Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 09/12/2026 10:19:38 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
President Trump had a good idea this week.
Send every adult American a $5,000 dividend.
My response?
Do it.
And before Washington starts explaining why it can't, I'd like everybody to grab a calculator.
At the Republican convention in Dallas, President Trump talked about $21 trillion in tariff-driven revenue.
Now I'm not interested in litigating that number here. I'm not interested in another 900-word argument about tariffs either.
For purposes of this conversation, I'm taking the President at his word.
Twenty-one trillion dollars.
Okay.
Now let's do the math.
There are roughly 240 million adult citizens in America. Five thousand dollars for each of them comes to approximately $1.2 trillion.
Against $21 trillion?
That's less than six percent.
Six percent.
Meaning, if we accept the President's number, Washington keeps more than 94 percent of it.
And people are telling me five grand is too much?
Please.
This is where Washington never ceases to amaze me.
The federal government can find billions for programs nobody remembers authorizing.
It can spend money overseas with numbers so large normal people stop comprehending them.
It can discover another hundred billion here and another hundred billion there.
But suggest actually sending some of the money back to the American people?
Suddenly everybody in Washington discovers fiscal restraint.
Now we're worried about the checkbook.
Now come the furrowed brows.
Now we need white papers.
No.
President Trump didn't propose sending everybody $50,000.
He didn't propose dividing the entire amount among the population and emptying the Treasury.
Five thousand dollars.
Less than six cents of every dollar represented by the $21 trillion figure?
Washington can survive on the other 94.
And think about what $5,000 actually means outside Washington.
It's not theoretical.
It's the transmission somebody has been putting off.
It's getting two credit cards out of the way.
It's replacing the refrigerator that has been making that noise for six months.
It's the dental work insurance somehow doesn't quite cover.
It's tuition.
It's groceries.
It's getting ahead on the mortgage.
It's putting something into savings and, for once, leaving it there.
For a family with two adults?
Ten grand.
That's real money.
Not Washington money.
Real-people money.
And President Trump added one condition I particularly like: spend it in America.
Fine by me.
Americans get the dividend.
American businesses get the spending.
The money moves through American communities.
The hardware store.
The mechanic.
The restaurant.
The contractor.
The appliance store.
The local business that's been trying to make payroll while Washington argues about macroeconomics.
Seems pretty straightforward.
But here's where I want to see whether Washington can actually do something that normal people understand.
Congress has to approve this.
That's where the trouble begins.
Because presidents can propose.
Congress has to appropriate.
And Congress has an almost supernatural ability to take a simple idea and murder it with process.
There will be objections.
There already are.
Some Republicans are worried about inflation and the deficit. Others support the idea. Getting something this size through both chambers is never going to be simple.
Fine.
Have the debate.
But don't lose sight of the arithmetic we're accepting for this exercise.
$21 trillion.
$1.2 trillion back to the American people.
More than $19 trillion remaining.
If that's the premise, stop acting like the five grand is the extravagant part.
It isn't.
And maybe that's what I like most about the idea.
Washington usually talks about Americans as sources of revenue.
Taxpayers.
Consumers.
Workers.
Filers.
Numbers on spreadsheets.
This proposal reverses the direction.
Something worked?
America benefited?
Then Americans get a piece.
I like that.
George W. Bush did something similar in 2001 when Americans received tax rebate checks after Washington found itself with a budget surplus.
Different circumstances. Different numbers.
Same concept.
Sometimes Washington can give some of it back.
And $5,000 in 2026 would mean considerably more to most households than politicians seem to understand.
Maybe because the people debating whether you need $5,000 aren't the people wondering whether the checking account will survive until Friday.
That's why I don't want to watch this become another Washington promise that disappears into committee rooms.
There's a number on the table now.
Five thousand dollars.
Good.
Now put Congress on the record.
Write the legislation.
Debate it.
Vote on it.
And let every member of Congress explain to the people back home why they're voting yes or no.
No hiding behind parliamentary fog.
No pretending nobody knows how these things happen.
And no spending six months explaining why Washington desperately needs every penny while simultaneously discovering another gigantic appropriation for something Americans never asked for.
