We were not
prepared for this outbreak. All around the country, there are shortages of
cleaning supplies, toiletries, and other necessities. There are also shortages
in the medical field including shortages of doctors, face masks and other
personal protective equipment, testing kits, and intensive care beds. People
are panicking, buying and hoarding way more supplies than they need. Other
people are trying to profit off the pandemic by selling things like hand
sanitizer for outrageous amounts of money. Most people are suffering. Suffering
because they can’t go to work. Suffering because they do not have substantial
savings. Suffering because they have a lot of debt. Suffering because they’re
401ks are crashing along with the stock market. Suffering because they can’t
afford health insurance. Crises like this highlight the fragility of many
peoples’ economic situation in this country. They highlight the enormous
inequality in our country and the absurdity of our healthcare system. They
highlight the enormous distrust of our government to govern effectively and efficiently
during times of crisis. They highlight the negligence of our government, which should
have been prepared for an outbreak like this. We can’t go back in time, but we
can learn from this outbreak and institute fundamental changes that prepare us
for the next outbreak.
Many scientists saw this coming.
There have been many outbreaks in the past, such the Spanish Flu, SARS, MERS,
and Ebola. New zoonotic diseases and mutations in common diseases happen often.
However, we are often reactive rather than proactive when it comes to addressing
these outbreaks. For example, the Ebola outbreak in Africa was tough to contain
because there weren’t many hospitals or doctors around. Doctors without borders
were able to come in a help contain it, but it was still a struggle. However,
Ebola is only contagious once you have symptoms, and only spreads through
contact with bodily fluids. Also, it mostly affected rural areas, which lowered
its transmission rates. The Ebola outbreak should have served as a warning for
governments to prepare for future outbreaks, but very little was done.
The response currently needed to address
this outbreak are beyond the capacity of philanthropy, but philanthropy could
still be helpful. I think in a crisis like this, philanthropy at the local
level could provide a lot of benefits to communities hit hardest by this
outbreak. These communities require the toughest restrictions on social and
economic life in order to slow the spread of the virus. Many of these changes
are abrupt and it could be hard for people to get the resources they need, especially
when some people decide to hoard resources. It would be good for local
organizations to help in those communities, but still much of the emergency
response should come from the federal and state governments. Philanthropy,
however, could be used in other ways. Philanthropy is often used in the short
term, for disaster relief and fulfilling urgent needs, but it could also be
used for the long term, like having resources on hand for emergencies or
funding research that could help lessen the effect of these crises. Charities
could shift some of there focus to advocacy, since the world’s problems are
getting too big for charities to handle. Right now, COVID19 is causing a lot of
economic upheaval. COVID19’s effects are both short and long term, but we will
recover from it. However, there are problems that will have even worse effects
that we still need to address, the main one being climate change. Philanthropy
aimed at addressing climate change like Jeff Bezos’ donation won’t help much
but advocating for governments to change their policies towards the environment
might. I think the coronavirus should serve as a wake-up call to everyone that
normalcy is not guaranteed and that preventative measures, in this case and in
the case of climate change, will save more money than they would cost. Life
will eventually go back to normal in the next year or two, but we can’t get too
comfortable. We must work on fixing our healthcare system, reducing the
enormous inequality in the country, canceling student debt, addressing the
greed of the pharmaceutical companies, switching to clean energy, and more. We
are not fully safe, and we will have to make substantial changes to government policy
and our lifestyles in order to ensure that our planet can keep on living.
Andrew,
ReplyDeleteI agree. Ignoring the issues that have been presented to us time after time will not do anything for us. Why do we keep slipping into this? We solve the issues at the time, but we do not address the fact that the issues can and will return. We have to start looking at issues for a longer term, not just helping in the moment.
I believe this is an issue that philanthropists deal with frequently. It is sometimes difficult to make donations to organizations that deal with situations like coronavirus, wanting to help the long-term, as the money is needed now, and will not be distributed to helping the longer-term, as the issue is prevalent. Even if a philanthropist wants to donate to help the long-term, they may not be able to do so.
You are correct in saying we were not prepared for this. It is scary to see everyone reacting the way we are to this event. If we had taken lessons from earlier, this should not be as intimidating. Although we will get past this, that does not mean we should not be prepared for next time.
This has pointed out the true dangers of our current government and healthcare system. We need to be prepared for something like this in the future. I believe more money could be donated to research at the time. This would help in the longer-term as well as the short term, as any discoveries now will help everyone in the future. It is still a difficult choice where to support.
