Good points. At this time I wouldn’t worry too much about people becoming too passive. This sudden lockdown and the shutdown of parts of the economy might have come as a shock to many. Plus they were told to sit at home and it’ll be over in three weeks. Only gradually do they let the info out that those restrictions are there to stay to varying degrees for undefined times.

When people realize that the government, while helping in the beginning, can only do so much, reliance on the state might go down again. That might lead to changes in motivation to self-improve or start novel or remodeled businesses and re-establish freedoms under those “new normal” conditions. The more positive examples we see, the more people might be inspired to follow.

For me this is hindsight, but it shouldn’t be for the agencies involved. The mask shortage could have been foreseen with the solution in having various designs on hand for near instant production, especially including those in production that were plenty good enough except that they were designated industrial or something else. The potential ventilator shortage didn’t have to exist at all with fall back simple capabilities already tested and designed. Hospital beds are often far over specialized in the face of a real pandemic. Classrooms with normal beds and some monitoring for many cases IF regular beds are short. A real assessment of medical skills required considering what medics and corpsmen are capable of in the military. There is a lot of capability around without burning out an artificially limited medical group. This all assumes a pandemic as bad as original projections.

In short, there are many things a government could do to prepare for a variety of potential problems. Providing for alternate testing capabilities and alternate mask production is just starters. Realizing that industries cannot increase production beyond a certain point without raising prices would help on everything from masks to TP. Paying overtime costs money and starting another shift costs as well, either of which could have a company losing money with every unit produced if prices are fixed artificially low.

My guess is that the most productive thing many of us can do is point out that depending on government to solve our problems hasn’t worked but do it without spending excessive time blaming any particular group. Promoting self reliance would be a good thing as self reliance often translates to high motivation.

It might do well to point out the corruptions prevalent in society that has contributed to our problems. Not corruption in the sense of prosecution, but corruption in the sense of corrupted code. What business other than medical can send bills out that are almost completely disconnected from the care actually received without facing legal problems in short order? What business other than education can charge high fees for knowledge that is nearly free online for the motivated? Rent control stops needed construction of new units cold. And so on with legal, insurance and many other things that are out of control, and couldn’t get away with it without government backing. Bashing government is not the issue, rather pointing out the limitations of top-down management is the point where I believe we have failed.

I expect to see both simultaneously. We have to hope that the economic power and will for freedom of the first group will be enough to compensate for the second group. Any examples of recent times that might give us some hints? What could we do to make the first more likely?

Look who doesn’t understand depressions, either. Getting recycled into another business assumes that there will be other businesses to absorb them. Without these other businesses, not only do we look like Russia and Venezuela, but we will depend upon Big Brother government to look out for us. That is what unemployment insurance is all about, in addition to various welfare programs, Social (In)Security, and Medicare.

Another assumption is that there will be businesses that are strong enough to expand into the assets and need the additional staffs. A third problem is that rapid expansion is very hazardous for any company, so a large workforce that needs hiring could take years for the other companies to expand enough to need them.

There have already been calls for equity positions and board directors for the government for any company that accepts bailout money, so this crisis is unlikely to go to waste for those who are turning us into a socialist country (despite Trump’s claim that we would never become socialist).

One has to wonder why some people think that it is good for government to cause bankruptcies of companies in trouble — trimming away “dead wood” — rather than have those companies continue to figure out how to do business more efficiently.

Other businesses that were in good shape a month ago are likely rapidly going into bad shape due to lack of revenue, the lifeblood of any business. How long can the stronger companies hold out during this government imposed shutdown? Few companies, even strong companies, have a safe full of cash that is available and sufficient for a monthlong shutdown.

In the month or two that many people have been forcibly outed from their careers, many have had time to reevaluate their life choices. I would not be surprised if over the next several years many new and valuable enterprises are started by people that were triggered by this crisis. Many others are likely to think about gaining life skills that will allow them to build up instead of just getting by on the lower rungs. A lot of underutilized talent in this country. It could also motivate many people to get better at their jobs such that they will earn more and not be in the non-essential category for the next round. Businesses also have a chance to appreciate their people when they don’t have them and possibly try to create a better work place for their good people, along with the realization that some people are an actual detriment to the company and need to go. Last and perhaps more important than any of this is the attitude towards having a government that can arbitrarily destroy what many have spent decades building. This could lead to a groundswell of support for a smaller government more responsive to reality.

Going the other direction, it is quite possible that many more people will ride the system for all it is worth now that their appetite has been wetted. And many politicians will use that along with their new found temporary power to increase their permanent power. It is possible that the minority that is normally in the forefront of the innovations and entrepreneurial spirit to improve our lot in life will be discouraged from driving forward.

I just wish my track record for prediction was good enough to see ahead to either or neither of these scenarios taking place.

It’s also a preview of life in the US if the Green New Deal ever gets passed.