vox--2020-05-07--It’s not your imagination. Allergy season gets worse every year.

The weather is warming .
The flowers are blooming .
Noses are running .
Eyes are watering .
Amid a global pandemic , many miserable Americans are asking themselves : Is it allergies or Covid-19 ?
The list of coronavirus symptoms continues to get longer — fever , coughing , loss of smell , chills — and as it does , it overlaps with other health problems even more , making it harder to know what ’ s what .
And with a shortage of Covid-19 tests , many people can ’ t be sure whether the pollen or the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the same time , it ’ s likely to be another brutal year for allergies across the United States .
Texas is bracing for its worst allergy season in years .
States like Georgia and New York have already seen near-record pollen counts .
And in Washington , DC , pollen spiked surprisingly early this year .
If you ’ re concerned about telling allergies apart from Covid-19 , the American Academy of Allergy , Asthma , & Immunology ( AAAAI ) has put together a handy chart comparing their symptoms , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and influenza : The main symptoms common to Covid-19 but not to allergies are fever , cough , and shortness of breath .
However , many people with the coronavirus don ’ t experience any symptoms at all , and there is nothing precluding someone from having both allergies and the virus at the same time .
The AAAAI says it ’ s important to continue managing allergies during the pandemic , and that it ’ s safe to use allergy control medicines like inhaled corticosteroids .
Now that it ’ s May @ @ @ @ @ @ @ peak tree pollen season and heading toward grass pollen season .
So even more misery is in store .
“ Grass pollen sufferers will face a long and severe season into summer , ” AccuWeather senior meteorologist Alan Reppert said in a report on the weather forecaster ’ s website .
Forecasters expect 2020 to be yet another above-average year for allergies , if not the worst year ever .
Just like 2019 , the year before that , the year before that , and the year before that .
Allergy season has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have taken to venting about warnings of the “ pollen tsunami ” or the “ pollen vortex ” or the “ perfect storm for allergies.
” But it turns out there ’ s truth behind the bombast : Pollen , an allergy trigger for one in five Americans , is surging year after year .
And a major driver behind this increase is climate change .
For instance , rising average temperatures are leading to a longer ragweed pollen season , as you can see here : A 2019 paper published in The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pollen counts have increased around the world as average temperatures climbed .
The majority of the 17 sites studied showed both an increase in the amount of pollen and longer pollen seasons over 20 years .
And the faster the climate changes , the worse it gets .
That ’ s why residents of Alaska , which is warming twice as fast as the global average , now face especially high allergy risks .
Taken together over the long term , seasonal allergies present one of the most robust examples of how global @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which are already a major health burden , will become an even larger drain on the economy .
“ It ’ s very strong .
In fact , I think there ’ s irrefutable data , ” said Jeffrey Demain , director of the Allergy , Asthma , and Immunology Center of Alaska .
“ It ’ s become the model of health impacts of climate change.
” And since so many are afflicted — some estimates say up to 50 million Americans have nasal allergies — scientists and health officials are now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ driving these risks in hopes of bringing some relief in the wake of growing pollen avalanches .
Here ’ s what scientists have figured out so far about the relationship between climate change and seasonal allergies .
Pollen is becoming impossible to avoid Allergies occur when the body ’ s internal radar system locks onto the wrong target , causing the immune system to overreact to an otherwise harmless substance .
This can cause mild annoyances like hives or itchy eyes , or life-threatening issues like anaphylaxis , where blood pressure plummets and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percent of US adults suffer from hay fever , also known as allergic rhinitis , brought on by pollen allergies .
Most cases can be treated with antihistamines , but they cost the US between $ 3.4 billion and $ 11.2 billion each year just in direct medical expenses , with a substantially higher toll from lost productivity .
Complications like pollen-induced asthma attacks have also proven fatal in some instances and lead to more than 20,000 emergency room visits each year in the US .
Pollen is a fine powder produced as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many varieties of plants , including elm trees , ryegrass , and ragweed .
It ’ s released in response to environmental signals like temperature , precipitation , and sunlight .
Grains of pollen range in size from 9 microns to 200 microns , so some types of pollen can travel deep into the lungs and cause irritation , even for people who don ’ t have allergies .
High concentrations of pollen in the air trigger allergic reactions and can spread for miles , even indoors if structures are not sealed .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ production throughout the year .
Trees like oak , ash , birch , and maple see pollen surges in the spring .
Pollen from timothy grass , bluegrass , and orchard grass peaks over the summer , and ragweed pollen spikes in the fall .
For people who are sensitive to multiple varieties of pollen , it means there will be less relief during warmer weather as these seasons overlap .
We ’ re already seeing a strong signal of climate change in pollen-spewing plants In general , pollen is emerging earlier in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out longer and longer , especially pollen from ragweed .
Ragweed is handy for studying the impacts of climate on pollen and allergies because it ’ s an annual plant , unlike trees or perennials .
This allows scientists to separate out how variables like winter temperatures and rainfall in the preceding season influence ragweed pollen .
Lewis Ziska , a plant physiologist who formerly worked at the USDA ’ s Agricultural Research Service , told Vox that the change in carbon dioxide concentrations from a preindustrial level of 280 parts per million @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than 400 ppm has led to a corresponding doubling in pollen production per plant of ragweed .
How does this happen ?
If you ’ ve looked at a bag or bottle of plant fertilizer , you may have noticed three numbers that represent the ratio of phosphorus , nitrogen , and potassium inside .
Different ratios encourage different aspects of a plant ’ s growth , like flowering or making seeds .
Carbon dioxide is also an important nutrient for plants , though it ’ s not included in fertilizer ( because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It turns out that higher carbon dioxide concentrations encourage plants to produce more pollen .
For ragweed , you can see a direct pollen response to increases in carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere : More pollen usually means more seeds , which means more ragweed in the next season .
And warmer average temperatures mean that spring starts earlier and winter arrives later , giving pollen producers more time to spew their sneeze-inducing particles .
We can see the effects of CO2 on smaller scales as well .
Researchers have found that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ production in response to localized surges in carbon dioxide , like from the exhaust of cars along a highway .
However , for other allergen sources like trees , the groundwork for a severe pollen season can be laid more than a year before the current season .
“ What happens is if the tree during the previous year has had a ‘ good season , ’ it tends to load up on carbs so that in the spring , it has a lot of carbs to put out for flower production , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happens , you can get a large bloom , and the consequences of that are inherent in the amount of pollen that ’ s being produced.
” The far north is getting hit the hardest Alaska is warming so fast that computer models have had a hard time believing the results .
That ’ s having huge consequences for allergy sufferers in the state , and not just from pollen .
Demain from the Allergy , Asthma , and Immunology Center of Alaska explained that rising temperatures are melting permafrost beneath Alaskan towns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This dampness then allows mold to grow , causing more people to seek treatment for mold allergies .
Stinging insects are also a mounting concern .
Warmer winters mean that more yellow jackets and wasps are surviving the cold months , increasing the likelihood of Alaskans getting stung .
In 2006 , Anchorage saw a spike in the numbers of these insects and suffered its first two deaths ever due to insect sting allergies .
“ It was so bad , they were canceling community outdoor events , ” Demain said .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ treatment from insect stings , Demain found that the increases grew starker going northward in Alaska , with the northernmost part of the state experiencing a 626 percent increase in insect bites and stings between 2004 and 2006 compared with the period between 1999 and 2001 .
Nonetheless , pollen remains a huge concern in Alaska as well , though the main source is birch trees , not ragweed .
Birch pollen around Anchorage can get so bad that even people without allergies get bogged down .
“ For a ‘ high ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 175 grains per cubic meter , ” Demain said .
“ In Alaska , we get highs between 2,000 and 4,000 grains per cubic meter.
” In addition to the quantity of pollen , Demain noted that rising carbon dioxide concentrations increase the allergenic peptides on pollen .
The peptides are the molecular signal that triggers the body ’ s immune system , so more peptides on a given pollen grain increase the severity of the allergy .
So it ’ s not just more pollen ; the pollen itself is becoming more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ For city dwellers , a big issue is that urban planners prefer to plant male trees , because they don ’ t produce seeds , pods , or fruit that can become litter .
The downside is that male trees produce pollen that can trigger allergies .
Allergies are going to get way , way worse Researchers estimate that pollen counts of all varieties will double by 2040 in some parts of the country , depending on what pathway the world takes on greenhouse gas emissions .
Here ’ s how scientists project @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the eastern United States under a “ high ” greenhouse gas emissions scenario : And here ’ s what to expect for grass pollen : This means that regardless of your pollen of choice , the future holds more misery for allergy sufferers .
And as the Covid-19 pandemic rages , it may be a long time before millions of Americans can breathe easy .
Every day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox @ @

