3 ms·
I agree giving poor people money (possibly just everyone money right away rather than sorting out who is poor first) is the right thing to do now, but I think a
by scottlamb 7y ago
I agree giving poor people money (possibly just everyone money right away rather than sorting out who is poor first) is the right thing to do now, but I think about it slightly differently:
I don't think "economic stimulus" is the right goal. The public health officials are doing their absolute best to bring the economy to a near-halt, at least any part of it involving non-essential physical interaction. I don't want to second-guess or undermine them.
I think the right goal is to make sure people have money to survive, including paying for food, medicine, and housing, paying off their debts, and building their savings, so they can make it through until we're ready to restart the economy. I wouldn't consider the measure to have failed if it's not all spent right away or if the stock market doesn't rise.
- rednerrus 7y agoKeeping the wheels moving on the economy is much easier than restarting the economy.
- tomp 7y agoIt's also impossible. How many millions would I have to pay you for you to take a skiing trip to Italy right now (flight, hotel, ski lifts, ...)? No matter the size of the economic stimulus, some parts of the economy will grind to a halt (demand shock), whereas others will be overstressed (supply shock - food, toilet paper, medical services). I think any stimulus should be targeted at those parts specifically, otherwise you're just wasting resources.
- danaris 7y agoYou don't have to encourage the skiing trip. That's not the point. The point is to make sure that the people who work at the ski resort can survive while no one's coming to vacation there.
- mc32 7y agoThe gov has to set parameters and then they can go by payroll data/IRS data. I’m sure there’s lots to think about if you want, but the important data is quite available.