Funny how the folks most eager to apply cost/benefit analyses to government regulations fail to apply such techniques to means testing. Means testing is very expensive for the government (even more so for the recipients) - yet nobody ever mentions the cost of conducting means testing, or whether any benefit other than cruelty is derived.
It's a tool to be sure middle class voters see the CTC as govt largess that doesn't benefit THEM. If only the poors get it it's easier to complain that it'll be wasted on drugs, so it turns a good thing into a liability for..checks notes..democrats.
BBB is dead. Move on
Funny how the folks most eager to apply cost/benefit analyses to government regulations fail to apply such techniques to means testing. Means testing is very expensive for the government (even more so for the recipients) - yet nobody ever mentions the cost of conducting means testing, or whether any benefit other than cruelty is derived.
I thought politicians were supposed to serve the people. Not the other way around.
Only as food
How come the 770 billion, with a B, spent, and voted yay by this tool, doesn't "concern" him?
Arg, the phantom thread strikes again.
The days of even pretending public service is about serving the public seem quaint and outdated these days.
It's a tool to be sure middle class voters see the CTC as govt largess that doesn't benefit THEM. If only the poors get it it's easier to complain that it'll be wasted on drugs, so it turns a good thing into a liability for..checks notes..democrats.