Addict America

What we are witnessing are the visceral images of a nation in the throes of an addiction.  It is an addiction to a message of Constitutional narcissism.  It is an addiction that has been knowingly fed by its dealers – Limbaugh, Hannity and their ilk – within the self-proclaimed Conservative Media for more than three decades.

Our nation is the same as any other well-heeled addict from prosperous circumstances.  We think we convey a sense of normalcy as the addiction grows, unaware that to the outside world, our property has grown seedier and our household more disorganized.  Most importantly, our children and most vulnerable are neglected and left as prey to the hard mercies of others.  The addiction stresses our ability to cope until something happens which collapses the facade and exposes our reality in its awful ugliness.  It is an addiction whose propagation now willingly courts death, a literal siren song luring the body politic to a mass fatal encounter as senseless as the American Civil War.

This something is obviously the Pandemic.  As I write this, the national daily death toll is such that the entire population of my hometown would be dead within a week and the numbers continue to rise, at least outside New York.  Yet many localities are again re-opening despite metrics that don’t even come close to those laid down by the Trump Administration and armed protesters stand on the steps of state capitol buildings proclaiming opposition to measures which purportedly infringe their Constitutionally mandated civil rights.  This opposition, fomented by the Conservative Media and the President – the guy whose folks put out the re-opening metrics less than a few days before, remember? – is predicated upon a wholesale misleading characterization of the Constitution.

How?

There is an inherent tension within the construct of the Constitution and that is the tension between the Me and the We.  The Me is encased within the Bill of Rights and has been the focus of the Conservative Media since the arrival of Rush Limbaugh after the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987.  Who doesn’t love our Bill of Rights?  It was the first written attempt in human history to enumerate and guarantee what were considered the essential rights of the individual in a society.  It is the most identifiable aspect of the Constitution.  The great majority of Americans can’t define the 17th Amendment let alone even tell you how many Amendments even exist.  But you can be damned sure that people know about their First Amendment right to freedom of speech and their Second Amendment right to bear arms.

Except that the Bill of Rights is only one part of the Constitution.  The other part of the Constitution is about the We.  The obvious and accelerating failure of the original Articles of Confederation prompted the calling of the meeting that became the Constitutional Convention of 1787.  It was the We that concerned Madison, Hamilton and the rest of the attendees.  Multiple states with different personalities based upon unique founding charters and culture, let alone geographic and economic differences, were too diverse to ensure continued political coherence.  The national structure was collapsing and the success of the Revolution would be rendered meaningless.

The Convention’s intent was not the Me, the Bill of Rights.  The Me wasn’t the first, second or third thing in the mind of either Madison or Hamilton.  It wasn’t on any agenda, as little as there was of one.  The Bill of Rights was an outgrowth of the debates as the Anti-Federalists pushed back against Madison.  In their minds, what was the point of the Revolution if it allowed the creation of a new government which could trample the individual as badly as the recent English king?  The resulting compromise created this Bill of Rights to assure that an individual’s rights were protected.  This compromise created an astounding document of political duality that attempted to balance the We Yin and the Me Yang.  There is supposed to be a balance.

These were the questions that most concerned the Constitution’s framers:  How can We maintain a civil society that can peaceably abide together under the principle that all are created equal under the law?  How can We allow for a civil society to change and adapt to the world around it within the framework of the first question?  How can We control power and allow the peaceable transfer of power?  Most importantly, how can We as a civil society protect ourselves from falling prey to predators such as demagogues, despots and zealots?

When viewed from this aspect, much of our history has been made in the effort to expand the We in the face of resistance from individual groups fearful of a loss of their own powers and wealth.  Expanding it to who?  Securing the rights of blacks and other minorities , including that key right to vote, expands the We.  Securing the rights of women, including that key right to vote, expands the We.  Why?  Because it’s through the securing of their own individual rights and enfranchisement that these groups – one of which actually comprises more than half of the population – can find a voice that entitles them to a place at the economic table sharing in the common wealth of the nation.  Not only sharing in the common wealth, but expanding it by dint of their own talents and efforts.

