The coronavirus has often been referred to as an “equalizer,” sickening both the rich and the poor, but is it really affecting people equally? As the socio-economic consequences of the outbreak become apparent, economists and policymakers are more concerned about the distributional impacts of the coronavirus. Students from low-income regions may not have access to the same level of online education as others do; informally employed migrant workers may no longer be able to send money back home; and many countries with scarce resources are facing serious disruptions in the supply chains of essential food and materials. This article will walk you through some of the impacts of the coronavirus epidemic, and explain why it disproportionately affects low-income households.
Since the Chinese government got the COVID-19 outbreak under control, local governments in China have been issuing “consumption vouchers” or “consumption coupons” to their citizens. But experts have expressed concerns about the voucher scheme, mainly in terms of its economic effect, social ramifications, and potential unfairness. Now that the scheme is largely over, it seems apropos to examine the evidence we have and understand why it failed.
Shortly after the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic, stock markets around the world experienced serious meltdowns, triggering the New York Stock Exchange’s shutdown mechanism multiple times in the following days. Many begin to question whether this could be the start of another global recession, and how the pandemic would affect the global economy as it continues to spread worldwide.
The novel coronavirus outbreak in China has caught the attention of billions of people worldwide. Hospitals in Hubei are overwhelmed with the flood of patients, and labs across China are working around the clock to test patients for the virus. In these difficult times, how can we utilize the power of science to estimate the potential scale of this outbreak? To find our answer, we must look beyond China.