The Way We Live Now

In his Washington Post column David Ignatius announces that the changes in the behavior of Americans will continue after the pandemic is over. He discusses the following ways in which things have changed, probably for good.

Working from home

A report this month by the consulting firm McKinsey & Co. found that companies had shifted to remote work more than 40 times faster than they expected possible. Interactions with customers for North American companies are now 65 percent digital, compared to 41 percent pre-crisis. Changes made to cope with the pandemic — like moving to cloud computing or online purchasing — are “likely to stick in the long term.”

Changes in consumption

The shock of the pandemic quickly altered some consumer habits. A July report from McKinsey found that Americans were spending more on groceries, household supplies and home entertainment and less on almost everything else. Seventy-five percent said they had changed their shopping behavior, and most said they planned to continue.

Changes in health care

A July study by Accenture of 2,700 patients in the United States and other industrial countries found that 70 percent had canceled or deferred in-person treatment, but that 9 out of 10 thought their care was as good or better than before and 44 percent were using new devices or apps to manage conditions.

Demands for a “stronger safety net” will increase

A September report by the Pew Research Center found that 63 percent of Americans agreed it is the “government’s responsibility to make sure all Americans have health care coverage,” compared with 59 percent a year ago.

And, ending on an optimistic note

Greater support for diversity

A Pew Research Center study found a significant increase since 2016 in the percentage of millennials who believe it’s good that America will soon have a majority of Black, Latino and Asian citizens. The millennial generation is also passionate about the threat of climate change: 92 percent of Biden’s millennial or younger supporters say it’s important; so do 49 percent of Trump’s supporters in that group.

I will limit my remarks on that last to these. The difference between the “Greatest Generation” and the present is that my parents and their peers faced their challenges with courage and determination. Today people are complaining that their needs aren’t being taken care of. Notice the difference? Also, guess what? Not only will America have a majority of black, Latino, and Asian citizens, we’ll have a majority of white, Latino, and Asian citizens. As I’ve been saying for decades, just as “white” meant something different in 1820 than it did in 1870 than it does today, it will mean something different in the years to come than it does now. Most Hispanics will consider themselves and will be white. Just as the Irish, Jews, and Italians do.

Every factor he lists to my eye appears to be an acceleration of pre-existing trends. I’m also curious about what he thinks 30-50% of the population will do if we don’t need waiters, busboys, dishwashers, and laborers. And how we will avoid moral hazard if we increase the strength of the “safety net” and there’s nothing for a large percentage of the population to do. They’re not all going to be Amazon warehouse workers or delivery drivers. Those jobs will be automated.

11 comments… add one
  • steve Link

    Not really a fan of idolizing the Greatest Generation. Yes, they faced the Depression and WWII well, but responding to external threats is easier and people unify around those. We even did that with 9/11. When you get into the details of how we responded to the Great Depression it isn’t always quite so noble either, whatever your family stories might be. On top f that I think you can make there case that Medicare and Social Security, to some extent, are products of the Great Generation. Both lose money while taking care of the Greatest Gen.

    Steve

  • but responding to external threats is easier and people unify around those. We even did that with 9/11.

    For about two months. The New York Times was running editorials against Bush again by the beginning of December 2009.

  • steve Link

    Yes, he decided to go fight Iraq. I bet we would have seen the same thing if after Pearl Harbor we decided the correct response was to invade Argentina.

    Steve

  • if after Pearl Harbor we decided the correct response was to invade Argentina.

    I don’t recall complaints about our invading Italy in 1943. Or France in 1944 for that matter. I think you’re underestimating how much solidarity there was during World War II. If Roosevelt had said that invading Argentina was necessary for the war effort, I think most Americans would have been fine with it.

  • steve Link

    Italy was part of the Axis and Germans were occupying France. So lets make this more apples to apples. We invade Argentina and then pretty much ignore Japan and Germany. You really think that would have been supported? No way? To this day we still dont have a good explanation why we invaded Iraq.

    Steve

  • On top f that I think you can make there case that Medicare and Social Security, to some extent, are products of the Great Generation.

    Neither the president nor any of the Congressional leadership of either party were members of the so-called Greatest Generation when Medicare was passed. They were members of the preceding generation. I agree that they were taking care of someone but it wasn’t the Greatest Generation. And of course none of that generation could vote and most hadn’t been born when Social Security was enacted.

    Also note that Ignatius was the one praising the Depression-World War II generation not I. I just am skeptical that Millennials are rising to the occasion.

  • steve Link

    The Greatest Gen is generally considered to be…”Pew Research Center defines this cohort as being born from 1901 to 1927.[5] Strauss and Howe use the birth years 1901–1924. Medicare passed 1965 and those below were POTUS and Congress leaders.

    For Social Security 1972 was the year they passed the pst of living clause.

    LBJ DOB 1908. Hubert Humphrey 1911. Mike Mansfield 1903. Russell B Long 1918. Spiro Agnew 1918. Robert Byrd 1917.

  • You’re right. I calculated wrong.

  • Grey Shambler Link

    “Changes in consumption”
    I can’t document this, but I think evidence is the strong housing market at a time where we see news reports of millions facing eviction.
    The plight of service workers is real, but for those able to keep their income by working from home or other, the lockdowns have given them a forced opportunity to save and they may find that they like the experience.
    Actually having some liquidity is a liberating feeling.

  • steve Link

    I always have to look up the dates for the different generations or else I get it wrong. I am making a subjective claim also about the Social Security. To be honest I did not look up the rate of increase in SS payments before the COLA addition, but by memory I think that increased spending.

    Steve

  • In my own defense, IMO if you could vote for the election of FDR in his first term and were too old for active duty during WWII, you’re too old to be considered Greatest Generation. LBJ’s commission was pretty obviously political and Mike Mansfield didn’t serve. I think they had a different mentality, identity than the cohort that was a little younger.

Leave a Comment