The Twa Corbies

I think this is true:

In the coming months and years, there will really be two pandemics in America. One will be disruptive and frightening to its victims, but thanks to their existing advantages and lucky near misses with the virus, they will likely emerge from it relatively stable—physically, psychologically, and financially. The other pandemic, though, will devastate those who survive it, leaving lasting scars and altering life courses.

I also think it is optimistic to imagine it will make any fundamental change to American society.  Mostly because it describes America before the pandemic.  Hell, it describes America before the Civil War, and the changes that war wrought didn't begin to become significant until the 1960's, and some of that significance (buh-bye, VRA.  The Roberts Court says you're a relic of a bygone era) has already been eliminated.

Stephen Moore, on and off Trump adviser who’s been advocating for ending the shutdowns, on the new jobless numbers: "The new unemployment numbers with more than 20 million Americans losing their jobs should be a five alarm wake up call for Washington and the nation's governors”

— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) April 16, 2020

Americans who want to “open this country” immediately vs. wait to see how #coronavirus progresses:

Cɪᴛʏ Rᴇsɪᴅᴇɴᴛs
• Now: 15%
• Wait: 75%

Sᴜʙᴜʀʙᴀɴ
• Now: 18%
• Wait: 73%

Rᴜʀᴀʟ
• Now: 23%
• Wait: 66%

Get out of your Twitter bubble.

👉🏻 https://t.co/HQhZ0EerPM https://t.co/XuiNF0cC0T

— Frank Luntz (@FrankLuntz) April 16, 2020

DR OZ: "Schools are a very appetizing opportunity. I just saw a nice piece in The Lancet arguing the opening of schools may only cost us 2 to 3%, in terms of total mortality. Any, you know, any life is a life lost, but ... that might be a tradeoff some folks would consider." 😳 pic.twitter.com/aifMeKTsIv

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 16, 2020

I read this morning of a study conducted a year ago, where the hypothetical was a pandemic with anthrax.  The result that stuck with me was that if there was a 0.01% chance of getting anthrax, would the participants in the study be willing to take that risk to return to "normal"?  The answer was:  "No." The author of the study pointed out that no amount of risk was acceptable to the participants in the study, a point he thinks carries over to the present crisis.  Of course, faced with the stark reality of unemployment v. health, what will people choose?  And what should we ask them to choose?

“They’re telling other old people, ‘Yeah, you’re going to have to die, get over it, we got to get Wall Street started again,'” he said. “But you’re not going to see them have family reunions in a barn in central Louisiana… they know they don’t want their family members to die. They’re going to stay cloistered behind the gates of their homes. They’re going to stay cloistered in the United States Senate.”

Not too many people are going to choose that, especially just to boost the stock portfolios of rich white men (stocks are at some point based on business production, not just speculation).  But shall we, like Dr. Oz, ask parents to put their children at risk so schools and day-care can open, and parents can go back to work?  Shall we ask them, and expect them to comply?

There's your "Two Americas."