On May 17th, economics reporter Ranjan Roy of The Margins shared a story about a friend of his— a New York City pizzeria owner who realized a hole in DoorDash‘s business model and decided to take advantage of it.
The story went something like this… Roy’s friend runs AJ’s NY Pizzeria, a dine-in and take-out pizza joint in Manhattan. The restaurant does not do delivery, but the owner somehow started getting complaints about faulty orders coming to their houses. After some investigation, it became clear that the deliveries were carried out via DoorDash, an app that set up a delivery option right on the restaurant’s Google Listing without permission.
What was more conspicuous, however, was that DoorDash was charging $16 for pizzas that should have costed $24. At Roy’s suggestion, AJ’s owner decided to do a little experiment, ordering a large number of pizzas from his own store using DoorDash. Because of the app’s underpricing, AJ’s ended up turning a profit by doing this. Testing the app even further, the owner started ordering more pizzas from himself, but began filling the boxes with nothing but dough. DoorDash never caught on, and he flipped an easy $8 for every “pizza” that the delivery driver came to pick up.
Ultimately, AJ’s made a couple risk-free hundred bucks from this trial. Roy dubbed the story “Pizza Arbitrage,” a fun parable of a local business beating out the corporate middleman. Nevertheless, as Roy and other economics reporters have fleshed out, AJ’s DoosDash experiment demonstrates the immense flaws in the seemingly ubiquitous delivery app economy.
DoorDash’s underpricing of AJ’s pizzas was a mistake. However, its shortsightedness, exploitation, and wastefulness exhibited throughout the situation were not anomalous. First off, the fact that DoorDash unwarrantedly inserted itself into AJ’s Google Listing is business-as-usual for most apps of the kind. Even through AJ’s does not do delivery itself, DoorDash has made it look like a seamless part of the restaurant’s platform. Therefore, if DoorDash messes up on a delivery, it still ends up reflecting poorly on AJ’s from a consumer’s limited point of view.
The app operates similarly for restaurants that offer delivery as well, yet this creates even more damage, as DoorDash then takes away from that established aspect of the business. Suddenly, restaurants are not profiting off of their delivery service, facing a twisted internal competition as their own employees are cheated out of essential work and tips.
Then, even when things go according to plan for DoorDash, it rarely turn a sufficient profit for itself. In the longterm, these apps are hardly sustainable. DoorDash reportedly lost $450 million in 2019. Similar services like GrubHub, Uber Eats, and Postmates saw comparable losses, and a clear rebound is not on the horizon for any of them.
Phantom Toll Both or Actual Service Upgrade?
For all the damage these apps do by intervening with small businesses and rerouting the economy in unstable directions, the sad reality is that they are not even subsisting well enough for themselves. Mergers and buyouts seem like the only possibility for these companies to stay relevant in the future, but given their deplorable track records, it’s questionable whether even that is a good idea.
Essentially, these apps are only staying alive for the sake of competition rather than profit right now. Economics 101 will tell you that such is not a suitable business model in a capitalist system. In the end, economists reckon that the only winner amongst the delivery apps will be whatever service lasts the longest and beats out the others. At that point, though, it would probably just be easier—and more economical—for the delivery economy to go back to its fundamental roots, with in-house delivery rather than these intermediary apps.
DoorDash, UberEats, and other apps in this system are all vying to be the Amazon of their niche field. They are in a giant game of Monopoly, and everyone is losing. Another sad truth is that Amazon itself is overdue for an antitrust suit. Thus, these apps are fighting for a legally (not to mention ethically) dubious fantastical endgame. Even if a sole delivery service does survive this nonsensical competition, it may find out that its efforts were too exploitative to persist in a fair and equitable society all along.
The CDC currently recommends that you “wear the most protective mask you can that fits well and that you will wear consistently.” The question, then, is what type of mask offers the best protection for you – by filtering the air you breathe in – and for those around you – by filtering the air you breathe out?
The CDC’s updated guidelines clearly lay out the hierarchy of protection: “Loosely woven cloth products provide the least protection, layered finely woven products offer more protection, well-fitting disposable surgical masks and KN95s offer even more protection, and well-fitting NIOSH-approved respirators (including N95s) offer the highest level of protection.”
From a performance standpoint, the N95 and KN95 masks are the best option. While supply chain limitations led to the CDC recommending people not wear N95s early in the pandemic, today they are easily obtainable and should be your first choice if you want the most protection.
The biggest change in the new guidelines has to do with cloth masks. Previous guidance from the CDC had said that some cloth masks could offer acceptable levels of protection. The new guidance still acknowledges that cloth masks can offer a small amount of protection but places them at the very bottom of the bunch.
2. What’s the difference between N95, surgical and cloth mask materials?
The effectiveness of a mask – how much protection a mask provides the wearer – is a combination of two major elements. First, there’s the ability of the material to capture particles. The second factor is the fraction of inhaled or exhaled air leaking out from around the mask – essentially, how well a mask fits.
Most mask materials can be thought of as a tangled net of small fibers. Particles passing through a mask are stopped when they physically touch one of those fibers. N95s, KN95s and surgical masks are purpose-built to be effective at removing particles from air. Their fibers are typically made from melt-blown plastics, often polypropylene, and the strands are tiny – often less than four thousandths of an inch (10 micrometers) in diameter – or approximately one third the width of a human hair. These small fibers create a large amount of surface area within the mask for filtering and collecting particles. Although the specific construction and thickness of the materials used in N95, KN95 and surgical masks can vary, the filter media used are often quite similar.
These fibers are very tightly packed together so the gaps a particle must navigate through are very small. This results in a high probability that particles will end up touching and sticking to a fiber as they pass through a mask. These polypropylene materials also often have a static charge that can help attract and catch particles.
Cloth masks are typically made of common woven materials such as cotton or polyester. The fibers are often large and less densely packed together, meaning particles can easily pass through the material. Adding more layers can help, but stacking layers has a diminishing return and the performance of a cloth mask, even with multiple layers, will still typically not match that of surgical mask or N95.
3. How much does fit matter for masks?
Fit is the other major component in how effective a mask is. Even if the materials used in a mask were perfect and it removed all particles from the air that passed through it, a mask can offer protection only if it doesn’t leak.
When you breathe in and out, air will always take the path of least resistance. If there are any gaps between a mask and someone’s face, a substantial fraction of every breath will seep out through those gaps and the mask will provide relatively little protection.
Many cloth mask designs simply do not seal well. They are not stiff enough to push against the face, there are gaps where the mask doesn’t even come in contact with the face and it is not possible to cinch them tightly enough against the skin to form a decent seal.
But leaking is a concern for all masks. Although the materials used in surgical masks are quite effective, they often bunch and fold on the sides. These gaps provide an easy route for air and particles to leak out. Knotting and tucking surgical masks or wearing a cloth mask over a surgical mask can both significantly reduce leakage.
N95 masks aren’t immune to this problem either; if the nose clip isn’t securely pushed against your face, the mask is leaking. What makes N95s unique is that a specific requirement of the N95 certification process is making sure the masks can form a good seal.
4. What is different about omicron?
The mechanics of how masks function is likely no different for omicron than any other variant. The difference is that the omicron variant is more easily transmitted than previous variants. This high level of infectiousness makes wearing good-quality masks and wearing them correctly to limit the chances of catching or spreading the coronavirus that much more critical.
Unfortunately, the attributes that make for a good mask are the very things that make masks uncomfortable and not very stylish. If your cloth mask is comfy and light and feels like you are wearing nothing at all, it probably isn’t doing much to keep you and others safe from the coronavirus. The protection offered by a high-quality, well-fitting N95 or KN95 is the best. Surgical masks can be very effective at filtering out particles, but getting them to fit correctly can be tricky and makes the overall protection they will provide you questionable. If you have other options, cloth masks should be a last choice.
Originally published on The Conversation by Christian L’Orange and republished under a Creative Commons License
If we are failing to meet our commitments, it is because of a handful of the richest people on the planet refuse to pay their taxes.
2021 will perhaps be remembered as the year when the great powers demonstrated their inability to assume their responsibilities to prevent the world from sinking into the abyss. I am thinking of course of the 26th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP26) in Glasgow. After having used up the available atmospheric space to develop, the industrialized countries reaffirmed their refusal to honour this climate debt, even though global warming has become an existential issue.
And this is not all. I also refer to the calamitous management of the Covid-19 pandemic. Rich countries have monopolized and hoarded vaccines, and then locked themselves in surreal debates about third doses or the comparative merits of this or that vaccine. This strategy sows death and hinders economic recovery in vaccine-deprived countries, while making them fabulous playgrounds for the proliferation of more contagious, more deadly and more resistant variants that do not care about borders.
If we add the tax evasion of the ultra-rich using tax havens, we arrive at a total loss of US $483 billion.
Finally, I also want to talk about another agreement imposed by the Northern capitals, apparently more technical, but which symbolizes their selfishness and blindness: the one on the taxation of multinationals. Concluded in October, it is a gigantic undertaking, the first reform of the international tax system born in the 1920s, totally obsolete in a globalized economy. Thanks to its loopholes, multinationals cause States to lose some US $312 billion in tax revenue each year, according to the “State of Tax Justice in 2021” just published by the Tax Justice Network, the Global Alliance for Tax Justice and Public Services International.
