[jdhn]

>My question is how much, if any, social unrest this will lead to.

The only social unrest that has happened so far have been the protests about wanting to lift or ease restrictions on states, and they were widely panned as a bunch of nutjobs. I doubt there will be any "unrest" beyond the protests.

[stcredzero]

The only social unrest that has happened so far have been the protests about wanting to lift or ease restrictions on states, and they were widely panned as a bunch of nutjobs.

It's easy to look down on people lower on the socioeconomic ladder. They're still human beings. They've been given this raw deal: For the greater good, you will now give up your job for an indefinite period of time, with no prospect of finding like employment elsewhere. You have no choice, and if you refuse, you are a horrible person and in some cases you may face civil and criminal consequences.

Injustice isn't any less unjust, because the recipients are somehow in a group one perceives as deplorable. Principles of justice and human rights are universal. This was MLK's ideological point in the Civil Rights movement.

Adherence to this principle is how I distinguish pseudo-activists who just want power and attention from those who really have justice at heart: Are the principles applied to everyone, or just to whomever it's convenient?

[kilroy123]

I completely agree with you, but... How about don't vote in leaders that only care about helping out their rich buddies then?

The Scandinavian countries have moved to pay all payrolls to keep people paid during all this madness, instead of just bailing out large debt holders.

[dlkf]

It's tough when your country isn't much of a democracy. A major difference between Scandinavia and the US/Canada/many others is that proportional representation plays a much greater role in the electoral system here.

[stcredzero]

It's a good thing, when a republic is constructed so that a minority still has a voice. One might perceive them as the "wrong" minority today, in the current context. In the future, they might well be the "correct" minority.

(That said, I think Sweden of all places in the west, have had the best, most sane reaction to the pandemic.)

[oblio]

And do you think that in Sweden of all places, minorities don't have a voice?

They have more of a voice, because they don't have a two party system. If you are American, please check out some European political systems. You'll find that politics in Europe are a lot more nuanced and minorities in general are much, much better represented.

[stcredzero]

And do you think that in Sweden of all places, minorities don't have a voice?

I don't know if you intended it that way, but the above feels like you're trying to put words in my mouth to that effect. No, I don't think I said that minorities are voiceless in Sweden.

They have more of a voice, because they don't have a two party system.

Right. Again, as Matt Easton says, "Context!" If the US were to go fully democratic, with our two parties, no electoral college, and everything done proportionally, things in the US would suck for constituencies smaller than 50%. Particularly with discourse being what it is in 2020.

However, if you know of a way to do away with the US two party system, I'm all ears.

Also, when I read your comment above, I tend to read it in my head as sounding angry and patronizing. Hopefully, you didn't mean it the way of, "What, you ignorant fool, do you not know...etc...?"

[Mc_Big_G]

What minority are you even talking about?

[stcredzero]

What minority are you even talking about

Any of them.

Some of them, I'm in. Some of them, I'll never be in. The principle is universal: A just society protects the minority. Any of them.

[Theodores]

In the UK there is a lot of payroll being paid by central government, plus there are interest free loans for small businesses.

This is very good on the surface, however, there is a large chunk of wealth going to the rentier class. The rentseekers were encouraged under successive Tory and New Labour governments with schemes such as 'buy to let'. Now they are the only truly protected sector of society. The rich get richer.

[simonh]

Buy to let has been heavily discourages by changes to the tax system and stamp duties in the last few years, so this is an unreasonable characterisation. The previous long-running Labour government did far less to discourage buy to let and other rent seeking activities than recent Conservative governments in the UK.

Yes rent seeking activities are a serious problem and I think there's a consensus forming on this, at least in the UK.

[incog_nit0]

> The rentseekers were encouraged under successive Tory and New Labour governments with schemes such as 'buy to let'. Now they are the only truly protected sector of society. The rich get richer.

There's some truth to this, but I wouldn't say rentseekers are the only truly protected sector of society. My parents put their life savings into buying a block of flats in the 90s. They borrowed from every single person they knew and took out a mortgage against their own home and put most of their subsequent savings into paying off the mortgage sooner.

