Post COVID, what things in life will be fundamentally different?

[Cranky]

If you have an address in the UK, you can get a free basic bank account. It is a problem for people who don't have an address at all, but they tend to have big problems that are more than just trying to live life without a debit card.

I agree with the PP that it's not like all transactions ever have been cash. Particularly that in less anonymous times it used to be common for shops to give credit so you could buy things on account and settle up monthly or quarterly. Just like... a credit card!

I spend cash more freely than card because it's already been deducted from my mental tally of how much I have in my account. In my mind the "spending" happens at the ATM. Different strokes for different folks.

I think the US is really behind western Europe on a lot of things. Sure, it's a bigger and more complicated country, but it's still kinda backward on things like banking and healthcare. It would be nice if coronavirus gave the politicians a kick up the arse, but... I doubt it. My dream for the UK is that it significantly advances the case for UBI (it's on my list to write letters to various people about it) but again... I doubt it.

Bank accounts in the US are pretty easy to get. It’s not a question of can get. It’s a question of have.

Then why don't people have them if it's so easy? There's clearly some barrier here. Is it just the "pain point" hasn't been reached in American society? As Plina said, in the UK you need a bank account for your benefits to be paid into even if nothing else. And while some small employers would pay you in cash, the stories I hear of people getting literal cheques even for middle class white collar jobs are mind-boggling to me. If things like that started to change (e.g. need a bank account for benefits), would large numbers of previously unbanked people skip happily to the bank to sign up? If not, why not?

I don't think bank accounts are so easy to get in the US, especially at the larger banks. You've got to have ID and a minimum amount of money to deposit, and there are fees, especially if you don't keep a certain amount of $ in that account.

Benefits are typically paid on a different, government issued card, though. Housing benefits are paid to the landlord (AFAIK), food benefits and cash assistance go onto a state issued card.

[ctuser1]

I don't think bank accounts are so easy to get in the US, especially at the larger banks. You've got to have ID and a minimum amount of money to deposit, and there are fees, especially if you don't keep a certain amount of $ in that account.

You can get around to a lot of those issues at a credit union.

I personally use a big one - DCU. They require $5 "share" deposit. There are many other local ones in Connecticut (and anywhere else I have "lived" - including Cincinnati) where you can have an account for $5.

ID is required. But credit unions will typically work with you if you don't have it.

Is it that credit unions are very uncommon in more rural corners? They aren't in CT - but I realize most of the country are not defined by what is normal in CT.

[Wolfpack Mustachian]

Question for people in the essentially cashless society. Are the fees associated with electronic purchases just a part of life? Are they handled by the government? When I use it at places like the local farmer's market/writing checks to places I want to donate money too/etc. it makes me a little bit happier to realize they are not losing x% of it to fees that are unnecessary. I could care less about it if I buy something at Amazon or Walmart, but it does mean something for certain places that get my money.

The fees are included in the price for the purchase as for cash. You are not allowed to take out a separate fee for use of cards. It costs to make cash deposits and there was a fee for checks already 20 years when I worked in retail. Cash has also the cost of counting, making deposits and bank costs to handling deposit. Not to talk about the cost of robberies and security costs related to cash. That is a big driver to a cashless society.

Interesting. So, the government inherently pays for the cost of cash in all systems I am aware of - at least the explicit costs of making it. Does the government create the system and the infrastructure that allows credit cards/debit cards to function in your situation? Or, do they simply regulate the banking industry and make them eat the cost of it?

As Dandarc points it out the cost of printing the cash is the small cost. Government or probably EU regulates the banking industry. You as the customer take the cost of card fees as well as you take the costs of handling cash. The banking industry pushes all the cost to the customers as any other business would do.

Right, I'm not arguing with the cost of cash outside of printing it, nor was I ever. It has a cost both societally and to the parties involved in the transfer - although I would think the cost is almost certainly smaller on a smaller scale where one person or couple sell personal goods directly, take cash, and then either uses the cash themselves (as people in those situations tend to be live more cash involved lives) or make a single deposit to the bank or whatnot (my theory, may not be true). In that context, 2-3% does certainly seem high to me. I had been simply saying earlier that I still feel that given the current situation where cash exists, for certain situations like farmer's markets or larger donations to a non-profit organization, it still makes sense to use cash or checks if you want to help the people there to avoid fees given our current setup for money. My goal is to talk to farmer's market people whenever I get a chance to see if they see it the same way.

My specific question was that there is an explicit cost of doing business that has to be put on someone. There are implicit costs as well, and they can be weighed by the parties involved in terms of what they accept or at least how they push for one type of payment or the other. Taxpayers as a whole front the cost of printing the money which is the explicit cost of using cash. I was curious if the government had actually created any infrastructure for it (doubt it but was curious) to do the backbone of simple money transactions or if they had simply regulated banks to declare that this will be free as a cost of doing business as a banks, thus where they transfer it on to the consumer. It sounds like the government doesn't charge for the cost it in taxes but forces banks to charge for it to customers in general. No moral judging either way, just curious, and in retrospect, probably a dumb question.

Electronical payments between private persons does not cost anything. The swish option for companies is 6 USD per month and about 25-30 cents per transfer for the seller depending on your setup. That is the system mostly used at farmers markets and by small businesses. You can also use it to give money to charities.

The card payment option for small businesses have a 1,85 % fee.

Interesting. I'll have to look into this. I haven't seen anything at the farmer's market or events where there are local sellers that imply anything beyond a generic "we take VISA, MC, etc." Thanks.

[ctuser1]

I've used Zelle a few times to make a few small electronic payments to some people. Random bar tab splits, paying a handyman etc. etc.

In all these cases - no fees for me, and none of the payees have complained about any fees either.

All electronic, no fees, seems much cleaner to me than cash. In half of the cases the recipient did not have a Zelle account, and seemed to be able to get set up with Zelle and connect it to their bank account pretty quickly.

I still carry some cash in my wallet for "just in case", but often go months before having to touch any of it.

[Sugaree]

I realize that most folks here have some self-restraint when it comes to spending money, especially what I'd categorize as "impulse buys." I think I'm in that camp too.

But...

Even I admit that spending cash is psychologically harder for me than just swiping a card. I tend to really be conservative with my spare cash, partially I guess because it's limited, but also because it's more "real" on some level, when I have a $20 bill in my hand, and I tend to question my purchase more.

I know "cashless" or some version near that, is going to happen soon, and I've already pointed out how it will hurt the elderly and lower-income people, but it won't exactly help the "generally middle-class Dave Ramsey caller" types either. By that, I mean the folks with decent jobs who still tend to spend everything they make and save little for retirement.

And the easier we make it to spend money (card swiping becomes just a tap, a tap becomes a wave of your hand, or just looking at something with your eyeballs), the most these people will struggle with their impulses. Cash can slow down people a little. I'm not saying it's a sure thing, but there's a reason Dave talks about cash so much, because on some level it DOES create at least a bit of friction.

Is it really a good thing, if in 2 years, you can order from Amazon just by looking at an item and blinking? I mean, isn't SOME level of friction a good thing to balance between convenience and many people spending more recklessly and mindlessly than they already do?

I hate physical cash.  I hate having it in my wallet.  I'm way more likely to spend it on something dumb just to make it go away than I ever am to make a conscious swipe of the credit card, creating a transaction record that will exist forever.  Cash is fleeting, ethereal.  Once it's gone it's like it was never there.  My spending definitely feels less "real" when it's physical cash.  I'm probably not in the majority there.

I'm with you ketchup. Cash is already spent in my head. It's not in any accounts that I tally up for net worth. So... it's like "free" spending.

It's the worst :(

Same here.  I think it has to do with the fact that I had my first checking account before having my first job.  So any money in my account is money and any cash came from gifts or something other than my working.

[maizefolk]

The research on this topic suggests that Spartana/Nick_Miller's experience is probably more representative of the general public. People tend to be willing to spend more for the same items when paying with a credit card than when paying with cash. Here's one of the classical early papers in the field in study from back in 2001 (sorry for the PDF link).

Businesses are also aware of this. A more recent paper showed that once states convert from cash tolls to electronic tolls, they were able to raise toll rates by 20-40%.

So keep in mind that when businesses are pushing people towards electronic payments and trying to reduce and eliminate cash, they aren't just doing it for efficiency, they're doing it because it because it'll cause their customers to spend more.

[Kris]

The research on this topic suggests that Spartana/Nick_Miller's experience is probably more representative of the general public. People tend to be willing to spend more for the same items when paying with a credit card than when paying with cash. Here's one of the classical early papers in the field in study from back in 2001 (sorry for the PDF link).

Businesses are also aware of this. A more recent paper showed that once states convert from cash tolls to electronic tolls, they were able to raise toll rates by 20-40%.

So keep in mind that when businesses are pushing people towards electronic payments and trying to reduce and eliminate cash, they aren't just doing it for efficiency, they're doing it because it because it'll cause their customers to spend more.

I definitely am not surprised by this.

I'm someone who definitely wants to move technology forward toward contactless. But at the same time, the idea of cash not being accepted -- as legal freaking tender!!! -- outrages me. Because again, not everyone has equal access to the technologies in question.

[Nick_Miller]

I mean, I took it to the extreme with a small amount of our cash reserves. $2500 in quarters in my closet, some rolled, some not.

And it's "my" money, left over from my pocket money over a period of like two years. Do you know how many times I would have spent that money on stuff had it not been in quarters? At least three times that I can count.

Yet I haven't, because the friction was too great.

And I haven't deprived myself at all. I mean, I have everything I need. Plus I have $2500 which would almost pay our mortgage for 2 months in case of an extreme emergency.

[Plina]

I mean, I took it to the extreme with a small amount of our cash reserves. $2500 in quarters in my closet, some rolled, some not.