If we add the tax evasion of the ultra-rich using tax havens, we arrive at a total loss of US $483 billion. This is enough, the report reminds us, to cover more than three times the cost of a complete vaccination programme against Covid-19 for the entire world population. In absolute terms, rich countries lose the most tax resources. But this loss of revenue weighs more heavily on the accounts of the less privileged: it represents 10% of the annual health budget in industrialized countries, compared to 48% in developing ones. And make no mistake, the people responsible for this plundering are not the tropical islands lined with palm trees. They are mostly in Europe, first and foremost in the United Kingdom, which, with its network of overseas territories and “Crown Dependencies”, is responsible for 39% of global losses.
In this context, the agreement signed in October is a missed opportunity. Rich countries, convinced that complying with the demands of their multinationals was the best way to serve the national interest, put themselves behind the adoption of a global minimum corporate tax of 15%. The objective, in theory, is to put an end to the devastating tax competition between countries. Multinationals would no longer have an interest in declaring their profits in tax havens, since they would have to pay the difference with the global minimum tax.
In reality, at 15%, the rate is so low that a reform aimed at forcing multinationals to pay their fair share of taxes risks having the opposite effect, by forcing developing countries, where tax levels are higher, to lower them to match the rest of the world, causing a further drop in their revenues. It is no coincidence that Ireland, the European tax haven par excellence, has graciously complied with this new regulation.
Taxation is the very expression of solidarity. In this case, the absence of solidarity. A global tax of 15% on the profits of multinationals will only generate US $150 billion, which, according to the distribution criteria adopted, will go, as a priority, to rich countries. If ambition had prevailed, with a rate of 21% for example, we would have obtained an increase in tax revenues of US $250 billion. With a rate of 25%, tax revenues would have jumped by US $500 billion, as recommended by ICRICT, the Independent Commission on the Reform of International Corporate Taxation, of which I am a member, along with economists such as Joseph Stiglitz, Thomas Piketty, Gabriel Zucman and Jayati Ghosh.
Making multinationals pay their fair share of taxes, fighting climate change, dealing with Covid-19 and future pandemics: in reality, everything is linked. While the virus is on the rise again with the arrival of winter in the northern hemisphere, the boomerang effect of the vaccine monopolies no longer needs to be shown or explained. As for the climate emergency, we know from a recent study by the World Inequality Lab that the map of carbon pollution is perfectly in line with that of economic disparities. The richest 10% of the world’s population emit nearly 48% of the world’s emissions—the richest 1% produce 17% of the total!—while the poorest half of the world’s population is responsible for only 12%.
This gap is obvious between countries, but also within them. In the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany and France, the emissions levels of the poorest half of the population are already approaching the per capita targets for 2030. If we are failing to meet our commitments, it is because of a handful of the richest people, the same people who do not pay their taxes. It is time for our elites to realize that fighting inequality on all fronts—health, climate and tax—is our only way out. Otherwise, there is no salvation for humanity—and it is no longer a hyperbole.
Originally published on Common Dreams by EVA JOLY and republished under under Creative Commons license (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)
The latest federal data, said Rep. Rashida Tlaib, should put “an end to the false myth that unemployment insurance benefits keep people from working.”
Republican lawmakers argued, and many of their Democratic counterparts accepted, that slashing federal jobless aid would lead to robust growth in employment. However, data released Friday shows that while eight million people were booted from expanded unemployment insurance programs last month, employers added just 194,000 jobs—the weakest monthly increase this year.
“194,000 jobs is equal to less than 3% of the people who were removed from the UI rolls in September.”
“I hope this puts an end to the false myth that UI benefits keep people from working,” said Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.). “They don’t.”
“We can’t build back better by adopting GOP talking points and putting them into policy,” she added. “This was the wrong call a month ago and it’s the wrong call today.”
According to the right-wing theory, the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) and Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation (PEUC) benefits introduced in the early stages of the coronavirus crisis were keeping people from taking jobs, so removing a key source of income from millions of people would force them to return to the labor market in droves.
This “starve people back to work” strategy, as Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) called the UI cuts, “did not work to say the least,” said policy analyst Matt Bruenig, founder of the People’s Policy Project, a left-wing think tank.
The September jobs report from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), Bruenig noted in a Friday blog post, showed “the worst month of job growth since [Joe] Biden became president and the second-worst since May of last year when the pandemic labor market recovery began.”
Citing the BLS data, Bruenig wrote that “194,000 jobs is equal to less than 3% of the people who were removed from the UI rolls in September. At this rate, it would take 3.5 years for jobs added to equal the number of people who lost their pandemic UI benefits.”
“The management of UI in the last six months,” he stressed, “has been a complete disaster.”
Last month’s nationwide assault on unemployed workers was preceded by state-level attacks on jobless benefits. Over the summer, 26 states—all but Louisiana led by Republican governors—prematurely ended federally expanded UI programs in a coercive bid to boost employment.
In a sign of things to come, the right-wing plan failed then as well. August job growth, Bruenig pointed out in an earlier blog post, was more than twice as fast in states that retained unemployment benefits.
Despite mounting evidence against cuts, the Democratic-controlled federal government refused to intervene to preservepandemic-era UI before it expired on September 6, although Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) recently unveiled a bill to extend the benefits until next February.
Echoing Bruenig and Tlaib, Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.) on Friday said that “back in June I led my colleagues sounding the alarm on Republican governors terminating unemployment aid early. We feared their cruelty would hurt job growth and sadly our fears were right.”
Back in June I led my colleagues sounding the alarm on republican governors terminating unemployment aid early. We feared their cruelty would hurt job growth and sadly our fears were right. https://t.co/VKR1qVjsVlpic.twitter.com/HOkgDNc2ah
The Economic Policy Institute (EPI) on Friday attributed September’s weak job growth to the impact of the ultra-contagious Delta variant and encouraged widespread vaccination to support economic recovery amid the ongoing pandemic.
Experts at the progressive think tank also urged policymakers to pursue changes that would permanently increase the bargaining power of workers.
“This is yet another sign that the strong wage growth we have seen in some industries this year is not a permanent shift in worker bargaining power, but a temporary result of the (very) unique circumstances of this recovery,” tweeted EPI president Heidi Shierholz. “For sustained strong job growth for working people, we need things like the PRO Act, minimum wage increases, etc.”
Originally published on Common Dreams by KENNY STANCIL and republished under a Creative Commons license (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
“Pfizer has used its monopoly on a lifesaving vaccine to extract concessions from desperate governments,” said the report’s author, urging action from the Biden administration.
Pfizer has used its position as a producer of one of the leading Covid-19 vaccines to “silence governments, throttle supply, shift risk, and maximize profits” through secret contracts with countries around the world, according to a Public Citizen report published Tuesday.
“The contracts consistently place Pfizer’s interests before public health imperatives.”
“Behind closed doors, Pfizer wields its power to extract a series of concerning concessions from governments,” report author Zain Rizvi, law and policy researcher at Public Citizen’s Access to Medicines program, said in a statement. “The global community cannot allow pharmaceutical corporations to keep calling the shots.”
The new report begins by noting February reporting about accusations of Pfizer—an American pharmaceutical giant that developed its mRNA vaccine with the German firm BioNTech—”bullying” Latin American governments during contract negotiations for doses.
Public Citizen obtained unredacted term sheets, drafts, or final agreements between Pfizer and Albania, Brazil, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, the European Commission, and Peru. The consumer rights advocacy group also examined redacted contracts with Chile, the U.S., and the U.K.
You can read our first story on Pfizer’s vaccine contracts in Latin America here. We found Pfizer had asked some countries to put up sovereign assets as a guarantee against the cost of any future legal cases. (Published February.)https://t.co/c0Y8qDIW4z
Based on those contracts, the report identifies six tactics Pfizer is using to serve the company rather than public health in the midst of a deadly pandemic:
1. Pfizer Reserves the Right to Silence Governments
The Brazilian government complained earlier this year that the company insisted on “unfair and abusive” terms but ultimately accepted a contract that “waived sovereign immunity; imposed no penalties on Pfizer for late deliveries; agreed to resolve disputes under a secret private arbitration under the laws of New York; and broadly indemnified Pfizer for civil claims.”
Brazil also agreed to a nondisclosure provision similar to those found in contracts with the European Commission and the U.S. government.
2. Pfizer Controls Donations
Again using Brazil as an example, the report points out that the South American nation must first get a go-ahead from Pfizer to accept donations or buy its vaccines from others. The country is also barred from “donating, distributing, exporting, or otherwise transporting the vaccine outside Brazil without Pfizer’s permission.”
3. Pfizer Secured an “IP Waiver” for Itself
Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla “has emerged as a strident defender of intellectual property in the pandemic,” the report says, noting his opposition to a proposal that members of the World Trade Organization who signed on to the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) waive IP protections for Covid-19 vaccines and treatments during the crisis.
“But, in several contracts, Pfizer seems to recognize the risk posed by intellectual property to vaccine development, manufacturing, and sale,” Public Citizen explains. “The contracts shift responsibility for any intellectual property infringement that Pfizer might commit to the government purchasers. As a result, under the contract, Pfizer can use anyone’s intellectual property it pleases—largely without consequence.”
4. Private Arbitrators, Not Public Courts, Decide Disputes in Secret
While the U.K. contract requires that disputes are settled by secret panel of three private arbitrators under the Rules of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce, the report says, “the Albania draft contract and Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Dominican Republic, and Peru agreements require the governments to go further, with contractual disputes subject to ICC arbitration applying New York law.”
