Sure but Econ 101 is purely theoretical. De facto what happens is people sell their good car and buy a clunker, they forego vacations, they avoid new purchases,

Sure but Econ 101 is purely theoretical. De facto what happens is people sell their good car and buy a clunker, they forego vacations, they avoid new purchases, they buy shittier food, they eat out less, they pull their kids out of extracurriculars, they sell their houses, they move to cheaper cities, they go deeper into debt, they pick up extra shifts or extra jobs, etc. Essentially it's a huge transfer of wealth and economic power to those who need it least from those have very little to begin with. I honestly don't understand any of the arguments in favor of it. Like is Johnson & Johnson using the money to make better baby powder (that doesn't give you cancer) or are they pumping their stock price, collecting bonuses, and prepping for another round of share buybacks?