James Fishback was struck by a brilliant idea during a recent dream: Issue dividend checks to American taxpayers using the funds saved from the dismantling of certain federal government sectors by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency. The concept gained traction after Fishback shared it on Twitter and Musk, in turn, promised to discuss it with President Trump. The President further endorsed the specifics of Fishback’s idea during the FII Priority Summit in Miami Beach, referring to a potential allocation of DOGE savings towards American citizens and debt reduction.
However, there are concerns that the proposed plan may not benefit low-income Americans as envisioned by Fishback. The CEO of Azoria and former collaborator with presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy recounted how the idea materialized and was swiftly developed into a proposal in collaboration with his firm’s lead researcher. Fishback highlighted the speed at which the proposal gained traction, eventually reaching President Trump through Musk.
This episode underscored Musk’s ability to capture the President’s attention with unconventional ideas, including those originating from relatively unknown individuals such as Fishback. The notion of a “DOGE dividend” mirrors aspects of a previous pandemic-era program from Trump’s first term, where direct payments were disbursed to Americans bearing the President’s name.
In Fishback’s proposal, he projects $2 trillion in potential government cuts attributed to DOGE, with 20% of these savings earmarked for distribution among 79 million taxpaying households, equating to $5,000 per household. Notably, the rebate would only be allocated to net-income taxpayers, excluding lower-income individuals who do not pay federal income taxes. Fishback justified this approach by emphasizing that the checks would be funded from existing allocations, mitigating inflation concerns associated with deficit-financed stimulus packages.
“The DOGE Dividend differs from previous stimulus initiatives by targeting tax-paying households exclusively,” Fishback emphasized. “This ensures that the funds benefit those who contribute to the tax system.
Individuals who are more inclined to save rather than spend transfer payments, such as the DOGE Dividend, typically have a lower proportion of their income allocated to consumption. Paying off debts, saving for emergencies, investing in education or retirement are all non-inflationary activities. According to Fishback, directing the dividend only to households above a certain income threshold can alleviate concerns about potential inflationary pressures caused by the rebates. He noted that during the pandemic, checks were distributed indiscriminately, with low-income households receiving significant transfer payments relative to their annual income. These payments cater specifically to households that are net contributors to federal income tax, suggesting a higher tendency to save rather than spend the DOGE dividend.
Despite some uncertainty, even among Republicans, regarding the allocation of funds saved by DOGE, the total amount remains unclear. While DOGE claims to have saved $55 billion to date, skepticism surrounds certain assertions, such as a purported $8 billion savings from a contract cancellation at the Department of Homeland Security, which was actually valued at $8 million. Initially pledging $2 trillion in savings by next year, Musk has tempered expectations, emphasizing the need to determine actual savings before committing to distributing dividend checks.
Chief economist Mark Zandi expressed reservations, questioning the rationale behind providing dividends without ensuring actual savings are achieved. He emphasized the importance of addressing deficit reduction before considering such distributions. Zandi also acknowledged that targeting higher-income households for rebates would likely lead to greater saving rather than immediate spending.
At a political conference, House Speaker Mike Johnson expressed hesitance towards the proposal, citing conservative principles of fiscal responsibility and the need to address the substantial federal debt and deficit. Musk indicated that discussions with former President Trump were positive, hinting at potential future action. The White House refrained from commenting on the proposal.
Fishback engaged in discussions with stakeholders in Washington but refrained from disclosing details.
Showing him having a brief conversation with Musk on Thursday, Fishback expressed a firm stance on the potential savings generated by the proposed plan. He addressed critics who doubted the possibility of Dogecoin delivering $2 trillion in total savings, stating that even if it were only $1 trillion or $500 billion, significant reductions in individual payments would still occur. Fishback emphasized the tangible impact of such savings, underscoring the symbolic value of the government redistributing funds to hardworking Americans as restitution for the misuse of their tax dollars.
In response to concerns raised by Zandi, Fishback acknowledged that the proposed cuts would not be without economic consequences. He highlighted the potential negative effects of job losses on the economy, emphasizing the need to consider both immediate and long-term repercussions. Questioning the assumption that the jobs being eliminated were not essential, Fishback challenged the notion that these roles did not contribute to the overall functioning of the economy and the nation.
In light of these considerations, Fishback cautioned against hastily dismissing the importance of the jobs being cut, suggesting that their value and significance might be underestimated. He urged for a comprehensive evaluation of the implications of such reductions on various sectors and underscored the complexity of assessing the true impact of scaling back government operations.