The weather is warming. The flowers are blooming. Noses are running. Eyes are watering.
Amid a global pandemic, many miserable Americans are asking themselves: Is it allergies or Covid-19?
The list of coronavirus symptoms continues to get longer — fever, coughing, loss of smell, chills — and as it does, it overlaps with other health problems even more, making it harder to know what’s what. And with a shortage of Covid-19 tests, many people can’t be sure whether the pollen or the virus is behind their malaise.
At the same time, it’s likely to be another brutal year for allergies across the United States. Texas is bracing for its worst allergy season in years. States like Georgia and New York have already seen near-record pollen counts. And in Washington, DC, pollen spiked surprisingly early this year.
If you’re concerned about telling allergies apart from Covid-19, the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma, & Immunology (AAAAI) has put together a handy chart comparing their symptoms, as well as signs of the common cold and influenza:
The main symptoms common to Covid-19 but not to allergies are fever, cough, and shortness of breath. However, many people with the coronavirus don’t experience any symptoms at all, and there is nothing precluding someone from having both allergies and the virus at the same time. The AAAAI says it’s important to continue managing allergies during the pandemic, and that it’s safe to use allergy control medicines like inhaled corticosteroids.
Now that it’s May, the US is moving away from peak tree pollen season and heading toward grass pollen season. So even more misery is in store. “Grass pollen sufferers will face a long and severe season into summer,” AccuWeather senior meteorologist Alan Reppert said in a report on the weather forecaster’s website.
Forecasters expect 2020 to be yet another above-average year for allergies, if not the worst year ever. Just like 2019, the year before that, the year before that, and the year before that.
Allergy season has become so predictably terrible that late-night comedians have taken to venting about warnings of the “pollen tsunami” or the “pollen vortex” or the “perfect storm for allergies.”
But it turns out there’s truth behind the bombast: Pollen, an allergy trigger for one in five Americans, is surging year after year. And a major driver behind this increase is climate change.
For instance, rising average temperatures are leading to a longer ragweed pollen season, as you can see here:
A 2019 paper published in The Lancet Planetary Health journal found that airborne pollen counts have increased around the world as average temperatures climbed. The majority of the 17 sites studied showed both an increase in the amount of pollen and longer pollen seasons over 20 years.
And the faster the climate changes, the worse it gets. That’s why residents of Alaska, which is warming twice as fast as the global average, now face especially high allergy risks.
Taken together over the long term, seasonal allergies present one of the most robust examples of how global warming increases health risks. Allergies, which are already a major health burden, will become an even larger drain on the economy.
“It’s very strong. In fact, I think there’s irrefutable data,” said Jeffrey Demain, director of the Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology Center of Alaska. “It’s become the model of health impacts of climate change.”
And since so many are afflicted — some estimates say up to 50 million Americans have nasal allergies — scientists and health officials are now trying to tease out the climate factors driving these risks in hopes of bringing some relief in the wake of growing pollen avalanches.
Here’s what scientists have figured out so far about the relationship between climate change and seasonal allergies.
Pollen is becoming impossible to avoid
Allergies occur when the body’s internal radar system locks onto the wrong target, causing the immune system to overreact to an otherwise harmless substance.
This can cause mild annoyances like hives or itchy eyes, or life-threatening issues like anaphylaxis, where blood pressure plummets and airways start swelling shut.
About 8 percent of US adults suffer from hay fever, also known as allergic rhinitis, brought on by pollen allergies. Most cases can be treated with antihistamines, but they cost the US between $3.4 billion and $11.2 billion each year just in direct medical expenses, with a substantially higher toll from lost productivity. Complications like pollen-induced asthma attacks have also proven fatal in some instances and lead to more than 20,000 emergency room visits each year in the US.
Pollen is a fine powder produced as part of the sexual reproductive cycle of many varieties of plants, including elm trees, ryegrass, and ragweed.
It’s released in response to environmental signals like temperature, precipitation, and sunlight. Grains of pollen range in size from 9 microns to 200 microns, so some types of pollen can travel deep into the lungs and cause irritation, even for people who don’t have allergies. High concentrations of pollen in the air trigger allergic reactions and can spread for miles, even indoors if structures are not sealed.
There are three big peaks in pollen production throughout the year. Trees like oak, ash, birch, and maple see pollen surges in the spring. Pollen from timothy grass, bluegrass, and orchard grass peaks over the summer, and ragweed pollen spikes in the fall.
For people who are sensitive to multiple varieties of pollen, it means there will be less relief during warmer weather as these seasons overlap.
We’re already seeing a strong signal of climate change in pollen-spewing plants
In general, pollen is emerging earlier in the year and the season is stretching out longer and longer, especially pollen from ragweed.
Ragweed is handy for studying the impacts of climate on pollen and allergies because it’s an annual plant, unlike trees or perennials. This allows scientists to separate out how variables like winter temperatures and rainfall in the preceding season influence ragweed pollen.
Lewis Ziska, a plant physiologist who formerly worked at the USDA’s Agricultural Research Service, told Vox that the change in carbon dioxide concentrations from a preindustrial level of 280 parts per million to today’s concentrations of more than 400 ppm has led to a corresponding doubling in pollen production per plant of ragweed.
How does this happen? If you’ve looked at a bag or bottle of plant fertilizer, you may have noticed three numbers that represent the ratio of phosphorus, nitrogen, and potassium inside. Different ratios encourage different aspects of a plant’s growth, like flowering or making seeds. Carbon dioxide is also an important nutrient for plants, though it’s not included in fertilizer (because it’s a gas). It turns out that higher carbon dioxide concentrations encourage plants to produce more pollen.
For ragweed, you can see a direct pollen response to increases in carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere:
More pollen usually means more seeds, which means more ragweed in the next season. And warmer average temperatures mean that spring starts earlier and winter arrives later, giving pollen producers more time to spew their sneeze-inducing particles.
We can see the effects of CO2 on smaller scales as well. Researchers have found that grasses and ragweed plants increase their pollen production in response to localized surges in carbon dioxide, like from the exhaust of cars along a highway.
However, for other allergen sources like trees, the groundwork for a severe pollen season can be laid more than a year before the current season.
“What happens is if the tree during the previous year has had a ‘good season,’ it tends to load up on carbs so that in the spring, it has a lot of carbs to put out for flower production,” Ziska said. “When that happens, you can get a large bloom, and the consequences of that are inherent in the amount of pollen that’s being produced.”
The far north is getting hit the hardest
Alaska is warming so fast that computer models have had a hard time believing the results. That’s having huge consequences for allergy sufferers in the state, and not just from pollen.
Demain from the Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology Center of Alaska explained that rising temperatures are melting permafrost beneath Alaskan towns, causing moisture to seep into homes. This dampness then allows mold to grow, causing more people to seek treatment for mold allergies.
Stinging insects are also a mounting concern. Warmer winters mean that more yellow jackets and wasps are surviving the cold months, increasing the likelihood of Alaskans getting stung. In 2006, Anchorage saw a spike in the numbers of these insects and suffered its first two deaths ever due to insect sting allergies.
“It was so bad, they were canceling community outdoor events,” Demain said.
Looking at patterns of people seeking medical treatment from insect stings, Demain found that the increases grew starker going northward in Alaska, with the northernmost part of the state experiencing a 626 percent increase in insect bites and stings between 2004 and 2006 compared with the period between 1999 and 2001.
Nonetheless, pollen remains a huge concern in Alaska as well, though the main source is birch trees, not ragweed. Birch pollen around Anchorage can get so bad that even people without allergies get bogged down.
“For a ‘high’ pollen count, you need greater than 175 grains per cubic meter,” Demain said. “In Alaska, we get highs between 2,000 and 4,000 grains per cubic meter.”
In addition to the quantity of pollen, Demain noted that rising carbon dioxide concentrations increase the allergenic peptides on pollen. The peptides are the molecular signal that triggers the body’s immune system, so more peptides on a given pollen grain increase the severity of the allergy.
So it’s not just more pollen; the pollen itself is becoming more potent in causing an immune response.
For city dwellers, a big issue is that urban planners prefer to plant male trees, because they don’t produce seeds, pods, or fruit that can become litter. The downside is that male trees produce pollen that can trigger allergies.
Allergies are going to get way, way worse
Researchers estimate that pollen counts of all varieties will double by 2040 in some parts of the country, depending on what pathway the world takes on greenhouse gas emissions. Here’s how scientists project allergy risks from tree pollen will change in the eastern United States under a “high” greenhouse gas emissions scenario:
Here’s the trajectory for ragweed:
And here’s what to expect for grass pollen:
This means that regardless of your pollen of choice, the future holds more misery for allergy sufferers. And as the Covid-19 pandemic rages, it may be a long time before millions of Americans can breathe easy.


vox--2020-05-07--The White House has 2 testing standards: One for Trump and another for everyone else