5. Pfizer Can Go After State Assets
“Pfizer required Brazil, Chile, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, and Peru to waive sovereign immunity,” the report highlights, detailing that the doctrine can sometimes protect states from companies trying to enforce decisions reached by the previously noted secret arbitral panels. Some of the contracts enable the company to “request that courts use state assets as a guarantee that Pfizer will be paid an arbitral award and/or use the assets to compensate Pfizer if the government does not pay,” according to Public Citizen.
6. Pfizer Calls the Shots on Key Decisions
“What happens if there are vaccine supply shortages? In the Albania draft contract and the Brazil and Colombia agreement, Pfizer will decide adjustments to the delivery schedule based on principles the corporation will decide” the report notes, concluding that “under the vast majority of contracts, Pfizer’s interests come first.”
Public Citizen calls on world leaders, especially U.S. President Joe Biden, to “push back” against Pfizer’s negotiating tactics and “rein in” its monopoly power.
According to the group, the Biden administration can “call on Pfizer to renegotiate existing commitments and pursue a fairer approach in the future” as well as “further rectify the power imbalance by sharing the vaccine recipe, under the Defense Production Act, to allow multiple producers to expand vaccine supplies.”
The U.S. administration “can also work to rapidly secure a broad waiver of intellectual property rules,” the report adds, declaring that “a wartime response against the virus demands nothing less.”
In response to Public Citizen’s report, Sharon Castillo, a spokesperson for Pfizer, toldThe Washington Post that confidentiality clauses were “standard in commercial contracts” and “intended to help build trust between the parties, as well as protect the confidential commercial information exchanged during negotiations and included in final contracts.”
Castillo also said that “Pfizer has not interfered and has absolutely no intention of interfering with any country’s diplomatic, military, or culturally significant assets,” adding that “to suggest anything to the contrary is irresponsible and misleading.”
Meanwhile, Peter Maybarduk, director of Public Citizen’s Access to Medicines program, accused Pfizer of “taking advantage of countries’ desperation” with the far-reaching contracts.
“Most of us have sacrificed during the pandemic; staying distant to protect family and friends,” Maybarduk said Tuesday. “Pfizer went the other way, using its control of scarce vaccines to win special privileges, from people that have little choice.”
This article was originally published on Common Dreams by JESSICA CORBETT was republished under the Creative Commons license (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
Above: Collage by Lynxotic, Original Photo on Unsplash
Kurt Thigpen clenched his hands around the edge of the table because if he couldn’t feel the sharp edges digging into his palms, he would have to think about how hard his heart was beating. He was grateful that his mask hid his expression. He hoped that no one could see him sweat.
A woman approached the lectern in the center aisle, a thick American flag scarf looped around her neck.
“Do you realize the mask, the CDC said it’s only 2% effective?” she demanded. “You’re failing our children, you’re failing our country, you’re failing our students’ future ….”
Thigpen fixed his eyes on a spot in the back of the blue-and-green auditorium. He let the person speaking at the lectern fade. It will be over soon, he told himself.
A dark-haired woman in a red vest removed her face shield as she moved to take her turn at the mic. As she began to speak, the school board employee responsible for queuing up public commenters interrupted: “Ma’am, I’m gonna have to ask you to please keep your shield on —”
“No, you’re not the boss of me, you work for us, I can’t breathe with it on —”
“Ma’am —”
“Don’t you dare cut my microphone —”
The crowd cheered. Thigpen focused on his breathing.
It will end soon, he told himself. It must. His sweat turned cold under his suit.
“The science isn’t there, take the kids outta the masks and let’s move on.”
It was March 2021, Thigpen’s second month as a school board trustee in Washoe County, Nevada. He had planned his campaign around local issues like improving the district’s diversity and equity policies and fixing an intersection where 20 students had been injured in traffic.
Public comment periods at school board meetings felt endless. Parents’ angers — over masking, over politics, over the “LGBTQ agenda” — fed off each other.
“I came here to speak about your fascist propaganda and ideology …”
He concentrated on making it to the next break period. His thoughts had begun to turn toxic. Why am I not good enough? Why am I the one struggling? They would turn darker. I don’t want to be here anymore. If something happened to me today, that would be fine.
“We will work tirelessly to remove you if you don’t focus on what’s important ….”
When the eight-hour meeting finally ended, he would drive home and pull off the suit and rip off his shirt. He would only take care with his rainbow tie, resting it gently in the closet. It still hangs there today. He would close the door, lay down on his bed, and let himself cry.
The stories of cruel, seemingly irrational and sometimes-violent conflicts over coronavirus regulations have become lingering symptoms of the pandemic as it drags through its second year. Two men on a Mesa-to-Provo flight got into a cross-aisle fight after one refused to wear a mask. A Tennessee teenager asking his school board to impose a mask mandate in honor of his grandmother who died of COVID-19 got jeered by the crowd. A California parent angered by the requirement that his child wear a mask allegedly beat up a teacher so badly that the teacher had to go to the emergency room. An Arizona father showed up to an elementary school with zip ties, allegedly intending to make a “citizen’s arrest” over COVID-19 rules. A Missouri medical center has distributed panic buttons to about 400 employees after an increase in assaults on health care workers by people frustrated over coronavirus-induced visitation restrictions and long wait times.
Many of the altercations have begun over masking because, unlike your vaccination status, a mask is right there on your face. Depending on your point of view, the mask can symbolize an erosion of personal freedoms or a willingness to protect others, a society that accepts tyranny or one that embraces science. A person’s reaction to a mask — or the absence of one — can be driven by an entire network of beliefs and emotions that have little to do with the face covering itself.
“What the hell is happening?” said Rachel Patterson, who owns a hair salon in Huntsville, Alabama, and who has been screamed at, cussed out and walked out on for asking clients to don a mask. “Like, I feel like we are living on another planet. Like I don’t — I don’t recognize anyone anymore.”
On Julie Simanksi’s first day of teaching for the fall 2021 semester, she tried to get her students to wear masks using the only method she was allowed: an emotional appeal. Simanski teaches at Des Moines Area Community College in Iowa. By state university policy, she can’t instruct her students to wear masks. Almost none did.
Simanksi told her students about her 20-year-old daughter, Olivia, who has a neuromuscular condition and requires 24-hour care. She didn’t know how Olivia’s body would cope with the virus. She was scared.
That night she sent an all-class email. She attached a picture of Olivia, smiling to her gums in blue sunglasses.
“I cannot mandate you to wear a mask in my class,” she wrote. “However, for the sake of my daughter and potentially others, I will make a continual plea to wear one.”
Simanksi brought a box of paper masks and put them in the back of the room. Some students took them. In each of her two sections, she has a group of four or five students who will not put one on.
“I’m surprised and I’m disappointed and a little bit angry that they just didn’t have the compassion to wear a mask for 55 minutes,” she said.
People’s pandemic views aren’t just preferences. They’ve evolved to fundamental beliefs. And when that happens, social psychologists say, people are more likely to accept incivility to achieve what they want.
“When people feel that their attitudes reflect strong moral convictions, that gives them permission to dehumanize those who oppose them,” said Linda Skitka, a psychology professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago who’s researching ideological divides. “And it doesn’t take a lot for the shift into perceptions of good and evil. So if the other side is basically evil, it’s not a far stretch to say it’s OK to yell at them.”
Courtney, a 29-year-old office worker living in Virginia who has asked that her last name not be shared for fear that she might lose her job if she’s identified, sat up on a medical bed surrounded by portraits of expectant mothers and their babies. In one, a brown-haired woman smiled at her 32-week mark, hands cupping her round belly. In another, the woman’s 6-day-old baby lay swaddled in a blue-and-white quilt, eyes closed. Courtney had just listened to her unborn child’s heartbeat. It was Aug. 17, two months out from her due date, and she had never before gotten so far along in a pregnancy without a miscarriage.
Courtney said her doctor went through the standard questions about her physical condition. Then the doctor asked if Courtney was working from home. No, she said. She had to go in twice a week.
Courtney looked at the pictures of the happy mothers. She’d undergone fertility treatment and had two miscarriages in less than a year. Both times, she’d asked herself: Was it my fault?
She knew that, even though she’d been fully vaccinated since May, a severe breakthrough infection could mean a ventilator for her and premature birth or death for her baby. She walked out of the office with a doctor’s note: Either everyone had to wear a mask around her, or she needed to work from home.
She saved a copy of the note on her phone and brought it with her the next time she went to the office. She recalls that as she sat at her desk, a colleague she considered a friend walked through her open door and sat down across from her. The colleague had just returned from a weeklong vacation and hoped Courtney could catch her up on what she’d missed.
The woman wasn’t wearing a mask.
“I actually have this note,” Courtney recalls saying. She pulled it up on her phone and held it out. “Do you mind wearing a mask?”
Her colleague didn’t look at the phone. She didn’t need to mask, the woman said. She had antibodies.
Courtney tried again. She told her colleague she was worried about what the virus could do to her baby. Even if there was no damage, she said, they might have to take the baby after birth to isolate her.
Courtney said that her colleague looked at her across the desk and said: “I’m not worried about it.”
She sat across from Courtney unmasked for the next 30 minutes.
Two weeks later, Courtney’s doctor wrote her another, sterner note: “It is my professional opinion that due to the lack of support for CDC recommended mask wearing indoors, please allow Courtney to work from home for the remainder of her pregnancy.”
Courtney forwarded it to her boss. He replied that he would remind the colleague who had sat in her office unmasked to follow the policy. But she still had to come in to work. They needed staff consistency.
