A loan may not encourage spending in the same way free, no-strings-attached money does. For example, if you're poor and struggling pay-to-pay, would you like the idea of borrowing knowing that it'll bite you later on when you have to survive on even less money due to paying back the loan?

On the other hand, absolutely no-strings-attached money might see you spend it on something that you've needed for a while but haven't been able to afford.

Quite true, my thought was that a loan can be a larger amount. $1k one time on't change much, $10k would help people pay for food etc.

It's always possible to do both.

> Furman proposes Congress pass a "one-time payment of $1,000 to every adult..."

better a perpetual with negative interest

Need based maybe. But $10K in one shot might be hard to pay and easy to spend