Unlike many Americans who are worried about contracting or spreading the coronavirus , President Donald Trump has yet to be seen in public wearing a mask .
He even went without one during his visit on Tuesday to a Honeywell facility in Arizona that otherwise requires them .
The White House ’ s ( flawed ) rationale for this is that Trump doesn ’ t have to because he and everyone he comes into contact with is tested for the virus .
In this respect , the White House is operating with one safer standard for officials , and another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump is now urging to go back to work in the teeth of a pandemic .
This disparity was put on stark display on Wednesday .
“ The notion that everyone needs to be tested is simply nonsensical , ” press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said during Wednesday ’ s press briefing , in response to a question from NBC ’ s Peter Alexander about why all Americans can ’ t get tested like the president before they go back to work .
Those comments came hours after Trump appeared in the Oval Office @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t wearing masks or social distancing — basic safety precautions they said weren ’ t necessary because they had all been tested for the coronavirus before meeting with the president .
McEnany didn ’ t argue that more testing wouldn ’ t be a good thing .
Her argument was that testing on the scale Alexander suggested would be impractical because “ if we tested every single American in this country at this moment , we ’ d have to test them an hour later and an hour later after that , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contract this virus.
” While testing all 328 million Americans every hour is obviously more than can be asked for , some experts do think that everyone needs to get tested on a regular basis in order for some sense of normalcy to be restored .
My colleague German Lopez has detailed perhaps the most aggressive and prominent of these proposals : Coincidentally , news that broke on Thursday about one of Trump ’ s personal valets testing positive for the coronavirus serves as a good example of how testing can help stop @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the valet had been in direct contact with Trump , following the positive test , both Trump and Vice President Mike Pence were administered coronavirus tests that came back negative .
Testing of that sort helps trace the virus ’ s spread .
But because of inadequate capacity , it continues to be extremely difficult for people who don ’ t have symptoms to get tested , even though they play a key role in spreading the coronavirus .
Not only is the US nowhere near conducting the 20 million tests a day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s nowhere near conducting the 500,000 or so that experts who are more modest about testing think is necessary to safely reopen businesses .
Right now , on a good day , the US is conducting about half that , or 250,000 tests , according to information gathered by the Covid Tracking Project .
Trump is not interested in engaging with this problem .
He ’ s regularly contradicted public health experts in his own government by insisting , falsely , that states already have more than enough testing capacity to reopen businesses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there hasn ’ t even been enough tests for all 100 US senators to be proactively screened or for professional sports franchises to procure them .
Instead of deploying the almost unlimited resources of the federal government in the hope of solving the problem , however , Trump has largely delegated the testing problem to cash-strapped states , while telling brazen lies about how US testing stacks up compared to other countries .
He even alluded to self-interested motives for resisting demands to expand the country ’ s testing capacity on Wednesday , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very little testing , we wouldn ’ t have the most cases .
So , in a way , by doing all of this testing , we make ourselves look bad.
” Trump has political reasons for wanting to keep the known number of coronavirus cases in the country as low as possible , but it seems a very different set of rules apply to him .
It makes sense — even if it ’ s not 100 percent foolproof — that the White House is screening people who come in contact with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the president healthy , it allows him to not wear a mask and in that way project a sense of normalcy to Americans , many of whom aren ’ t leaving their homes these days without one .
But Trump is only able to do that because the White House has testing abilities that the rest of the country doesn ’ t .
To use the military metaphors Trump is accustomed to , the general is sending his “ warriors ” into battle without the intelligence needed to know where the “ invisible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ offer free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

Unlike many Americans who are worried about contracting or spreading the coronavirus, President Donald Trump has yet to be seen in public wearing a mask. He even went without one during his visit on Tuesday to a Honeywell facility in Arizona that otherwise requires them. The White House’s (flawed) rationale for this is that Trump doesn’t have to because he and everyone he comes into contact with is tested for the virus.
In this respect, the White House is operating with one safer standard for officials, and another less-safe standard for the “warriors” Trump is now urging to go back to work in the teeth of a pandemic. This disparity was put on stark display on Wednesday.
“The notion that everyone needs to be tested is simply nonsensical,” press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said during Wednesday’s press briefing, in response to a question from NBC’s Peter Alexander about why all Americans can’t get tested like the president before they go back to work.
Those comments came hours after Trump appeared in the Oval Office with a group of nurses who weren’t wearing masks or social distancing — basic safety precautions they said weren’t necessary because they had all been tested for the coronavirus before meeting with the president.
Here's a nurse who met with Trump on Wednesday discussing how everyone who meets with the president gets tested for coronavirus, followed hours later by Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany saying applying that same standard of testing to the American public is "nonsensical" pic.twitter.com/Eb1nIuFDkU — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 7, 2020
McEnany didn’t argue that more testing wouldn’t be a good thing. Her argument was that testing on the scale Alexander suggested would be impractical because “if we tested every single American in this country at this moment, we’d have to test them an hour later and an hour later after that, because at any moment you could theoretically contract this virus.”
While testing all 328 million Americans every hour is obviously more than can be asked for, some experts do think that everyone needs to get tested on a regular basis in order for some sense of normalcy to be restored. My colleague German Lopez has detailed perhaps the most aggressive and prominent of these proposals:
Paul Romer, a Nobel Prize-winning economist, has projected that the US needs more than 20 million tests each day, effectively letting the country test each person in the country every two weeks. He estimated that would cost $100 billion — which may sound like a lot, but it pales in comparison to the cost of keeping the economy shut down.
Coincidentally, news that broke on Thursday about one of Trump’s personal valets testing positive for the coronavirus serves as a good example of how testing can help stop the spread. CNN reported that since the valet had been in direct contact with Trump, following the positive test, both Trump and Vice President Mike Pence were administered coronavirus tests that came back negative.
Testing of that sort helps trace the virus’s spread. But because of inadequate capacity, it continues to be extremely difficult for people who don’t have symptoms to get tested, even though they play a key role in spreading the coronavirus.
Not only is the US nowhere near conducting the 20 million tests a day that Romer recommends, but it’s nowhere near conducting the 500,000 or so that experts who are more modest about testing think is necessary to safely reopen businesses. Right now, on a good day, the US is conducting about half that, or 250,000 tests, according to information gathered by the Covid Tracking Project.
Trump is not interested in engaging with this problem. He’s regularly contradicted public health experts in his own government by insisting, falsely, that states already have more than enough testing capacity to reopen businesses and schools. But the reality is there hasn’t even been enough tests for all 100 US senators to be proactively screened or for professional sports franchises to procure them.
Instead of deploying the almost unlimited resources of the federal government in the hope of solving the problem, however, Trump has largely delegated the testing problem to cash-strapped states, while telling brazen lies about how US testing stacks up compared to other countries. He even alluded to self-interested motives for resisting demands to expand the country’s testing capacity on Wednesday, telling reporters that “if we did very little testing, we wouldn’t have the most cases. So, in a way, by doing all of this testing, we make ourselves look bad.”
Trump has political reasons for wanting to keep the known number of coronavirus cases in the country as low as possible, but it seems a very different set of rules apply to him.
It makes sense — even if it’s not 100 percent foolproof — that the White House is screening people who come in contact with the president. In addition to keeping the president healthy, it allows him to not wear a mask and in that way project a sense of normalcy to Americans, many of whom aren’t leaving their homes these days without one.
But Trump is only able to do that because the White House has testing abilities that the rest of the country doesn’t. To use the military metaphors Trump is accustomed to, the general is sending his “warriors” into battle without the intelligence needed to know where the “invisible enemy” is hiding.


vox--2020-05-07--Kristin Lavransdatter is an amazing novel about how God doesn’t care if we live or die