She is due within the month.
If it looks like we’ve forgotten each other’s humanity, it’s because we’ve evolved to do so.
Humans are tribal creatures, and our responses to the pandemic have been tribalized almost since the beginning: A Pew Research poll from June 2020 found support for masking divided along partisan lines. Almost a year after the Pew poll, Fox News host Tucker Carlson urged his supporters toconfront people wearing masks.
Because the mask has become so polarizing, the extreme reactions aren’t really about being asked to wear one for an hour. It’s about communicating what side you’re on.
David Chester, a psychology professor at Virginia Commonwealth University who studies aggression, puts it this way: If you see members of the opposing group as human like you, you’ve failed as a tribalist.
“It really makes adaptive sense to treat out-group members not like people, because then it’s much easier to hurt them and to act against them,” he said. “One central piece of intergroup conflict is a switch in viewing your enemies from full-blown humans to dehumanized entities that you do not ascribe all the things that you typically ascribe to a person. That makes conflict so much easier.”
Seeing someone else wear a mask in a grocery store becomes what Chester calls “a threatening proposition from an out-group member.” It triggers anger. And giving in to anger can feel good — especially after months of frustration.
In a viral incident from June 2020, a woman who has cancer was shopping in a Florida Pier 1 when she had a confrontation with another shopper, later identified as Debra Jo Hunter. The incident culminated in Hunter, maskless,coughing in the woman’s face. In a virtual sentencing hearing nine months later, as Jacksonville’s First Coast News reported, Hunter submitted 23 pages of threats that she and her family had received. Hog from hell. I hope your whole family gets COVID and suffers immensely, then dies. Kill yourself.
Hunter’s husband testified on her behalf. It had been a hard couple months leading up to the incident, he said. They’d had a house fire and lost most of their possessions. A family member had been in a boating accident.
No one from the family responded to requests for comment.
“It was like air being inflated into a balloon, and it finally got to the point where she couldn’t handle any more air,” Hunter’s husband testified. “And then she finally rubbed up against something and just popped.”
The paper was written sometime around the turn of the third century. The author was philosopher-slash-medical writer Claudius Galenus, known today as Galen.
Two millennia later, the fundamental idea holds true. It’s one of the main tools in modern-day cognitive behavioral therapy: Learn how to pull yourself back from getting swept away by strong feelings, and then evaluate the situation with your rational side.
“There’s a lot of research that says that if people think about injustice from a first-person perspective, they’re more likely to respond aggressively,” said Tracy Vaillancourt, a professor at the University of Ottawa specializing in children’s mental health and violence prevention. “If they think about injustice from a third-person perspective, they’re less likely to be aggressive. And it’s because, in a sense, now they pulled back and are able to take the perspective of both parties that are involved.”
On a societal scale, one of the fastest ways for two deeply entrenched, opposing groups to start seeing each other as fellow humans again is to give them something bigger to fight against together. It’s an “Independence Day” sort of scenario, Chester, the Virginia Commonwealth University professor, said: If aliens invaded, countries who hate each other in normal times would suddenly work together against an external threat.
But the external threat with the potential to unite a deeply polarized country, he said, should have been the pandemic. And it didn’t happen.
“I think fundamentally, it’s because we have different perceptions of this pandemic,” he said. “It’s really hard now that it’s so entrenched, that masks are viewed as this group symbol. It’s really hard to get people out of that.”
It’s possible that signals from authority figures — at least the ones you already trust — could sway individual behavior, Chester said. Then again, former President Donald Trump got booed at an August rally in Alabama after suggesting that his followers get vaccinated.
When Skitka, with the University of Illinois at Chicago, saw Trump get booed, she thought it might be too late for even political leaders to temper their constituents’ passions. “We’re still trying to figure out what will work,” she said.
Kurt Thigpen resigned from the Washoe County School District on May 24, citing medical reasons. Later, he wrote an op-ed explaining what he really meant. The anxiety and the panic that had been triggered by the school board meetings had mutated into passive suicidal ideation. Even when the board transitioned to virtual meetings, he could barely get out of bed and make himself presentable for Zoom. He wished he could stop existing. No job was worth that.
“I thought I had things handled,” he wrote, “but my coping skills were no match for the events of the last seven months.”
He had sought therapy and worked with a psychiatrist to find medication. He got diagnosed with ADHD. He learned new coping mechanisms.
The initial reaction was positive. People were angry on his behalf. They wished him well. They thanked him for his openness.
And then the op-ed was mentioned in anAssociated Press article on toxic school board meetings around the country. Thigpen had no idea until a friend on the city council texted him. His original op-ed got reshared on Facebook. The commenters rushed in.
“What a whiney person,” someone wrote.
“Where do these woke zombies come from?”
“I have a lot to say to this young fragile individual.”
“Perfect example of a PACB= Professional Adult Cry Baby”
“You have no idea how badly I wanted to stop reading that article, but he is such a trainwreck of an individual I couldn’t stop,” one woman posted. She added: “You know, upon re-reading my post, I apologize for being so cruel. Clearly this man is severely mentally disabled and belongs in an institution.”
No one, Thigpen said, has reached out to apologize.
When the iOS 15.1 update drops for the general public (likely soon as it’s already been seeded to beta testers since Monday) it will feature the ability to add your proof of vaccination status to the Health app and then create a vaccination ID card in Apple Wallet.
Many businesses, venues, restaurants, and more are requiring proof of vaccination for entry. For example California is the first state where proof of COVID vaccination or negative test for indoor events over 1,000 people.
The new feature in iOS 15.1 is made possible by the support Smart Health Cards which are valid for California, Louisiana, New York, Virginia, Hawaii, and some Maryland counties, as do Walmart, Sam’s Club, and CVS Health.
Above: ID in iPhone Wallet
Therefore, using this system you would be able to to look up their information in state databases, if you are in any of the states listed above, but if you were vaccinated through at Walmart or CVS it will also be feasible to add your information to the Health and Wallet.
Once you have gone to the web site for your state, for example in California it would be found at https://myvaccinerecord.cdph.ca.gov where you can type in personal information such as name and date of birth to get access to your records and status.
Though iOS 15 already has the ability to download the information to your Health app, and you can do this today, the last step, adding an ID to your wallet from the health app will not be possible until you have upgraded to iOS 15.1.
The record is locked to your name and can only be used by you. There will be a QR code that you will first download to your health app on the iPhone, then, once it is in the health app there will be a prompt to allow you to “add to wallet”. By clicking that link a vaccination ID car, with the QR code will be generated and added to your wallet.
iOS 15.1 is likely to be available under > General > software update in your phone’s Settings app within days. (Our guess is by Monday, September 27, 2021)
Tap the download link on your iPhone or iPod touch.
Tap Add to Health to add the record to the Health app.
A unique talent for choosing and presenting exactly the theme and subject of the moment, and for posterity
Above:Photo from ‘The Big Short’ courtesy of Paramount
Very few authors have the intense feeling for the “zeitgeist” that Michael has shown throughout his long career. The ability to capture the spirit of the times so well is also possibly the reason why so many of his books have been snapped up and made into successful films. Examples are “The Big Short” (Christian Bale), “Moneyball” (Brad Pitt), “The Blind Side” (Sandra Bullock), all three of these also received Best Picture Oscar nominations.
While perhaps not an author to be remembered as a high literary genius such as James Joyce or William Shakespeare, the body of work, as a chronicle of modern times seen through the lens of his minds eye is, nevertheless, substantive and engaging. While “The Big Short”, both the book and subsequent film, capture with amazing clarity a confusing period that has been in many ways glossed over, even willfully, by those that were partially responsible but never held to account.
Though it remains to be seen how the future will look back on the 2020 novel coronavirus era, “Premonition” has, once more, the same potential to become one, potentially definitive portrait, of the crisis and it’s emergence into a full blown worldwide pandemic.
Now, soon, “The Premonition” is set to be produced by Amy Pascal for Pascal Pictures, with Rachel O’Connor. Directors are slated to be Phil Lord and Chris Miller who are mostly known for lighter fare.
To make it easier a great selection of Michael Lewis’ books are featured front and center, below, along with descriptions, provided courtesy of the Bookshop (and the various publishers), and with some links for a variety of options of where to purchase.
Fortunately, we are still a nation of skeptics. Fortunately, there are those among us who study pandemics and are willing to look unflinchingly at worst-case scenarios. Michael Lewis’s taut and brilliant nonfiction thriller pits a band of medical visionaries against the wall of ignorance that was the official response of the Trump administration to the outbreak of COVID-19.
The characters you will meet in these pages are as fascinating as they are unexpected. A thirteen-year-old girl’s science project on transmission of an airborne pathogen develops into a very grown-up model of disease control.
A local public-health officer uses her worm’s-eye view to see what the CDC misses, and reveals great truths about American society.
A secret team of dissenting doctors, nicknamed the Wolverines, has everything necessary to fight the pandemic: brilliant backgrounds, world-class labs, prior experience with the pandemic scares of bird flu and swine flu…everything, that is, except official permission to implement their work.
Michael Lewis is not shy about calling these people heroes for their refusal to follow directives that they know to be based on misinformation and bad science. Even the internet, as crucial as it is to their exchange of ideas, poses a risk to them. They never know for sure who else might be listening in.