If we're accepting $21 trillion as the premise, the American people's share isn't extravagant.
It's not even close.
It's less than six percent.
A good idea landed on the table this week. Congress shouldn't be the place it goes to die.
Don't you dare turn $5,000 into another Washington promise that somehow never makes it back to the people.
Washington can survive on the other 94 percent.
Send the checks.
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
From each according to his ability.
To each according to his need.
No.
Was his word good when he said he was carried away by two firefighters at ground zero?
Ted Cruz already shot it down. He twisted the President’s proposal from a straight payment to American adults into a tax rebate to “working people.” A tax rebate (amount unknown) to poorly defined “working people” means millions would never see a penny of the money the President wants to send back to us. Anyone who isn’t a “working” person wouldn’t see anything. Anyone who owes taxes to the IRS would see a rebate be snapped up by the IRS. Anyone who is retired and on Social Security wouldn’t see any rebate even though they paid into SoSec all their working lives. And so on.
Oh goodie, it’s the LX hit and run, middle of the night post. Iran still doesn’t have a nuke. Probably won’t have tomorrow either. Check back then.
Over what timeframe is that figure of $21T derived? Eternity? It’s ridiculous.
50,000 cash in advance of the election is my price delivered in person by Alan Dershowitz on behalf of the POTUS
Yep, $328 Billion in tariffs in the last year and a half (some of that to be sent back due to the SCOTUS ruling??). And tariffs are a naturally declining source of revenue if they are working to bring back manufacturing to the USA. According to the current math it would take 101 years to recoup $21 Trillion in revenue. (Assuming no decline in tariff revenue due to a smaller trade deficit).
Piker. You should demand several multi-million dollar houses like Bernie.
This might be easier to read?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
President Trump had a good idea this week. Send every adult American a $5,000 dividend. My response? Do it. And before Washington starts explaining why it can’t, I’d like everybody to grab a calculator.
At the Republican convention in Dallas, President Trump talked about $21 trillion in tariff-driven revenue. Now I’m not interested in litigating that number here. I’m not interested in another 900-word argument about tariffs either.For purposes of this conversation, I’m taking the President at his word. Twenty-one trillion dollars. Okay.
Now let’s do the math. There are roughly 240 million adult citizens in America. Five thousand dollars for each of them comes to approximately $1.2 trillion. Against $21 trillion? That’s less than six percent. Six percent. Meaning, if we accept the President’s number, Washington keeps more than 94 percent of it. And people are telling me five grand is too much? Please.
This is where Washington never ceases to amaze me. The federal government can find billions for programs nobody remembers authorizing. It can spend money overseas with numbers so large normal people stop comprehending them. It can discover another hundred billion here and another hundred billion there. But suggest actually sending some of the money back to the American people? Suddenly everybody in Washington discovers fiscal restraint. Now we’re worried about the checkbook. Now come the furrowed brows. Now we need white papers.
No. President Trump didn’t propose sending everybody $50,000. He didn’t propose dividing the entire amount among the population and emptying the Treasury. Five thousand dollars. Less than six cents of every dollar represented by the $21 trillion figure? Washington can survive on the other 94.
And think about what $5,000 actually means outside Washington. It’s not theoretical. It’s the transmission somebody has been putting off. It’s getting two credit cards out of the way. It’s replacing the refrigerator that has been making that noise for six months. It’s the dental work insurance somehow doesn’t quite cover. It’s tuition. It’s groceries.It’s getting ahead on the mortgage. It’s putting something into savings and, for once, leaving it there.
For a family with two adults? Ten grand. That’s real money. Not Washington money. Real-people money. And President Trump added one condition I particularly like: spend it in America. Fine by me. Americans get the dividend. American businesses get the spending. The money moves through American communities. The hardware store. The mechanic. The restaurant. The contractor. The appliance store. The local business that’s been trying to make payroll while Washington argues about macroeconomics. Seems pretty straightforward.
But here’s where I want to see whether Washington can actually do something that normal people understand. Congress has to approve this. That’s where the trouble begins. Because presidents can propose. Congress has to appropriate. And Congress has an almost supernatural ability to take a simple idea and murder it with process. There will be objections. There already are. Some Republicans are worried about inflation and the deficit. Others support the idea. Getting something this size through both chambers is never going to be simple.