The last mortage payment is due end of this year and they were looking forward to leaving their full time jobs whilst maintaining their little property 'empire'.

So far this month they've had 3 tenants call asking for rent reductions, 1 totally unable to pay rent and another insisting on a 20% discount because their friend's landlords are offering the same.

Maintaining that block of 10 flats is no picnic. It means you're on call to unblock toilets on bank holidays or clean, paint, draft tenancy agreements and file paperwork on your evenings and weekends.

Of course - owning an appreciating asset means you're better off than someone who doesn't but you're not quite sitting pretty.

[Frondo]

That is unfortunate. All business has risk; becoming a property owner is no different. I anecdotally know a few people who bought second homes to rent out, and they're facing a crunch too. I don't see why, though, small-time landlords should be treated different from other small business owners when it comes to society-wide crises like these.

[coryfklein]

Trump was elected on a populist, "drain the swamp" agenda. The public is notoriously bad at predicting which candidate will help the people, and which will "help out their rich buddies."

[stcredzero]

The public is notoriously bad at predicting which candidate will help the people, and which will "help out their rich buddies."

For the latter, you can get pretty close with this algorithm:

    WillHelpRichBuddies() {
        return true
    }

[dcow]

Great! So just pick people with benevolent rich buddies.

[stcredzero]

I completely agree with you, but... How about don't vote in leaders that only care about helping out their rich buddies then?

Tone deafness in the media and the social and governmental leadership of any country is a key reason why demagogues and sociopaths get into power. This has been the case across time and cultures.

The Scandinavian countries have moved to pay all payrolls to keep people paid during all this madness, instead of just bailing out large debt holders.

Watch Louis Rossman's YouTube coverage of the US programs as a potential recipient/applicant. As a small business owner, he has a front seat to the incompetence of US lawmakers. It's the same kind of thing which smells like grandstanding incompetence, which also afflicted the "banking reforms" post 2008. The laws aren't written by and for people who actually know how things work.

[greedo]

Oh they're definitely written by and for people who actually know how things work. They're written by Congressional aides and advisors who do exactly what they're told by the donors to the politicians. The politicians don't care what's in the bills, they care how the voters will react.

[astronautjones]

> It's easy to look down on people lower on the socioeconomic ladder. They're still human beings. They've been given this raw deal: For the greater good, you will now give up your job for an indefinite period of time, with no prospect of finding like employment elsewhere. You have no choice, and if you refuse, you are a horrible person and in some cases you may face civil and criminal consequences.

Lots of these people (and a lot of the trumpy, NRA class at large) are bourgeoise, fwiw

[stcredzero]

Lots of these people (and a lot of the trumpy, NRA class at large) are bourgeoise, fwiw

Well, for one thing, in that subset there are still people getting a raw deal.

For another thing, it's a generally bad thing when people start formulating their political equations or thoughts of who's worthy to be listened to based on group stereotypes. "People like that," is just another form of, "those people," or "them."

I've been on the receiving end of stuff like that all my life, as being one of a few classes of minorities, some of it from people who might be characterized as "the trumpy, NRA class at large."

Ultimately, we're all individuals, and we're all human beings. Beware of people who rail against a group, then have you identify them by outward signs. Be especially wary, when those people start claiming to know the presence of bad thoughts in others, such that they "don't deserve" this or that. Be especially wary when the "don't deserve" starts extending to basic human rights.

In 2020, be triply wary if you are, in effect, being asked to think badly of and ignore the human rights of one particular group -- in the name of justice and human rights.

[mbgerring]

> It's easy to look down on people lower on the socioeconomic ladder.

That's not who's protesting with assault rifles demanding that their hairdresser show up to work.

People who are "lower on the socioeconomic ladder" are the ones going on strike for PPE, hazard pay and sick leave that the media are dutifully ignoring.

[stcredzero]

That's not who's protesting with assault rifles demanding that their hairdresser show up to work

Again, it's easy to paint a group as a "type" to justify disregarding their viewpoint. There are opportunists at any large protest. Ultimately, the protest is a collection of individuals, each with their own story.

People who are "lower on the socioeconomic ladder" are the ones going on strike for PPE, hazard pay and sick leave that the media are dutifully ignoring.

