial4freedom]

I’m just not a fan of buying votes...and this smells like it.

[avital2]

if it helps win midterms to allow for longer period of R program adoption, i don’t consider it bad financially.