The real story of the crash began in bizarre feeder markets where the sun doesn’t shine and the SEC doesn’t dare, or bother, to tread: the bond and real estate derivative markets where geeks invent impenetrable securities to profit from the misery of lower- and middle-class Americans who can’t pay their debts.
The smart people who understood what was or might be happening were paralyzed by hope and fear; in any case, they weren’t talking.
Michael Lewis creates a fresh, character-driven narrative brimming with indignation and dark humor, a fitting sequel to his #1 bestseller Liar’s Poker.
Out of a handful of unlikely-really unlikely-heroes, Lewis fashions a story as compelling and unusual as any of his earlier bestsellers, proving yet again that he is the finest and funniest chronicler of our time.
Michael Lewis was fresh out of Princeton and the London School of Economics when he landed a job at Salomon Brothers, one of Wall Street’s premier investment firms.
During the next three years, Lewis rose from callow trainee to bond salesman, raking in millions for the firm and cashing in on a modern-day gold rush. Liar’s Poker is the culmination of those heady, frenzied years–a behind-the-scenes look at a unique and turbulent time in American business.
From the frat-boy camaraderie of the forty-first-floor trading room to the killer instinct that made ambitious young men gamble everything on a high-stakes game of bluffing and deception, here is Michael Lewis’s knowing and hilarious insider’s account of an unprecedented era of greed, gluttony, and outrageous fortune.
Moneyball is a quest for the secret of success in baseball.
In a narrative full of fabulous characters and brilliant excursions into the unexpected, Michael Lewis follows the low-budget Oakland A’s, visionary general manager Billy Beane, and the strange brotherhood of amateur baseball theorists. They are all in search of new baseball knowledge–insights that will give the little guy who is willing to discard old wisdom the edge over big money. Also made into a hit movie starring Brad Pitt, Moneyball is a book that exposes human nature, and how it can suddenly be overcome when unique perspectives lead to innovative choices.
When we first meet him, Michael Oher is one of thirteen children by a mother addicted to crack; he does not know his real name, his father, his birthday, or how to read or write.
He takes up football, and school, after a rich, white, Evangelical family plucks him from the streets. Then two great forces alter Oher: the family’s love and the evolution of professional football itself into a game where the quarterback must be protected at any cost.
Our protagonist becomes the priceless package of size, speed, and agility necessary to guard the quarterback’s greatest vulnerability, his blind side.
In Michael Lewis’s game-changing bestseller, a small group of Wall Street iconoclasts realize that the U.S. stock market has been rigged for the benefit of insiders.
They band together–some of them walking away from seven-figure salaries–to investigate, expose, and reform the insidious new ways that Wall Street generates profits. If you have any contact with the market, even a retirement account, this story is happening to you. Billions have been spent by Wall Street firms and stock exchanges to gain the advantage of a millisecond. “Is it a scam?” 60 Minutes correspondent Steve Kroft asks during his interview with the author, It’s bigger than a scam, Lewis says.
Lewis further explains how ordinary investors are affected and argues that high-frequency traders have created instability in the stock market — for everyone. A reoccurring metaphor Lewis uses in his book “Flash Boys” is one of “prey and predators.” According to Lewis, the prey is “anybody who’s actually an investor in the stock market.”
Michael Lewis’s brilliant narrative of the Trump administration’s botched presidential transition takes us into the engine rooms of a government under attack by its leaders through willful ignorance and greed.
The government manages a vast array of critical services that keep us safe and underpin our lives from ensuring the safety of our food and drugs and predicting extreme weather events to tracking and locating black market uranium before the terrorists do. The Fifth Risk masterfully and vividly unspools the consequences if the people given control over our government have no idea how it works.
Forty years ago, Israeli psychologists Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky wrote a series of breathtakingly original papers that invented the field of behavioral economics.
One of the greatest partnerships in the history of science, Kahneman and Tversky’s extraordinary friendship incited a revolution in Big Data studies, advanced evidence-based medicine, led to a new approach to government regulation, and made much of Michael Lewis’s own work possible. In The Undoing Project, Lewis shows how their Nobel Prize-winning theory of the mind altered our perception of reality.
New bill is a joke for those struggling, unhappy, viral memes abound
A second stimulus package has been in the works for months now, supposedly. The current version of the proposed stimulus bill, which would, if passed, be the second Covid-19 relief package since the start of the pandemic, is still under discussion.
However, if granted, it would contain only about half of the first round of cash assistance compared to the previous bill which had $1,200 individual payments. The new bill would provide a direct payment of only $600 to $700 per person for those that qualify.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez took to Twitter asking followers to respond to a poll which asked if the $600 would be enough, under the current dire circumstances, and the responses, well, are laughable
The congresswoman has been fighting to get more help to Americans overcome their financial difficulties that have only gotten worse during the first, and now second, waves of the pandemic. The options provided in the poll, as possible answers to the question “Is $600 for a second COVID check enough”, included: Yes, No, and Hell No. Hell no received a whopping 62% while a simple “No” got 32.8%. Apparently 94.8% are not happy with the sum.
The bill has yet to be finalized and representative Ocasio-Cortez made it clear to her followers that she was not in agreement with the proposed lower payment amount.
Democrats have continued to demand at least $1,200 for stimulus checks and restoring the $600 “increase” for unemployment benefits as well as continued rent and mortgage protections.
“PLEASE CALL YOUR MEMBER if you have any doubt whatsoever on what their stance is, And if you don’t want your member to vote for a $600 deal, you really need to tell them that. Don’t think ‘oh I voted for a Dem, we’ll be fine.’ No. If there’s an amount that’s too little, or any other red line that you want them to vote NO on, then you need to tell them that.”
Check out the memes that resulted from AOC’s poll, while they will not help if the $600 is approved, can definitely provide a bit of levity in the meantime!
…No surprise, yet another of the Trump clan has covid-19
Asymptomatic but in quarantine, one more of the anti-mask Trump crew has been added to the list of those that have tested positive for the Covid 19 virus. It’s unknown whether the public would have been informed by either Trump Jr. or the White House without the story from Bloomberg broken.
“Don tested positive at the start of the week and has been quarantining out at his cabin since the result, He’s been completely asymptomatic so far and is following all medically recommended COVID-19 guidelines.”
Spokesperson for Donald Trump Jr.
Recent news that pentagon officials and other have tested positive after several other members of the Trump family including Kimberly Guilfoyle, Trump Jr.’s girlfriend, were infected with the virus earlier this year. Trump Sr. was positive in October, first lady Melania Trump, and their son Barron had also tested positive for the disease and Guilfoyle was infected in August .
Also On Friday, a White House aide who is also Rudy Giuliani’s son Andrew Giuliani, put out a tweet that was also positive. In addition, an aide to aides toVP Mike Pence, including, Hannah McInnis, was also positive surrounding to the Bloomberg article. Other aides of the VP were previously infected, such as his press secretary and chief of staff. Pence himself has not yet announced any positive diagnosis.
It’s unknown whether the public would have been informed by either Trump Jr. or the White House without the story from Bloomberg broken. This is a developing story and will be updated as news breaks.
As follows, a list of various other Republican establishment figures that have tested positive as well;
Melania Trump (First Lady)
Ronna McDaniel (Republican National Committee chairwoman)
Hope Hicks (White House communications aide)
Kellyanne Conway (Former White House counselor)
Bill Stepien (Trump campaign manager)
John Jenkins (University of Notre Dame president)
Chris Christie (Former New Jersey Gov.)
Nick Luna (Director of Oval Office operations)
Karoline Leavitt (White house assistant press secretary)
Chad Gilmartin (White House press office staffer)
Kayleigh McEnany (White House press secretary)
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah)
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.)
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)
Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.
Above: Walmart shopp stocks up for quarantine. Photo Lynxotic
Similar to the Curfew in place during the initial surge in March, the curfew requires most non-essential work, movement and gatherings to stop between 10 p.m. and 5 a.m. This time around the 30 day oder will be in effect from Saturday, November 21st until Monday, December 21st.
Clearly after more than 1.3 Million deaths and a rising tide of confirmed cases reaching towards 12 million since the pandemic started, there is concern that a laissez fare approach, such as that championed by the Trump administration, could result in an outcome that borders on unthinkable.
“The virus is spreading at a pace we haven’t seen since the start of this pandemic and the next several days and weeks will be critical to stop the surge. We are sounding the alarm. It is crucial that we act to decrease transmission and slow hospitalizations before the death count surges. We’ve done it before and we must do it again.
—California Governor Gavin Newsom in a press release today
Regardless of the various competing studies that tout or play-down the effectiveness of wearing masks, social distancing and just plain staying home, not to mention the hope for a speedy vaccine to become available and disseminated, the so called “lock-down” is one of the few things that have sown to be effective worldwide in at lease limiting the acceleration of the spread of the deadly affliction.
While it is to be expected that various factions will create political backlash for Newsom and may even try to use this as a way to cast aspersions toward “democratic” cities, states and governments, ultimately most people do understand that, as inconvenient it may be to wear a mask and stay home during an imposed curfew or time restriction, having a loved one dying of covid-19, or succumbing to it yourself, is a far more inconvenient outcome.
Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.
Lincoln Project ad once again uses his own words to expose the criminal incompetence
A serious ad on a serious subject. Using clips from recent interviews it becomes shockingly clear that the “plan” that is Trump’s actual one, and has been all along, is to rely on a “herd mentality” (a freudian slip of murderous proportions) to kill off the weak and, eventually, leave those with biological resistance alive.
