[klyrs]

A huge number of folks, perhaps an overwhelming majority of americans, are living paycheck to paycheck[1]. When they get "airdrop" money, these folks tend to pay their outstanding bills or make large purchases that they would otherwise need to save up for. Who's getting that money in the end? Businesses whose services are in demand. This, in turn, incentivizes hiring and maintaining capacity to deliver their services.

But what's happened when we've airdropped money on businesses? They pocket the cash. Executives get bonuses, companies buy back stock and cut dividends to their shareholders. And to show their commitment to belt-tightening, they punish consumers and lay off workers. Trickle-down economics does not work. Paying companies does not help the workers as much as paying the workers directly.

[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2019/01/11/live-pa...

[hyperpape]

It's a hard pill for people to swallow that they deserved to be laid off because their employer was non-essential. In an advanced economy, an enormous number (maybe even the majority) of jobs are non-essential. If they all disappear overnight, we'd have to rebuild the majority of the economy, and we'd extend the economic crisis by years.

"Non-essential" businesses that are in trouble under major social distancing include: most retail, gyms, yoga studios, massage therapy, most things related to office supplies/maintenance/provisioning, hotels, auto mechanics (they'll have some business but a lot less), airlines, coffee shops, restaurants, probably some manufacturing...there's really no way I can give a complete list.

Some large corporations will go out of business, though lots will be fine. The real hit will be small businesses, which typically have less than 2 months of cash reserves.

Note that I'm not advocating that more should be given to businesses than individuals, just that keeping businesses from closing is an important part of having an economy to recover. Giving money to individuals is the most important thing--it has an immediate impact, and targets the most vulnerable people now. But avoiding business closures is also important, and is important to ensuring we don't have 25% unemployment 12 months from now.

I do see how my original post wasn't strong enough in saying helping individuals is the most important thing. But please don't confuse the claims "the current stimulus is a poorly targeted shitshow full of bailouts for wealthy corporations" (true) with "nothing needs to be done for businesses" (false).

[triceratops]

Small correction: auto mechanics are classified as an essential occupation under California's shelter in place order.[1]

It makes sense. Can't run the other essential businesses and services without repairing the means of transportation.

1. https://covid19.ca.gov/img/EssentialCriticalInfrastructureWo...

[hyperpape]

I could’ve said that more clearly. The parenthetical meant they’d be open, but would get much less business.

[bdcravens]

I think people will spend some of that money even in "non-essential" businesses, after they pay their essentials.

For many small businesses, they can leverage the SBA benefits in the stimulus package to stay afloat.

[hyperpape]

To the first point: maybe they’ll eventually make that money back, but they also may need help to survive the crisis.

As for the second point, I’m a bit confused whether you think you’re disagreeing with me. Giving companies loans on terms they couldn’t otherwise get is a form of supporting them. I was disagreeing with an OP who said we should only care about individuals.