> It should be noted that the US decided not to extend the universal free school meals program, because it was "too expensive" at $11B. Tragic, yes, but note t

> It should be noted that the US decided not to extend the universal free school meals program, because it was "too expensive" at $11B. Tragic, yes, but note that you can’t compare the price tags directly on bills like this because the headline number tends to be a mix of tax breaks combined with spending authorization stretch out over many years. For example, $100 billion of the bill goes to domestic funding scientific research and fostering technology hubs. It’s spread out over 5 years. I need to read the fine print of how this is all spread out, but it’s incorrect to read the headline and assume that chipmakers are getting $280B of checks next year. For comparison, a bill authorizing the domestic lunch program over a similar 5 year term would likely be said to cost $65-70 billion due to the 5-year term and the inevitable rising prices over that term. (Note I’m not making any moral judgments about this, just putting it in context. I also didn’t verify any cost numbers from the parent comment, so don’t take my example as a fact)