Known, by the real world, as “herd immunity” the idea is a much debated topic among medical and scientific researchers. Unknown as a solution one thing is known: many more than the 200k already dead will have to die before this mythical immunity will save those left alive.
After a tragicomical series of nonsense excuses and lame attempts at outlining a plan to combat the virus, Trump finally announces, with his odd and bizarre habit of admitting to crimes he is likely to be accused of, that his plan all along was to just let people die until the virus, eventually, fades away on its own.
Would you like to volunteer your family? Your parents or children? How about you yourself? Trump doesn’t care. He has a medical staff and the Secret Service protecting him 24/7. But they can’t protect him from your vote for Biden. That’s the real message here.
Wear A Mask: Paul Rudd as certified Young Person (Spoiler alert!)
Paul Rudd (the 51 year old actor and comedian), channeled his inner millennial to help engage with the youth in sending a crucial message that everyone, young and old need to do their part and wear a mask.
Doing his best, occasionally, hilarious impersonation of young people, Rudd can be heard using lingo like “beast”, “lit”, “bae”, and “homie” all in the name of public safety.
“So Cuomes asks me, he’s like, ‘Paul, you’ve got to help. What are you, like, 26?’ And I didn’t correct him. So, fam, let’s real-talk. Masks, they’re totally beast. So slide that into your DMs and Twitch it.”
Paul Rudd
A little comedic relief is necessary, but the end goal is to stress the importance that wearing a mask is going to help the end result – of eventually getting back to some semblance of a normal life. Perhaps it could be funnier – but the shift to getting “real” at the end is, apparently, the real point.
“We want to go to bars, we want to drink, hook up, do our TikToks. I get it. I’m not gonna preach at you like some celebrity. Ugh. This is a convo, where I talk, you shut up. Wear your mask.”
Rudd filmed the public service announcement as part of New York Governor Andrew Cuomo’s “Mask Up, America” campaign. This is the latest video from the campaign, which has also featured PSAs by Billy Crystal, Robert DeNiro, Morgan Freeman and many others.
Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.
Has Trump learned anything? Or was it all Intentional.
Sara Gideon, the Maine House speaker is taking a jab at both Donald Trump and Maine Republican Senator Susan Collins. In a video put out by her campaign akin to that of the Lincoln Project, who retweeted this video, the video clip shows how Trump admitted he knew the severity of the pandemic and intentionally misled and downplayed the American public.
Unfortunately, she never stood up or even wavered from her blind loyalty. Her anti-impeachment rubber-stamp was historically myopic and she is now a prime target for removal on November 3rd. She is, make no mistake, a Trump follower and in no-way a lone voice of dissent within her party.
Trump lies do matter, as hundreds of thousands of people have already lost their lives to the pandemic, and many of those deaths could have been prevented.
Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.
On September 5, 2020, the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health (CDPH) announced that the majority of Halloween activities will be restricted because of COVID-19. Many children, young and old, look forward to traditional celebrations of the holiday by going door to door to “trick or treat” for candy, however this year the pandemic has effectively canceled the holiday. The ban comes as preventative measures as maintaining social distance, minimizing contact with non-household members and avoiding confined spaces like doorways would be difficult to follow.
Throughout Los Angeles County, other annual Halloween events and attractions have already announced cancellation like that of Universal Studios and its very popular Halloween Horror Nights.
Update from Universal Studios Hollywood on HHN 2020.
According to the Post “L.A. County is still among the California counties with high rates of community transmission,” Los Angeles County Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer said. “Before we get into cooler weather and flu season, we need to significantly lower the number of new cases. This is the only path forward that allows us to get more students back to school and reopen more business sectors.”
What LA Country Residents Can and Cannot Do
According to the Health Guidance Release, the following Halloween related activities are “not permitted” due to risk of spreading coronavirus:
Door to door trick or treating is not allowed because it can be very difficult to maintain proper social distancing on porches and at front doors especially in neighborhoods that are popular with trick or treaters.
“Trunk or treating” events where children go from car to car instead of door to door to receive treats are also not allowed.
Gatherings or Parties with non-household members are not permitted even if they are conducted outdoors.
Carnivals, festivals, live entertainment, and haunted house attractions are not allowed.
The Department provided some safer (non-traditional) alternatives of what is “permitted” for the Halloween season – and it appears fairly grim:
Online parties/contests (e.g. costume or pumpkin carving)
Car parades that comply with public health guidance
Halloween movie nights at drive in theaters
Halloween themed meals at outdoor restaurants
Halloween themed art installations at an outdoor museum
Dressing up homes and yards with Halloween themed decorations.
Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.
Doctor Anthony Fauci has held the position of Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and the National Institute of Health (NIH) for nearly 50 years and most recently the lead expert in the Trump Administration’s White House Coronavirus Task Force. Dr. Fauci has, from the beginning, vocalized his predictions about COVID-19, warning the public of its seriousness and the urgent need to take precautions (social distancing and wearing a face covering). Recently, however, The White House has lobbed seemingly random criticisms against the doctor. For example, Trump, in an interview with Sean Hannity of Fox News, called Fauci a “nice man, but he’s made a lot of mistakes.” Also Peter Navarro, Trump’s Trade Advisor, in an op-ed in USA Today, wrote that Fauci “has been wrong about everything I have interacted with him on”. In a recent response Fauci called the attacks “bizarre”, and added that Peter Navarro was “in a world of his own”.
The Lincoln Project has put together a succinct and poignant look at this exchange in a new ad, released on July 15, 2020, contrasting the “American Hero” and “Natural Leader” with the abysmal conduct of the President during the coronavirus pandemic and crisis. (above)
So why would anyone attack and blame Fauci, who has served as a medical advisor for 6 different presidents? Perhaps, as shown in the video, while Fauci has been nothing but upfront and honest, Trump has failed America and repeatedly lied about the severity of the virus, confidently stating, the now obviously absurd opinion, that the virus will just “disappear one day like a miracle”.
In the text accompanying the clip on their web site, the group added:
“Dr. Fauci has served both Republican and Democratic administrations. He is a profoundly respected physician, whose work has improved the lives of millions of Americans,” said Reed Galen, co-founder of The Lincoln Project. He continued, “President Trump’s incompetence has cost 130,000 Americans their lives, sickened millions more and wrecked our economy
The Lincoln Project
The Lincoln Project is a super-PAC formed in 2019 by a group of Republicans that hold a singular mission: To defeat Donald Trump and Trumpism.
Conservative Republican Org a.k.a. RVAT’s new ad highlights the need for a Nov. 3rd Trump Loss
Another video has been released from Republican Voters Against Trump, who are more simply referred to as RVAT, a political initiative launched by Defending Democracy Together, with a view to safeguarding the 2020 presidential election against a Trump victory. The clip below shows how the president and in particular his adoring VP, Mike Pence, have uttered numerous falsehoods about the realities of the coronavirus, in stark comparison to the truth and facts, such as the increasing spread of the virus and how case numbers are rapidly rising.
The United States continues to report record high totals of daily new cases during the COVID-19 pandemic. Many states have had different approaches to reopening and face-covering restrictions, and those with more lenient restrictions have had major surges of new confirmed cases. As the new academic year is fast approaching, there are many school districts struggling to decide if they will be opening up normally or will start with online classes only.
Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.
Following up a spate of “worst ever” coronavirus decisions with yet another…
Earlier this month, President Donald Trump and Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos announced their ambitions to have all public schools open and operating by the fall for the start of the new academic year. This is a dicey decision, for most schools closed long before the start of summer break because of the coronavirus, transitioning to virtual leaning for the last few months of classes. Thus, reopening schools in autumn would only make sense if there was a significant decrease in COVID-19 cases over the summer.
Unfortunately, such is not the case, as the pandemic recently hit a second spike with increased numbers in several states throughout the country. Barring some miracle, it does not look like the coronavirus will be reasonably diminished by the regular first day of school. Still, Trump and DeVos are steadfast in their plan to reopen, even threatening to thin school budgets for districts that remain closed.
Understandably, the President and Secretary’s outlook has been criticized by many, most notably teachers, who are strangely left out of conversations about plans to reopen. Many state and local governments—the institutions who have the most direct say in how their schools should operate—also disagree with the federal government on this one, for it puts students, teachers, and faculty members at incredibly high risk.
Like all things COVID-19-related, though, the risk is not equally intense across the board. Although the public school system is often dubbed America’s great equalizer, history shows that such has never quite been the case. Socio-economic imbalances, racial inequities, language-barriers, and additional differences between districts proves that not every student has the same opportunities across America. The choice to reopen all schools during a pandemic only highlights these ongoing discrepancies.
A higher risk for the lowest income areas echos throughout the pandemic, including schools
First off, there is the simple fact that not all places in America are experiencing COVID-19 in the same way. A few months ago, the mid-Atlantic was facing the worst of it while the Rocky Mountains were relatively safe. Now, states like New Jersey and New York are recovering while figures in Idaho and Utah are surging. To execute the same course of action in all schools across all states in these uncertain times would make no logical sense.
Even schools within the same states, though, have to deal with this pandemic in different ways. Schools in wealthy communities, for example, may have the local tax dollars to afford more instructors, thus allowing for smaller class sizes with more socially-distanced environments. Contrarily, schools operating on shoestring budgets—often urban and overcrowded schools—will have no choice but to put their students at risk. Non-coincidentally, these are also the schools that would be most effected by budget cuts.
