The government is considering sending a $250 check to every social security recipient. The common case against doing so is well explained here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/28/business...

But moreover, I think that a stimulus program should not send checks to anyone. Regardless of whether it's Obama's proposed $250 to seniors, or the Bush $300+ that went to everyone.

Instead, if the government wants to give money away to individuals for the express purpose of stimulating the economy, it should send debit cards rather than checks.

Checks will often be deposited and saved. Or used to pay down existing debt. These are both worthwhile things, and can both help individuals who need help... but they do not accomplish the goal, they do not serve the purpose for which the money is being send out in the first place. For it to work as stimulus, the money must be spent. On new consumption. And quickly.

So I would suggest payments in the form of debit cards, with some additional twists:

* the debit cards should expire in a short time... say, 60 days. That way the stimulus happens when needed; and any money not spent within that time would automatically return to the government's coffers, unspent and available for future programs, debt reduction, whatever. There is no stimulus benefit in giving this money away to people who are not going to spend it right away.

* the debit card should have higher value when paid with a physical swipe through a card reader. For example, a $50 debit card purchase might only reduce the card's balance by $25 if physically swiped (essentially turning, say, a $100 debit card into a $200 debit card, if all of its purchases were made through card readers). This would encourage people to spend their stimulus funds locally, to help increase the ability of the stimulus to help all communities and help people where they live. After all, local economies are not helped when stimulus money is spent at amazon.com.