Feahhh Itself

We’re all familiar with the saying about the cure being worse than the disease – which probably isn’t true all that often. But FEAR certainly is worse. We have been advised not to panic about the coronavirus, but are we taking that advice? The stock market has been collapsing, meetings are being cancelled, schools are closing in many countries, and the face-mask makers can’t keep up with the demand.

There are some scary things about the coronavirus for sure. There is no cure, and it spreads rapidly. But if you catch it, there’s a way better-than-even chance you’re going to survive. According to reports, the majority of those who do come down with COVID-19 experience only mild symptoms. Yes, the death rate is higher than with the typical seasonal flu, but ALL flus are deadly to some.

My view is a contrary one. I am not an epidemiologist, but I wonder whether quarantine is working. I can see how it can slow the spread of the disease, but in this case, I think the horse has already left the barn. The US testing capability is way below what it should be. I have a sneaking suspicion that if the whole American population were tasted, there would be many thousands coming up positive for coronavirus. You may be carrying it yourself, though you don’t yet present symptoms.

So what do we do about it as individuals? Certainly it’s always a good idea this time of year to wash your hands frequently, catch sudden sneezes in your sleeve  or even lighten up on handshaking. But how far do we need to go in altering our lifestyles? Do we stop going to restaurants, movies, sports events, cocktail parties, or even family gatherings? Catching the disease from a family member is exactly the same as getting it from a stranger. Do we shun those people or lock ourselves up?

The stock market is a good barometer of hope and fear, but is not always reasonable. You may feel rushed to sell a stock that has fallen in recent days, but the product that stock represents hasn’t changed. Yes, there are supply chain problems, but are they permanent? Is the economy going to be allowed to grind to a halt?

It’s our bad luck that we don’t have the national leadership we need at this moment. The President feels this is just another hoax, and says that some miracle will cause the coronavirus to disappear. He’s dead wrong about the hoax and very likely wrong about the miracle bit, but not about the ending, which may come later than we’d like. But the coronavirus WILL end, just like SARS, H1N1, the Asian and even the Spanish flus before it. For the most part, our species absorbs these things and comes out on the other side, though sometimes not without great cost. In the meantime, science may come up with a solution that keeps this disease and its cousins from visiting us again.

Life itself is a risk. You could come down suddenly with any number of diseases or conditions much more serious than coronavirus, for which there is also no cure and that you could not have avoided.

Governments may be either prompt or slow to react to this crisis. But in the end, we as individuals are responsible for our own level of fear, and with what attitude we confront what lies ahead of us in our own lives.

The Presidential Skill Set

Many of us by now have seen multiple presidential debates. What took us there? Sure, we did want to hear what the candidates had to say about the issues, but I bet that wasn’t all. The Super Bowl was on a few weeks ago, and some of that mindset is still with us. We wanted to see who scored points and how each candidate responded to hits. The first questions among pundits after a debate is over are: who won and who lost? It takes gladiatorial skill to survive in this sport. Is that alone worth our vote in the upcoming election? 

Shouting matches are entertaining, but the feeling wears off quickly. Let’s face it: debates can bring out the worst in people. It’s almost as if participants are coached to interrupt and overreach for sound-bite conversion. I recognize that this is a survival tactic for some of them. In many cases, though, the moderators are no help. They lose control or maybe even deliberately give it up. Instead of answering questions, the candidates are allowed to use their time to pivot to other topics. The debate news anchors and panels of what we normally consider no-nonsense, hard-hitting journalists fold up like potato chips in the rain. I used to moderate debates myself, and my low-tech method of keeping control was a gavel that I borrowed from a local judge.

I enjoy these events up to a point, but being a skilled debater is only one of the qualities I look for in a candidate. Thinking quickly and responding coherently under a time limit is a necessary skill. But I’m increasingly attracted to the “town hall” format, where the candidate answers questions from audience members and is allowed to respond more casually. From this we can discern if the candidate has the ability to listen and answer with empathy to fellow citizens who aren’t in the “gotcha” business.

The bottom line is, we can’t really evaluate candidates until we know them from seeing them in a variety of situations and determining if they are not only smart and deep thinkers, but who know what they don’t know and can listen to informed advice. They must also be honest, authentic, and have an actual beating heart.