Norwegian novelist Sigrid Undset , who in 1928 became the third woman ever to win the Nobel Prize in Literature , is one of those writers whose career has been largely defined by one book : her massive tome Kristin Lavransdatter .
She wrote other highly acclaimed novels , but none have had the staying power ( at least in the US and UK ) of Kristin .
Kristin Lavransdatter is over 1,000 pages long and was published in three parts between 1920 ( one century old , baby ! )
and 1922 .
You can purchase it as either @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It follows the life of one medieval Norwegian woman named ( you guessed it ) Kristin Lavransdatter , from the age of 7 until she dies somewhere around the age of 50 .
She leads a mostly normal life , but like all of us , she lives in abnormal times .
Throughout her lifespan , major world events provide a backdrop of endless political intrigue , rises and falls from fortune and glory , and the arrival of the Black Death in Norway in 1349 .
But Undset doesn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ She focuses on the life Kristin carves out irrespective of them , a life involving a broken engagement , a scandalous love affair , and a slowly splintering relationship with her seven sons .
By the time Kristin is gracefully approaching death , the book takes on a transcendent , almost religious quality — and even if you ’ re not a believer , the power of Kristin ’ s faith in God and her hope to feel his purpose in her life when he remains silent will still be moving .
Kristin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that will surely cause your attention to flag here and there .
( All of the political stuff may necessitate either skimming or frequent treks to Wikipedia , unless you happen to be an expert on medieval Norwegian lines of succession . )
But when I first read it , over several months in 2019 , I was deeply touched and strangely comforted by its portrayal of one woman making a life in a world that would rather toss her off its back .
Is Kristin Lavransdatter perfect ?
No .
It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I ’ ve ever read .
The use of natural imagery in Kristin Lavransdatter is stunning First things first : If you ’ re going to read this book , be sure to seek out the translation by Tiina Nunnally , which she completed between 1997 and 2000 .
Kristin Lavransdatter ’ s reputation flagged in English-speaking countries for decades because the only translation available was sprinkled with archaic medievalisms — thees and thous and shalts .
Nunnally ’ s translation restores a groundedness to the story .
It no longer feels like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but in this one .
As someone who grew up in the church and struggled with what that meant for my womanhood , I was an easy mark for Kristin .
But I found it remarkable how Undset , a devout Christian , is careful to not let Kristin become too pious for words .
Kristin strives to be the best person she can be , but she ’ s also felled by temptation and sin , particularly when it comes to Erlend , the man who coaxes her out of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ She shouldn ’ t sleep with him .
She really shouldn ’ t .
But even in the 1300s , in an age of marriages arranged for political and economic gain , the heart wants what it wants .
What makes Undset and Kristin ’ s devoutness bearable lies in how the author pulls back from her main character to reveal how other characters see her .
Notably , each of the three books that compose the whole ends from the point of view of one of the many men important to Kristin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her protagonist through their eyes .
Kristin is headstrong and impetuous , and it ’ s intoxicating to spend time inside her head .
But she has a bad habit of ignoring the feelings of those around her in her quest for piety .
And every time you might think Undset has lost track of just how self-righteous Kristin has become , another character chews her out .
( My favorite sequence in the whole book comes when Kristin and Erlend , long married and sick of each other , finally have it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . )
But Undset is also interested in how impossible it is to lead anything close to a sinless , blameless life .
Kristin tries her whole life to make up for her early dalliances with Erlend .
She does better than just about anybody else could do , but she can never make it up to the God she longs to hear from , a God who does not seem to speak .
Life , then , becomes a mystery to her and to all the people she loves — a confusing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any closer to meaning .
Unless it does .
Throughout Kristin Lavransdatter , Undset steps back from the human drama of the story to reveal the natural world continuing apace all around her characters .
Rich descriptions of deep forests , of roaring ocean waves , and of stony fjords fill the book , and there is a hushed reverence for them .
If God will not speak to Kristin , perhaps he will be present in this terrifying and empty wilderness .
When the Black Death arrives late in the book , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nature finally lays its cards on the table , revealing God ’ s handiwork of beauty intermingled with peril .
That sounds like a lot , and it is .
But Kristin Lavransdatter is also frequently funny and incredibly smart about family dynamics .
The romance between Kristin and Erlend is genuinely sexy in places , while the scenes where internecine politics finally burst into unexpected bouts of action are much more pulse-pounding than you ’ d expect for a book that also contains prolonged explanations of how to properly manage a farm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ better times than right now to read a long book about God ’ s disinterest in humanity in general ( and one woman in particular ) that ends with a lengthy section set during the deadliest plague in human history .
But there are few better times than right now to lose yourself in a long book that not only tries to tell a gripping story but also resurrects some bygone world and one of the women who lived in it .
By the time you finish Kristin Lavransdatter , you might find @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — an incredibly irritating , self-involved friend , but a friend nevertheless .
One Good Thing is Vox ’ s recommendations feature .
In each edition , find one more thing from the world of culture that we highly recommend .
Every day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

One Good Thing is Vox’s recommendations feature. In each edition, find one more thing from the world of culture that we highly recommend.
Norwegian novelist Sigrid Undset, who in 1928 became the third woman ever to win the Nobel Prize in Literature, is one of those writers whose career has been largely defined by one book: her massive tome Kristin Lavransdatter. She wrote other highly acclaimed novels, but none have had the staying power (at least in the US and UK) of Kristin.
Kristin Lavransdatter is over 1,000 pages long and was published in three parts between 1920 (one century old, baby!) and 1922. You can purchase it as either one volume or as three separate ones. It follows the life of one medieval Norwegian woman named (you guessed it) Kristin Lavransdatter, from the age of 7 until she dies somewhere around the age of 50. She leads a mostly normal life, but like all of us, she lives in abnormal times. Throughout her lifespan, major world events provide a backdrop of endless political intrigue, rises and falls from fortune and glory, and the arrival of the Black Death in Norway in 1349.
But Undset doesn’t focus on those major world events. She focuses on the life Kristin carves out irrespective of them, a life involving a broken engagement, a scandalous love affair, and a slowly splintering relationship with her seven sons. By the time Kristin is gracefully approaching death, the book takes on a transcendent, almost religious quality — and even if you’re not a believer, the power of Kristin’s faith in God and her hope to feel his purpose in her life when he remains silent will still be moving.
Kristin Lavransdatter is a complicated, dense novel that will surely cause your attention to flag here and there. (All of the political stuff may necessitate either skimming or frequent treks to Wikipedia, unless you happen to be an expert on medieval Norwegian lines of succession.) But when I first read it, over several months in 2019, I was deeply touched and strangely comforted by its portrayal of one woman making a life in a world that would rather toss her off its back.
Is Kristin Lavransdatter perfect? No. It’s still one of the greatest books I’ve ever read.
The use of natural imagery in Kristin Lavransdatter is stunning
The chapter where Kristin and Erlend get together, and she has no idea what to make of her emotions is pic.twitter.com/Y02jwJht6H — Emily VanDerWerff (@tvoti) August 10, 2019
First things first: If you’re going to read this book, be sure to seek out the translation by Tiina Nunnally, which she completed between 1997 and 2000. Kristin Lavransdatter’s reputation flagged in English-speaking countries for decades because the only translation available was sprinkled with archaic medievalisms — thees and thous and shalts. Nunnally’s translation restores a groundedness to the story. It no longer feels like it takes place in some imagined world, but in this one.
As someone who grew up in the church and struggled with what that meant for my womanhood, I was an easy mark for Kristin. But I found it remarkable how Undset, a devout Christian, is careful to not let Kristin become too pious for words. Kristin strives to be the best person she can be, but she’s also felled by temptation and sin, particularly when it comes to Erlend, the man who coaxes her out of a safe engagement and into his arms. She shouldn’t sleep with him. She really shouldn’t. But even in the 1300s, in an age of marriages arranged for political and economic gain, the heart wants what it wants.
What makes Undset and Kristin’s devoutness bearable lies in how the author pulls back from her main character to reveal how other characters see her. Notably, each of the three books that compose the whole ends from the point of view of one of the many men important to Kristin, the author forcing us to see her protagonist through their eyes.
Kristin is headstrong and impetuous, and it’s intoxicating to spend time inside her head. But she has a bad habit of ignoring the feelings of those around her in her quest for piety. And every time you might think Undset has lost track of just how self-righteous Kristin has become, another character chews her out. (My favorite sequence in the whole book comes when Kristin and Erlend, long married and sick of each other, finally have it out and say how they really feel.)
But Undset is also interested in how impossible it is to lead anything close to a sinless, blameless life. Kristin tries her whole life to make up for her early dalliances with Erlend. She does better than just about anybody else could do, but she can never make it up to the God she longs to hear from, a God who does not seem to speak. Life, then, becomes a mystery to her and to all the people she loves — a confusing, too-brief mirage that never brings one any closer to meaning.
Unless it does. Throughout Kristin Lavransdatter, Undset steps back from the human drama of the story to reveal the natural world continuing apace all around her characters. Rich descriptions of deep forests, of roaring ocean waves, and of stony fjords fill the book, and there is a hushed reverence for them. If God will not speak to Kristin, perhaps he will be present in this terrifying and empty wilderness. When the Black Death arrives late in the book, it’s almost a relief — nature finally lays its cards on the table, revealing God’s handiwork of beauty intermingled with peril.
That sounds like a lot, and it is. But Kristin Lavransdatter is also frequently funny and incredibly smart about family dynamics. The romance between Kristin and Erlend is genuinely sexy in places, while the scenes where internecine politics finally burst into unexpected bouts of action are much more pulse-pounding than you’d expect for a book that also contains prolonged explanations of how to properly manage a farm in medieval Norway.
There may be better times than right now to read a long book about God’s disinterest in humanity in general (and one woman in particular) that ends with a lengthy section set during the deadliest plague in human history. But there are few better times than right now to lose yourself in a long book that not only tries to tell a gripping story but also resurrects some bygone world and one of the women who lived in it. By the time you finish Kristin Lavransdatter, you might find yourself thinking of Kristin as a friend — an incredibly irritating, self-involved friend, but a friend nevertheless.


vox--2020-05-07--Join the Vox Book Club!

Join the Vox Book Club!

