There’s a better response to this virus
Ever tried to pull a screw out of the wall with a hammer? It will come out, but not before tearing up the drywall. If all you have is a hammer and you treat everything like a nail, anticipate damage. Speaking of blunt instruments, state and local government stay-at-home orders may be helping to flatten the curve of infection rates from COVID-19, but they are rending people’s lives, their livelihoods, and their future.
Anyone who questions the scope of stay-at-home orders is accused of not caring. Fortunately, nearly three decades of volunteer work with hospice, refugees, the blind, poor women and children, the elderly, and other vulnerable people renders such accusations laughable in my case. I also have no personal agenda; I’ve complied with the orders, I work primarily from home, and with my hobbies, I could happily stay at home for months. So I can ask the hard questions: Are these broad stay-at-home orders justified or could they be more narrowly tailored to minimize unintended consequences?
Let’s face it, closing businesses is devastating the economy. New unemployment claims during the week of March 21 beat the state’s single-week record set during the Great Recession in 2010 and the unemployment rate is likely to double over the next three weeks. It’s not surprising that Colorado business leaders reported the lowest level of optimism in 17 years on a recent University of Colorado Leeds School of Business survey.
The worst is yet to come. According to University of Chicago professor of economics Casey Mulligan, “Without any improvement in our techniques for fighting the war , the sacrifices by households and businesses will be staggering and historically unprecedented.” His research projects an annualized growth rate in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of negative 50% in the second quarter of 2020 if nonessential businesses remain closed. “GDP losses,” writes Mulligan, “while massive, nonetheless understate the true costs of the sacrifices that households and businesses are making, which I estimate to total almost $10,000 per household per quarter.”
Unemployment, GDP, and income statistics understate the full impact of broad stay-at-home mandates. People will lose homes, businesses, and retirement savings. Suicide rates may go up. So may divorce and bankruptcy rates. What about domestic violence? The City of Aurora has experienced a recent uptick in domestic violence reports. No work, no paycheck, and nowhere to go except the liquor store could make a bad situation worse.
The government and the press have focused on the cost of not doing enough to stop the contagion. The impact of doing too much should be at least as much a concern.
Emptying movie theaters, classrooms, and church services where people sit in close proximity make sense. Shuttering spas, tattoo parlors, and salons, limiting elective surgeries, and discouraging other
direct person-to-person contact are prudent steps. However, state and local stay-at-home orders covering other so-called nonessential businesses are less justifiable.
For example, a shopper in a small marijuana store is likely to be in closer proximity to other people than a shopper in a large craft store. Since recreational drugs are deemed “essential” and recreational crafts are not, the craft store must close or risk a citation while the pot shop stays open.
Pet stores are considered essential even though most pet goods are available at Walmart and online. Why are they open while garden centers are not? A person at a gun or liquor store is more likely to pass within 6 feet of another customer than a person at a large department store.
Guns, hamsters, and beer are deemed essential; clothing is not. Department stores are closed and their employees are without jobs.
Perhaps a less arbitrary measure of risk would be personsper-square-foot not whether goods sold are deemed “essential.” Retailers, restaurants, and offices could put into place policies to accommodate limited numbers of people. The risk of contagion will increase some but the risk of significant financial hardship, particularly among those who can least afford it, will decrease. There has got to be a better way to slow the spread of COVID-19. We need something other than a hammer.