And it's "my" money, left over from my pocket money over a period of like two years. Do you know how many times I would have spent that money on stuff had it not been in quarters? At least three times that I can count.

Yet I haven't, because the friction was too great.

And I haven't deprived myself at all. I mean, I have everything I need. Plus I have $2500 which would almost pay our mortgage for 2 months in case of an extreme emergency.

Some years ago I had a bag of coins with about 200 euros, about 200 USD that, I took with me on a biking vacation to Spain. It was a pretty heavy bag. We had all inklusive half of the time but you had to pay for the water and other drinks. The waiters were not happy to be paid by coins for their 2 euro water. Mallorca also has these Nice little cafés were you could get coffe for 2 euros in some small town café. The bag of coins lasted the whole two week vacation and was a pretty Nice way to use the coins that otherwise would still have been in a cupboard somewhere.

[Cranky]

I don't think bank accounts are so easy to get in the US, especially at the larger banks. You've got to have ID and a minimum amount of money to deposit, and there are fees, especially if you don't keep a certain amount of $ in that account.

You can get around to a lot of those issues at a credit union.

I personally use a big one - DCU. They require $5 "share" deposit. There are many other local ones in Connecticut (and anywhere else I have "lived" - including Cincinnati) where you can have an account for $5.

ID is required. But credit unions will typically work with you if you don't have it.

Is it that credit unions are very uncommon in more rural corners? They aren't in CT - but I realize most of the country are not defined by what is normal in CT.

You *can* get around them, but your average minimum wage worker is not awfully likely to pursue that, and while I think they are all open to the public now, they used to be connected to a specific job, at least in Ohio. We do belong to the credit union, which used to be limited to teachers. We keep our Big Emergency Account there, because it's local but not that easily accessible. There are not a lot of conveniently located branches. in fact, I've never been in that credit union - dh drops stuff off there when he's at work.

I'd also point out that there is a cash economy that some people voluntarily participate in, for a lot of reasons. It's not just drug deals. Cash is untraceable, and doesn't show up on your taxes. There are an awful lot of $100 bills circulating for that reason.

[matchewed]

I’ve been watching a great series on Hulu called “The Food That Built America.” It is all about how many huge brands came about through the industrial revolution. I’m up to the point of manufacturing through and just after WWII. It is amazing to see how many things the US used to make here that is now all made in China. The narrators were praising that US had a better economy post war than before as we were able to make such a variety of products and export during the war.

Watching this has really been eye opening. So many of these creators took giant risks or went bankrupt several times before getting the right product and distribution. Seeing this in such a time of uncertainty has given me a little hope that perhaps we will raise some great companies or products from this situation.

During WWII the US actually didn't suffer any major loss. Europe and Japan got bombed to pieces. Especially the industrial centres. While the US was busy selling weapons to the allies. So after the war, all the competition was wiped out, there was a huge demand for products and America was regarded as the champion of democracy protecting the world from the Nazi's and Russians. So that was a uniquely good situation for the US economy.

This crisis will be a big reset for the world. Definitely there will be new companies formed, but it is very possible that the west will lose in a big way to the Chinese. In a way many old companies where already on the way down, but due to cheap credit and political support where surviving. I'm thinking Boeing, GE, etc. With stock prices crashing they may get purchased and stripped of talent and IP.

Our manufacturing sector is very mature, the odds of a new wave of companies is very slim unless there is a technological advance which would cause one. Sure will there be some small companies that can't stay afloat in this environment, thereby opening up areas for entrepreneurship? Yeah. Will some of those smaller companies just become a part of a larger capital investment group? Yeah.

Will this somehow increase the amount of manufacturing done in the US? I doubt it. Many of the things that are manufactured in China are closer to the commodity side of the spectrum (Commodity-------------Custom). Commodities are meant to be cheaper and more disposable. It's tough to make things cheap when you have to pay a workforce much more. When your margins are already razor thin you'll dive out of an expensive place to make things like the US and jump to an overseas location for your commodity like products.

Will there be a wave of anti-globalization talk among people? Sure. I think we were already trending xenophobic in our rhetoric. I also think it's hard for Americans to stop their habit of buying crap regardless of an economic bump in the road. Remember people were talking in '08/'09 about how this might make people start to realize that they need to save more money and not leverage themselves to the hilt with an expensive mortgage. That didn't last too long IMO.

We have some companies that have started making protective gear in the country or are going to ramp up the production. One of them are importing the machinery from China and they are automating the part that is currently sewn  by Chinese workers. Another one is today making the fabric to Chinese factories were they sew the gowns. Now they have found a way to weld the gown instead of sewing it in china. So machines are fast replacing the Chinese workers as the cost of the supply chain have gone up. I have also read some articles were companies are talking about automating part of the production and taking it back to europé, mainly eastern europe due to risk we have seen with interrupted supply chains.

But that is for product that is in exceptional demand due to current temporary circumstances. That PPE isn't going to remain in permanent high demand. When the need for that disappears what happens to those companies?

As for supply chain you do have a point there. I do think that supply chains in general will be impacted by this. How that shakes out will be particular to each thing being made and the availability of the raw materials. I'm not so convinced that a permanent shakeup of how business was done is going to happen. If anything how prepared countries are to respond to illnesses will change but I don't think how things or where things are made is going to rapidly change due to coronavirus.

[Nick_Miller]

Getting away from the cash/card issue, I think another big issue is education, especially for elementary through high school.

I mean, there's a REAL chance that at least some school districts won't open "as normal" this fall, which could mean continued distance learning or staggered schedules or something else. I mean, how can you claim to be adhering to ANY level of "social distancing" if you cram a 1,000+ kids into a school building all day? There doesn't seem to be much middle ground here. Either they're crammed in the building, or they aren't.

Yes it sucks for working parents, but think about how much it sucks for the kids. I have a kiddo starting high school this year and another starting middle school. Those are big milestones for most kids, and the thought that they will start the new phases by doing work alone at home just makes me sad. No making new friends, no meeting the teachers in a real way, no school activities or sports or assemblies or clubs or anything. That's a real possibility at least for the rest of 2020.

I'm glad we're just taking this a week at a time right now, because if my kids knew the rest of 2020 could look a lot like March and April, that would devastate them.

And then I feel horrible when I think about all the kids who have it so much worse. Kids who depend on school for much more than education: for food, a safe place, role models, etc. If we continue with online education for the rest of 2020, LOTS of kids will absolutely fall SO far behind, it will be staggering.

No easy answers here for school districts.

[Plina]

I’ve been watching a great series on Hulu called “The Food That Built America.” It is all about how many huge brands came about through the industrial revolution. I’m up to the point of manufacturing through and just after WWII. It is amazing to see how many things the US used to make here that is now all made in China. The narrators were praising that US had a better economy post war than before as we were able to make such a variety of products and export during the war.

Watching this has really been eye opening. So many of these creators took giant risks or went bankrupt several times before getting the right product and distribution. Seeing this in such a time of uncertainty has given me a little hope that perhaps we will raise some great companies or products from this situation.

During WWII the US actually didn't suffer any major loss. Europe and Japan got bombed to pieces. Especially the industrial centres. While the US was busy selling weapons to the allies. So after the war, all the competition was wiped out, there was a huge demand for products and America was regarded as the champion of democracy protecting the world from the Nazi's and Russians. So that was a uniquely good situation for the US economy.

This crisis will be a big reset for the world. Definitely there will be new companies formed, but it is very possible that the west will lose in a big way to the Chinese. In a way many old companies where already on the way down, but due to cheap credit and political support where surviving. I'm thinking Boeing, GE, etc. With stock prices crashing they may get purchased and stripped of talent and IP.

Our manufacturing sector is very mature, the odds of a new wave of companies is very slim unless there is a technological advance which would cause one. Sure will there be some small companies that can't stay afloat in this environment, thereby opening up areas for entrepreneurship? Yeah. Will some of those smaller companies just become a part of a larger capital investment group? Yeah.

Will this somehow increase the amount of manufacturing done in the US? I doubt it. Many of the things that are manufactured in China are closer to the commodity side of the spectrum (Commodity-------------Custom). Commodities are meant to be cheaper and more disposable. It's tough to make things cheap when you have to pay a workforce much more. When your margins are already razor thin you'll dive out of an expensive place to make things like the US and jump to an overseas location for your commodity like products.

Will there be a wave of anti-globalization talk among people? Sure. I think we were already trending xenophobic in our rhetoric. I also think it's hard for Americans to stop their habit of buying crap regardless of an economic bump in the road. Remember people were talking in '08/'09 about how this might make people start to realize that they need to save more money and not leverage themselves to the hilt with an expensive mortgage. That didn't last too long IMO.

We have some companies that have started making protective gear in the country or are going to ramp up the production. One of them are importing the machinery from China and they are automating the part that is currently sewn  by Chinese workers. Another one is today making the fabric to Chinese factories were they sew the gowns. Now they have found a way to weld the gown instead of sewing it in china. So machines are fast replacing the Chinese workers as the cost of the supply chain have gone up. I have also read some articles were companies are talking about automating part of the production and taking it back to europé, mainly eastern europe due to risk we have seen with interrupted supply chains.

But that is for product that is in exceptional demand due to current temporary circumstances. That PPE isn't going to remain in permanent high demand. When the need for that disappears what happens to those companies?

As for supply chain you do have a point there. I do think that supply chains in general will be impacted by this. How that shakes out will be particular to each thing being made and the availability of the raw materials. I'm not so convinced that a permanent shakeup of how business was done is going to happen. If anything how prepared countries are to respond to illnesses will change but I don't think how things or where things are made is going to rapidly change due to coronavirus.