Here ’ s how the Vox Book Club works : Every month , we pick a book .
We go through it week by week , with a discussion post going up on the site every Friday .
Each discussion post will contain thoughts and discussion questions from me , your humble book critic , but we ’ ll also have comments turned on and moderated so you can share your thoughts , too .
Talk among yourselves !
Post your opinions and questions !
Or use our discussion posts as a jumping-off point for ( socially distanced ) discussions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And at the end of the month , we ’ ll hold a virtual live discussion .
After a fantastic April spent discussing N.K .
Jemisin ’ s The City We Became ( watch the replay of the live event here ! )
, in May we ’ ll turn to Donna Tartt ’ s classic The Secret History .
This book has everything : idyllic liberal arts college aesthetics ; classics majors in a murder cult ; deep thoughts on the nature of evil ; the strong suggestion that it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to deal with the consequences of joining a murder cult .
Come join us , and sign up for the Vox Book Club newsletter to get the latest updates .
Here ’ s the full Vox Book Club schedule for May 2020 Friday , May 8 : Discussion covering all of Book I , the prologue–chapter 5 ( pp .
1–254 )

The Vox Book Club is linking to Bookshop.org to support local and independent booksellers.
Here’s how the Vox Book Club works: Each month, we pick a book. Around the middle of the month, we publish a discussion post containing thoughts and questions from Vox book critic Constance Grady, but we also have comments turned on and moderated so you can share your thoughts, too. Talk among yourselves! Post your opinions and questions! Or use the conversation as a jumping-off point for your own conversations with friends and family. And at the end of the month, we gather on Zoom for a virtual live discussion.
Our pick for November 2021 is Such a Fun Age by Kiley Reid. It’s a witty and biting debut novel that also contains one of the cringiest Thanksgiving scenes ever committed to the page. We’ll have plenty to discuss here on the site, and at the end of the month, we’ll meet with Reid herself live on Zoom to discuss the whole thing. RSVP here to join the fun, and in the meantime, subscribe to the Vox Book Club newsletter to make sure you don’t miss anything.
Here’s the full Vox Book Club schedule for November 2021:
Friday, November 19: Discussion post on Such a Fun Age published to Vox.com
Tuesday, November 30, 5 pm Eastern: Virtual live event with author Kiley Reid. RSVP here. Reader questions are encouraged!


