These are my observations and opinions from my select news of the day.

REVISITING MY VIEW on returning to some form of normalcy as soon as practical.

On March 24, 2020, President Trump expressed a hope that much of the country could reopen for business by Easter.  It wouldn’t mean that the “15 Days to Slow the Spread” guidelines would no longer be practiced.

While not possible in many jobs, he suggested that social distancing and the practice of frequent handwashing should continue as people return to work.  It will be up to the ingenuity of employers and employees. Of course, meetings of 10 or more workers should and can be avoided. And why not shifts to allow splitting the workforce?

Earlier, he voiced concern that “We cannot let the cure be worse than the problem itself.”

It’s a matter of managing a delicate balancing act of weighing the public health benefits of virus restrictions against the economic pain that those measures are causing.

The president’s task force on the virus have urged caution against the premature easing of the guidelines, and Americans across the nation are being urged by cities and states to stay at home. They are confident that the president will listen carefully to their advice.

At the same time, there are those concerned about the economy, who worry about an “overreaction” that if restrictions continue, the economy would collapse beyond a recession into a depression.

“Economic prosperity is a matter of public health, too,” opines Washington Post columnist Charles Lane, “the necessary condition for it, in fact.  The United States must respond to the coronavirus accordingly.

“The sooner we can start, the better.  Resolving the coronavirus threat to public health is the necessary precondition.  Yet, just as we shut down economically on the basis of unavoidably imperfect information about the threat, we will probably lack clear, agreed-upon criteria for when it’s safe to blow the all-clear.”

MEANWHILE, over at the left-leaning Arizona Republic, its lightweight editorial columnist, Elvia Diaz, wrote in opposition to Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick’s message “let’s get back to work, let’s get back to living,” and his recommendation that we “be smart about it.”

While writing that “we must consider ways to minimize the financial hit,” Diaz  says that “second guessing people’s lives over the economy is pure madness.”

Diaz favors shuttering and shelter in place.  In Wickenburg and Cottonwood, too?

Patrick recognizes that Navasota and Ozona, Texas aren’t Dallas or Austin.

And, after hearing the New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo cite the importance of shuttering and sheltering in place, North Dakota Sen. John Hoeven commented that North Dakota isn’t New York.

THE TASK FORCE’S GUIDELINES seem to have caught on as the latest Gallup survey revealed that social distancing is being practiced in some form by 96 percent of the respondents.  In addition, some 60 percent are completely or mostly isolated.

What concerns me is that 82 percent of those surveyed would in all likelihood stay home for a month if public officials recommended it to further slow the virus outbreak.  With 92 percent of Americans avoiding large crowds and 87 percent not using mass transit or planning to fly, do they not understand the impact of their decision on their city, state or the nation’s economic well-being?  A month?

I’M NOT AN ECONOMIST, but clearly, we need to make some difficult trade-offs as we assess the economic impact of the response to the outbreak.  As we address the potential risk to our bodies, we need to be considering what we are already doing to the health of our economy.

Does the reduction of the spread of the virus need to take place before the cost of an economic shutdown is considered?  That could take, who knows, months? That uncertainty makes it harder to strike a balance between managing the outbreak and fostering the economy.  What we need is some old-fashioned risk management.

WE’RE AT A POINT TODAY that we wouldn’t have thought possible a few months ago with the lowest unemployment in decades and the knowledge that there was a job for anyone who wanted one; fewer people were on food stamps and the poverty rolls reduced. However, as Congress toys with the virus aid package, we are already hearing about payments that will discourage people from working.  Democrats!

“THE WHITE HOUSE is eager to get people back to work and the administration will have to weigh the costs of further economic paralysis against the continuing and the very real public health concerns,” writes Jason L. Riley in the Wall Street Journal.  “But sending people checks is an election year gimmick that, in itself, will do little to address the deeper problems we face.”

WHAT’S NEXT? – In the weeks ahead, the virus task force will be closely watching the curve, and they will be reviewing data from across the nation, noting the locations of hotspots and less populated areas where it’s obvious that residents have taken the guidelines seriously.

“The president will have to balance against the very valid concerns about the impact on the economy,” as he studies mortality rates, infection rates and other data, HHS Secretary Alex Azar told Breitbart’s Mathew Boyle yesterday.

“We will probably lack clear, agreed-upon criteria for when it’s safe to blow the all-clear.” – Charles Lane, Washington Post

CBS IGNORES ITS OWN POLL– On Tuesday, CBS This Morning devoted just 10 seconds to the fact that 53 percent of its respondents approved of President Trump’s handling of the virus outbreak. Not mentioned was 43 percent trust level respondents have for the media, compared to the 44 percent for Trump.

                    May God continue to bless the United States of America.