The profound economic cost of the battle against the coronavirus is becoming clearer in Minnesota and across the U.S., and forcing policymakers toward an uncomfortable set of questions.
Is there a point at which flattening the curve of viral infection causes more damage than it prevents, and where is that point? What cost to the U.S. and global economies are Americans willing to accept to save the lives of those most vulnerable to the pandemic?
Even if the government were to encourage everyone back to normal life sooner than public health officials and epidemiologists advise, will people feel safe enough to do so?
"WE CANNOT LET THE CURE BE WORSE THAN THE PROBLEM ITSELF," President Donald Trump tweeted late Sunday night, triggering a debate Monday that fell along partisan lines.
Governors, including Minnesota's Tim Walz, have imposed social distancing rules that have shut down public life in hopes of slowing the spread of the virus and preventing the health care system from being overwhelmed. But information about the virus is imperfect.
As of Monday, there were 374,921 confirmed cases of COVID-19 worldwide. So far 16,411 people had died from the virus, a 4.4% death rate. But likely hundreds of thousands have contracted the virus without being tested or suffering symptoms of COVID-19, so the real mortality rate is unclear.
Meanwhile, financial markets fell another 3.5% Monday, and are down more than a third since a month ago. Wall Street banks are projecting the U.S. economy will contract dramatically in the April-June quarter.
James Bullard, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, told Bloomberg that unemployment could soar to 30%, which would be worse than 1933, the worst year of the Great Depression.