They are both hygiene and health related companies. The first one is not the corona virus specific masks but rather the lighter ones. If they already have the machinery and it is automated the cost should be lower than having Chinese doing it by hand so I think they will continue producing the stuff even when the high demand is over. Especially the first company could have continued producing the masks in a lot smaller quantity as they currently do instead of investing in new machinery. The wage levels are also increasing in China so companies are looking for cheaper markets and therefore automation could be an interesting option.
It will be interesting to follow.

[Optimiser]

Getting away from the cash/card issue, I think another big issue is education, especially for elementary through high school.

I mean, there's a REAL chance that at least some school districts won't open "as normal" this fall, which could mean continued distance learning or staggered schedules or something else. I mean, how can you claim to be adhering to ANY level of "social distancing" if you cram a 1,000+ kids into a school building all day? There doesn't seem to be much middle ground here. Either they're crammed in the building, or they aren't.

Yes it sucks for working parents, but think about how much it sucks for the kids. I have a kiddo starting high school this year and another starting middle school. Those are big milestones for most kids, and the thought that they will start the new phases by doing work alone at home just makes me sad. No making new friends, no meeting the teachers in a real way, no school activities or sports or assemblies or clubs or anything. That's a real possibility at least for the rest of 2020.

I'm glad we're just taking this a week at a time right now, because if my kids knew the rest of 2020 could look a lot like March and April, that would devastate them.

And then I feel horrible when I think about all the kids who have it so much worse. Kids who depend on school for much more than education: for food, a safe place, role models, etc. If we continue with online education for the rest of 2020, LOTS of kids will absolutely fall SO far behind, it will be staggering.

No easy answers here for school districts.

My daughter is starting high school next year too. She has been really good about the transition to learning at home, but she does not like it. In her mind things will be back to normal by the time school starts in the fall, but if they aren't she is gong to be devastated. My preschooler on the other hand seems to vastly prefer being home vs. going to school, but I think that half day of social interaction, that she is missing out on now, was really good for her development.

[CodingHare]

Getting away from the cash/card issue, I think another big issue is education, especially for elementary through high school.

I mean, there's a REAL chance that at least some school districts won't open "as normal" this fall, which could mean continued distance learning or staggered schedules or something else. I mean, how can you claim to be adhering to ANY level of "social distancing" if you cram a 1,000+ kids into a school building all day? There doesn't seem to be much middle ground here. Either they're crammed in the building, or they aren't.

Yes it sucks for working parents, but think about how much it sucks for the kids. I have a kiddo starting high school this year and another starting middle school. Those are big milestones for most kids, and the thought that they will start the new phases by doing work alone at home just makes me sad. No making new friends, no meeting the teachers in a real way, no school activities or sports or assemblies or clubs or anything. That's a real possibility at least for the rest of 2020.

I'm glad we're just taking this a week at a time right now, because if my kids knew the rest of 2020 could look a lot like March and April, that would devastate them.

And then I feel horrible when I think about all the kids who have it so much worse. Kids who depend on school for much more than education: for food, a safe place, role models, etc. If we continue with online education for the rest of 2020, LOTS of kids will absolutely fall SO far behind, it will be staggering.

No easy answers here for school districts.

As a person who was homeschooled from K-12, I can say that social isolation is a big deal in those years.  I didn't speak to anyone my own age all through highschool, except online.  When I went to college I was unable to relate to my peers due to missing socialization skills.  It's only in my late twenties that I'm starting to overcome not building those skills in the formative years.

I mean, my homeschooling was way more restrictive than what most kids are facing now, but it's certainly not ideal for anyone.

[dandarc]

@CodingHare - I went to public school my whole life and didn't really develop the social skills until well into my 20's. And I don't recall any time when I was away from school for a super long time for any reason.

[Nick_Miller]

Getting away from the cash/card issue, I think another big issue is education, especially for elementary through high school.

I mean, there's a REAL chance that at least some school districts won't open "as normal" this fall, which could mean continued distance learning or staggered schedules or something else. I mean, how can you claim to be adhering to ANY level of "social distancing" if you cram a 1,000+ kids into a school building all day? There doesn't seem to be much middle ground here. Either they're crammed in the building, or they aren't.

Yes it sucks for working parents, but think about how much it sucks for the kids. I have a kiddo starting high school this year and another starting middle school. Those are big milestones for most kids, and the thought that they will start the new phases by doing work alone at home just makes me sad. No making new friends, no meeting the teachers in a real way, no school activities or sports or assemblies or clubs or anything. That's a real possibility at least for the rest of 2020.

I'm glad we're just taking this a week at a time right now, because if my kids knew the rest of 2020 could look a lot like March and April, that would devastate them.

And then I feel horrible when I think about all the kids who have it so much worse. Kids who depend on school for much more than education: for food, a safe place, role models, etc. If we continue with online education for the rest of 2020, LOTS of kids will absolutely fall SO far behind, it will be staggering.

No easy answers here for school districts.

My daughter is starting high school next year too. She has been really good about the transition to learning at home, but she does not like it. In her mind things will be back to normal by the time school starts in the fall, but if they aren't she is gong to be devastated. My preschooler on the other hand seems to vastly prefer being home vs. going to school, but I think that half day of social interaction, that she is missing out on now, was really good for her development.

I feel your pain, and hers too. Some of my kiddos' teachers are trying to soften the blow by gently holding out hope that a few end-of-year things might be salvaged, but we all know that's not going to happen. I think they're just trying to engage them any way they can, which I understand.

[CodingHare]

@CodingHare - I went to public school my whole life and didn't really develop the social skills until well into my 20's. And I don't recall any time when I was away from school for a super long time for any reason.

Whereas my public schooled husband is still friends with his best friend from middle school and several people from college.  It truly is individual.  For me the absence of kids my own age was a direct cause of my lack of social skills--I was very outgoing when I was younger and my parents made an effort to go to homeschooling coops.  In any case, we're both proof that you can get there in the end.

[Wolfpack Mustachian]

Getting away from the cash/card issue, I think another big issue is education, especially for elementary through high school.

I mean, there's a REAL chance that at least some school districts won't open "as normal" this fall, which could mean continued distance learning or staggered schedules or something else. I mean, how can you claim to be adhering to ANY level of "social distancing" if you cram a 1,000+ kids into a school building all day? There doesn't seem to be much middle ground here. Either they're crammed in the building, or they aren't.

Yes it sucks for working parents, but think about how much it sucks for the kids. I have a kiddo starting high school this year and another starting middle school. Those are big milestones for most kids, and the thought that they will start the new phases by doing work alone at home just makes me sad. No making new friends, no meeting the teachers in a real way, no school activities or sports or assemblies or clubs or anything. That's a real possibility at least for the rest of 2020.

I'm glad we're just taking this a week at a time right now, because if my kids knew the rest of 2020 could look a lot like March and April, that would devastate them.

And then I feel horrible when I think about all the kids who have it so much worse. Kids who depend on school for much more than education: for food, a safe place, role models, etc. If we continue with online education for the rest of 2020, LOTS of kids will absolutely fall SO far behind, it will be staggering.

No easy answers here for school districts.

I agree there are no easy answers. However, am I the only one that thinks that no matter what health people say, schools will be opened up for next school year? They go hand in hand with bringing America back up into some semblance of production functionality. Are there really that many childless Americans or Americans that can see themselves surviving on one parent's income? Technically, we can probably as a nation do without many of the service industries, but there's still a lot of things that are in some way produced in America and a lot of jobs that need people physically at them. I have no idea how where to start to do the math on what is actually required, but I can't see schools/day cares shut down outside of the short term.

[maizefolk]

I agree there are no easy answers. However, am I the only one that thinks that no matter what health people say, schools will be opened up for next school year? They go hand in hand with bringing America back up into some semblance of production functionality. Are there really that many childless Americans or Americans that can see themselves surviving on one parent's income? Technically, we can probably as a nation do without many of the service industries, but there's still a lot of things that are in some way produced in America and a lot of jobs that need people physically at them. I have no idea how where to start to do the math on what is actually required, but I can't see schools/day cares shut down outside of the short term.

I think the short answer to your question is yes.

About 3/4ths of american households don't have any children living in them (including single person households, married couples without children, and people with adult children).

For the remaining 25% about 1/3 were married couples where only one person works outside the household to begin with.

Some additional number of households among the remaining 16% or so have either children too young to be in school or old enough that they can be trusted home alone (and maybe even watch younger siblings). I couldn't find good numbers for this. Figure 13+ can stay home alone, and once you have at least one teenage at home they could watch younger siblings during the day.

So hand wavey, back of the envelope number, I'd call it about one in ten households that are having to figure out alternative child care arrangements because schools are shutdown. Which is still a lot of people, but I don't think it's enough to drive policy decisions.

