"The rush to restart economies can only end in one of three ways."
"The rush to restart economies can only end in one of three ways."
Steps toward economy-restarting have now been taken by the Western and Northeast Asian countries that were hit hardest by the coronavirus pandemic. The first to ease up on the COVID-19-related economic and social restrictions were Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, the Scandinavian countries and Germany. These countries were followed by Italy, Spain and France. The latest hard-hit country to join the restriction-easing parade has been the US, with Connecticut as the last of the 48 mainland states to ease up on its COVID-19-related regulations.
The economy-restarting step has been total in two or three instances, but in the rest of the cases it has been gradual in character, with a number of easing measures followed by others over a set period. The combination of measures has varied from country to country and from one US state to another US state. Decisions to install a second or third set of easing measures have been made on the basis of the experience with the prior set of measures; if the number of deaths has risen, if the number of new infection cases and/or the number of deaths have risen, the introduction of a fresh set of easing measures has been deferred. Thus far, there has been no instance of a lockdown being fully reimposed.
This multi-country movement toward economic restoration has come in the midst of a raging debate between politicians and health scientists that has come to be known as the health-versus-wealth (or lives-versus-livelihoods) debate. The debate has essentially revolved around the idea of prematureness. The health scientists believed then, and believe now, that, with the still-high numbers of infections and deaths, it was premature to take the foot off the pedal and ease the restrictions. They fear the occurrence of a second wave of infections later this year, which would negate the sacrifices made by the citizenries thus far and could be worse than the first wave.
The politicians, with political survival uppermost in their minds, have had other ideas. This has been politically true of those politicians who, like the US’s Donald Trump, are facing re-election in 2020. For them, wealth comes before health and livelihoods come before lives.
So far, the premature economy-restarting moves have yielded mixed results. Some countries and states have seen a spike in infections and deaths; others have seen no adverse results to date. But most of the health scientists remain fearful that a second wave of infections and deaths will come, probably as early as the closing months of this year.
The rush to restart economies can only end in one of three ways. The rush to reopen designated sectors of an economy – including sensitive sectors like personnel services and entertainment – could prove to be successful, with no significant increases in the numbers for infections and deaths. This outcome is much to be hoped – nay, prayed – for.
Or there could be a very significant, but not overwhelming, rise in the number of people infected by the coronavirus and the number of people dying therefrom; this is what has begun to happen in a handful of US states.
The third possible outcome of the premature restarting of economies is too terrible to contemplate: a full-blown second wave of COVID-19 infections, with an accompanying rise in mortality rates. One can only pray that this outcome will not come to pass and that, contrarily, the headlong rush to restore economic activity in the coronavirus-hit countries and states will prove to be successful wealth-over-health gambles.
The health scientists fervently desire such a felicitous outcome, but their knowledge and experience have filled them with a sense of negative foreboding.