Noted!

[JoeAltmaier]

Lots is being done to lessen the effect on the lower socioeconomic ladder. My state has a $600/week stipend for all those unemployed. In many cases this is more than they earned while employed. Sort of a temporary "basic income".

So its unevenly applied (not in every state). That's an issue to bring up with your state representative.

[mcphage]

> It's easy to look down on people lower on the socioeconomic ladder. They're still human beings. They've been given this raw deal: For the greater good, you will now give up your job for an indefinite period of time, with no prospect of finding like employment elsewhere. You have no choice, and if you refuse, you are a horrible person and in some cases you may face civil and criminal consequences.

The man in front of the protest to ease restrictions in my mid-sized city was a wealthy local real estate magnate.

[stcredzero]

The man in front of the protest to ease restrictions in my mid-sized city was a wealthy local real estate magnate.

That still doesn't change the equation for those who aren't real estate magnates and were living paycheck to paycheck before the crisis.

You either listen to all people and meet them where they're at, or you give fuel to demagogues. (Who might be rich magnates.)

[mcphage]

It definitely doesn't, but it does change the tenor and content of those protests.

[stcredzero]

it does change the tenor and content of those protests.

If people who shouldn't have political power gain it by listening to the neglected, the proper course of action isn't to denigrate the people. Take back that power by listening.

[mcphage]

> If people who shouldn't have political power gain it by listening to the neglected, the proper course of action isn't to denigrate the people.

He didn't get it by listening to the neglected. He got it by spending money. The protests in my city, like in most places, were primarily people saying "I want people to work for me!" and not "I want to work!". Also had some confederate flags thrown in, because why not.

> Take back that power by listening.

If I were to listen, I would hear that people don't want to be forced to choose between survival and health.

[kazagistar]

Those protester people were to a large extent rich employers who wanted to start earning on the backs of others again, or benefiting from that work with normal service availability. There isn't a lot of rawness in that deal, only privilege, and their request was one that hurts others to maintain that privilege.

[harikb]

> one perceives as deplorable

There is no reason to bring that reference in an otherwise non-political discussion.

[stcredzero]

There is no reason to bring that reference in an otherwise non-political discussion.

It's hard to separate socioeconomic differentials from politics. And I specifically use deplorable to call out the political excesses of my own accustomed "tribe."

[krapp]

>And I specifically use deplorable to call out the political excesses of my own accustomed "tribe."

And, either purposely or naively, you're misconstruing the context and scope of a single quote as if you were a part of the other "tribe."

The "basket of deplorables" comment is widely and incorrectly assumed to be an expression of elitist disdain by "the left" for all rural white males, all Trump supporters, or everyone of lower socioeconomic class, when it rather explicitly referred to the - and I'm paraphrasing almost directly from the quote here - "racists, sexists, homophobes, xenophobes, Islamophobes" who took over Trump's base and steered it in an extremist direction. In other words, people who should be considered deplorable.

It may not have been a precisely worded criticism but it was an accurate one.

[stcredzero]

And, either purposely or naively, you're misconstruing the context and scope of a single quote as if you were a part of the other "tribe."

The "basket of deplorables" comment is widely and incorrectly assumed to be an expression of elitist disdain by "the left" for all rural white males, all Trump supporters, or everyone of lower socioeconomic class, when it rather explicitly referred to the - and I'm paraphrasing almost directly from the quote here - "racists, sexists, homophobes, xenophobes, Islamophobes" who took over Trump's base and steered it in an extremist direction. In other words, people who should be considered deplorable.

It may not have been a precisely worded criticism but it was an accurate one.

Thanks. I have absolutely no reason to reply to any of that.

I know the following from personal experience as a person of color, as a not completely hetero-normative person, and as someone who lived in the on-campus house of an organization that had non-gender specific bathrooms in the 1980's. As I mentioned elsewhere, tone-deafness and lack of self-awareness are often symptoms of someone having lost the ability to view others -- all others -- as fully equal in basic human being status.

Left as an exercise to the reader: Who exactly am I calling out here?