[phildonnia]

Here are some things I think aren't coming back:

• Movie Theaters.  Movie theaters were already on the ropes, since so many people have home entertainment systems that are at least comparable in sound and picture quality, but allow you to pause to use the restroom or get more snacks, and don't cost $12 per showing.  Movie theaters were the first thing to be shut down for COVID, and they'll likely be the last to come back, if at all.
• Full-service banking. I've been inside a bank branch exactly once in the last year, and that was because f***g Chase Bank won't let you open their bonus-paying account online.  While I was there, I saw the segment of humanity that still values that human touch, and expects velvet ropes, complementary coffee, and chatty tellers.  Now, I literally get an email every day from my various banks encouraging me to discover all that their website has to offer.  I can assume that those other people are getting these too, and will start to make that mental shift to fully online banking.
• Paper Money Yesterday, I took a ten-dollar bill to the Taco Bell drive through, and I watched as the person in front of me paid with a credit card without ever actually touching the reader.  And then I came up with my filthy scrap of paper, and was given three more filthy scraps of paper in change.  I don't know where they came from, or who else might have sneezed all over them before me, but next time I'm bringing the plastic.  And so is everyone else.  There is almost nothing that requires Federal Reserve Notes any more.
• The Office The stay-at-home orders were just the push we needed to force everyone into permanent tele-commuting.  Amid all the gripes about the distractions at home, you're not hearing just how wonderful it is not to spend an hour in the car each day.  And, you're also not hearing the businesses, as they wonder: If we're being just as productive, why the hell are we paying rent on this building, with all its electricity, window-washing, janitors, and toilet paper stock?
• Zombie movies We're sick of thinking about worldwide contagions and the dangers that lurk outside.  It's getting tedious. This trope is dead.
• Bulk Food I love the price; I love the variety.  But they're not bringing it back unless they can guarantee perfect sterility, which they can't.
• Mega-cruise-ships Cruises in general will survive.  I plan to book one immediately when cruises return with discount rates.  But I never understood the appeal of bigger and bigger ships.  COVID was not even the first time that a plague has swept through these multi-thousand-passenger floating cities, which seem designed for disease transmission.  Look for a return of smaller, less Disney-esque ships with employee servers at the buffet.
• Sick kids at school Elementary and secondary school will remain an in-person activity.  Let's face it, learning is a side-benefit to the school's primary purpose of watching your kids all day.  Even with working from home, it's nice to have a major government department watching your kids while you try to get something done..  Previously, there was an unspoken agreement that you can send your kid to school sick, but in return, I get to send my kid to school sick.  We'll all get sick, but that's the bargain.  Well, no more.  There will be new school policies that any cough or sniffle is a trip to the nurse, and a call home. 

[startingsmall]

Getting away from the cash/card issue, I think another big issue is education, especially for elementary through high school.

I mean, there's a REAL chance that at least some school districts won't open "as normal" this fall, which could mean continued distance learning or staggered schedules or something else. I mean, how can you claim to be adhering to ANY level of "social distancing" if you cram a 1,000+ kids into a school building all day? There doesn't seem to be much middle ground here. Either they're crammed in the building, or they aren't.

Yes it sucks for working parents, but think about how much it sucks for the kids. I have a kiddo starting high school this year and another starting middle school. Those are big milestones for most kids, and the thought that they will start the new phases by doing work alone at home just makes me sad. No making new friends, no meeting the teachers in a real way, no school activities or sports or assemblies or clubs or anything. That's a real possibility at least for the rest of 2020.

I'm glad we're just taking this a week at a time right now, because if my kids knew the rest of 2020 could look a lot like March and April, that would devastate them.

And then I feel horrible when I think about all the kids who have it so much worse. Kids who depend on school for much more than education: for food, a safe place, role models, etc. If we continue with online education for the rest of 2020, LOTS of kids will absolutely fall SO far behind, it will be staggering.

No easy answers here for school districts.

My daughter is starting high school next year too. She has been really good about the transition to learning at home, but she does not like it. In her mind things will be back to normal by the time school starts in the fall, but if they aren't she is gong to be devastated. My preschooler on the other hand seems to vastly prefer being home vs. going to school, but I think that half day of social interaction, that she is missing out on now, was really good for her development.

My daughter (currently in 2nd grade) is begging me to continue long-term homeschooling. I've admittedly considered it before... she gets a lot of positive socialization through church and extracurricular activities, while 2nd grade socialization feels like nothing but Lord of the Flies style free-for-alls and bullying. She was coming home from school in tears almost every day and it has been SO nice not to have that drama... she has definitely been much happier since being home.

I feel like it's almost unimaginable that schools won't open in the fall. I can't see people going for that. But will going to school in the fall be a GOOD idea? Probably not. I'm really considering homeschool or some sort of online program for next year. I haven't started researching it yet, but I guess I probably should.

[ketchup]

• Zombie movies We're sick of thinking about worldwide contagions and the dangers that lurk outside.  It's getting tedious. This trope is dead.

This one I'll disagree with.  I recently read World War Z only because of the pandemic, and every time in the past two months I've looked on JustWatch, Contagion (2010) is trending.

[frugalnacho]

Here are some things I think aren't coming back:

• Zombie movies We're sick of thinking about worldwide contagions and the dangers that lurk outside.  It's getting tedious. This trope is dead.

I've been watching those type of movies lately.  My life is largely still normal since I'm essential and still go to work, so it's not like I have a bunch of free time to sit around watching netflix like so many others are doing, but I am putting these movies into my queue and watching them when I have a chance.  I recently watched outbreak and contagion.  I have plans to watch pandemic, the stand, and I am legend.  I've already seen a lot of movies in the zombie genre, and I certainly hope it's not going away.

[Plina]

Here are some things I think aren't coming back:

• Movie Theaters.  Movie theaters were already on the ropes, since so many people have home entertainment systems that are at least comparable in sound and picture quality, but allow you to pause to use the restroom or get more snacks, and don't cost $12 per showing.  Movie theaters were the first thing to be shut down for COVID, and they'll likely be the last to come back, if at all.
• Full-service banking. I've been inside a bank branch exactly once in the last year, and that was because f***g Chase Bank won't let you open their bonus-paying account online.  While I was there, I saw the segment of humanity that still values that human touch, and expects velvet ropes, complementary coffee, and chatty tellers.  Now, I literally get an email every day from my various banks encouraging me to discover all that their website has to offer.  I can assume that those other people are getting these too, and will start to make that mental shift to fully online banking.
• Paper Money Yesterday, I took a ten-dollar bill to the Taco Bell drive through, and I watched as the person in front of me paid with a credit card without ever actually touching the reader.  And then I came up with my filthy scrap of paper, and was given three more filthy scraps of paper in change.  I don't know where they came from, or who else might have sneezed all over them before me, but next time I'm bringing the plastic.  And so is everyone else.  There is almost nothing that requires Federal Reserve Notes any more.
• The Office The stay-at-home orders were just the push we needed to force everyone into permanent tele-commuting.  Amid all the gripes about the distractions at home, you're not hearing just how wonderful it is not to spend an hour in the car each day.  And, you're also not hearing the businesses, as they wonder: If we're being just as productive, why the hell are we paying rent on this building, with all its electricity, window-washing, janitors, and toilet paper stock?
• Zombie movies We're sick of thinking about worldwide contagions and the dangers that lurk outside.  It's getting tedious. This trope is dead.
• Bulk Food I love the price; I love the variety.  But they're not bringing it back unless they can guarantee perfect sterility, which they can't.
• Mega-cruise-ships Cruises in general will survive.  I plan to book one immediately when cruises return with discount rates.  But I never understood the appeal of bigger and bigger ships.  COVID was not even the first time that a plague has swept through these multi-thousand-passenger floating cities, which seem designed for disease transmission.  Look for a return of smaller, less Disney-esque ships with employee servers at the buffet.
• Sick kids at school Elementary and secondary school will remain an in-person activity.  Let's face it, learning is a side-benefit to the school's primary purpose of watching your kids all day.  Even with working from home, it's nice to have a major government department watching your kids while you try to get something done..  Previously, there was an unspoken agreement that you can send your kid to school sick, but in return, I get to send my kid to school sick.  We'll all get sick, but that's the bargain.  Well, no more.  There will be new school policies that any cough or sniffle is a trip to the nurse, and a call home. 

I don’t see bulk food dissapearing. There is no such thing as totally sterile food. It would mean that all vegetabled and fruits, except the frozen, would need to disappear. Not to mention food buffets.

[mm1970]

Getting away from the cash/card issue, I think another big issue is education, especially for elementary through high school.

I mean, there's a REAL chance that at least some school districts won't open "as normal" this fall, which could mean continued distance learning or staggered schedules or something else. I mean, how can you claim to be adhering to ANY level of "social distancing" if you cram a 1,000+ kids into a school building all day? There doesn't seem to be much middle ground here. Either they're crammed in the building, or they aren't.

Yes it sucks for working parents, but think about how much it sucks for the kids. I have a kiddo starting high school this year and another starting middle school. Those are big milestones for most kids, and the thought that they will start the new phases by doing work alone at home just makes me sad. No making new friends, no meeting the teachers in a real way, no school activities or sports or assemblies or clubs or anything. That's a real possibility at least for the rest of 2020.

I'm glad we're just taking this a week at a time right now, because if my kids knew the rest of 2020 could look a lot like March and April, that would devastate them.

And then I feel horrible when I think about all the kids who have it so much worse. Kids who depend on school for much more than education: for food, a safe place, role models, etc. If we continue with online education for the rest of 2020, LOTS of kids will absolutely fall SO far behind, it will be staggering.

No easy answers here for school districts.

My daughter is starting high school next year too. She has been really good about the transition to learning at home, but she does not like it. In her mind things will be back to normal by the time school starts in the fall, but if they aren't she is gong to be devastated. My preschooler on the other hand seems to vastly prefer being home vs. going to school, but I think that half day of social interaction, that she is missing out on now, was really good for her development.

Same.  My son starts high school next year.  I think he probably thinks it would be fine to do the at home thing like we are currently doing.  But I think it would be an absolute shit-show to attempt all the advanced classes that way.   Right now, he's fine, because the teachers are (rightfully) phoning it in, a bit.  Many of them also have children at home, they are on a weird, reduced schedule.  A good % of kids don't have internet access yet.  So his math compaction class will NOT get through the amount that he would have normally.

I do think schools might not start up like we expect.  My son is VERY motivated by: challenging teachers and by: getting better grades than everyone else.  I think distance learning will muck that up.

[mm1970]

I agree there are no easy answers. However, am I the only one that thinks that no matter what health people say, schools will be opened up for next school year? They go hand in hand with bringing America back up into some semblance of production functionality. Are there really that many childless Americans or Americans that can see themselves surviving on one parent's income? Technically, we can probably as a nation do without many of the service industries, but there's still a lot of things that are in some way produced in America and a lot of jobs that need people physically at them. I have no idea how where to start to do the math on what is actually required, but I can't see schools/day cares shut down outside of the short term.