I read an article that related philanthropy to the stock market and it reflects what you said. It says that the stock market's reliance on quarterly gains is not a great way to measure a company effectively (https://ssir.org/articles/entry/short_term_vs_long_term_focus_in_philanthropy). This is because you forget the reason you invested in the first place and sell because you are not making money quickly. But the article says that smart investors invest in the long-term and stick with it. Check the article out if you can!
Andrew,
ReplyDeleteThis is an insightful look into the factors that have truly made this pandemic such a crisis in our country. I agree that we were completely underprepared for this situation and that a large portion of that responsibility falls on the federal government. In addition, I agree with your sentiment that the problem has evolved into something philanthropy cannot tackle alone. You briefly mentioned that charities could shift their focus towards more advocacy based projects. I'm curious, do you have any ideas on where they could focus their efforts? Personally, I think a great option is locally stockpiling non-perishable goods so that in the event of a similar situation they could be adequately distributed to those most in need. Another more advocacy based route is campaigning for more funds towards scientific research to develop treatments, vaccines, or even a cure. Ultimately, I think your post had a lot of good potential and really opened up the floor to debate on how philanthropy should try to address issues of this caliber.
-Ryan Marrone
Hi Andrew!
ReplyDeleteOur world does seem to be in an upheaval of resources and jobs due to the COVID19. I also agree that philanthropy can greatly help restore or bring more resources in for those who are in dire. As you stated, many people are simply hoarding supplies they do not need, which takes away from others. In addition to that, we do not have enough proper medical supplies to take care of those who have fallen ill to the virus. I agree that philanthropy can most definitely make an impact in that way.
Just the other day when I went to go food shopping, I was astonished to see that most of the simple necessities like lettuce, chicken, eggs, soup and other boxed foods were totally out of stock. I couldn’t believe what I was seeing! It seemed so odd to me that people were working on the “every man for himself” mentality rather than considering others as well. It raised questions to me as to why people could be so greedy in times where everyone is clearly suffering.
I addition to philanthropy being able to help, I think another way philanthropists can help is not only in helping provide resources, but also helping to provide accurate information regarding the virus. Proper updates can not only provide a sense of solitude to the public, but also give them accurate information, rather than people freaking out about inaccurate information relayed to them.
I believe that it is incredibly important for people to remain calm and socially distance themselves for now. However, philanthropy can possibly help instill proper information, and abilities for people to live as close to their normal lives as possible.
Overall, I think you raised many strong points in your post, and I agree that philanthropy can implement themselves into our world to help better everyone’s lives in this chaotic time.
Andrew,
ReplyDeleteI agree with your claim that we should have been proactive of a potential outbreak after the occurrence of the Ebola virus. During times of economic upheaval, such as the one we are experiencing right now, the inequalities in society that philanthropy hopes to address are most definitely emphasized. While for the time being, people need time to recover from this pandemic, we must take action on a national scale to ensure that we are prepared for another outbreak, and also to correct these inequalities to ensure a proper quality of life for all. I agree with you that the most effective means of philanthropy now would be advocacy, and this is for one purposeful reason from my perspective. Advocacy helps the general population understand the importance of being proactive, and this would allow for new laws to be adopted along with more action being done on both the organizational level and individual level. While it is much easier to claim to correct these inequalities and correct environmental issues, it is much more difficult to take action.
While the coronavirus pandemic is undoubtably devastating on an economic and social level, with the administration issuing a quarantine, there are also positive effects. It is possible that this situation is exactly what the world needs to address the inequalities that govern socitey along with the vulnerabilities within society in addressing such an outbreak in the future. It is clear that the healthcare system was not prepared for such a tragedy, and we must ensure that we correct the flaws present for the future. Furthermore, I believe that this post will bring about more discussion about how philanthropy can be most effectively used to correct the issues in our nation highlighted by the COVID-19 outbreak, whether that is inequality in terms of obtaining resources for the quarantine or not having adequate healthcare systems to provide support for the ill.
-Arpeet Patel
I think you've raised many important points and concerns regarding the role of philanthropy and the role of federal and state governments amidst large scale economic crises. Although philanthropy is beneficial and effective for local and short-term causes, its functionality becomes almost obsolete in times of economic instability and chaos because it is a band-aid solution to systemic issues. However, philanthropists can provide resources and share accurate information that will pressure governments and hold officials and representatives accountable, especially now that COVID-19 is dramatically affecting people's everyday lives: store shelves are empty, employees are being laid off, schools moving online, ect. For example, the promotion of staying at home and washing your hands while providing resources, information, and statistics on COVID-19 are ways philanthropist organizations can effectively navigate during this time. I agree that normalcy is not guaranteed after this and it is uncertain whether it is even salvageable, which is why preventative measures should be prioritized in government spending in the first place.
ReplyDelete