NEWS AND OPINION
The Trump administration has called nursing homes “ground zero for Covid-19,” and the analogy is apt—one New York City facility has seen 98 residents die from the disease, while more than two-thirds of Massachusetts nursing homes have reported infections. Though the link to long-term care facilities from deaths after hospitalization is not always recorded, 19 percent of those dying from the virus in Hungary, 51 percent in France, and 62 percent of those in Canada were identified as nursing-home residents.
The population in nursing facilities is vulnerable, and the disease is easily transmitted through extensive personal care in crowded quarters from staff who travel back and forth from the wider community. Several innovative senior homes have secured their facilities by paying bonuses to staff to stay on-site during the most hazardous phase of the crisis. Many lives could be saved if Congress were to support expanding these efforts. Indeed, preventing nursing homes from acting as super-spreaders might help broader communities more swiftly return to normal, too.
The fight that is beginning over whether to cut the payroll tax is much more than an economic or political issue.
The stunning rise in unemployment has made it dramatically clear that more stimulus will be needed if America is to get out of this virus-induced depression (it is much deeper and more painful than a recession).
The money is going to be spent. The question is: How will it be spent – and what kind of America will it help create?
The elite-level consensus has been for some time now that the solution to all things COVID-19 is testing. The fancy group of talking heads who make the rounds daily on cable news certainly seems convinced more testing would have avoided the scale of the current crisis and that more testing will allow a safe exit from the current lockdown that has 30 million Americans unemployed.
Surprisingly little attention seems to have been paid to some practical matters related to trying to test tens of millions of Americans. Many are laser focused on creating an infrastructure to do testing, but have spent little time on discussing obstacles that relate to the current capability of the available tests.
Attorneys general for 18 states have signed a letter asking bipartisan leaders in both the House and Senate to open hearings into China's role in the spread of the coronavirus, accusing the nation of "layers of deceit" in a coverup of the severity of the virus while it "wreaked havoc" in the U.S.
The letter, dated May 9, was led by South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson, who said that to get to the bottom of the truth "we can't rely solely on media to do the investigation. We have got to have truly, we have got to have congressional oversight. We have got to go deep into an investigation using the reaches of the federal government."
"Congressional hearings are critical to our nation's understanding of the origins of COVID-19 and efforts by the communist Chinese government to deceive the international community," the letter read.
The U.S. is continuing its gradual reopening this week, with more than a dozen states easing strict lockdown measures that shuttered businesses and brought the daily lives of millions of Americans to a halt for more than a month as part of a critical tradeoff to slow the spread of the coronavirus.
States across the country believe they have “flattened the curve” of infections enough to phase in their economies under new health guidelines and restrictions to protect citizens from the COVID-19 virus.
The U.S. on Sunday recorded 731 virus-related fatalities -- its lowest daily number of deaths since March 29 and the first time under 1,000 deaths were reported in 42 days. As of Monday morning, there were more than 1.3 million confirmed cases of COVID-19 and more than 79,000 deaths in the U.S.
Since the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic, which went into effect on March 16th, people over the age of 65 were urged to stay at home.
Health authorities said that seniors, and especially those within this age group who have pre-existing health conditions, are most at risk from Covid-19 complications.
But during the press conference on May 8th, Health Minister Alain Berset acknowledged that the diminishing rates of Covid-19 infections throughout the country now allow more flexibility to be granted to older people.
Third, the government should stop hurting entrepreneurs by trying to help them. In the last 20 years, federal, state and local agencies have devoted millions to encouraging startups. Unfortunately, by subsidizing college programs that teach would-be entrepreneurs whacky academic theories, supporting ineffective local business incubators and creating publicly backed venture funds, they have created a culture of government dependency.
The result: From 1996 to 2006, the number of high-potential startups, adjusted for population growth, has fallen by roughly 40 percent.
Some politicians and pundits have set up a dichotomy: Either lock down the economy and prevent deaths from coronavirus, or loosen restrictions and prevent economic devastation and all the downstream consequences. This is false.
As an emergency physician working in an urban, low-income neighborhood of Philadelphia, I have treated several patients who lost jobs due to the coronavirus outbreak. For example, I treated a young cook who came in with palpitations and overwhelming anxiety not knowing how he will pay his rent, and a middle-age janitor who ran out of money to buy alcohol and came in by ambulance shaking in withdrawal, tearfully ashamed of his situation.
