Coronavirus as Stress Test

[NAOS]

Do you recall when the Fed ran a series of “stress tests” a handful of years after the 2008 collapse of the stock market? Essentially, they involved making sure the banking and insuring industries had enough liquidity and security to endure through economic shocks of a certain size. Let’s think about this Coronavirus event as a Stress Test—but in a broader, cultural sense.

“For the sake of public health, we’re in a place right now where we must embrace measures that we know will further damage the economy.”

Coronavirus has brought us the first instance of a mass acceptance of this logic. However hesitant and unwilling many of us might be, the weight of acceptance has shifted to this point—since without acceptance, we will be unable get our arms around the disease right now.

I would like to put forward the idea that we’ll do best in the long run if we see this as a turning point—a change in our orientation toward growth, the market, and wealth-creation—rather than some kind of disaster without precedent (one that cannot be filed into the annals of history and is instead left hanging out in outlier territory). Not only does it have a good likeness to a disease from just 100 years ago, but the politics of embracing harm to the market so that we might take better care of ourselves and our environment (there is no real dichotomy between self and environment, of course) will be key, featured movements in the future.

Coronavirus as a Stress Test. How are we doing?

 

[JazzGal]

I'm stressed.

Sent from my moto z3 using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[LogGrad98]

I'm stressed.

Sent from my moto z3 using JazzFanz mobile app

You passed!

 

[gandalfe]

I'm stressed.

I'm tested.

 

[LogGrad98]

So far I think we are doing pretty ******. The failure of any official organizations, i.e. government, to provide enough direction and information to stem the panic is disheartening at the least.

Industries like the airlines requesting huge bail outs is disappointing. Years of record profits and no planning, so apparently they can't weather the storm. I don't think our government should subsidize profits. Keeping a company afloat if they are in imminent danger of closing their doors and they are critical to our infrastructure is one thing, but handing out 50 billion to help them maintain double digits profits is something else entirely.

I think the biggest gap, again, is in communication and having a disaster plan for local, state, and the federal government. It feels like they are entirely making this up as they go. You would think that after having seen similar illnesses in the past, especially H1N1, we would have had some better contingencies in place. That part is very disappointing.

Overall I grade the response as a D so far.

 

[sahlensguy]

I think we're mostly fine so far.

This could get really bad very quickly. A lack of income combined with higher prices in the short term and increased national debt that will increase inflation in the long run could be crippling.

If Mexico shuts it's border (oh the irony) we are screwed. Food prices will skyrocket.

Good now though. It's Camp Corona at my place.

 

[NAOS]

So far I think we are doing pretty ******. The failure of any official organizations, i.e. government, to provide enough direction and information to stem the panic is disheartening at the least.

Industries like the airlines requesting huge bail outs is disappointing. Years of record profits and no planning, so apparently they can't weather the storm. I don't think our government should subsidize profits. Keeping a company afloat if they are in imminent danger of closing their doors and they are critical to our infrastructure is one thing, but handing out 50 billion to help them maintain double digits profits is something else entirely.

I think the biggest gap, again, is in communication and having a disaster plan for local, state, and the federal government. It feels like they are entirely making this up as they go. You would think that after having seen similar illnesses in the past, especially H1N1, we would have had some better contingencies in place. That part is very disappointing.

Overall I grade the response as a D so far.

How much do you think the fumbling around by the Trump administration is playing a factor in that D grade? There are all the issues of the test kits, of course—but after you weigh those issues, how much insecurity and panic is being produced by the inability to communicate accurate information?

I don’t mean to imply that Executive-level communication or miscommunication is the main driver of our economic problems at the moment. I think the truth is far from this. We’re seeing serious shocks to the supply-side of the global economic system, and these particular shocks can not be easily mended. But there’s still the question of the effect that leadership does have. What do you think?

 

[checkbookdoc]

I think Federal response has been disappointing so far (D), but state, local, and societal responses have been impressive (B+ or higher).
This has been a good test run for a pandemic that is highly contagion and lethal across mortality rates.

 

[LogGrad98]

How much do you think the fumbling around by the Trump administration is playing a factor in that D grade? There are all the issues of the test kits, of course—but after you weigh those issues, how much insecurity and panic is being produced by the inability to communicate accurate information?

I don’t mean to imply that Executive-level communication or miscommunication is the main driver of our economic problems at the moment. I think the truth is far from this. We’re seeing serious shocks to the supply-side of the global economic system, and these particular shocks can not be easily mended. But there’s still the question of the effect that leadership does have. What do you think?

Here's a good article on panic-buying with a section on how miscommunication affects this sort of thing. I agree with the part in bold as to how the administration's disjointed communication is affecting all this.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cn...anic-buying-and-stockpiling-toilet-paper.html

"It's about 'taking back control' in a world where you feel out of control," he said. "More generally, panic buying can be understood as playing to our three fundamental psychology needs."

Thse needs were autonomy, or a need for control, relatedness, which Marsden defined as "we shopping" rather than "me shopping," and competence, which is achieved when making a purchase gives people a sense that they are "smart shoppers."
'Fear contagion'
Meanwhile, Sander van der Linden, an assistant professor of social psychology at Cambridge University, said there were both generalized and coronavirus-specific factors at play.

"In the U.S., people are receiving conflicting messages from the CDC and the Trump administration," he said. "When one organization is saying it's urgent and another says it's under control, it makes people worry."

President Donald Trump downplayed the impact of the U.S. coronavirus outbreak on Twitter this week, with a disconnect reportedly widening between the administration and U.S. health authorities. The virus is now present in at least 35 states, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

More generally, a "fear contagion" phenomenon was taking hold, van der Linden added.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Borderline failure, but I'm considering a D-.

The demonstrable, naked malfeasance would be shocking in any other socio-political era. We had months of lead time and leadership actively sabotaged measures that would've dramatically slowed this down. We could've been reliably testing months ago and we're just now getting there. Maybe.