[stupac2]

The concern I have is that lack of money in people's pockets is not the problem at this time.

Probably not what you'd be saying if you were a server or a bartender or a hotel worker or flight attendant etc etc etc.

Plus people like you and me (and I assume most of us on here) might be more likely to get takeout a few times a week if we have that extra $1k or whatever.

Definitely not good phrasing on my part; I did follow it up with "I think the best we can do is try to tie people over for the next few months so that businesses don't go out of business and people can be tided over so that they don't have knock-on effects on the economy".

I think I was trying to make an argument against a broad-based "give every American money" and more towards "let's target individuals who are directly affected by the pandemic" (such as your bartenders, hotel worker, or flight attendant). 

Just to give you an idea, I had started shopping for a car.  That's on hold now, because it isn't urgent and in any case I'm not driving.  That would inject some money into the economy.  Unfortunately, an extra $1000 or even winning the lottery isn't going to be the difference between me buying a car and waiting until this passes.

The good news, such as it is, is that after the pandemic passes, I will be buying that car... unless of course I lose my job because of the recession because of the pandemic.

BC

Targeting takes time that we don't have. It's better to just pump the money out there and accept that some relatively small fraction of the populace won't really need it. (And that would be, what, 10%? Big deal. And don't forget that a lot of high-income people inexplicably live paycheck-to-paycheck as well.)

[stupac2]

The concern I have is that lack of money in people's pockets is not the problem at this time.

Probably not what you'd be saying if you were a server or a bartender or a hotel worker or flight attendant etc etc etc.

Plus people like you and me (and I assume most of us on here) might be more likely to get takeout a few times a week if we have that extra $1k or whatever.

Definitely not good phrasing on my part; I did follow it up with "I think the best we can do is try to tie people over for the next few months so that businesses don't go out of business and people can be tided over so that they don't have knock-on effects on the economy".

I think I was trying to make an argument against a broad-based "give every American money" and more towards "let's target individuals who are directly affected by the pandemic" (such as your bartenders, hotel worker, or flight attendant). 

Just to give you an idea, I had started shopping for a car.  That's on hold now, because it isn't urgent and in any case I'm not driving.  That would inject some money into the economy.  Unfortunately, an extra $1000 or even winning the lottery isn't going to be the difference between me buying a car and waiting until this passes.

The good news, such as it is, is that after the pandemic passes, I will be buying that car... unless of course I lose my job because of the recession because of the pandemic.

BC

Targeting takes time that we don't have. It's better to just pump the money out there and accept that some relatively small fraction of the populace won't really need it. (And that would be, what, 10%? Big deal. And don't forget that a lot of high-income people inexplicably live paycheck-to-paycheck as well.)