While the angry protesters carrying rifles in the news photos do not look like my patients, they have cause for being upset. The April unemployment rate shot up to 14.7% on Friday with 20.5 million jobs lost, wiping out the equivalent of every job gained over the past decade. While most are temporary layoffs, 42% may be permanent.
Job loss could increase deaths
Furthermore, as a researcher who works on preventing deaths from substance use and trauma, I am concerned about the effect this widespread income loss will have on these outcomes. Historically, in counties where factories permanently shut down, there are approximately nine additional deaths due to opioid overdoses per 100,000 residents.
It is estimated that individual-level poverty is associated with over 133,000 deaths per year in the United States. More job loss will lead to loss of health insurance and contribute to worsening of these numbers.
So, do we really have to pick our poison — to choose between saving lives from coronavirus and ruining the economy, or opening the economy and losing more lives to coronavirus? The answer is no.
First, history tells us that U.S. cities that were more aggressive with public health measures to get the 1918 flu pandemic under control grew faster economically after the pandemic was over and had fewer deaths. Today, check out South Korea: Despite being China’s neighbor, it has had only 256 deaths and has begun reopening its economy after aggressive testing, tracing and isolation of cases.
Second, reopening retail businesses only addresses the supply of services. For robust sales to occur, there will also need to be robust demand. Polls show that given current risks, most Americans are not ready to resume normal activities, even if restrictions are lifted. Reducing the risk of coronavirus is vital for stimulating shopping, dining, leisure and travel.
Those with fewest choices:On coronavirus, we know who will pay the price when states reopen before they should
Why the stock market rally is actually signaling an ‘abnormal’ economic recovery, not a V-shaped coronavirus rebound
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-the-stock-markets-stay-at-home-rally-isnt-really-signaling-a-v-shaped-coronavirus-recovery-2020-05-11?mod=home-page
It’s “abnormal” because the sectors that usually lead the stock market out of a recession-induced downturn aren’t doing so. Instead, leadership has come largely from big tech stocks and pharmaceuticals rather than financials and cyclical sectors that closely track the ups and downs of the economy, such as industrials and consumer discretionary stocks.
The S&P 500 SPX, +0.01% plunged nearly 34% from a Feb. 19 record close to its March 23 low. The subsequent rebound left the large-cap index just 13.5% below its all-time closing high. Stocks saw a mixed finish on Monday, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average DJIA, -0.44% finishing with a loss of around 109 points, or 0.4%, while the S&P 500 eked out a fractional gain.
The tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite COMP, +0.77% extended its win streak to six sessions, leaving it less than 7% away from its all-time closing high.
How to Ensure the Economic Downturn Doesn’t Exacerbate Florida’s Housing Crisis
https://reason.org/commentary/how-to-ensure-the-economic-downturn-doesnt-exacerbate-floridas-housing-crisis/
While the number of Florida households increased by nearly 120,000 each year between 2010 and 2018, the housing stock increased by an annual average of 88,665 units—just under 60,000 of which were single-family homes.
Extensive permitting processes lead to delays and increased uncertainty for homebuilders. Permitting delays can be costly because builders often use loans to buy land and building materials, and the payments on those loans need to be made regardless of whether construction is occurring. Those added costs are passed on to buyers in the form of higher home prices.
A recent study published by the James Madison Institute found that the combined effect of land-use regulations and permitting delays were regressive. In other words, regulatory costs were similar regardless of a home’s size but made up a disproportionate percentage of the sales price of smaller homes. If lower-income households tend to purchase smaller, less expensive homes, the costs of regulation and permitting delays would impact them more than wealthy households.
Amid the current crisis, some commenters are suggesting that strict zoning may be desirable as a public health initiative. Residents of lower density, single-family neighborhoods can presumably more easily engage in social distancing, but the relationship between density and the spread of coronavirus is somewhat tenuous. While New York City may be the epicenter of America’s COVID-19 cases, similarly dense cities around the world such as Singapore and Seoul were able to contain the spread by implementing more effective policy responses. A short-term shock like a once-in-a-lifetime global pandemic should not outweigh the long-term economic benefits of higher density development, not to mention the measurable health benefits associated with higher density development during normal times.