vox--2020-05-07--The agonizing story of Tara Reade

The agonizing story of Tara Reade

In April 2019 , a woman named Tara Reade reached out to me with a clear , consistent story to tell about her experience as a staffer in Joe Biden ’ s Senate office in 1993 .
I spent hours on the phone with her , and many more tracking down possible witnesses and documents , trying to confirm her account .
Reade told me that a senior aide told her Biden liked her legs and that he wanted her to serve cocktails at a fundraiser for him , a request she found demeaning and declined .
When she later @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden would put his hands on her shoulder , neck , and hair during meetings in ways that made her uncomfortable , she says she was blamed and told to dress more conservatively .
Within a few months , she said , her responsibilities had been stripped and she felt she was being pushed out of the job .
She went back home to California deflated .
Reade told me that she wanted me to think of this story as being about abuse of power , “ but not sexual misconduct.
” Her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Biden ’ s office by Senate aides , who she said retaliated against her for complaining about how Biden touched her in meetings .
“ I don ’ t know if [ Biden ] knew why I left , ” she said .
“ He barely knew us by name.
” She sent me an email that evening with an essay she ’ d written .
Her local paper in California , the Union , published a similar version a few weeks later with a line she ’ d sent to me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a story about sexual misconduct ; it is a story about abuse of power .
It is a story about when a member of Congress allows staff to threaten or belittle or bully on their behalf unchecked to maintain power rather than modify the behavior.
” Last year , Reade encouraged me to speak with a friend of hers who counseled her through her time in Biden ’ s office in 1992 and 1993 .
The friend was clear about what had happened , and what hadn ’ t .
“ On the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and I feel ashamed , but it wasn ’ t that bad .
[ Biden ] never tried to kiss her directly .
He never went for one of those touches .
It was one of those , ‘ sorry you took it that way.
’ I know that is very hard to explain , ” the friend told me .
She went on : “ What was creepy was that it was always in front of people.
” I wanted to break this story .
Badly .
About half a dozen women @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spoke with Reade to say they were bothered by how Biden had touched them at events .
I wrote a column praising them for staring down the political media that had given him a pass for all those years .
Reade ’ s story took these complaints further — showing how even lower-grade inappropriate conduct can have real consequences for a woman ’ s career , an important subject that we still don ’ t talk about nearly enough .
I knew I wasn ’ t the only reporter Reade was talking to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reporters on the story , she told me .
On April 3 , the day after we first spoke , she texted me four times .
She wanted to know when I planned to publish , and she warned me that other outlets were getting ready to do so .
That day , the Union published an article with her story .
This happens sometimes .
It ’ s happened to me , many times .
You fight for a story that would be explosive if you could prove it , but you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on her story for a few more weeks after the story broke , but I didn ’ t get enough .
Vox did not publish anything about Reade in 2019 .
Neither did the major outlets that I know were pursuing the story , including the Times , the Washington Post , and the Associated Press .
In March 2020 , Reade resurfaced with a new allegation , which she told on The Katie Halper Show .
In addition to her account of her experience with office staff , Reade said that in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ encounter on her .
She said Biden pushed her against a wall on the Capitol grounds , kissed her , and then digitally penetrated her — all against her will .
Biden ’ s campaign did not respond publicly to Reade ’ s claims in 2019 .
On May 1 , Biden answered questions about the allegations for the first time on MSNBC ’ s Morning Joe .
He denied all of Reade ’ s claims and underscored his denial of the sexual assault allegation .
“ I ’ m saying unequivocally , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he told host Mika Brzezinski .
Three aides whom Reade said she approached about her complaints in 1993 told the New York Times that they also dispute her account .
“ I never once witnessed , or heard of , or received , any reports of inappropriate conduct , period — not from Ms. Reade , not from anyone , ” said Marianne Baker , Biden ’ s longtime executive assistant .
“ I have absolutely no knowledge or memory of Ms. Reade ’ s accounting of events , which would have left @ @ @ @ @ @ @ woman professional , and as a manager.
” When Reade ’ s story reemerged in a new form , I went through my reporting notes and interview transcripts from a year ago .
I spoke with Reade last week for several hours over the course of multiple interviews .
Reade and I have had a good rapport .
She ’ s optimistic and idealistic , even , as one friend told me , to a fault .
When she tells her account , she becomes emotional .
She seems sincere .
If I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s and she told me this same story privately over the course of a year , I doubt I would question her account .
The brain processes traumatic experiences differently , making it difficult for some survivors to share them as a linear narrative .
And the personal nature of a sexual assault can saddle victims with feelings of shame and doubt .
It ’ s not easy to talk about .
Many sexual assault survivors never speak of the experience at all .
But I ’ m not an old friend .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ came to me because she wanted to share her story with the world , not just with me .
It was clear in our conversations that she understood the difference .
I listened to her , I interviewed relevant sources , and I returned to her many times in an attempt to get more information to help me find more corroboration .
Reade ’ s latest allegation is far more serious and comes in a far more fraught political context .
The story that both she and her corroborating witnesses are telling has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all of us — in an agonizing place .
I ’ ve written many articles through the Me Too era .
It ’ s unrealistic to demand “ perfect ” victims .
And , like most who come forward with allegations of sexual misconduct or assault , Reade has suffered for speaking out .
In several exchanges this year and last year , she ’ s shown me disturbing messages she ’ s received online .
As my colleague Anna North writes , there has long been an ambiguity in the Me Too @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to “ believe women.
” But the acts of journalism that have driven the movement forward have been built on extraordinary amounts of evidence : They usually include not just consistent corroboration but oftentimes multiple stories , stacked on top of each other .
Taking on powerful men over these issues was unthinkable just a few years ago .
It ’ s required herculean effort .
Reporters who ’ ve succeeded in forcing powerful men to be held to account relied on an incredible amount of reporting to do it .
For example @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Amy Brittain exposed Charlie Rose for an alleged decades-long pattern of sexual harassment , had pursued the story for years .
When their exposé appeared in the Washington Post , it was built on accusations from eight women , three on the record .
Carmon and Brittain found consistency across the women ’ s stories and strong corroboration of each account : Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein fell in 2017 after Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey of the New York Times published the accounts of dozens of women who said Weinstein had assaulted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years .
Ronan Farrow published another story shortly after in the New Yorker , an account that included 13 accusations of sexual assault , three of them rape .
All three reporters have gone on to write books about the incredible lengths they went to in order to get the story .
Eight women have now said they ’ ve been made uncomfortable by Biden in public settings .
Reade is the lone woman to accuse him of sexual assault .
This is a situation out of her control , but it means @ @ @ @ @ @ @ story about Biden around a pattern of behavior , where multiple accusers boost one another ’ s story .
Instead , reporters are looking at Reade ’ s account in isolation — and that account has changed .
When we spoke a year ago , Reade told me the only named sources she could give me were her deceased mother and the friend I spoke to .
A recently uncovered tape of her mom on Larry King Live appears to corroborate Reade ’ s claim that she was struggling in Biden ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ include an assault allegation .
When I reconnected with the friend I spoke to last year , who had previously told me Biden had not assaulted Reade , she told me a version of the story that matched Reade ’ s latest account .
This year , Reade said to Halper that she also told her brother about the alleged assault and harassment .
He later told the Washington Post in an interview that he remembers his sister was upset in 1993 about Biden touching her neck and shoulders .
He followed up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ later over text message to say Reade also said Biden “ put his hands under her clothes.
” Since then , a former neighbor of Reade ’ s , Lynda LaCasse , has come forward in an interview with Business Insider .
She said Reade spoke about the harassment and assault claims in 1995 .
I asked Reade why she hadn ’ t mentioned LaCasse to me a year ago , or to Halper , or to the first few reporters she told about her assault allegation , including the New York Times @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dive into her story at the same time .
She said LaCasse hadn ’ t seemed like a relevant source because she ’ d talked to her two years after the alleged incident took place .
Reade added that she told reporters about two other anonymous friends later who hadn ’ t seemed relevant to her either .
When asked a similar question by the Associated Press , which had been working on the story , too , Reade didn ’ t respond .
If Reade had told a consistent story and shared @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , if those sources had told a consistent story , if the Union piece had shaken loose other cases like hers , or if there were “ smoking gun ” evidence in Biden ’ s papers , her account might have been reported on differently in mainstream media a year ago .
It is not fair to an individual survivor that their claims require an extraordinary level of confirmation , but it ’ s what reporters have found is necessary for their stories to hold up to public scrutiny and successfully hold powerful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The media took Reade seriously .
She wanted more .
When Halper asked Reade why she didn ’ t mention the assault allegation originally , she responded by blaming the media : But that wasn ’ t the narrative I wanted .
I wanted the truth .
And I certainly had no qualms about the accusations being of sexual misconduct .
Reporters at many outlets , including the reporters Reade spoke to , have not shied away from reporting on detailed sexual assault allegations .
In the Me Too era , reporters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ powerful men who , for far too long , have abused and assaulted women with no consequences .
In the interview with Halper and in her most recent conversations with me , Reade was critical of how major outlets treated her story .
For example , in the interview with Halper , Reade said she contacted “ someone at the Washington Post and then they never really followed up.
” The Washington Post says that it interviewed Reade “ on multiple occasions — both this year and last — as well as people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ claim and more than a half-dozen former staffers of Biden ’ s Senate office , ” a fact Reade conceded to me in an interview .
In a recent conversation , I asked Reade why she would say the media was shutting her down when she was initially so adamant with me ( and other outlets ) that this wasn ’ t a misconduct story .
The only answer she gave was that she was speaking about the response to her claims “ collectively.
” And in her opinion , the added details @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is not a story about sexual misconduct , ” because , she told me , sexual assault itself is about power .
I spoke with Reade ’ s friend again this week .
She said that Reade had told her about the alleged assault the week it happened in 1993 .
I asked the friend why , then , did she volunteer so explicitly that Biden “ never tried to kiss her ” or touch her inappropriately .
“ It just organically rolled out that way , ” the friend said .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conversations a year ago about what her degree of comfort was .
She wanted to leave a layer there , and I did not want to betray that .
It just wasn ’ t my place.
” Reade told me last year that she gave a supervisor a written statement voicing her complaints about how she ’ d been treated in the office .
The complaint was limited to the harassment allegation , not the misconduct allegation , she told me this year .
I helped Reade in 2019 request documents from a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ record .
( Personnel files wouldn ’ t be released to a third party , like a reporter . )
First , she put in a request with the Senate secretary ’ s office , which maintains some employment records .
That office provided a copy of her payroll history , which confirmed her dates of employment and salary .
We next tried the Office of Personnel Management , which maintains federal records of employment , but the office was not able to track down a file in its electronic system .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a warehouse across the country where it would most likely have ended up to see if there was a physical file stashed there .
He couldn ’ t find one .
One place the complaint could have landed is back in the Senate office , though that wouldn ’ t be proper protocol .
Biden is now under pressure to check files maintained by the University of Delaware .
He gave the university his Senate documents in 2012 under the condition they ’ d remain sealed until two years after his time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extended when he decided to run for president .
When asked on Morning Joe if he would have the documents reviewed , Biden said he would not , maintaining a personnel file wouldn ’ t be there and that the files are about his policy decision-making , speechwriting , etc .
Biden says that if a complaint exists , it would be held by the National Archives and they should release any relevant documents .
He also sent a letter to the Senate secretary ’ s office asking for any relevant records , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ records that might exist are “ strictly confidential.
” Reade herself says the complaint didn ’ t include the assault accusation , so finding the complaint — or failing to find it — would neither corroborate nor debunk the most serious allegation .
The complaint could corroborate Reade ’ s claims of sexual harassment , which Biden also denies .
But it ’ s well established that Biden has over the years touched women in a way that some have said made them uncomfortable , and Biden has acknowledged this publicly .
Whether @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that adequate , it ’ s the assault accusation that has made Reade the center of attention .
All parties agree that a complaint wouldn ’ t speak to that .
Where this leaves us All of this leaves me where no reporter wants to be : mired in the miasma of uncertainty .
I wanted to believe Reade when she first came to me , and I worked hard to find the evidence to make certain others would believe her , too .
I couldn ’ t find it .
None of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it leaves us in the limbo of Me Too : a story that may be true but that we can ’ t prove .
There ’ s another issue at play , which Biden supporters and critics of Reade have pointed to in response to her allegation .
A year ago , Reade went to mainstream , national outlets including the Times , the Post , and the Associated Press .
It was in the middle of a competitive Democratic primary .
She had no obvious connection to any candidate .
And if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it was unclear who would benefit .
This year , Reade has emerged as an ardent Bernie Sanders supporter , with a much more damaging story to tell about Biden , who is now the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee .
She went public with the rape accusation on a podcast sympathetic to Sanders and followed up with Ryan Grim of the Intercept , an outlet that has been consistently critical of Biden .
A few weeks before Reade spoke to Halper , she replied to a tweet from Grim seeming to tease @ @ @ @ @ @ @ declined to elaborate on what she meant in the tweet , directing me to a spokesperson .
Grim said he hadn ’ t noticed the reply when she sent it , and he didn ’ t speak with her for the first time until March 8 , almost a week later .
Reade ’ s supporters on the left see the Democratic establishment ’ s response to her accusation as hypocritical , particularly when compared to how party leaders rallied around Christine Blasey Ford when she testified in the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there was near-universal support for her .
Critics on the left say that Democrats should stand up for Reade , and that the “ believe women ” rallying cry should apply even when it ’ s not politically convenient .
But Democrats have largely lined up behind Biden .
Top Barack Obama alumni have said that they vetted Biden fully in 2008 and found no evidence of the kind of behavior Reade describes .
Rising Democratic star Stacey Abrams recently said , “ I believe Joe Biden.
” Sen. Elizabeth Warren penned an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , seen as a Me Too leader for her push to oust Sen. Al Franken after he was accused of sexual misconduct , headlined an event for Biden this week .
Many liberals have said now and during the Franken saga that the Democratic Party has held itself to a ridiculous standard .
Donald Trump has admitted on tape to what Reade accuses Biden of doing and still denies the accounts of more than 20 women who have accused him of sexual misconduct .
And given that the goal of beating Trump is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on an accusation that has yet to be definitively proven as a damaging distraction .
To Reade , though , none of this is that complicated .
“ My story never changed .
I just didn ’ t come forward with all the details .
It ’ s really simple , ” she said to me .
“ I held back this story because I was afraid of a powerful man.
” Every day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