Fine. Have the debate. But don’t lose sight of the arithmetic we’re accepting for this exercise. $21 trillion. $1.2 trillion back to the American people. More than $19 trillion remaining. If that’s the premise, stop acting like the five grand is the extravagant part. It isn’t. And maybe that’s what I like most about the idea. Washington usually talks about Americans as sources of revenue. Taxpayers. Consumers. Workers. Filers. Numbers on spreadsheets.
This proposal reverses the direction. Something worked? America benefited? Then Americans get a piece. I like that. George W. Bush did something similar in 2001 when Americans received tax rebate checks after Washington found itself with a budget surplus. Different circumstances. Different numbers. Same concept. Sometimes Washington can give some of it back.
And $5,000 in 2026 would mean considerably more to most households than politicians seem to understand. Maybe because the people debating whether you need $5,000 aren’t the people wondering whether the checking account will survive until Friday. That’s why I don’t want to watch this become another Washington promise that disappears into committee rooms. There’s a number on the table now. Five thousand dollars. Good. Now put Congress on the record. Write the legislation. Debate it. Vote on it. And let every member of Congress explain to the people back home why they’re voting yes or no. No hiding behind parliamentary fog. No pretending nobody knows how these things happen. And no spending six months explaining why Washington desperately needs every penny while simultaneously discovering another gigantic appropriation for something Americans never asked for.
If we’re accepting $21 trillion as the premise, the American people’s share isn’t extravagant. It’s not even close. It’s less than six percent. A good idea landed on the table this week. Congress shouldn’t be the place it goes to die. Don’t you dare turn $5,000 into another Washington promise that somehow never makes it back to the people. Washington can survive on the other 94 percent.
Send the checks.
If this $5K thing is real then focusing on the $$$ is completely missing what is in play here. If PDJT is sincerely proposing this then the real story here is that dems stand to sweep the 2026 midterms and will soon hold the house AND the senate. The proverbial sht is about to hit the fan and the “Golden Age of America” will be an idea only. If someone can ‘splain to me how the GOP is in any place that resembles a favorable position, please please do. TY.
with all the money lost to frauds exposed so far and likely more to come, Govt should send bills to all those fraud money recipients and anyone connected in helping the fraud. Add interest if not paid in 30 days.
Those thieves owe the rest of us.
Every Republican supporting this would be screaming if the Democrats did it. Wrong is wrong, and this is not just wrong, it is pathetic and wrong.
Borrowing money to give to us, that will have to be paid back with interest by our kids, grandkids and great grandkids.
Trump is really jumping the shark lately....and it shows.
Whatever Trump is doing now, it is not conservative.
If a political party abandons its very reason for existence, what is it?
$41 trillion
$2 trillion
Tax the oil companies. They have been gouging us and making record profits.
So vote for the DSA, or refuse to cast a vote and don’t counter someone voting fornthe DSA. And Trump’s the problem? Right.
There's a number on the table now.
Five thousand dollars.
Yes there is, even seconds. Portions:
Haazinu is on a double Chumash loop for last week and also this one, bridging 5786-7, so here we are today for the repeat beginning on 9/13 (913: cf. "בראשית").
Interesting ends marking the end(s) in verse 5, even a reversal ("ואות"), but then they are followed by the peculiar enlarged hei that begins verse 6, written as if it were its own word or initial ('ה), which *is* the beginning of a word:
שחת לו לא בניו מומם דור עקש ופתלתל
ה ליהוה
An enlarged hei = 5000, like the beginning of the year dates ('ה).
The timing certainly is pure gold (פז), but who will truly take the time to paz and reflect during these high holy days? (the truly observant, of course)
Well, I’m a conservative. But if you proudly post a picture of Nathan Bedford Forrest I’m not comfortable being included in that “we”.
And conservatism has nothing to do with spending or tax cuts. The rest of the ideals conservatives stand for, like limited government, result in less spending and lower taxes, but ‘less spending’ isn’t a conservative ideal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.