278
Trump's $2,000 rebate checks would cost $600 billion ‒ double the new revenue from tariffs
(www.usatoday.com)
this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2025
278 points (98.9% liked)
politics
26427 readers
2480 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't believe it in the first place, but if I did I would want to know what the catch is. Altruistic is a term I sincerely doubt has ever been unironically applied to that... thing.
The catch is that we've already been paying for it, since the consumers bear the cost of the tariffs.
I mean, sure, but what's the advantage in giving any of it back? You'd think he'd just steal it. He's not exactly shy about committing crimes, and the justice system is out to lunch in perpetuity when it involves him.
I mean it's pretty classic narcissist shit. The husband who punches his wife in the face and sends roses the next day. The deadbeat dad who drops off an expensive birthday gift 3 weeks late after blowing off said birthday. They don't like when people are angry but lack the empathy and emotional maturity to do any actual introspection or attempts at a proper resolution, so they just throw money or something shiny at the problem and pat themselves on the back for their 'compassion'.
Not sure if this is his exact motive or not, but its pretty obvious that this would buy back some good will he's lost with some of his followers or people who don't pay attention to politics. People get angry, then get a check and then calm down a bit. For where I live, a $2000 check would maybe cover most of rent for a low-mid range 1 bedroom apartment for a month, but that's it.
For other people in the country, presumably where more of his followers live, that could be like 3 months of rent. Its also not his personal money he'd be losing, its ours. He's just forcing the public to spend their own tax money on a Band-Aid for his terrible economic policies, while it hilariously gets taxed again in the form of 'income' for each individual.
That's a reasonable argument I largely hadn't considered because I genuinely hadn't considered he cares whether he has goodwill, or would even accept he had lost it anyway. But if he does, and he has, you could well be right.
I think this is just another 5000 check from doge though.
Who knows. He claimed he paused tarrifs in the beginning because people were getting 'yippy' (lmao what kind of dismissive, out of touch fucking asshole says that?), so he could just be tired of hearing about poor people's troubles and thinks this will shut everyone up.
His handlers are starting to worry that the number of maga morons who voted for him have dropped so low that even the steps they've taken to disenfranchise their opponents won't be enough to prevent progressives from swooping in in 2026 replacing Republicans and Democrats.
They are banking on people being too dumb to realize that they're going to have to borrow more than half that money to pay it out.
They are, sadly, correct.