The education sector has felt both direct and indirect impacts from the virus and mitigation efforts. Schools across the country have been closed at all levels. In their place, efforts to continue education at home with online instruction have been rolled out with varying degrees of success. The limitations of internet connectivity have been exposed, particularly rural versus urban. The internet infrastructure that is currently in place has been challenged by the volume of people using it for more data heavy streaming and live meeting applications, again all concentrated at home when the infrastructure was designed to be most effective in the work environment. Both teachers and parents are struggling with the dual demands of doing their designated work and caring for their children. Some children have actually blossomed with the change in learning environment. However, the change, on the whole, appears be having more negative than positive effects. Since primary and secondary education gets most of its funding from taxes, the same tax revenue issues faced by other government sectors is being experienced by schools as well. At the post-secondary level, whether in state schools or private schools, the closures have been devastating economically. Loos of tuition and housing payments are not counterbalanced by reductions in operating costs due to the closures. Aside from when schools will reopen, how they will reopen and whether they will still attract the same student volumes are major concerns. Like many other industries, post-secondary schools are not designed to allow for the type of safety measures needed to keep a pandemic at bay. Already, some schools have announced that they will not reopen for on-campus activities this fall. Others have announced they will actually reopen early and then try to finish their fall semester before a potential spike in COVID-19 and influenza in late fall. Online learning was already on the rise in post-secondary settings, somewhat easing the blow for some schools. However, it was nowhere near pervasive enough and certainly not lucrative enough to balance a complete loss of in-person instruction. International trade has also been affected both directly and indirectly by the pandemic. Although international shipments of goods continue, the closure of borders to personal travel, even business travel, has constricted trade. Changes in consumption patterns and the sudden emergency need for medical supplies of all types have thrown demand and supply out of balance across sectors and across geographies. Disruptions in domestic production, either directly due to closures and illness, or indirectly due to the reallocation of resources to medical production, have added to the imbalance. The open disagreement between the U.S. and China, the world’s two biggest economies, and more generalized antagonism between other countries and China and between various western nations over medical resource allocation increase the likelihood of disruptions to trading relationships and trade balances in the future, even after the pandemic subsides. A corollary to tensions over access to goods is a renewed interest in supporting domestic production. A shift to greater and more diversified domestic production is not necessarily bad in itself. However, the shift in global supply and demand and the potential steps taken to boost domestic production, including tariffs and subsidies, could have significant effects on national and international economic health.
∴ PROGNOSIS
45
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs