As so often, the Bible has it right. Or, to quote a lesser authority (Mr Dillow):
Ordinarily, we should worry about the distributional impact of support packages, incentive effects and whether systems will be gamed. In a crisis, though, these are low priorities. What matters is that the support be immediate and large. If your house is on fire, you should not worry about your carpets getting wet. You should put the fire out and clean up the mess later.Gamed?! Outright fraud would be more like it - I am sure we could all recount a long list of the individual cases we are personally aware of. Dillow's piece is headed "When rules don't apply"; and as a soldier, it's always necessary to remind junior officers that ruthlessness in action is what's needed. (Your average subaltern is nicely brought up, and inclined to find a gate in a wall instead of driving clean through it. "A farmhouse is obscuring my line of sight ..." - Then flatten it!)
So - do we care? Is the point of 'helicopter money' to just get people spending?
I don't think it's quite as easy as that, even if there's a point that needs recognising. But. War-profiteering is one thing: outright theft is another. People of good will on both the Right and the highly-redistributive Left ought to be distressed at the thought that, "when this is all over", the de facto distribution that will have taken place is disproportionately to more-or-less organised criminals. That's what happened to Russia in the 1990's, and the legacy of that era is pretty awful.