We do have to keep our expectations reasonable. These are other human beings with their own mixtures of qualities and flaws. And this year, whether we like it or not, we do have to consider that other thing: electability. 

All the Way to the Bank

It seems fashionable now in some quarters to shame billionaires. The not-so-subtle suggestions are that they don’t deserve their wealth, that they game the tax system, or even that they acquired their lucre by questionable means. And, of course, they only care about their houses, yachts, the art on their walls, and the advantage their money gives them over the rest of us. But hey, they are people too.

It might just be possible to be rich and a good human being at the same time, as Bill Gates and Warren Buffett have shown us. Many wealthy people and families have created foundations to support charitable causes. After all, they can only spend so much money on themselves, then what?

Some are wealthy by inheritance, others thanks to a talent, and still others because an idea came to them and they brought it to market. Then there are those who just won the lotto. But there is no automatic virtue in just being less well-off.

It is true that some wealthy people do not pay their fair share of taxes. Personally, I think all income should be taxed the same, whether it’s from work or capital gains. The wealthy should pay a much higher percentage in tax. I’m for a tax code printed on a single 8 ½-by-11 sheet of paper, that everyone could understand. This may not be making me many friends here, so I’ll stop now.

Anyway, we can’t talk about wealth without talking about Michael Bloomberg, who is accused of trying to buy the Democratic nomination for President. I don’t much like what he’s doing either -- but it’s almost working. Thanks to relentless advertising, he has statements almost instant national name recognition and ranking. What we know about the current occupant of the White House is that the one thing that can intimidate him is someone who can buy and sell him 50 or 100 times over.

I’m not endorsing Mr. Bloomberg here. He has controversial behaviors and policies in his history that he has to explain and even apologize for. He entered the Nevada debate unprepared to take on five other candidates who are seasoned veterans of that genre. But could he run the country? Certainly. Could he inspire and lead? We will find out as the campaign goes on.

Bloomberg has pledged that if another Democratic candidate becomes the nominee, he will use his wealth to support that individual’s campaign. He has also pledged to help Democrats in down-ballot races. Maybe Democrats should think twice about overly dissing this particular billionaire while their bacon is being saved.

Plague or PITA?

I’m still trying to figure out my feelings about the coronavirus. Should I be concerned, worried, or frightened? The media reports usually preface “coronavirus” with “deadly.” This is a flu, and all flus are deadly. The death rate for this is still under 3 percent, but the hard number of those who have died of coronavirus is higher than that for SARS.

It would be useful if we had a Richter scale for this. For example, if the Spanish Flu of 1918, which killed 50 million people, was a 9, and SARS, let’s say, was a 4 or a 5, what do we give this new one?  Too simple, I guess.

Then there is the name. “Coronavirus” isn’t specific enough. We don’t use animals anymore, The swine flu was a death sentence for pigs. A geographic name causes travel and commerce issues and even racial profiling – and can also be wrong. The Spanish Flu did not start in Spain. So now they have neutral designations, and for this one, it’s COVID-19.

In this country, it's already starting. What do I mean by "it"? I heard that some ride-hailing drivers here are starting to avoid picking up Asians. But it goes beyond that. I myself was shopping in a big-box store and suddenly had to sneeze. I covered my nose and mouth, but when I looked up, I found a woman glaring at me. Some checkout clerks in that store had masks on. In China, many are wearing masks, and those who don’t are socially unacceptable. The masks keep sneezes in and other people’s cooties out. The door is wide open to blame, as in, you gave this to me, or you’re going to give it to me.

There are people who were just in the wrong place at the wrong time, and have been  trapped on cruise ships or military bases because they might be carrying the disease. For those cleared to  return to their lives, how many party invitations will they be getting for a while?

Hopefully, science will answer the technical questions. Genetic researchers are zeroing in on what is common to all viruses and doesn’t mutate, which could lead to an all-inclusive vaccine someday. But in the meantime, we have to sort out the information in front of us that we accept and our own feelings about it, then decide how we will interact with others before COVID-19 becomes a “thing” here. It just might.