In April 2019, a woman named Tara Reade reached out to me with a clear, consistent story to tell about her experience as a staffer in Joe Biden’s Senate office in 1993. I spent hours on the phone with her, and many more tracking down possible witnesses and documents, trying to confirm her account.
Reade told me that a senior aide told her Biden liked her legs and that he wanted her to serve cocktails at a fundraiser for him, a request she found demeaning and declined. When she later complained to others in the office that Biden would put his hands on her shoulder, neck, and hair during meetings in ways that made her uncomfortable, she says she was blamed and told to dress more conservatively. Within a few months, she said, her responsibilities had been stripped and she felt she was being pushed out of the job. She went back home to California deflated.
Reade told me that she wanted me to think of this story as being about abuse of power, “but not sexual misconduct.” Her emphasis was on how she was treated in Biden’s office by Senate aides, who she said retaliated against her for complaining about how Biden touched her in meetings. “I don’t know if [Biden] knew why I left,” she said. “He barely knew us by name.”
She sent me an email that evening with an essay she’d written. Her local paper in California, the Union, published a similar version a few weeks later with a line she’d sent to me, too: “This is not a story about sexual misconduct; it is a story about abuse of power. It is a story about when a member of Congress allows staff to threaten or belittle or bully on their behalf unchecked to maintain power rather than modify the behavior.”
Last year, Reade encouraged me to speak with a friend of hers who counseled her through her time in Biden’s office in 1992 and 1993. The friend was clear about what had happened, and what hadn’t.
“On the scale of other things we heard, and I feel ashamed, but it wasn’t that bad. [Biden] never tried to kiss her directly. He never went for one of those touches. It was one of those, ‘sorry you took it that way.’ I know that is very hard to explain,” the friend told me. She went on: “What was creepy was that it was always in front of people.”
I wanted to break this story. Badly. About half a dozen women had stepped forward around the time I spoke with Reade to say they were bothered by how Biden had touched them at events. I wrote a column praising them for staring down the political media that had given him a pass for all those years. Reade’s story took these complaints further — showing how even lower-grade inappropriate conduct can have real consequences for a woman’s career, an important subject that we still don’t talk about nearly enough.
I knew I wasn’t the only reporter Reade was talking to. The New York Times had three reporters on the story, she told me. On April 3, the day after we first spoke, she texted me four times. She wanted to know when I planned to publish, and she warned me that other outlets were getting ready to do so.
That day, the Union published an article with her story. This happens sometimes. It’s happened to me, many times. You fight for a story that would be explosive if you could prove it, but you can’t. I continued reporting on her story for a few more weeks after the story broke, but I didn’t get enough. Vox did not publish anything about Reade in 2019. Neither did the major outlets that I know were pursuing the story, including the Times, the Washington Post, and the Associated Press.
In March 2020, Reade resurfaced with a new allegation, which she told on The Katie Halper Show. In addition to her account of her experience with office staff, Reade said that in 1993, Biden forced an unwanted sexual encounter on her. She said Biden pushed her against a wall on the Capitol grounds, kissed her, and then digitally penetrated her — all against her will.
Biden’s campaign did not respond publicly to Reade’s claims in 2019. On May 1, Biden answered questions about the allegations for the first time on MSNBC’s Morning Joe. He denied all of Reade’s claims and underscored his denial of the sexual assault allegation. “I’m saying unequivocally, it never, never happened,” he told host Mika Brzezinski.
Three aides whom Reade said she approached about her complaints in 1993 told the New York Times that they also dispute her account. “I never once witnessed, or heard of, or received, any reports of inappropriate conduct, period — not from Ms. Reade, not from anyone,” said Marianne Baker, Biden’s longtime executive assistant. “I have absolutely no knowledge or memory of Ms. Reade’s accounting of events, which would have left a searing impression on me as a woman professional, and as a manager.”
When Reade’s story reemerged in a new form, I went through my reporting notes and interview transcripts from a year ago. I spoke with Reade last week for several hours over the course of multiple interviews. Reade and I have had a good rapport. She’s optimistic and idealistic, even, as one friend told me, to a fault. When she tells her account, she becomes emotional. She seems sincere.
If I were an old friend of Reade’s and she told me this same story privately over the course of a year, I doubt I would question her account. The brain processes traumatic experiences differently, making it difficult for some survivors to share them as a linear narrative. And the personal nature of a sexual assault can saddle victims with feelings of shame and doubt. It’s not easy to talk about. Many sexual assault survivors never speak of the experience at all.
But I’m not an old friend. I’m a journalist. Reade came to me because she wanted to share her story with the world, not just with me. It was clear in our conversations that she understood the difference. I listened to her, I interviewed relevant sources, and I returned to her many times in an attempt to get more information to help me find more corroboration.
Reade’s latest allegation is far more serious and comes in a far more fraught political context. The story that both she and her corroborating witnesses are telling has changed dramatically. This leaves me — all of us — in an agonizing place. I’ve written many articles through the Me Too era. It’s unrealistic to demand “perfect” victims. And, like most who come forward with allegations of sexual misconduct or assault, Reade has suffered for speaking out. In several exchanges this year and last year, she’s shown me disturbing messages she’s received online.
As my colleague Anna North writes, there has long been an ambiguity in the Me Too movement. The rallying cry has been to “believe women.” But the acts of journalism that have driven the movement forward have been built on extraordinary amounts of evidence: They usually include not just consistent corroboration but oftentimes multiple stories, stacked on top of each other. Taking on powerful men over these issues was unthinkable just a few years ago. It’s required herculean effort.
Holding powerful men accountable takes a mountain of evidence
Reporters who’ve succeeded in forcing powerful men to be held to account relied on an incredible amount of reporting to do it.
For example, Irin Carmon, who, along with Amy Brittain, exposed Charlie Rose for an alleged decades-long pattern of sexual harassment, had pursued the story for years. When their exposé appeared in the Washington Post, it was built on accusations from eight women, three on the record. Carmon and Brittain found consistency across the women’s stories and strong corroboration of each account:
There are striking commonalities in the accounts of the women, each of whom described their interactions with Rose in multiple interviews with The Post. For all of the women, reporters interviewed friends, colleagues or family members who said the women had confided in them about aspects of the incidents.
Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein fell in 2017 after Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey of the New York Times published the accounts of dozens of women who said Weinstein had assaulted or harassed them over the previous 30 years. Ronan Farrow published another story shortly after in the New Yorker, an account that included 13 accusations of sexual assault, three of them rape. All three reporters have gone on to write books about the incredible lengths they went to in order to get the story.
Eight women have now said they’ve been made uncomfortable by Biden in public settings. Reade is the lone woman to accuse him of sexual assault. This is a situation out of her control, but it means that reporters can’t build a story about Biden around a pattern of behavior, where multiple accusers boost one another’s story. Instead, reporters are looking at Reade’s account in isolation — and that account has changed.
When we spoke a year ago, Reade told me the only named sources she could give me were her deceased mother and the friend I spoke to. A recently uncovered tape of her mom on Larry King Live appears to corroborate Reade’s claim that she was struggling in Biden’s office in 1993, but does not include an assault allegation. When I reconnected with the friend I spoke to last year, who had previously told me Biden had not assaulted Reade, she told me a version of the story that matched Reade’s latest account.
This year, Reade said to Halper that she also told her brother about the alleged assault and harassment. He later told the Washington Post in an interview that he remembers his sister was upset in 1993 about Biden touching her neck and shoulders. He followed up with a Post reporter a few days later over text message to say Reade also said Biden “put his hands under her clothes.”
Since then, a former neighbor of Reade’s, Lynda LaCasse, has come forward in an interview with Business Insider. She said Reade spoke about the harassment and assault claims in 1995. I asked Reade why she hadn’t mentioned LaCasse to me a year ago, or to Halper, or to the first few reporters she told about her assault allegation, including the New York Times, which was working on a deep dive into her story at the same time. She said LaCasse hadn’t seemed like a relevant source because she’d talked to her two years after the alleged incident took place. Reade added that she told reporters about two other anonymous friends later who hadn’t seemed relevant to her either. When asked a similar question by the Associated Press, which had been working on the story, too, Reade didn’t respond.
If Reade had told a consistent story and shared all of her corroborating sources with reporters, if those sources had told a consistent story, if the Union piece had shaken loose other cases like hers, or if there were “smoking gun” evidence in Biden’s papers, her account might have been reported on differently in mainstream media a year ago. It is not fair to an individual survivor that their claims require an extraordinary level of confirmation, but it’s what reporters have found is necessary for their stories to hold up to public scrutiny and successfully hold powerful men accountable. So we are here.
The media took Reade seriously. She wanted more.
When Halper asked Reade why she didn’t mention the assault allegation originally, she responded by blaming the media:
Well, I was going to tell the whole thing … the whole history with Biden. … But the way I was being questioned, it made me so uncomfortable that I didn’t trust it. And no offense to the reporters out there, it’s just maybe that’s something that can be learned, how to talk to somebody who got. … Because I just really got shut down. … And the narrative [they] really wanted it to be was that it wasn’t a sexual thing. Like don’t say it’s sexual. And so I was like, okay, I guess I can’t really say the whole story. …
But that wasn’t the narrative I wanted. I wanted the truth. And I certainly had no qualms about the accusations being of sexual misconduct. Reporters at many outlets, including the reporters Reade spoke to, have not shied away from reporting on detailed sexual assault allegations. In the Me Too era, reporters have been aggressive in uncovering stories of powerful men who, for far too long, have abused and assaulted women with no consequences.
In the interview with Halper and in her most recent conversations with me, Reade was critical of how major outlets treated her story. For example, in the interview with Halper, Reade said she contacted “someone at the Washington Post and then they never really followed up.”
The Washington Post says that it interviewed Reade “on multiple occasions — both this year and last — as well as people she says she told of the assault claim and more than a half-dozen former staffers of Biden’s Senate office,” a fact Reade conceded to me in an interview.
In a recent conversation, I asked Reade why she would say the media was shutting her down when she was initially so adamant with me (and other outlets) that this wasn’t a misconduct story. The only answer she gave was that she was speaking about the response to her claims “collectively.” And in her opinion, the added details still fit her construct that “this is not a story about sexual misconduct,” because, she told me, sexual assault itself is about power.
I spoke with Reade’s friend again this week. She said that Reade had told her about the alleged assault the week it happened in 1993. I asked the friend why, then, did she volunteer so explicitly that Biden “never tried to kiss her” or touch her inappropriately. “It just organically rolled out that way,” the friend said. “[Reade] and I had many conversations a year ago about what her degree of comfort was. She wanted to leave a layer there, and I did not want to betray that. It just wasn’t my place.”
The missing complaint
Reade told me last year that she gave a supervisor a written statement voicing her complaints about how she’d been treated in the office. The complaint was limited to the harassment allegation, not the misconduct allegation, she told me this year.
I helped Reade in 2019 request documents from a few offices to try to find the record. (Personnel files wouldn’t be released to a third party, like a reporter.) First, she put in a request with the Senate secretary’s office, which maintains some employment records. That office provided a copy of her payroll history, which confirmed her dates of employment and salary.
We next tried the Office of Personnel Management, which maintains federal records of employment, but the office was not able to track down a file in its electronic system. I then checked with a source who worked in a warehouse across the country where it would most likely have ended up to see if there was a physical file stashed there. He couldn’t find one.
One place the complaint could have landed is back in the Senate office, though that wouldn’t be proper protocol. Biden is now under pressure to check files maintained by the University of Delaware. He gave the university his Senate documents in 2012 under the condition they’d remain sealed until two years after his time in office. The time frame was extended when he decided to run for president.
When asked on Morning Joe if he would have the documents reviewed, Biden said he would not, maintaining a personnel file wouldn’t be there and that the files are about his policy decision-making, speechwriting, etc.
Biden says that if a complaint exists, it would be held by the National Archives and they should release any relevant documents. He also sent a letter to the Senate secretary’s office asking for any relevant records, a request the office declined because any records that might exist are “strictly confidential.”
Reade herself says the complaint didn’t include the assault accusation, so finding the complaint — or failing to find it — would neither corroborate nor debunk the most serious allegation.
The complaint could corroborate Reade’s claims of sexual harassment, which Biden also denies. But it’s well established that Biden has over the years touched women in a way that some have said made them uncomfortable, and Biden has acknowledged this publicly. Whether or not one finds his apology for that adequate, it’s the assault accusation that has made Reade the center of attention. All parties agree that the complaint wouldn’t speak to that.
Where this leaves us
All of this leaves me where no reporter wants to be: mired in the miasma of uncertainty. I wanted to believe Reade when she first came to me, and I worked hard to find the evidence to make certain others would believe her, too. I couldn’t find it. None of that means Reade is lying, but it leaves us in the limbo of Me Too: a story that may be true but that we can’t prove.
There’s another issue at play, which Biden supporters and critics of Reade have pointed to in response to her allegation. A year ago, Reade went to mainstream, national outlets including the Times, the Post, and the Associated Press. It was in the middle of a competitive Democratic primary. She had no obvious connection to any candidate. And if voters or the party pushed Biden out, it was unclear who would benefit.
This year, Reade has emerged as an ardent Bernie Sanders supporter, with a much more damaging story to tell about Biden, who is now the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. She went public with the rape accusation on a podcast sympathetic to Sanders and followed up with Ryan Grim of the Intercept, an outlet that has been consistently critical of Biden.
A few weeks before Reade spoke to Halper, she replied to a tweet from Grim seeming to tease that a story was coming. Reade declined to elaborate on what she meant in the tweet, directing me to a spokesperson. Grim said he hadn’t noticed the reply when she sent it, and he didn’t speak with her for the first time until March 8, almost a week later.
Yup. Timing... wait for it....tic toc — taratweets ( Alexandra Tara Reade) (@ReadeAlexandra) March 4, 2020
Reade’s supporters on the left see the Democratic establishment’s response to her accusation as hypocritical, particularly compared to how party leaders rallied around Christine Blasey Ford when she testified in the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearings. In Ford’s case, there was near-universal support for her. Critics on the left say that Democrats should stand up for Reade, and that the “believe women” rallying cry should apply even when it’s not politically convenient.
But Democrats have largely lined up behind Biden. Top Barack Obama alumni have said that they vetted Biden fully in 2008 and found no evidence of the kind of behavior Reade describes. Rising Democratic star Stacey Abrams recently said, “I believe Joe Biden.” Sen. Elizabeth Warren penned an op-ed with Biden. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, seen as a Me Too leader for her push to oust Sen. Al Franken after he was accused of sexual misconduct, headlined an event for Biden this week.
Many liberals have said now and during the Franken saga that the Democratic Party has held itself to a ridiculous standard. Donald Trump has admitted on tape to what Reade accuses Biden of doing and still denies the accounts of more than 20 women who have accused him of sexual misconduct. And given that the goal of beating Trump is paramount this fall, some see dwelling on an accusation that has yet to be definitively proven as a damaging distraction.
To Reade, though, none of this is that complicated.
“My story never changed. I just didn’t come forward with all the details. It’s really simple,” she said to me. “I held back this story because I was afraid of a powerful man.”