Likewise, schools located in disadvantaged parts of the country deal with student populations at a higher risk. Although we are told the virus doesn’t discriminate, if a poor child is infected or someone in his or her family gets sick, that student will face a far less secure road to recovery than someone coming from money. Healthcare bills, insufficient housing, and the tumultuous state of the economy renders the virus far more dangerous to certain demographics than others right. All life is equally precious, but students in schools with large classes and tight budgets have the most to lose from coming into contact with the disease.
Then, there is the matter of education, the quality of which could be severely hurt if students and teachers spend valuable class time worrying about a perilous disease. Increasing precautions would be essential, but who would be responsible for enforcing such precautions? It is hardly the duty of teachers, who being older and having to engage in multiple classes a day will often be at even greater risk than their students.
The danger is real and forcing an across-the-board re-opening is no solution at all
Teachers are already severely overworked, underpaid, and under-appreciated for all the effort they put in, and most of them go above and beyond for their students as it is. However, demanding them to put their lives in jeopardy day-in and day-out is simply too much to ask, especially when none of the people making this decision for them are (or ever have been) teachers.
Of course, nobody dislikes remote learning more than teachers and students. They know better than anyone how imperative in-person instruction is to learning. But it is still not as important as health and wellbeing. Today and always, those should be the top priorities in any institution.
Plus, if Trump or DeVos want to use the “learning experience” or the “importance of education for all” as their rationales for reopening, one only needs to look at their records in the field to recognize the con. Since assuming their current titles, the two political cronies have slashed the federal education department’s budget, often targeting Special Education programs and LGBTQ+ protections for cuts. They are also both big proponents of education privatization. Evidently, the “importance of education for all” was not a big deal for them before the virus started spreading during an election year.
Speaking of privatization, many private schools—including some of the nation’s most elite universities—are currently announcing plans for their fall semesters, and most of them involve remote learning in some capacity. Once again, it demonstrates how the premature decision to reopen schools is latently classist. The students who can afford private educations won’t have to risk their lives everyday. Trump and DeVos, both of whom patronize private high schools and universities, clearly do not think public school students deserve the same protections as their own children.
Sadly, these educational inequities have always been the case. The egregious pressure that Trump and DeVos are currently putting on our nation’s most vulnerable and innocent, however, just brings these inequities to the foreground.
Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.
To get through this we’re gonna need all our faculties on high alert…
It’s no wonder that the busiest freeway on the planet is nearly empty, with all that’s going on. Sure. But try driving on it if you remember the old normal. To dramatize, take a look at the video above taken during the 5pm rush hour on Tuesday, and the video below, of just what this beast could do on a big traffic day. Even a “normal” day, pre-covid-19 had a similar feeling. Not anymore.
It can be an emotional and somber experience to see, first hand and in-person, what the busiest freeway in the world looks like in the middle (at the beginning?) of a pandemic and with unemployment rate at up to 50% (locally). And then there’s the one bright spot; that the deserted freeway is being impacted even more so by the new “WFH” (work from home) boom as we change our lives and reduce carbon emissions by living a digital life.
“Anecdotal” evidence: raising the feeling that something’s going on other than what you hear from on-high
Sometimes, even if you listen to the voices all around you, take in all the news and noise, you just have to block all of that out and take a good look with your own eyes. If you look beneath the surface of the news you will also find a very different story.
Take for example the recent “positive” jobs reports. Unemployment appears to be dropping and the overall numbers are not as bad as many had feared, right? Or is that just a manufactured impression? The previous official jobs reports were rife with confusion and even errors that were admitted outright by The Bureau of Labor Statistics. Of course by that time the “good news” had already circulated and had created the desired effect (a delay of the stock market pricing-in the real unemployment numbers).
The reports, according to former US secretary of labor, Robert Reich, are not giving an accurate picture, and he points out in a recent piece that the real situation is that the current number of unemployed is the worst in over 70 years.
Naturally the reasons, emanating from the top job at the White House, for wanting to spin these very important numbers, are obvious. Not only is there the the high stakes re-election scenario but, in this special case, the potential prosecutions that could proceed from a loss for Trump in November.
And if you are not a “Robin Hood” day trader and are just trying to get a life?
Although Los Angeles is not currently in an official “lockdown”, there is a surge in new cases and over twelve million active cases worldwide, and over three million in the US alone. Therefore, the streets reflect the real situation that people are experiencing – both economic due to the lack of employment and the caution and self-isolation that is appropriate and the coronavirus continues to wreak havoc in the city.
Donald Trump said Thursday’s jobs report, which showed an uptick in June, proves the US economy is “roaring back”.
Rubbish. The labor department gathered the data during the week of 12 June, when America was reporting 25,000 new cases of Covid-19 a day. By the time the report was issued, that figure was 55,000.
Click to See “Saving Capitalism“ to Help Lynxotic and Independent Bookstores. Also Available on Amazon.
Then, just today, the newest jobs report came out. The headline on Marketwatch was that, although 33 million people are unemployed and millions more getting laid off weekly, “many doubt it’s that bad”. Why the caveat? You tell me.
Rather than focusing on the 33 million out of work, with the real number potentially far higher, they question anything that may help to mitigate the negative impression (bad for the stock market). Then they feature an earlier story with the title: “U.S. Regains 4.8 million Jobs in June”, further giving the impression that everything is hunky dory.
Oh, and late last night United Air Lines announced that they would lay off 36,000 which they site as a worst case scenario. Brooks Brothers announced Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Bed, Bath and Beyond are closing 200 stores. And the list goes on.
With the Climate Crisis far from over, A pandemic that has no end in sight and economic repercussions that are beginning to boggle the mind, there is plenty to overwhelm the average or even supra-average human.
Maybe, for now though, with all the doom and gloom, it’s best to just put the pedal-to-the-metal and enjoy the empty road…
Many factors contribute to the haze of confusion surrounding the facts
The coronavirus pandemic is sowing confusion across the globe, not just medically but in the representation of fact vs. hopes. Since, 1918, most of the world has not experienced anything akin to a global outbreak of this magnitude. In order to navigate this novel landscape, quality, consistent, and factual information is essential. Unfortunately, many journalists are already getting the boot during the shutdown, which causes trusted reporting to be less available, but the stifling of facts does not stop there, as now scientific integrity may be in question too.
As harrowing as COVID-19 is, the disease is presenting new opportunities for scientists and medical researchers. Academically speaking, it is an irresistibly hot topic, and any significant contribution to its study could launch a career. Thus, there is a budding competitiveness amongst the scientific community, with many researchers rushing to uncover something (anything) about the coronavirus and get it published.
According to a new post on Harvard Law’s Bill Of Health website, a recent study from Stanford University epitomizes the chaotic drive for scientific corona-findings right now. The Stanford study is documented in an unpublished paper titled, “COVID-19 Antibody Seroprevalence In Santa Clara County, California.” It describes a procedure whereby the scientists tested multiple Santa Clara County residents for the SARS-Cov-2 antibody, which causes COVID-19. The ultimate findings suggest that many more Santa Clara residents had the virus than sought treatment for it.
By extension, the scientists suppose that this conclusion could be true for other parts of the world as well. If it is, it could significantly alter the reported data as well as the global reaction to the virus.
Peers in the scientific community, however, express skepticism towards the Stanford study, citing dire flaws in its methodology. First off, Stanford improperly selected its subjects for the tests. Rather than creating an algorithm for testing random individuals from the Santa Clara area, it fished for volunteers on Facebook, attracting people more likely to seek out testing in the first place and ergo, more likely to have symptoms. Using social media also means that they probably drew in a younger crowd, catering to a demographic that is less at risk and therefore less prone to hospitalize or report feeling sick.
Critics also note some inconsistencies in the data itself, particularly the section that takes into account the risk-factor of faulty equipment or inaccurate results. Overall, the results are more than a little suspicious, depicting a possible example of scientists getting excited over this unprecedented natural phenomenon and jumping to conclusions.
Politics, ratings and money are putting pressure on journalists and scientists alike
Of course, the scientific community meets even greater discrepancies when findings get thrown into the blenders of media and politics. Even when the science remains rightfully impartial, different forces can twist or manipulate data to tell a different story.
“If refusing to mislead the public during a health crisis is insubordination, then I will wear that badge with honor,”
Rebekah Jones in an interview with Chris Cuomo of CNN
In Florida, for example, Department of Health scientist recently lost her job for refusing to skew data. In a statement to CBS, she said that the Department wanted her to “manually change data to drum up support for the plan to reopen.”
Jones’ job at the Department was to create Geographic Information Systems (maps) of Florida that topographically represented the spread of COVID-19 across the state. Her work was widely praised and her departure comes non-coincidentally around the same time that Florida Governor Ron Desantis is trying to reopen stores, restaurants, and barber shops across the Sunshine State.
In a leaked email, Jones warned other Florida Health Department workers to be weary of forthcoming data produced by the state, for it could easily be meddled in corrupt agendas.
Science, by definition, is the objective study of what is. When warped to fit a subjective point of view, though, it becomes something very dangerous—a destructively deceitful force disguised as the truth. Nowadays, truth is an unfortunately delicate term, but it is a necessity to conquer our current circumstance. If we lose science as the impartial study of truth, then we lose the facts, and thus lose our grasp on reality.