I think the short answer to your question is yes.

About 3/4ths of american households don't have any children living in them (including single person households, married couples without children, and people with adult children).

For the remaining 25% about 1/3 were married couples where only one person works outside the household to begin with.

Some additional number of households among the remaining 16% or so have either children too young to be in school or old enough that they can be trusted home alone (and maybe even watch younger siblings). I couldn't find good numbers for this. Figure 13+ can stay home alone, and once you have at least one teenage at home they could watch younger siblings during the day.

So hand wavey, back of the envelope number, I'd call it about one in ten households that are having to figure out alternative child care arrangements because schools are shutdown. Which is still a lot of people, but I don't think it's enough to drive policy decisions.

My googling found data from 2016 that suggests that 40% of all households have children, and 61% of those have two working parents.  That means we are closer to 25% of the population needing alternative care arrangements. That's significant.

You cannot just say "well, there's an older teen".  Sure, our 14 yo can babysit his 7 yo brother for a few hours but we are NOT talking about child minding, we are talking about SCHOOLING.  Both kids need to be getting educated, simultaneously.  The teen can't get his schooling done and teach his 2nd grade brother.

[renata ricotta]

Here are some things I think aren't coming back:

• Movie Theaters.  Movie theaters were already on the ropes, since so many people have home entertainment systems that are at least comparable in sound and picture quality, but allow you to pause to use the restroom or get more snacks, and don't cost $12 per showing.  Movie theaters were the first thing to be shut down for COVID, and they'll likely be the last to come back, if at all.
• Full-service banking. I've been inside a bank branch exactly once in the last year, and that was because f***g Chase Bank won't let you open their bonus-paying account online.  While I was there, I saw the segment of humanity that still values that human touch, and expects velvet ropes, complementary coffee, and chatty tellers.  Now, I literally get an email every day from my various banks encouraging me to discover all that their website has to offer.  I can assume that those other people are getting these too, and will start to make that mental shift to fully online banking.
• Paper Money Yesterday, I took a ten-dollar bill to the Taco Bell drive through, and I watched as the person in front of me paid with a credit card without ever actually touching the reader.  And then I came up with my filthy scrap of paper, and was given three more filthy scraps of paper in change.  I don't know where they came from, or who else might have sneezed all over them before me, but next time I'm bringing the plastic.  And so is everyone else.  There is almost nothing that requires Federal Reserve Notes any more.
• The Office The stay-at-home orders were just the push we needed to force everyone into permanent tele-commuting.  Amid all the gripes about the distractions at home, you're not hearing just how wonderful it is not to spend an hour in the car each day.  And, you're also not hearing the businesses, as they wonder: If we're being just as productive, why the hell are we paying rent on this building, with all its electricity, window-washing, janitors, and toilet paper stock?
• Zombie movies We're sick of thinking about worldwide contagions and the dangers that lurk outside.  It's getting tedious. This trope is dead.
• Bulk Food I love the price; I love the variety.  But they're not bringing it back unless they can guarantee perfect sterility, which they can't.
• Mega-cruise-ships Cruises in general will survive.  I plan to book one immediately when cruises return with discount rates.  But I never understood the appeal of bigger and bigger ships.  COVID was not even the first time that a plague has swept through these multi-thousand-passenger floating cities, which seem designed for disease transmission.  Look for a return of smaller, less Disney-esque ships with employee servers at the buffet.
• Sick kids at school Elementary and secondary school will remain an in-person activity.  Let's face it, learning is a side-benefit to the school's primary purpose of watching your kids all day.  Even with working from home, it's nice to have a major government department watching your kids while you try to get something done..  Previously, there was an unspoken agreement that you can send your kid to school sick, but in return, I get to send my kid to school sick.  We'll all get sick, but that's the bargain.  Well, no more.  There will be new school policies that any cough or sniffle is a trip to the nurse, and a call home. 

I don’t see bulk food dissapearing. There is no such thing as totally sterile food. It would mean that all vegetabled and fruits, except the frozen, would need to disappear. Not to mention food buffets.

Yeah I agree, I'm not following this one. Why would the bulk food section be any more or less difficult to sterilize than anything else in the grocery store?

[maizefolk]

I agree there are no easy answers. However, am I the only one that thinks that no matter what health people say, schools will be opened up for next school year? They go hand in hand with bringing America back up into some semblance of production functionality. Are there really that many childless Americans or Americans that can see themselves surviving on one parent's income? Technically, we can probably as a nation do without many of the service industries, but there's still a lot of things that are in some way produced in America and a lot of jobs that need people physically at them. I have no idea how where to start to do the math on what is actually required, but I can't see schools/day cares shut down outside of the short term.

I think the short answer to your question is yes.

About 3/4ths of american households don't have any children living in them (including single person households, married couples without children, and people with adult children).

For the remaining 25% about 1/3 were married couples where only one person works outside the household to begin with.

Some additional number of households among the remaining 16% or so have either children too young to be in school or old enough that they can be trusted home alone (and maybe even watch younger siblings). I couldn't find good numbers for this. Figure 13+ can stay home alone, and once you have at least one teenage at home they could watch younger siblings during the day.

So hand wavey, back of the envelope number, I'd call it about one in ten households that are having to figure out alternative child care arrangements because schools are shutdown. Which is still a lot of people, but I don't think it's enough to drive policy decisions.

My googling found data from 2016 that suggests that 40% of all households have children, and 61% of those have two working parents.  That means we are closer to 25% of the population needing alternative care arrangements. That's significant.

You cannot just say "well, there's an older teen".  Sure, our 14 yo can babysit his 7 yo brother for a few hours but we are NOT talking about child minding, we are talking about SCHOOLING.  Both kids need to be getting educated, simultaneously.  The teen can't get his schooling done and teach his 2nd grade brother.

I think you're looking at the "percentage of all family households in the United States had children under age 18 living in the household." That's about 40%, but there are lots of households which don't count as family households (i.e. single adults) which is what brings the overall percentage down to 25% before we even start looking at households with kids where only one parent works to begin with.

I agree with the threshold is ongoing education rather than children are safe and supervised being babysit during the day by an older sibling isn't going to cut it. From what I've heard though, that's a standard we're already not meeting in a lot of states. Folks in my home town as being specifically told not to cover new material with their children (although they are welcome to review past material) because it would give those kids an unfair advantage over those whose parents aren't able to teach them during the school shutdown. Seems crazy to me.

Shall we say 10% of households if the threshold is "safe and supervised" and 16% if the threshold is "ongoing and effective remote education"?

[OtherJen]

Here are some things I think aren't coming back:

• Movie Theaters.  Movie theaters were already on the ropes, since so many people have home entertainment systems that are at least comparable in sound and picture quality, but allow you to pause to use the restroom or get more snacks, and don't cost $12 per showing.  Movie theaters were the first thing to be shut down for COVID, and they'll likely be the last to come back, if at all.
• Full-service banking. I've been inside a bank branch exactly once in the last year, and that was because f***g Chase Bank won't let you open their bonus-paying account online.  While I was there, I saw the segment of humanity that still values that human touch, and expects velvet ropes, complementary coffee, and chatty tellers.  Now, I literally get an email every day from my various banks encouraging me to discover all that their website has to offer.  I can assume that those other people are getting these too, and will start to make that mental shift to fully online banking.
• Paper Money Yesterday, I took a ten-dollar bill to the Taco Bell drive through, and I watched as the person in front of me paid with a credit card without ever actually touching the reader.  And then I came up with my filthy scrap of paper, and was given three more filthy scraps of paper in change.  I don't know where they came from, or who else might have sneezed all over them before me, but next time I'm bringing the plastic.  And so is everyone else.  There is almost nothing that requires Federal Reserve Notes any more.
• The Office The stay-at-home orders were just the push we needed to force everyone into permanent tele-commuting.  Amid all the gripes about the distractions at home, you're not hearing just how wonderful it is not to spend an hour in the car each day.  And, you're also not hearing the businesses, as they wonder: If we're being just as productive, why the hell are we paying rent on this building, with all its electricity, window-washing, janitors, and toilet paper stock?
• Zombie movies We're sick of thinking about worldwide contagions and the dangers that lurk outside.  It's getting tedious. This trope is dead.
• Bulk Food I love the price; I love the variety.  But they're not bringing it back unless they can guarantee perfect sterility, which they can't.
• Mega-cruise-ships Cruises in general will survive.  I plan to book one immediately when cruises return with discount rates.  But I never understood the appeal of bigger and bigger ships.  COVID was not even the first time that a plague has swept through these multi-thousand-passenger floating cities, which seem designed for disease transmission.  Look for a return of smaller, less Disney-esque ships with employee servers at the buffet.
• Sick kids at school Elementary and secondary school will remain an in-person activity.  Let's face it, learning is a side-benefit to the school's primary purpose of watching your kids all day.  Even with working from home, it's nice to have a major government department watching your kids while you try to get something done..  Previously, there was an unspoken agreement that you can send your kid to school sick, but in return, I get to send my kid to school sick.  We'll all get sick, but that's the bargain.  Well, no more.  There will be new school policies that any cough or sniffle is a trip to the nurse, and a call home. 

I don’t see bulk food dissapearing. There is no such thing as totally sterile food. It would mean that all vegetabled and fruits, except the frozen, would need to disappear. Not to mention food buffets.

Yeah I agree, I'm not following this one. Why would the bulk food section be any more or less difficult to sterilize than anything else in the grocery store?

I could see greater restrictions on who can access the bulk food containers. Like, all of them would be behind a barrier of some sort, and an employee would have to measure out what customers wanted. Honestly, I'd consider that an improvement. I've heard enough stories about people sticking bare hands into bulk bins to be grossed out, and I'm not particularly squeamish.

