COVID-19: Economic Impact, Human Solutions

The COVID-19 pandemic is a public health crisis threatening to become an economic catastrophe that affects tens of millions of Americans. Is the $2 trillion aid package recently passed by Congress and signed by the president enough to keep the economy from freefall? What more is needed?


A panel of UC Berkeley's leading economists and public policy experts discuss the economic consequences of sheltering-in-place, evaluate the Congressional response and discuss strategies that could help to stabilize the economy, safeguard jobs and protect society's most vulnerable people. [Show ID: 35876]

More from: UC Public Policy Channel

UCTV is the broadcast and online media platform of the University of California, featuring programming from its ten campuses, three national labs and affiliated research institutions. UCTV explores a broad spectrum of subjects for a general audience, including science, health and medicine, public affairs, humanities, arts and music, business, education, and agriculture. Launched in January 2000, UCTV embraces the core missions of the University of California -- teaching, research, and public service – by providing quality, in-depth television far beyond the campus borders to inquisitive viewers around the world.

[Trout]

I watched most of this and at no point did I hear anything about personal responsibility. Scary people.

[danyellerobinson]

Jesse, I think we do have a way to fix vulnerabilities of inequities. We have simply lacked the will.

[brentshuffler]

Secondly, it is important to keep in mind this time that, because the job-losses and business-closures are not due to traditional faults and failings of individuals, but as a direct result of conscious public-health policies, the Government, in this instance, has a unique moral imperative [1] to replace the incomes of workers who are ordered not to work and [2] to supplement the revenues of businesses ordered to close without having any alternative to in-person modalities of operation.

[mohdhazim]

Hello admin... can u help me with writing all the point of the discussion.. i have trouble understanding the discussion clearly because iam not very good in english and now i need this point for my english assignment... My focus is on the solution or how to face the impact of the pandemic to global economy... i really appreciate if u help me... love from Malaysia.

[dr.p.s.kamble]

This panel discussion was really useful which thrown light on the number of issues relating to impact of covid19 .

[grahamstull]

I find the focus of the analysis here quite scary, because it either means that a lot of mainstream social scientists are misunderstanding this situation fundamentally, or it means I am. The young African-American lady in purple, Laura, came closest, for me, to getting a grasp on the situation, perhaps because her historical economics background gives her a better perspective.


As I see it, this is a supply-side stop to the economy, unlike anything we have seen since WWII. Demand solutions, including regarding the social safety net, are only secondary and only relate to the distribution of resources, not to the loss of actual production. It's worth thinking a little more on how the stop to the economy actually impacts the quantity of goods and services in the economy. First, there is the stop itself. We have reduced labour by 1/3, which means we will have 1/3 less goods and services in the economy. Now, some of this will be a shift to home production (cooking and baking instead of eating in restaurants), but much of it will be a deadweight loss - anxious frustrated 'non'-workers whose output is zero.


Second, we have massively reduced the efficiency of another 1/3 of the economy. This is because we have forced people to telework, we have forced parents into the farcical situation of attempting to care for the children when they are supposed to be working, we have stopped the movement of seasonal workers to pick fruit, etc etc. It's harder to understand what the costs of this efficiency loss might be, but it could easly reduce output by another 10%.


They keep talking about borrowing as a solution here, but this is not a viable solution to this situation. Money, in the end, is ony a claim on production. If there is less production, increasing the supply of money can only result in inflation. Of course, it can change the distribution (regear luxury yacht industries to make baby shoes...) but that is a slow process, itself fraught with deadweight cost and efficiency loss.


At least, that's how I understand the economy.

[mervynshute]

tax wall street, that would be a start, then all of the corporations, with no relief.

[KendraLock]

Excellent moderator that asked appropriate questions and kept the panel focused. On point for sure. I believe in resiliency. Might be good to begin forming neighborhood think tanks that can creatively troubleshoot economic comebacks.

[brentshuffler]

We can expect the total funding from the U.S.A.'s Federal Government will need to be in the order of 33% of G.D.P. (over U.S.$7 TRILLION). If the unemployment rate exceeds that percentage, the aid required will exceed even that figure. So, overall, aid could reach U.S.$5 TRILLION to U.S.$10 TRILLION OVER THE NEXT 12 MONTHS . . . and might extend to 18 to 24 months, depending on how quickly an effective vaccine/treatment will become tested, widely available, and widely implemented.

[news.series]

Mr. Economists what will happend when closed World back to open as usual, eithet its will be inflation or deflation taken-Place?

[TheParadox_]

I counted maybe 5 different analogies.

[The_Oblivion_Light]

The economic bubble had burst once before. Back then, people couldn't even sale a $10 product for $1 just due to the fact not many people couldn't even spare a dollar. After seeing oil prices drop into negative teritory, its safe to say that the bubble had burst once again. Funny though. I though Big Tech would be the one to do it first! I mean, $2500 for a folding smart phone? How many rich people they think there are in this country and let alone the world. Just under 75% of the work force are minimum wage workers with some maybe making a dollar or two more yet struggle to pay the rent and pay bills and may don't have healthcare-The biggest debate for a decade now. This COVID-19 didn't only just claimed lives and sickened over a million people. It single handedly endangered our futures financially. It was already bad enough that all layers of government was systematically creating ways to have tax payers to pay for their visions, not completely ours, theirs, we still have natural disasters to deal with at the same time trying to recover from this pandemic. Though we do need all this money from the government to support our needs under a shutdown, the cost fill be passed on eventually, moreover, the economy is not designed to support a stay at home order. The economy is designed to circulate money through buying power. Staying at home means over due rent/mortgages with bills piling up and about a quarter of this country lost their jobs, another casualty of the virus.

[susanblood]

You can all help main street by getting out of the way. Go work in a home for developmental disabled and learn something.

[jerryhenderson]

Sound just like a group of liberal Academics. Have any of them ever run a Corporation or even a small business. We've now got ventilators coming out of our ears and one to the panelist our leadership needs to build more. We've got test in the field that officials are not utilizing because of the difference of opinion on the front line, over who should be tested

[PointsofRfactor]

I’m no fan of Trump – but you are missing the Point America doesn’t like government,
take a closer look at the society  that put him there, it is an election year

[camilojazzfernandes]

hahaha ... COVID-19 pandemic -- does it exist ? ... hahaha

[mauriceupton]

The ACV rt-pcr test is the problem it's any coronavirus test * not accurate.*

[dtgdgl]

On the U.S. aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt Roughly 60% of the over 600 sailors who tested positive so far have not shown symptoms of COVID-19.

Lets pretend everybody is infected: 60% are asymptomatic + 40% sick = 100%.

Lets pretend half of the 60% asymptomatic are recovering i.e.30%. If the duration were 14 days. Then a 4-6-4 day cycle.

In the worst case: Asymptomatic and healthy for 4 days, then 6 days sick and 4 more days hibernating with antibodies that provide immunity.

Skip ahead, now healthy again! But maybe the antibodies have worn-out? Since everybody is infected, they get infected again. Another 14 day (4-6-4) cycle commences. At any one time 30% of the population is healthy. The rest, 70%, are recovering - a disaster for civilization.

OOOOPS! Herd Immunity may not work. It depends on how long the antibodies give us protection from re-infection - We need data.

[andrewsnowmon]

Depression and cannibalism are in the future.