So, to be clear, you don't think that pumping 5 Trillion dollars into the economy would boost the economy?
That;'s correct. That's because they cannot "pump" even one dollar into the economy. All they can do is cycle the money from somewhere else. That somewhere else could be using hte money for more productive purposes.
Not reading at all?
A tax credit would only require that 1 of the 5 Trillion come from the government. The other up to 4 Trillion would come from people who have the money sitting around, but are not spending it. It's probably too late now since there are no dollars of any type left.
If you are rich and pay allot of tax, your tax rate would allow a greater credit and you could add a wing to the old house and cause a contractor to hire more employees. If you're not so rich and just buy a gallon or two of paint and a couple brushes, someone had to sell them them to you, someone had to stock the shelf, someone had to make the stuff and someone had to deliver it.
Someone had to build the vehicles and the roads to transport these things.
With a tax credit, the spending is incented, the tax dollars are multiplied and the economy moves. A tax credit, in an economy moved to dismal pessimism, that is, this one, only incents people to hold on to the money and wait for the next misdirected false step from the Big 0.
Stupid much?
No one has "money sitting around". THey have money invested somewhere. Even if it is in the bank, the bank is investing it somewhere. If someone pulls money from his bank account to add a wing to his house he is depriving the bank's borrower of that money--money that would probably be put to more productive uses than building a diminishing resource.
If the gov't gives a tax incentive, they must make up the revenue somewhere else, either taxing someone else or borrowing it from someone, who might use the money to make loans that actually produce something.
Your understanding of the problem is itself the problem. Unfortunately, most of the Obama Administration thinks like you.