[simonsez]

I could see greater restrictions on who can access the bulk food containers. Like, all of them would be behind a barrier of some sort, and an employee would have to measure out what customers wanted. Honestly, I'd consider that an improvement. I've heard enough stories about people sticking bare hands into bulk bins to be grossed out, and I'm not particularly squeamish.

I think there are low tech solutions for this.  The grocery store we go to has the "gravity turnstile" containers for the bulk section.  No one's grubby hands touch your food before you (other than the employee filling the containers to begin with) but I guess if someone wanted to be nefarious they could put germs at the bottom part of the chute. 

[Metalcat]

Here are some things I think aren't coming back:

• Movie Theaters.  Movie theaters were already on the ropes, since so many people have home entertainment systems that are at least comparable in sound and picture quality, but allow you to pause to use the restroom or get more snacks, and don't cost $12 per showing.  Movie theaters were the first thing to be shut down for COVID, and they'll likely be the last to come back, if at all.
• Full-service banking. I've been inside a bank branch exactly once in the last year, and that was because f***g Chase Bank won't let you open their bonus-paying account online.  While I was there, I saw the segment of humanity that still values that human touch, and expects velvet ropes, complementary coffee, and chatty tellers.  Now, I literally get an email every day from my various banks encouraging me to discover all that their website has to offer.  I can assume that those other people are getting these too, and will start to make that mental shift to fully online banking.
• Paper Money Yesterday, I took a ten-dollar bill to the Taco Bell drive through, and I watched as the person in front of me paid with a credit card without ever actually touching the reader.  And then I came up with my filthy scrap of paper, and was given three more filthy scraps of paper in change.  I don't know where they came from, or who else might have sneezed all over them before me, but next time I'm bringing the plastic.  And so is everyone else.  There is almost nothing that requires Federal Reserve Notes any more.
• The Office The stay-at-home orders were just the push we needed to force everyone into permanent tele-commuting.  Amid all the gripes about the distractions at home, you're not hearing just how wonderful it is not to spend an hour in the car each day.  And, you're also not hearing the businesses, as they wonder: If we're being just as productive, why the hell are we paying rent on this building, with all its electricity, window-washing, janitors, and toilet paper stock?
• Zombie movies We're sick of thinking about worldwide contagions and the dangers that lurk outside.  It's getting tedious. This trope is dead.
• Bulk Food I love the price; I love the variety.  But they're not bringing it back unless they can guarantee perfect sterility, which they can't.
• Mega-cruise-ships Cruises in general will survive.  I plan to book one immediately when cruises return with discount rates.  But I never understood the appeal of bigger and bigger ships.  COVID was not even the first time that a plague has swept through these multi-thousand-passenger floating cities, which seem designed for disease transmission.  Look for a return of smaller, less Disney-esque ships with employee servers at the buffet.
• Sick kids at school Elementary and secondary school will remain an in-person activity.  Let's face it, learning is a side-benefit to the school's primary purpose of watching your kids all day.  Even with working from home, it's nice to have a major government department watching your kids while you try to get something done..  Previously, there was an unspoken agreement that you can send your kid to school sick, but in return, I get to send my kid to school sick.  We'll all get sick, but that's the bargain.  Well, no more.  There will be new school policies that any cough or sniffle is a trip to the nurse, and a call home. 

I don’t see bulk food dissapearing. There is no such thing as totally sterile food. It would mean that all vegetabled and fruits, except the frozen, would need to disappear. Not to mention food buffets.

Yeah I agree, I'm not following this one. Why would the bulk food section be any more or less difficult to sterilize than anything else in the grocery store?

Also, most bulk produce is shelf stable, so very easy to leave alone for a few days in quarantine before using.
I'm still shopping at the bulk store, I just leave everything in the pantry for 72 hrs.

[phildonnia]

Yeah I agree, I'm not following this one. Why would the bulk food section be any more or less difficult to sterilize than anything else in the grocery store?

It's probably no more difficult to keep clean than, say, the fresh produce.  But perception will play a big role.  Somehow, it doesn't bother me that someone else has handled all the apples, looking for rotten spots.  But the idea of someone running their hands through the cashews is disgusting.  People will avoid the bulk food, whether that makes sense or not.

[FlytilFIRE]

Some additional number of households among the remaining 16% or so have either children too young to be in school or old enough that they can be trusted home alone (and maybe even watch younger siblings). I couldn't find good numbers for this. Figure 13+ can stay home alone, and once you have at least one teenage at home they could watch younger siblings during the day.

Mailman,

I'm 62, so perhaps completely out of touch (just ask my SO!). But when I was 10, my 13 yo brother and I swapped babysitting my 2 yo brother all summer long (and we made $5/week, too!). The current situation might encourage many families to engage siblings in care giving roles. Of course the Authorities might then charge the entire family with child abuse/neglect, but I'd like to think not.

Individuals and families are going to have to adjust to the new world. And if they can do it, our communities will get stronger as well. This virus is a wake up call that the nanny state will fail you when you most need it. The individuals, and families, will figure it out.

[OtherJen]

Yeah I agree, I'm not following this one. Why would the bulk food section be any more or less difficult to sterilize than anything else in the grocery store?

It's probably no more difficult to keep clean than, say, the fresh produce.  But perception will play a big role.  Somehow, it doesn't bother me that someone else has handled all the apples, looking for rotten spots.  But the idea of someone running their hands through the cashews is disgusting.  People will avoid the bulk food, whether that makes sense or not.

I wash fresh produce. I don’t generally wash cashews or baking supplies.

[mancityfan]

Getting away from the cash/card issue, I think another big issue is education, especially for elementary through high school.

I mean, there's a REAL chance that at least some school districts won't open "as normal" this fall, which could mean continued distance learning or staggered schedules or something else. I mean, how can you claim to be adhering to ANY level of "social distancing" if you cram a 1,000+ kids into a school building all day? There doesn't seem to be much middle ground here. Either they're crammed in the building, or they aren't.

Yes it sucks for working parents, but think about how much it sucks for the kids. I have a kiddo starting high school this year and another starting middle school. Those are big milestones for most kids, and the thought that they will start the new phases by doing work alone at home just makes me sad. No making new friends, no meeting the teachers in a real way, no school activities or sports or assemblies or clubs or anything. That's a real possibility at least for the rest of 2020.

I'm glad we're just taking this a week at a time right now, because if my kids knew the rest of 2020 could look a lot like March and April, that would devastate them.

And then I feel horrible when I think about all the kids who have it so much worse. Kids who depend on school for much more than education: for food, a safe place, role models, etc. If we continue with online education for the rest of 2020, LOTS of kids will absolutely fall SO far behind, it will be staggering.

No easy answers here for school districts.

My daughter is starting high school next year too. She has been really good about the transition to learning at home, but she does not like it. In her mind things will be back to normal by the time school starts in the fall, but if they aren't she is gong to be devastated. My preschooler on the other hand seems to vastly prefer being home vs. going to school, but I think that half day of social interaction, that she is missing out on now, was really good for her development.

Same.  My son starts high school next year.  I think he probably thinks it would be fine to do the at home thing like we are currently doing.  But I think it would be an absolute shit-show to attempt all the advanced classes that way.   Right now, he's fine, because the teachers are (rightfully) phoning it in, a bit.  Many of them also have children at home, they are on a weird, reduced schedule.  A good % of kids don't have internet access yet.  So his math compaction class will NOT get through the amount that he would have normally.

I do think schools might not start up like we expect.  My son is VERY motivated by: challenging teachers and by: getting better grades than everyone else.  I think distance learning will muck that up.

I am a middle school teacher. I will only feel comfortable with returning to school if there is widespread testing, tracing, quarantine rules in place in my state. Even then, it will be uncomfortable and less than ideal. My class sizes are around 30 kids. Shifts of kids coming to school to reduce class sizes may have to come in. There is going to have to be some serious thinking out of the box, and radical adjustments to school until a vaccine is found.

Parents who are anti vaxxers. There will be more push back that if you are not going to vaccinate your kids, then they cannot take part in public education. You keep your choice, but you have to accept the consequences.

This is such a tough time for kids and parents. School is not just a place of learning, it is often a safe haven for those with difficult home lives. I miss my students.

[Nick_Miller]

In some ways, I think it will be much mentally tougher this summer and this fall (stay with me here)...

Right now, for most of it, there are virtually no options. We stay at home unless working, and we social distance the crap out of everything. It sucks, but the expectations are pretty straightforward. For now.

But what happens let's say in June, when governors start to loosen restrictions a bit? I feel like the real mental anguish will start.

Scenario 1: Your buddy Laura invites to you a cookout at her house in June. There will be 30-40 people there, of all ages, and you won't know 2/3 of them, and you have no idea about their health status, etc. It's a crap shoot.  Do you go? It seems you start getting into utilitarian analysis re: the pleasure you might get from a few hours of eating and socializing in the sun versus the potential harm if even one person contracts the virus or spreads it to one other person. I mean, when you look at that "math," I'm not sure how I could convince myself to expose my wife and kids to that potential harm, but EVERYONE is going to want to go, so saying "no" to things once they "open up again" will start WWIII in many households. And hell, it could even ruin friendships if one friend thinks that it's now fine and expected to "hang out" some while the other thinks that non-essential contact with anyone is a ridiculous risk.

Scenario 2: Schools start back up in August, but there's no vaccine (there won't be), and kids will still be stuffed 25-30 students/per classroom. Only changes are widespread availability of hand sanitizer, more thorough cleanings of building, strict "stay home" orders at any sign of sickness. Would you send your kid? I mean, what analysis do you use? The old "Well, everyone else is doing it, so I guess we will" analysis? Would you be afraid of looking like a lunatic if you pulled your kids? Would pulling your kids mean you have to homeschool them? Do you just cross your fingers and tell yourself that they're young and things will probably be fine?"

