Trying to understand the Coronavirus while living through it
Since our last post, the world has changed markedly around us. We’re writing this post over a video call, while quarantined in our apartments only a few miles from each other in Brooklyn. We’ve both been working from home for weeks, either haven’t left the house at all, or have only left to go to the grocery epicenter of the virus in the United States, which now has the most confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the world.
It seems only appropriate to talk about this virus. It’s basically been the sole topic of conversation among family, friends, and coworkers. Our conversation will touch on a few areas. We have no real expertise to share on this topic — medical, public health, or otherwise — we’re just two people trying to discuss a world-changing event in real time.
Samarth: Jay, right before we got started, you were telling me about people you’ve been talking to who have had a very difficult time in quarantine. How has quarantine been for you and what do you think are the contours of who can do ok in quarantine and who cannot?
Jay: As a state employee, I’ve been asked to take phone calls for the state hotline that was set up to hear complaints against employers who aren’t abiding by the executive orders on social distancing and quarantines. And every caller has been in a desperate situation, forced to go into work, or see their loved ones go into work, in a workplace where they aren’t protected: no social distancing, no masks, and no notice of co-workers who test positive for the virus. These people are scared and powerless. They know they are at risk but can’t give up the paycheck from a job that is forcing them to choose between their health and their safety.
And fortunately for me, their situations are very different from my own. I have rock solid job security, an apartment where I can comfortably work from home, and even a private outdoor area where I can get some fresh air without going out in public. And I imagine there are a lot of people with great situations like mine, and a lot of people with bad situations like the ones who call into the state hotline.
Samarth: the social inequality that was always present around work, home-life, medical care, child-care, and so many other facets of our lives has really come into stark relief during this crisis. When my partner and I take walks late at night around our neighborhood, to get some fresh air ourselves, the only people I see on the streets are delivery bikers.
Mapping the experience of Americans dealing with this crisis onto the usually discussed points of inequality, like wealth, healthcare, job security, etc, feels almost obvious. But I wonder if there are novel ways in which inequality is showing up during this crisis.
Jay: This crisis seems to be exposing a complex kind of inequality. Instead of simply rich versus poor, we see more complex disparities, like white collar workers who can easily work from home compared to blue collar workers who can’t; people with stable work in government or large corporations compared to gig workers or workers in highly elastic industries, like food service and construction; families with young and old dependents compared to untethered adults in singles or couples.
And in a lot of ways, these disparities between people who are well-placed to deal with the quarantine and isolation measures and people who aren’t reflect the populist tensions that have characterized our national politics recently: in Peggy Noonan’s words, the difference between the “protected” and the “unprotected.”
Samarth: I agree. The ways in which this crisis will shape and reshape political battlegrounds seems totally unknowable at this point. I keep forgetting and re-remembering that we’re still in a presidential election year. It feels like a lifetime ago that we were talking about the Iowa Caucuses and the relative advantages of Joe Biden vs Bernie Sanders. It’s been interesting to see Andrew Cuomo’s star rise on the national stage as the manager of this crisis in NY, but how this all plays out around the country, who knows.
There’s another disparity, speaking of which. The difference between urban population centers like New York City vs rural areas with less population density.
Jay: Politically, rural people might have longstanding grievances against urban coalitions (Trump v. Clinton in 2016 is an example of those trends). And it might be too early to predict how this will turn out, but it’s interesting that most of the public health policies are taken directly from the recommendations of epidemiologists and public health experts, whose perspective is more likely to reflect urban concerns. If rural people come out of this crisis feeling like they took an unfair hit, compared to city-dwellers, we could see even more virulent populism from the “unprotected,” of the sort that elevated Donald Trump to the presidency.
Samarth: to me, it makes sense that public health officials are trying to solve this problem with an urban perspective. That’s where the disease is spreading the most. That’s where hospitals are overwhelmed. But I also see how the actions we’re taking as a country, ostensibly to protect everyone, but maybe protect particularly vulnerable populations in dense areas, end up having repercussions far beyond those areas. Slowing down the economy in NYC, Washington DC and Chicago has implications far beyond those cities.
Jay: And I agree that an urban focus makes sense, and I don’t want to criticize public health officials for their decision making during a time of uncertainty. But it is interesting that political leaders have virtually handed over policy making to the experts. No political leader was interested in advocating a course different from that recommended by the public health experts. And that means that the strategy we have pursued all over the world has been 100% focused on epidemiological concerns, without any balancing of other concerns, whether those are economic or social. The expertise needed to combat an epidemic isn’t necessarily identical to the political leadership needed to govern a society faced with an epidemic, but our political leaders don’t seem to see a difference.
Samarth: maybe this is, ultimately, an indictment of all our political leaders. Very few people are competent communicators. Very few are good deal makers. Few seem adept at walking the public through the complicated but necessary trade-offs we’re facing as a nation. We seem to have elected people who are very good at running for office but not that good at being in office. Especially during emergencies. All the International coverage of how the crisis has been dealt with in places like South Korea leaves me really yearning for competent leadership.
Jay: I’m not sure I’m yearning for Southeast Asian-style government, but I definitely get your point on a lack of competent leadership.
Samarth: speaking of the International nature of this crisis, another inevitable and era-defining change that I expect to see is how this crisis will reshape Globalization. Brexit, populist and nativist governments coming into power in the West, and the role of China were already reshaping our global relations. But this crisis is likely to expedite huge changes in US-China relations, the movement of people and goods, manufacturing and supply flows and the overconfidence in a post-manufacturing, financial economic system.
Jay: These changes are going to be most noticeable in our debates about economic production and equality, and global supply chains. For example, discussions about health care policy have recently focused on equitable access to health care — Obamacare ensured that everyone would have access to financial instruments that were intended to flatten the curve of individual health expenses. And that was the goal of public health policy all over the West: by focusing on costs and coverage, countries like Italy or the U.K. were perceived as having excellent national health care systems. This crisis has brought health care production back into the conversation. It doesn’t matter whether health care is equitable, right now, when there aren’t enough ventilators and masks. So while our healthcare debates previously focused on status and on equitable distribution of healthcare costs, our future debates will also need to consider production, productive capacity in a crisis, and innovation. The crisis has exposed a blindspot, and correcting it will require some big changes.
Samarth: related to production, manufacturing and global supply chains is the role of China. China has played a complicated trade partner for us for the last few decades. Even before this crisis arrived on our shores, it hobbled China’s economy for months, which immediately had repercussions around the world. Moving forward, countries will probably want to hedge against the centrality of China. The US and others will likely want to diminish their reliance on China and work on diversifying their supply chains and manufacturing capabilities.
An already complicated relationship with China is likely to get even more complex. And lest we forget, China is also the home of where the virus originated.
In fact, that’s a complicated enough question that we should probably save it for another post. In the meantime, I hope you hang in there and survive whatever next phase this crisis moves into.
Jay: and we also want to discuss the contours of post-Coronavirus life, but that can wait too. The peak of the virus is projected for two weeks from now…
