This crisis is quite unlike an ordinary recession caused by a demand shock. There the response is to boost aggregate demand by fiscal and monetary policy. Ideally, though this is never achieved in practice, the policy is so well designed that we never see a decline in output and employment. But with the Covid-19 crisis a decline in GDP is inevitable since large parts of the economy are shut down either by high sickness rates amongst workers or by social distancing by consumers leading to closures of pubs restaurants, cinemas, theatres, etc. Since a hit to GDP is inevitable, the real issue is how to share the burden fairly and protect the vulnerable. It is also necessary to prevent unnecessary losses of GDP and employment in the rest of the economy, i.e. second round effects: Demand could fall in the rest of the economy if mass redundancies are allowed to occur in the most affected sectors. Given this analysis, the best response of those offered in the question is “”Making unemployment benefits more generous, etc”. But I hope it would be possible to do better than this. The government should in effect take on a large part of the employment costs of workers in the most affected sectors, on condition that workers are not made redundant but kept on the books. Bailouts of businesses may be needed too but should also come with strings. “Broad cash transfers and/or tax cuts” may have a role in preventing secondary effects but should not be the main focus, unless the first best policy is for some reason infeasible.