Scenario 3: You find out that, by going to a totally unneeded activity, like a cookout or party, you unknowingly spread the virus to someone else, who later dies from it. How do you mentally or emotionally handle that? How do you ever forgive yourself, even if you didn't know you had the virus at the time? If you would have just stayed home, that person wouldn't have died.

[JGS1980]

In some ways, I think it will be much mentally tougher this summer and this fall (stay with me here)...

Right now, for most of it, there are virtually no options. We stay at home unless working, and we social distance the crap out of everything. It sucks, but the expectations are pretty straightforward. For now.

But what happens let's say in June, when governors start to loosen restrictions a bit? I feel like the real mental anguish will start.

Scenario 1: Your buddy Laura invites to you a cookout at her house in June. There will be 30-40 people there, of all ages, and you won't know 2/3 of them, and you have no idea about their health status, etc. It's a crap shoot.  Do you go? It seems you start getting into utilitarian analysis re: the pleasure you might get from a few hours of eating and socializing in the sun versus the potential harm if even one person contracts the virus or spreads it to one other person. I mean, when you look at that "math," I'm not sure how I could convince myself to expose my wife and kids to that potential harm, but EVERYONE is going to want to go, so saying "no" to things once they "open up again" will start WWIII in many households. And hell, it could even ruin friendships if one friend thinks that it's now fine and expected to "hang out" some while the other thinks that non-essential contact with anyone is a ridiculous risk.

Scenario 2: Schools start back up in August, but there's no vaccine (there won't be), and kids will still be stuffed 25-30 students/per classroom. Only changes are widespread availability of hand sanitizer, more thorough cleanings of building, strict "stay home" orders at any sign of sickness. Would you send your kid? I mean, what analysis do you use? The old "Well, everyone else is doing it, so I guess we will" analysis? Would you be afraid of looking like a lunatic if you pulled your kids? Would pulling your kids mean you have to homeschool them? Do you just cross your fingers and tell yourself that they're young and things will probably be fine?"

Scenario 3: You find out that, by going to a totally unneeded activity, like a cookout or party, you unknowingly spread the virus to someone else, who later dies from it. How do you mentally or emotionally handle that? How do you ever forgive yourself, even if you didn't know you had the virus at the time? If you would have just stayed home, that person wouldn't have died.

Great post Nick Miller.

How would I handle these 3 scenarios? We are in our 30's and have school aged kids.

First, I would assume we have reached ZERO [less than 5?] cases of Covid in our county at the time.

Scenario 1: Me and my family will refuse to go to a party with 30-40 people, most of them strangers.
We will, however, have 1-2 families over for dinner/cookout/drinks on the porch with play time for the kids.

Scenario 2: Assuming no cases locally, I would send my kids back to school.

Scenario 3: Will be avoided hopefully by limiting my social circle, avoiding crowds, and good old luck.

Of course all these scenarios are VERY individualized, if someone in my home were very high risk, all my decisions would change accordingly.

[T-Money$]

I don't think life will change very much in the longer term.  Not only is the current situation economically unsustainable, but it is depressing for a whole lot of people.  Many I'm close to want to go back living the way they were before, they realize correctly there is not a significant risk from the virus for the overwhelming majority of people.  There are things to be worried about, but COVID-19 ain't it.

As the virus spreads (which it will), if it behaves like other coronaviruses there will at the very least be short-term adaptive immunity with the overwhelming majority of those infected and it will likely mutate to something that is even less lethal than it is now.  Basically, the virus won't be as lethal, there will be at least some immunity in circulation and it won't be able to spread as fast. 

It's great there is so much effort towards a vaccine, but much like the flu vaccine I think it may be more of a psychological placebo than anything else. 

It seems unlikely society will be so fearful indefinitely, fear and insecurity are draining.  As more of the economy gets open (which seems to be happening in Europe first) and there aren't catastrophic consequences, life will mainly go back to the way it was.  It will take some time, for sure. 

Those that aren't good at assessing risk will direct their Chicken Little syndrome to the next flavor (child predators, terrorists, immigrants, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, etc.).

Or perhaps we are all going to die...who knows.  Time to go to the park without my mask on.  L8TR.

[former player]

As the virus spreads (which it will), if it behaves like other coronaviruses there will at the very least be short-term adaptive immunity with the overwhelming majority of those infected and it will likely mutate to something that is even less lethal than it is now. 

Basically, the virus won't be as lethal, there will be at least some immunity in circulation and it won't be able to spread as fast. 

Can you explain these two statements for me?  On the first statement I would understand how lethal a virus is by what percentage of people who catch it are likely to die - ie the number of deaths out of number infected, and for the virus to become less lethal then either the virus has to evolve to become less deadly or the human population has to evolve to become more resistant.  If you are proposing the evolution answer to the virus what is the timeline for that?

On the second statement you seem to be saying that immunity means the virus won't be able to spread as fast.  By "immunity" I can see that the more people who have had the virus and therefore become immune (although I think the science isn't settled on this yet?) the less it will spread.  But taken with your first sentence you also seem to be proposing immunity through evolution, which I would like to think would happen within my natural lifespan but is there any science to say this could happen?

[Nick_Miller]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/16/us/coronavirus-pandemic-new-normal/index.html

Here's an interesting post analyzing some of the ideas we've expressed in this thread.

I guess I could see kids going to the school building on like a split 50/50 basis, to focus on group work, instruction, summative assessments, etc., and then performing a lot of the normal/re-enforcement work at home or through online lessons and programs. It would mitigate exposure if you only had 50% of the normal amount of students in the building, and it could give the kids the much-needed social interactions to strengthen their mental health.

But then you'd still have the issue of who watches the kiddos on "off days." And could school districts realistically handle this setup? You'd still need your full fleet of buses everyday (unless the staggering was geographically-based) and teachers could be pulled in both directions in an already very challenging field.

It seems like the one thing most everyone agrees on is no huge gatherings for the rest of the year. It will be interesting to see if MLB or other sports could make it work economically with no asses in the seats for 2020.

[LifeHappens]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/16/us/coronavirus-pandemic-new-normal/index.html

Here's an interesting post analyzing some of the ideas we've expressed in this thread.

I guess I could see kids going to the school building on like a split 50/50 basis, to focus on group work, instruction, summative assessments, etc., and then performing a lot of the normal/re-enforcement work at home or through online lessons and programs. It would mitigate exposure if you only had 50% of the normal amount of students in the building, and it could give the kids the much-needed social interactions to strengthen their mental health.

But then you'd still have the issue of who watches the kiddos on "off days." And could school districts realistically handle this setup? You'd still need your full fleet of buses everyday (unless the staggering was geographically-based) and teachers could be pulled in both directions in an already very challenging field.

It seems like the one thing most everyone agrees on is no huge gatherings for the rest of the year. It will be interesting to see if MLB or other sports could make it work economically with no asses in the seats for 2020.

I went to school in a district that did a split schedule because of building overcrowding. It didn't affect my class year, but the years before me had what were essentially long 1/2 days every day. Some students were in class from 7am-12pm and others from 12pm to 5pm. A setup like that could actually work fine with a combo of before/after care offsite and time at school.

Pro sports is going to be interesting. I'm a Sportsball fan and it's something I miss. Most teams make enough revenue off TV revenue to keep going, so I could see games played in empty venues as a solution. The bigger challenge, I think, will be keeping the players and their families healthy. Rich 20-somethings aren't exactly known for their common sense and good public health practices!

[Villanelle]

In some ways, I think it will be much mentally tougher this summer and this fall (stay with me here)...

Right now, for most of it, there are virtually no options. We stay at home unless working, and we social distance the crap out of everything. It sucks, but the expectations are pretty straightforward. For now.

But what happens let's say in June, when governors start to loosen restrictions a bit? I feel like the real mental anguish will start.

Scenario 1: Your buddy Laura invites to you a cookout at her house in June. There will be 30-40 people there, of all ages, and you won't know 2/3 of them, and you have no idea about their health status, etc. It's a crap shoot.  Do you go? It seems you start getting into utilitarian analysis re: the pleasure you might get from a few hours of eating and socializing in the sun versus the potential harm if even one person contracts the virus or spreads it to one other person. I mean, when you look at that "math," I'm not sure how I could convince myself to expose my wife and kids to that potential harm, but EVERYONE is going to want to go, so saying "no" to things once they "open up again" will start WWIII in many households. And hell, it could even ruin friendships if one friend thinks that it's now fine and expected to "hang out" some while the other thinks that non-essential contact with anyone is a ridiculous risk.

Scenario 2: Schools start back up in August, but there's no vaccine (there won't be), and kids will still be stuffed 25-30 students/per classroom. Only changes are widespread availability of hand sanitizer, more thorough cleanings of building, strict "stay home" orders at any sign of sickness. Would you send your kid? I mean, what analysis do you use? The old "Well, everyone else is doing it, so I guess we will" analysis? Would you be afraid of looking like a lunatic if you pulled your kids? Would pulling your kids mean you have to homeschool them? Do you just cross your fingers and tell yourself that they're young and things will probably be fine?"

Scenario 3: You find out that, by going to a totally unneeded activity, like a cookout or party, you unknowingly spread the virus to someone else, who later dies from it. How do you mentally or emotionally handle that? How do you ever forgive yourself, even if you didn't know you had the virus at the time? If you would have just stayed home, that person wouldn't have died.

Spot on.  I've already given a lot of thought to #1.  While all my friends are social distancing, I'm the most intense about it (haven't left my house in nearly 5 weeks) and I started earliest.  I suspect our differences will be reflected when things are loosened up, and I can see scenarios where they feel judged for choosing to go out if I say I'm not going to go to X event, and I will feel judged for choosing to continue to be "extreme". 