vox--2020-05-08--The unemployment rate soared to 14.7 in April

The US shed 20.5 million jobs and the unemployment rate surged to 14.7 in April , according to data newly released by the US Department of Labor this morning — worse than any unemployment rate on record in modern data , and higher than anything experienced since the Great Depression .
To make matters even worse , this shocking figure almost certainly understates the true figure .
April unemployment numbers are released in May based on surveys that took place during the week that contained April 12 .
And since April 12 in the US , things have only gotten @ @ @ @ @ @ @ figures released in the final two weeks of April indicate that the labor market continued to deteriorate at a rapid pace , albeit slightly less rapidly than in the first weeks .
Ernie Tedeschi , a labor market economist , projected Thursday based on real-time data that the current unemployment rate is actually 20 percent .
Further complicating things , for now , enhanced unemployment insurance benefits mean that workers in the bottom half of the income distribution are likely getting more money from UI than they would have from working .
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ consumer spending from joblessness is considerably less than it would normally be during a period of double-digit unemployment .
Conversely , many employers have cut salaries and benefits even for workers who haven ’ t been laid off , so there are pockets of income loss that are worse than what you ’ d expect from the unemployment numbers .
Others may still be working in restaurants or hotels but dealing with a precipitous decline in tips as fewer customers come in the door .
The big picture is that the economy is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ secondary and tertiary economic impacts separate from the hit to the labor market caused by the virus itself .
When people don ’ t have money , they don ’ t buy new cars or new appliances .
They don ’ t remodel kitchens or buy restaurant meals .
When incomes drop , state and local tax revenue drops , forcing layoffs and furloughs of teachers and firefighters who in turn need to cut back on their spending .
In normal times , the Federal Reserve would try to counteract this by cutting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hoping to spark a boom in investment .
But the Fed already cut rates all the way down to zero back in March .
To dig out of this whole will likely require more than a solution to the public health crisis , it ’ s going to take some mix of creative thinking from central bankers and aggressive fiscal stimulus from Congress .

The US shed 20.5 million jobs, and the unemployment rate surged to 14.7 percent in April, according to preliminary data released by the US Department of Labor Friday morning — worse than any unemployment rate on record in modern data, and higher than anything experienced since the Great Depression.
To make matters even worse, this figure almost certainly understates the true situation. April unemployment numbers are released in May based on surveys that took place during the week that contained April 12. And since April 12 in the US, things have only gotten worse: The initial unemployment insurance claims figures released in the final two weeks of April indicate that the labor market continued to deteriorate at a rapid pace, albeit slightly less rapidly than in the first weeks.
Ernie Tedeschi, a labor market economist, projected Thursday based on real-time data that the current unemployment rate is actually 20 percent. And in the jobs report, the Bureau of Labor Statistics said it believes murky classification of temporary unemployment in the household survey caused the official number to be about 5 percentage points lower.
Further complicating things, for now, enhanced unemployment insurance benefits mean that many workers in the bottom half of the income distribution are likely getting more money from UI than they would have from working. That means the hit to incomes and consumer spending from joblessness is considerably less than it would otherwise be during a period of double-digit unemployment.
But many employers have cut salaries and benefits even for workers who haven’t been laid off, so there are pockets of income loss that are worse than what you’d expect from the unemployment numbers. Others may still be working in restaurants or hotels but dealing with a precipitous decline in tips as fewer customers come in the door.
The big picture: The economy is at grave risk of experiencing big secondary and tertiary economic impacts separate from the hit to the labor market caused by the virus itself.
When people don’t have money, they don’t buy new cars or new appliances. They don’t remodel kitchens or buy restaurant meals. When incomes drop, state and local tax revenue drops, forcing layoffs and furloughs of teachers and firefighters who in turn need to cut back on their spending.
In normal times, the Federal Reserve would try to counteract this by cutting interest rates to a low level and hoping to spark a boom in investment. But the Fed already cut rates all the way down to zero back in March. To dig out of this hole will require more than a solution to the public health crisis, it’s going to take some mix of creative thinking from central bankers and aggressive fiscal stimulus from Congress.