Helicopter Money: There IS such a thing as a free lunch

First of all, read this article as background information:  Why Helicopter Money is a "Free Lunch".  I just browsed through it fairly quickly and need to read it again in depth.

But try to suspend logical thinking for a minute and follow this thought experiment:  What if the U.S. government issued non-interest bearing perpetual bonds, let's say in denominations of $1,000?  They would be in effect be $1,000 bills, but issued by the government, not the Fed, and they wouldn't be anonymous like cash is.  And then the Fed would offer to buy them at face to maintain their value.  (This transaction would be an increase in the Fed's assets - U.S. debt, and a corresponding increase in its liabilities). And then with the newly created wealth, do something useful to close the "output gap", which is described as:

"Fiat money can then be used at no cost to the consolidated public sector balance sheet as a way to mobilize unemployed or underemployed real resources and to accelerate price and wage dynamics in heavily indebted economies suffering from large output gaps and price deflation. HM is a “free lunch” in the simple sense that, if it works and succeeds in closing the output gap, people won’t have to repay it through higher taxes or undesired (above optimal) inflation."

Voila!  Free lunch.  You just created money out of nothing that does not require interest payments or higher taxes or inflation.

Now, second thought experiment:  What if the Fed created a bunch (say a trillion dollar's worth) of $1,000 bills, similar to above, but with the requirement that every transfer of them be recorded on a special website, to keep the money launderers and drug cartels from using them?  And suppose the U.S. government guaranteed them (without interest), and this was added to the national debt (to keep everything balanced).  I'm sure it would require an Act of Congress to do.  Wouldn't this be the equivalent of the previous thought experiment?  And wouldn't it be the equivalent of fiscal policy, except it wouldn't require interest payments?  Now, spend it on something "useful", and voila!

Ok, third thought experiment.  What if there was a special one-time tax credit, which would give a $10,000 voucher to every taxpayer (and $20,000 to married couples), and it could be spent only on paying down a pre-existing mortgage or on payment of an existing residential lease, and figure out something for homeless people to be fair.  The Housing Payment Assistance Act.  This would reduce the amount of mortgage debt outstanding.  Everyone would benefit.  What would the cost be?  Say 200 million taxpayers times $10,000 each totalling $2 trillion.

And fourth thought experiment.  Eliminate the interest on excess reserves paid to big banks.  Ok, it isn't that much, I previously estimated it at $12 billion per year, and I'm sure it means something to the banks, but bear with me.  Most of the excess reserves came from previous rounds of quantitative easing.  How does this differ from helicopter money, except the "helicopter drop" is normal government deficit spending?  So is "helicopter money" the equivalent of deficit spending?