My parents are getting squirrely as well.  Last night during our weekly Skype happy hour, they mentioned how excited they are to come visit in September, something that has been a loose plan for about a year.  It's going to be really awkward and difficult if I end up wanting to try to tell them not to come.  I think that as older people, their calculus on things is probably different than mine.  I respect that, but I also want to keep them (and my household, too) as safe as possible.  And if they come, I doubt they are going to be willing to just sit in our house. 

As for as school splitting, which it could work and provide at least a bit more safety, if we are asking teachers to put in even more hours, we are going to need to pay them more.  Extending their school day by 3 hours, in addition to all the other work they do, isn't going to fly unless they are paid more.  Even then, many of them rely on keeping roughly the same hours as their school aged children so they don't pay for childcare, which wouldn't work if they work from 7-530p and their kids go to school from 730 to 1230. 

[startingsmall]

Scenario 1: Your buddy Laura invites to you a cookout at her house in June. There will be 30-40 people there, of all ages, and you won't know 2/3 of them, and you have no idea about their health status, etc. It's a crap shoot.  Do you go? It seems you start getting into utilitarian analysis re: the pleasure you might get from a few hours of eating and socializing in the sun versus the potential harm if even one person contracts the virus or spreads it to one other person. I mean, when you look at that "math," I'm not sure how I could convince myself to expose my wife and kids to that potential harm, but EVERYONE is going to want to go, so saying "no" to things once they "open up again" will start WWIII in many households. And hell, it could even ruin friendships if one friend thinks that it's now fine and expected to "hang out" some while the other thinks that non-essential contact with anyone is a ridiculous risk.

Scenario 2: Schools start back up in August, but there's no vaccine (there won't be), and kids will still be stuffed 25-30 students/per classroom. Only changes are widespread availability of hand sanitizer, more thorough cleanings of building, strict "stay home" orders at any sign of sickness. Would you send your kid? I mean, what analysis do you use? The old "Well, everyone else is doing it, so I guess we will" analysis? Would you be afraid of looking like a lunatic if you pulled your kids? Would pulling your kids mean you have to homeschool them? Do you just cross your fingers and tell yourself that they're young and things will probably be fine?"

Scenario 3: You find out that, by going to a totally unneeded activity, like a cookout or party, you unknowingly spread the virus to someone else, who later dies from it. How do you mentally or emotionally handle that? How do you ever forgive yourself, even if you didn't know you had the virus at the time? If you would have just stayed home, that person wouldn't have died.

I'm starting to give some serious consideration to the issue of school in the fall. Obviously, a lot could change between now and then (for better OR for worse!), but I don't trust my local community to make the same risk assessments that I would. Our governor so far has been very reasonable, but he's getting a lot of pushback and if he leaves decisions to the counties we're screwed. (My county still has a lot of coronavirus deniers, probably because FOX News is our community's primary info source). I can definitely envision a scenario in which my husband and I opt for either homeschool or online schooling for our daughter for next year. We've considered homeschooling in the past and always decided against it, but reopening the schools with continued transmission in our area might tip the scale for us.

The biggest complication that we're foreseeing is church. My husband is a pastor. Right now, much of the congregation is supportive of him doing virtual services (they have no choice, since our governor mandated it)... but they seem to be growing impatient and getting antsy to return to in-person services. I can see a point coming where he has to choose between a) resuming services before we're comfortable with it or b) leaving his job. Hopefully I'm wrong and some of the questions about this virus will be answered, making the "right" choice more obvious, less controversial, more unanimous, etc... but I can easily see a scenario where we still feel that it's a significant threat to our elderly congregation and they try to force him to resume in-person services anyway.

[2Cent]

...
The biggest complication that we're foreseeing is church. My husband is a pastor. Right now, much of the congregation is supportive of him doing virtual services (they have no choice, since our governor mandated it)... but they seem to be growing impatient and getting antsy to return to in-person services. I can see a point coming where he has to choose between a) resuming services before we're comfortable with it or b) leaving his job. Hopefully I'm wrong and some of the questions about this virus will be answered, making the "right" choice more obvious, less controversial, more unanimous, etc... but I can easily see a scenario where we still feel that it's a significant threat to our elderly congregation and they try to force him to resume in-person services anyway.

There are in-between options where you do in person services with social distancing in place. You could easily separate the young and elderly members by having different music styles. The thing people are mostly missing is the social interaction. You could facilitate that by organising gatherings of smaller groups which mitigates some risk.

[former player]

...
The biggest complication that we're foreseeing is church. My husband is a pastor. Right now, much of the congregation is supportive of him doing virtual services (they have no choice, since our governor mandated it)... but they seem to be growing impatient and getting antsy to return to in-person services. I can see a point coming where he has to choose between a) resuming services before we're comfortable with it or b) leaving his job. Hopefully I'm wrong and some of the questions about this virus will be answered, making the "right" choice more obvious, less controversial, more unanimous, etc... but I can easily see a scenario where we still feel that it's a significant threat to our elderly congregation and they try to force him to resume in-person services anyway.

There are in-between options where you do in person services with social distancing in place. You could easily separate the young and elderly members by having different music styles. The thing people are mostly missing is the social interaction. You could facilitate that by organising gatherings of smaller groups which mitigates some risk.

Also, meetings without singing, because all that deep breathing and projecting sound is likely to have much the same effect in spreading exhalations as coughing.

[mancityfan]

...
The biggest complication that we're foreseeing is church. My husband is a pastor. Right now, much of the congregation is supportive of him doing virtual services (they have no choice, since our governor mandated it)... but they seem to be growing impatient and getting antsy to return to in-person services. I can see a point coming where he has to choose between a) resuming services before we're comfortable with it or b) leaving his job. Hopefully I'm wrong and some of the questions about this virus will be answered, making the "right" choice more obvious, less controversial, more unanimous, etc... but I can easily see a scenario where we still feel that it's a significant threat to our elderly congregation and they try to force him to resume in-person services anyway.

There are in-between options where you do in person services with social distancing in place. You could easily separate the young and elderly members by having different music styles. The thing people are mostly missing is the social interaction. You could facilitate that by organising gatherings of smaller groups which mitigates some risk.

Also, meetings without singing, because all that deep breathing and projecting sound is likely to have much the same effect in spreading exhalations as coughing.

Was there not a case of a church choir that continued to sing and rehearse a few weeks back, and many of them got infected?

[OtherJen]

...
The biggest complication that we're foreseeing is church. My husband is a pastor. Right now, much of the congregation is supportive of him doing virtual services (they have no choice, since our governor mandated it)... but they seem to be growing impatient and getting antsy to return to in-person services. I can see a point coming where he has to choose between a) resuming services before we're comfortable with it or b) leaving his job. Hopefully I'm wrong and some of the questions about this virus will be answered, making the "right" choice more obvious, less controversial, more unanimous, etc... but I can easily see a scenario where we still feel that it's a significant threat to our elderly congregation and they try to force him to resume in-person services anyway.

There are in-between options where you do in person services with social distancing in place. You could easily separate the young and elderly members by having different music styles. The thing people are mostly missing is the social interaction. You could facilitate that by organising gatherings of smaller groups which mitigates some risk.

Also, meetings without singing, because all that deep breathing and projecting sound is likely to have much the same effect in spreading exhalations as coughing.

Was there not a case of a church choir that continued to sing and rehearse a few weeks back, and many of them got infected?

Yes. https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-03-29/coronavirus-choir-outbreak

[startingsmall]

...
The biggest complication that we're foreseeing is church. My husband is a pastor. Right now, much of the congregation is supportive of him doing virtual services (they have no choice, since our governor mandated it)... but they seem to be growing impatient and getting antsy to return to in-person services. I can see a point coming where he has to choose between a) resuming services before we're comfortable with it or b) leaving his job. Hopefully I'm wrong and some of the questions about this virus will be answered, making the "right" choice more obvious, less controversial, more unanimous, etc... but I can easily see a scenario where we still feel that it's a significant threat to our elderly congregation and they try to force him to resume in-person services anyway.

There are in-between options where you do in person services with social distancing in place. You could easily separate the young and elderly members by having different music styles. The thing people are mostly missing is the social interaction. You could facilitate that by organising gatherings of smaller groups which mitigates some risk.

We definitely don't have enough younger members to support contemporary music... we're strictly an old-timey choir church.

What we'll need to do is come up with a way to artificially separate people in 2 or 3 separate services (our sanctuary is small) and figure out how to do just a small ensemble instead of the choir.

There are options, but I don't know how well-received they will be. Our church is very focused on their history and resists change. It's a small country church and there's definitely a potential for conflict. Hopefully not, but my husband & I are both a little nervous.

[shelivesthedream]

...
The biggest complication that we're foreseeing is church. My husband is a pastor. Right now, much of the congregation is supportive of him doing virtual services (they have no choice, since our governor mandated it)... but they seem to be growing impatient and getting antsy to return to in-person services. I can see a point coming where he has to choose between a) resuming services before we're comfortable with it or b) leaving his job. Hopefully I'm wrong and some of the questions about this virus will be answered, making the "right" choice more obvious, less controversial, more unanimous, etc... but I can easily see a scenario where we still feel that it's a significant threat to our elderly congregation and they try to force him to resume in-person services anyway.

There are in-between options where you do in person services with social distancing in place. You could easily separate the young and elderly members by having different music styles. The thing people are mostly missing is the social interaction. You could facilitate that by organising gatherings of smaller groups which mitigates some risk.

WTF? What a weird thing to say. In my experience it's the middle aged people who are all about guitars, whereas the young adults and proper oldies like a normal choir. I guess that's not what you meant...?

There were calls to have more services before the churches closed, though, so you'd have fewer at each service. I don't know if there could be some way of allocating people to a service? Otherwise I think most people would just come at their regular time, rather than to one of the extra times. I know we picked our usual mass time for a lot of reasons (mostly toddler-related) which would be hard to change on a dime.