[cultus]

The folks participating in the protest are not at all lower on the socioeconomic latter, but predominately middle class. Black Americans, who tend to be poorer and less secure, support the lockdown at a higher rate than whites or other racial groups [0] (at least in Florida). Whites have the least support for a lockdown, but most still oppose reopening.

Lastly, at least some of the protests were funded by the DeVos family [1].

[0] https://poll.qu.edu/florida/release-detail?ReleaseID=3659

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/26/devos-family...

[q92z8oeif]

Fact that US still have to break down so much into racial cohorts in polls is weird. And offer nothing of value other than the generalizations like "who tend to be poorer" that doesn't help the discussion nor analysis. What do you do with this information in this context?

How about breaking down by religion or something else that at least points to what kind of media/message the group is more exposed to? or something that hints at extraneous interests, like homeowners or not. There are so much better ways to break down this data.

[vinay427]

> How about breaking down by religion or something else that at least points to what kind of media/message the group is more exposed to?

I'm an American that fits into neither of these groups but nearly everyone I know does, so from my third party perspective I think you might be underestimating how different the sources, messaging, and conversations are between white and black Americans on average. That being said, I think it is still vastly overused in polls, and is perhaps a self-fulfilling prophecy to some degree.

[cultus]

Due to the history of the US, race is highly determinate to culture and socioeconomic status. It's a very good proxy for to cut across all sorts of differences. For example, you mentioned home owners. Guess which race has very few of those?

I would have preferred to see a poll based on income, but race is still a decent proxy for that.

[q92z8oeif]

"decent proxy" is a gross generalization that depends on your deeply set pre-conceptions.

[cultus]

It's a statistical fact. It's not racist to acknowledge that racial minorities in the US are disadvantaged.

[misun78]

Building up socio-economic status is a straw man point here given how widespread the effects of this downturn are. It could be that parts of the middle class that are protesting may have lost their jobs or businesses and the stimulus checks don’t offset that as much as it would for lower income folks.

[kyuudou]

And our middle-class is typically just a few, if not just one, paycheck away from abject poverty.

[ryandrake]

It would be much harder to "look down" on the protestors if their protests were backed by sanity. For every sign saying "I need to work to feed my family," you see 20 saying:

* Coronavirus is a hoax!

* Fake nurses!

* 5G cellphones cause coronavirus!

* Impeach Bill Gates!

* Vaccines are poison!

* Social Distancing is Communism!

* Freedom!!

There are reasonable arguments against the temporary shutdown, but the protesters are not part of that reasonable conversation.

[stcredzero]

For every sign saying "I need to work to feed my family," you see 20 saying...

Ask yourself this: Why is the media playing up those fringer crazies, and not covering the very poignant, socially relevant, and human angle of "I need to work to feed my family"? Then go and look up Manufacturing Consent. Here's how propaganda often happens in the West: Emotional manipulation is better than outright ham-handed Pravda-esque censorship.

BTW, you seem to have watched the same "All Gas No Brakes" YouTube video of the Sacramento protests I did. You name the very same nutcase signs as appeared in the video. There's part of your answer right there: If it bleeds it leads. Nutcase signs are easy to get viral sharing out of. They tick the humor and outrage buttons all at the same time.

Freedom!!

This is a good thing. If someone tries to associate freedom with bad people, it's because they want all the power for their own tribe.

Note this quote from a cousin comment: "People who are 'lower on the socioeconomic ladder' are the ones going on strike for PPE, hazard pay and sick leave that the media are dutifully ignoring." Please, ask yourself why the media are dutifully ignoring certain things.

[fzeroracer]

You realize everything what you say holds true on the opposite side of things, yes?

All of the media coverage I've seen and read played up those protesters as valiant, the suffering workers of the world uniting to stop the government from destroying their career.

Your argument that this is the result of a unified media doesn't exactly work, unless you're referring specifically to media you disagree with.

[stcredzero]

Your argument that this is the result of a unified media doesn't exactly work

Well, of course not. That's the classic trope of putting the predicate calculus version of "All" into another's mouth. However, depending on where you look, such an approach is quite predominant in the "mainstream." I don't have time to review all media myself, personally.

