“If we take the route of the permanent handout, the American character will itself be impoverished.” – Richard Nixon

Free money is popular! Who woulda thunk? 

A vast majority of Americans – 72% to 76% – support Biden’s $1.9 trillion COVID bailout, “including a sizable share of Republican voters,” according to the NYT.

I’m surprised it isn’t 95%. It’s hard to say no to free money.

Of course, it’s not free. And the people getting the checks now will be paying for it later on – but with interest.

That isn’t the case for the people that passed the bill. Unlike the working classes in America, the retirement accounts of our elected officials and government workers are protected against inflation.

The bill was sold as a necessary step to help Americans survive the lockdown-triggered economic collapse that began last March and continues. And there’s no doubt that some of it will have a stimulating effect on the economy. The question is: How much?

Last night, at the bar at Fina y Mar at Rancho Santana, I asked a half-dozen people I was drinking with whether they thought the bill would be helpful. The response was roughly the same as the NYT poll: Four thought it would; two thought it wouldn’t.

Then I asked them if they know any of the provisions of the bill.

“Checks for unemployed people,” one said.

“Money for small businesses that have employees, if they keep them employed,” another said.

“I think there’s money in there for small business operators,” a third said.

Well, not exactly. Here are the data:

* $413 billion for another round of stimulus checks

* $246 billion for unemployment provisions

* $75 billion towards vaccinations, medical supplies, and treatments

* $19 billion for “public health” programs

* $26 billion for live venues, restaurants, and bars

* $7.2 billion in additional funds for the Paycheck Protection Program

That adds up to $786 billion of the $1.9 trillion assigned to pandemic relief.

Where is the remaining $1.2 trillion going? Take a look…

* $100 million for a Silicon Valley subway system

* $1.5 million for a bridge that Chuck Schumer has been wanting to connect NY and Canada

* $500 million towards “grants to fund activities related to the arts, humanities, libraries and museums, and Native American language preservation”

* $30 billion for public transit agencies

* $4 billion towards mental health assistance

* $6 billion for the Indian Health Service

* $15 billion towards economic injury disaster loans

* $15 billion to help airlines make payroll

* $4.5 billion for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance program

* $15 billion towards a temporary 5% increase in Federal Medicaid to states offering eligibility to lower-income adults

* $19 billion in rental assistance

* $39 billion for child care

* $86 billion for employers insured by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp.

* $129 billion for elementary and secondary schools, regardless of their reopening status, and $40 billion for higher education (According to the Congressional Budget Office, Congress has already given $113 billion to schools and “most of those funds remain to be spent.”)

* $350 billion for state and local governments, using a formula that favors sending more money to states that strictly enforced economic lockdowns

* Some of these expenditures we all agreed, were indirectly related to the Corona Economy. But which of them were necessary? We had a good arguments about that. But some, like the $500 million allocated to the arts and the $100 million destined for the Silicon Valley transit system, left everyone, even the big-government people, speechless.

That’s a fact, but opinions vary:

“We’re here today because Pelosi, Schumer, and Biden decided to use a pandemic to push forward a progressive wish list – items to reward political allies, friends, and donors at the expense of the American working class,” said Representative Jason T. Smith (R-MO).

“This is a spectacular piece of legislation,” Nancy Pelosi told reporters Friday evening. “While the Senate has prevented us temporarily from passing one aspect of it, let us not be distracted from what is in here, because it is a great bill.”

“I am known as a dove [one who supports low interest rates and generous government assistance],” said Olivier Blanchard, MIT economics professor and former International Monetary Fund chief economist. “I believe that the absolute priority is to protect people and firms affected by COVID. Still, I agree [that] the $1.9 trillion program could overheat the economy so badly as to be counterproductive. Protection can be achieved with less.”

Those are the facts and some of the opinions. You should make your own assessment.