In an interconnected world consensus happens fast when a new thing needs to be named
The coronavirus is, as we all know by now, properly named covid-19 or at least the novel coronavirus. Could even be the new coronavirus, which is what “novel” is meant to convey. As you also probably already know, it is not named after a Mexican beer, but rather the fact that, presumably under a microscope, the virus looks like a crown or “corona”. And the “19” in covid-19 stands for the year of discovery, 2019, not that it is the 19th pandemic or 19th strain of the virus (go now and tell Kellyanne Conway).
If you are watching an interview on the pandemic and an expert or pundit is opining they are probably an epidemiologist which is a person who studies epidemics and is a word, and a group of people, you don’t hear much about except when the whole world is in the middle of one.
As you read this you might be at home due to your state, city or county having issued a “stay-at-home order” which is a nice way of saying you are under lock-down. When you go out you will need a mask and, above all to practice social distancing. Oh, and that mask will theoretically need to be an N-95 medical grade one to protect not only others but you as well. But please don’t wear one as they are needed for medical professionals.
The N-95 is necessary because droplets coming from coughing, sneezing, breathing or even loud talking or singing (!) will be hanging in the air for many minutes. See illustration above for a graphic portrait off droplets in action.
Flattening the curve is a simple and yet complicated concept that has become part of folklore or at least our community consciousness. It refers not to stopping or conquering the virus, which is impossible, but to slowing the rate of new infections down to a tempo that is below the rate at which hospitals and government services can keep pace with the surge of new patients. Spreading the virus more slowly is the real goal of wearing masks, practicing social distancing and observing the stay-at-home orders.
What do we do during lockdown? Go shopping of course!
Also, we must all have at least a cursory understanding of the meaning of essential vs non-essential business and employment. Walmart is essential due to the huge grocery section and the much sought after paper products, but the areas where every other non-essential product are available remain open also. However, if your store looks like Walmart but has no grocery section you are non-essential.
Photo / Lynxotic
Amazon of course is the most essential business of all and it’s soon to be trillionaire owner can decide what products to favor with faster shipping and which to delay or try not to sell, even as they remain on sale. He owns our national supply chain now. but just be sure to use alcohol spray on the boxes and wait anywhere from 3 to 72 hours before opening. And when you wash your hands, which you must do many, many, many times a day be sure and sing happy birthday to yourself. Or set your timer for 20 seconds +.
Both gouging, which is a crime in many states but Amazon wants to be made into a federal crime so it can blame its individual marketplace sellers, and hoarding which everybody does, especially with paper products, are rampant and it’s just something to get used to.
After approximately 2 months, flattening the curve changes to F.U. to the Gov, as long as they are democrats
Anti-lockdown protests, which are never called anti-stay-at-home-order protests are also something to get used to. Noose imagery, nazi swastikas, calls to kill or lynch the governor and, naturally semi-automatic weapons with enough ammo cartridges to re-load at least half-a-dozen times are all ok, even inside the state capitol. Just be sure you are white. If so you will be designated as a “good person” by the guy in the White House.
We are all intimately familiar with that little town of 11 million residents in China they call Wuhan, and we know that they have both a notorious “wet-market”, Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market, where people occasionally also buy bats they plan to snack on, and we also know that the same little town has a, now famous lab where they had been studying coronavirus strains.
Depending on who you ask, the novel coronavirus, aka covid-19, had its origin in one of these two places and was released accidentally, or on purpose either by the chinese government or by the U.S. military and the they, or the bat eating customers and wholesalers are to blame for everything.
The coronavirus might kill you but when the pandemic is a pin prick to the largest bubble in history you will surely notice it
The outcome of all of this is still very mush uncertain, but the US government and the SBA have already issued stimulus checks, created the C.A.R.E.S. act, created programs such as the Paycheck Protection Program, The EIDL disaster loan program and beefed up unemployment payments by $600 per week, while extending the length in some cases that claims can last. This is all to combat the economic fallout from the pandemic, and, depending on who you ask is a recession or a depression and in any case is really, really bad and getting worse. This has created an unemployment spike as large as or larger than the 1930’s Great Depression peak and make the 2008 Financial Crisis look like a hiccup.
Oh, and they have spent already somewhere between $2-3 trillion dollars, not including the Federal Reserve‘s contribution to “infinite quantitative easing” and other measures. Las week the congress passed a bill for an additional $3 trillion of “stimulus” but this will change as the senate and the prez and not going to agree (not due to the size but because the “wrong” people will get the money).
A sequel to this glossary on the next chapter “post pandemic deflationary depression and words you will need to understand to survive” is in the works and will follow shortly, along with the eponymous depression itself. Cheers.
Banks make final approval, official form, with schedule for documentation, lays out detailed requirements
The US treasury department, along with the SBA made the highly anticipated document and details available on Friday. The application, which can be downloaded from this link and printed, or filled out online, contains the requirements needed in order for the so called Paycheck Protection Program, or PPP, recipients to apply for forgiveness under the program.
This release also clarifies the process whereby the borrower must fill out the form and provide any additional accompanying documentation. Once completed the borrower must submit the form and accompanying documents to the lending institution where they received the PPP funds. The lending bank will make the final decision to approve any forgiveness.
The 11 pages included in the file consist of the forgiveness application itself and instructions on how to fill it out. The application itself has two important schedules: Schedule A and the worksheet for Schedule A.
Key is the 60-day period which has been designated as the period within which the funds must be used, in order for the expenses to be forgivable. In some cases there can be, apparently, some flexibility regarding the date an expense was incurred, such as hours worked by employees, vs. the date those incurred expenses were paid, such as the scheduled payroll payment date or pay period closing date. The applicable dates, can in some cases, be the date the expenses were incurred, not paid, in case of discrepancies.
While some may find this application and the accompanying instructions more than sufficient, such as ongoing businesses that maintained employment and lease / mortgage payments, and already have a ratio to costs between them at 75% / 25% as prescribed in the original guidelines. Others, however, may have a more difficult time deciphering what exactly they can or can’t expect forgiveness for.
Though the release is a major step toward clarification, confusion still abounds in the details of the program and forgiveness eligibility
Articles are appearing online picking apart the confusion that may be caused by this initial attempt to clarify the process and set it into motion. The SBA has indicated that more guidance will be forthcoming.
One gripe being mentioned is the lack of narrative-based guidance, basically a verbal explanation for the various cases that could potentially arise and how they should be handled.
Many businesses had to furlough or fire employees due to lack of funds and then re-hire or re-activate them to comply with the SBA program, in particular wanting to be sure to qualify for forgiveness. This was an acute need in some situations, such as restaurants or other businesses that were required to close and deemed non-essential. In many of those cases the employees were paid not to work or to do minimal work while receiving a full paycheck.
Companies in that situation, even with full forgiveness granted, face a daunting, uphill battle to regain profitability or viable revenue streams to keep them running after the 60 days of funds has run out. The lingering effects of the pandemic and the lock-down and stay-at-home orders along with the general state of fear (well founded in many cases, it appears) create a situation where former levels of business revenue and activity may take a long time to regain.
This is not taking into account the economic after-effects and general depressed state of consumption being seen in current national published data.
While the SBA has taken a large and positive step forward with the release of this application and achieved some clarification of the process, much more help for struggling businesses will be needed as we emerge, slowly, from the coronavirus / covid-19 crisis.
Groundbreaking and unvarnished look at what really transpired
A new book set for release on May 15th, 2020 comes from one of China’s most acclaimed and decorated writers and is a powerful first-person account of life in Wuhan during the peak of COVID-19 outbreak.
It is unclear if and when a physical book will be available for purchase, but for the moment, it is most It is unclear if and when a physical book will be available for purchase, but for the moment, it is becoming available in audiobook and e-book format
Synopsis from the publisher, HarperCollins :
On January 25, 2020, after the central government imposed a lockdown in Wuhan, acclaimed Chinese writer Fang Fang began publishing an online diary. The writer used a pen name rather than her birth name as she wanted to be a “witness” rather than be cast as a critic for or against the Chinese government and how the pandemic was handled.
In the days and weeks that followed, Fang Fang’s nightly postings gave voice to the fears, frustrations, anger, and hope of millions of her fellow citizens, reflecting on the psychological impact of forced isolation, the role of the internet as both community lifeline and source of misinformation, and most tragically, the lives of neighbors and friends taken by the deadly virus.
A fascinating eyewitness account of events as they unfold, “Wuhan Diary” captures the challenges of daily life and the changing moods and emotions of being quarantined without reliable information. Fang Fang finds solace in small domestic comforts and is inspired by the courage of friends, health professionals and volunteers, as well as the resilience and perseverance of Wuhan’s nine million residents. But, by claiming the writer´s duty to record she also speaks out against social injustice, abuse of power, and other problems which impeded the response to the epidemic and gets herself embroiled in online controversies because of it.
As Fang Fang documents the beginning of the global health crisis in real time, we are able to identify patterns and mistakes that many of the countries dealing with the novel coronavirus have later repeated. She reminds us that, in the face of the new virus, the plight of the citizens of Wuhan is also that of citizens everywhere. As Fang Fang writes: “The virus is the common enemy of humankind; that is a lesson for all humanity. The only way we can conquer this virus and free ourselves from its grip is for all members of humankind to work together.”
Blending the intimate and the epic, the profound and the quotidian, Wuhan Diary is a remarkable record of an extraordinary time.
Click to buy “Wuhan Diary” and at the same time help Lynxotic and all Independent Local Bookstores
.jpg#/media/File:%D0%92%D0%BD%D0%B5%D1%88%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D1%81%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B9_%D0%BC%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B9_%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8_(%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8F%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%8F).jpg){kind=link}