[ryandrake]

Complaints of media manipulation and conspiracy are also a longstanding, standard element of the fringe's message. When your message is strong and supportable, you want a camera and microphone pointed at you. When your message doesn't make any sense, then media attention is always painted as mean and biased.

"Freedom"

Every protest in the USA, no matter where it sits on the moral or political spectrums, tries to hitch its wagon to "Freedom" in some way. It's become a word you just paint on a sign when you can't think of something to actually be complaining about.

[stcredzero]

Well, depending on one's viewpoint and level of shortsightedness, there's always, "F- Your Free Speech!"

[nradov]

Do you count it as "unrest" when people just quietly ignore the restrictions without actively protesting? Because I see a lot of that, and more every day. In some rural counties the local Sheriffs have unilaterally decided not to enforce statewide "shelter in place" orders. I'm not justifying that behavior but it will inevitably increase week by week.

[jdhn]

How broad is your definition of unrest? If it’s as broad as ignoring laws while being quiet about it, then speeding could technically be seen as “unrest”. As for quietly disobeying the “shelter in place” orders, I don’t see that as unrest, but as I said earlier, depending on how broad your definition is, it could be.

[ohazi]

> I doubt there will be any "unrest" beyond the protests.

> No school means poor kids roam the street like packs of feral dogs asking for money for food around here.

What was that quote about society being three meals away from anarchy?

[thephyber]

Speaking of meals: US food banks have been reported as having 6 mile long lines and were required by Dept of Agriculture to maintain a 5-6 minute questionnaire (per meal recipient) up until a week ago.

Unemployment rate is underreported because states can't bring applicants onto their rolls fast enough for demand (if the state even accepts the applicant).

Rent payments, Mortgages, credit cards defaults are all growing. Once people exhaust their stopgap measures, the pressure for civil unrest grows quicker.

[shiningdays]

> The only social unrest that has happened so far

Keyword being "so far". In Italy, where people have been out of work for months, things are starting to get dicey. Here are some links:

- [Sky News: Coronavirus: Italy becoming impatient with lockdown - and social unrest is brewing](https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-italy-becoming-impati...) - [The Guardian: Singing stops in Italy as fear and social unrest mount ](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/01/singing-stops-...)

There's more but I won't flood you. The point I'm trying to make is that things _so far_ are okay, but will get increasingly dicey if people don't have access to food and the necessities for living.

[register]

I am sorry to disappoint you but no, things are not starting to get dicey in Italy, at least not yet. I am italian and value that Guardian report as I value one written in "Novella 2000". Those reported are single episodes and UK journalism is trying to build a case out of nothing as happened other times in the past.

P.S: I live in Rome and here people are still singing. P.P.S: "Novella 2000" is the unquestionable italian king of trash gossip magazines.

[jessaustin]

...widely panned...

...in the corporate news media. They have never had the full story, and they have less and less of it recently. This knob has been turned too far; it's broken now. TPTB will remember they have other knobs (every other OECD nation is directly supporting citizens' incomes, for example) or the whole machine will catch fire.

[jasonv]

Social unrest?

How about some activism, social representation..? We don't really do that in the US these days.

[modzu]

it reminds me of how i read somewhere the average citzen in china approves of their government while in the west this is hard to comprehend. think of the furor when google tried to do business there: dont they want the truth, dont they want freedom?? it turns out that actully more importance is placed on values like stability and order. its interesting to see in america the head nodding, that yes, health and safety is #1 above all else, no matter what cost (i dont mean economic cost!) -- i mean not freedom, not choice. anecdotally, it also reminds me of how doctors treated my terminally ill friend. submit yourself to drugs and surguries and live like hell but you will live a few months longer. instead the doctors should have been saying go away, live as best you can while you can! but that sentiment is technically against their duty. technically they were 'treating' her, 'helping' her. anyway this is just to say, a change is happening, a change possibly for the worse, but a change we ourselves are asking for (secure us, keep us safe, keep order... to hell with the truth and freedom, those values are for confederate flag waving 'rednecks')

[marricks]

There’s been plenty of strikes at Amazon, instacart, and others. Hell, there’s a growing movement for a rent strike in May as well.

Just go figure the only widely covered protests are the right wing astroturfed ones...