Dr. Andy Welki will explore the state of the economy.
Uncertainty can be scary and costly. Dr. Andy Welki will explore the state of the economy, the volatility of the markets, and project the road ahead for the United States and economies around the globe. Like all of our webinars, you will have the opportunity to submit questions in real time for Dr. Welki through the chat feature in Zoom.
Andy Welki, Ph.D. is a faculty member in the Boler College of Business focusing on the areas of Business Statistics, Environmental Economics, and Managerial Economics. His research interests include issues related to highway safety and highway safety policies, both domestically and internationally. In addition, he also does research in the area of how political and economic freedom connect to highway safety. His work has been published in Managerial and Decision Economics, The Journal of Business Education, and Transportation Research, "Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review". Dr. Welki received the Wasmer Award in 1992, 1997, 2002, and 2008, which recognizes teaching excellence in the Boler School of Business at John Carroll University. He is a strong supporter of JCU athletics and currently serves as the Faculty Athletics Representative for Blue Streak athletics
A.C.E.S. Online The Economic Impact of COVID-19 - 6/25/2020 with Dr. Andy Welki
Remaining unanswered questions:
In questions 1, 8 and 10 I see a common theme around the idea of people coming together in groups.
The underlying challenge is that humans are social animals and there is no substitute for human interaction and connectivity. Yes, technology can play a part, but anyone who has lived in the world of zoom knows it is not the same as a person to person interaction.
Therein lies the challenge. We crave human interaction yet human interaction exposes us to the possibility of the virus. It is a continuum along which individuals have to make choices and that opens up the challenges.
Think of a different example, alcohol consumption. There are two extremes, no drinking and overly excessive drinking. Either end point is untenable. So where along the continuum is the boundary and how do you manage a boundary when everyone wants to set their own boundary because of how they see themselves (e.g. I can hold my alcohol, I am not impaired).
The opening up of the world after lockdown has too many people ignoring all the distance protocols and businesses (at least some) not enforcing any boundaries. The challenge is what are the enforcement mechanisms if people choose to behave badly especially if they may not bear the consequences of their bad decisions.
At the end of the day, it is personal accountability and the acceptance of a social responsibility to protect each other. In a land of personal freedom and individual “rights”s\ that is a significant hurdle.
Questions 2 and 5 are very interesting to me. They are a subset of something that every organization/sector will grapple with. What did we learn and how does that change how we move forward organizationally?
Every sector/organization/firm has been disrupted. What did they learn? How can they do things differently? What worked and did not? Where were the points that breakdowns occur? While we have become more technology reliant over time, never before were we disrupted and forced to infuse and imagine how technology can replace the “this is the way we have always done it” mindset. Change that formerly was incremental is now paradigm shift level. That is where the new frontier is.
As a side bar, the role of public health has never been more important, both domestically and internationally (this ties to #9). The global interconnectedness means a problem anywhere can rapidly become a problem everywhere. Couple this with a serious distrust and disrespect (some justified, some not) for institutions, this area has no easy solution. Trust does not rebuild anywhere as quickly as it can be broken.
For #3, I am not an expert in that area but I think the unemployment challenges will linger through most of 2021, all based upon the speed at which things can open and how opening affects virus spread.
For #6, great question, basically…. if I do what I am told and follow the best available evidence as shared by the government/health officials, am I liable if someone gets infected? Obviously that should include protecting vulnerable populations. For me personally, the company should not be liable. But my mind is simple. I agree it is a “fear factor” for organizations looking to reconvene employees in one place.
For #10, much different situations internationally and domestically, both in terms of heterogeneity of populations and political situations. The polarization of the US political scene does nothing to help the situation. As the US political mantra goes….never let a crisis go to waste. Embedded in there is the idea of a political advantage and not a societal advantage. Many to many people at the highest levels that see “we” and not “us”.
For #7, that is why fiscal houses should always be in order, not something that has existed in the US for a long time. Like a credit card with no limit (at least is some minds) there will be a day of reckoning how far out and who are the bill collectors remains to be seen.
For #4 (hi Chris) data challenges are a big problem, you are trying to model spread with limited or no information as to who the spreaders are (asymptomatic people, no testing, limited contact and tracing capability). Bad/limited/no data equals bad models and bad predictions.