Commonweal.  It’s an archaic word used by my wife in a recent conversation as we discussed the multiple acronymic lifelines already thrown to the business community and capital markets but not extended in any meaningful measure to the average person.  It forms the basis of the word commonwealth and in its simplest terms is the common good.  It is the idea that while the members of a community can expect their rights to be respected by the community, they have a like obligation to the well-being of that  community, politically and economically.  Is it important to distance ourselves for a period to not overwhelm our medical system as well as protect our most vulnerable?  Then it’s what we do for the community and in turn, we expect the community to support us through this period.  Commonweal.

Except that that hasn’t happened.  The community has responded with full support to the wealthiest and only one-time payments to the general citizenry with the understanding that they would still be responsible for the upkeep of their bills.  In the meantime, the unemployment rate has skyrocketed.  The public has been left to bear the losses from a communal disaster without certainty of income for an unknown period.  In a society that embraced the commonwealth philosophy, the community would be certain to provide sufficient support to support its members while they were asked to participate social distancing to protect the community.

Not only do we ignore the concept of the common good, we have a Chief Executive who ignores the Constitution, exemplifying the fatal flaws of the original Articles of Confederation by abdicating responsibility for a national crisis to the individual states.

There should be balance.  We haven’t had that for decades.

Why?

The cultural birth of the Me preexisted it’s maturation in the 1980s.  The Boomer Generation were a cultural phenomenon and their quirks led to their titling as the Me Generation by the writer Tom Wolfe in 1976.  That generation – mine – turned society on its head in search of self-fulfillment and it persisted as they aged and entered the economic and political mainstream.

Their entry into the mainstream set the stage for the economic and political rise of the Me in the 1980s.  Rush Limbaugh, the first of the Conservative Media, arose on the back of a resurgent conservative response to Ronald Reagan’s famous comment:  Government isn’t the solution, it’s the problem.  Limbaugh expanded upon that with the message that I earned that money and I should be allowed to keep it.  Soon, other commentators entered the field and proceeded to help fracture the We by separating the nation into Good Americans versus Liberals and Republicans versus Democrats in the search for listeners and market share.  Understand this:  Conservative Media is not only a message of anger but a business model of anger as well.  Anger and fear are profitable and this profitability has caused an even harder push.

Uncertain about this?  Consider Les Moonves’ – then CEO of Columbia Broadcasting – comment about Donald Trump in 2016:  “It may not be good for America, but it’s damn good for CBS”.

It’s the same for the other side of the media spectrum as increased competition extends the boundaries and coarsens the dialogue to gain listeners.

But why do Conservative Commentators have the advantage in ratings?  Where do they find the materials to gin up rage, secure listeners and earn profits?  The materials are ensconced right there within the Bill of Rights.  Some of the ten amendments are outdated and not suited for the propagation of rage.  Quartering troops in houses?  Archaic.  Unreasonable search and seizure?  Right to a jury trial and reasonable bail?  Perhaps, but if you obey the law – like any of our salt of the earth listeners – then it isn’t pertinent, is it?  State’s rights?  Not since 186…never mind.  Just go to the first two amendments right up front:  religious freedoms in the First Amendment and gun rights in the Second Amendment.  The rancor of the past two decades has built within these two amendments but it has been stirred, spiced and served on a scalding hot plate in our laps by our Chef Executive.

We are near the culmination of the Conservative drive for power and money.  The Conservative Media has relentlessly pushed fear and anger and the President has mastered it, wielding it venomously in a strategy of Divide and Conquer.  To secure his election in 2016, he divided us from the world and in the aftermath of the inauguration, proceeded to remove or threaten to remove us from multiple international treaties.  When he viewed the push back demonstrated by the Women’s March after his inauguration, he narrowed the Divide and Conquer Strategy to focus on the nation itself and found his ammunition in the first two amendments of the Bill of Rights.  He has openly stoked his followers with fears of religious persecution and the threat of a repeal of the Second Amendment.  A call to “Liberate Michigan!” via Twitter led to his supporters bringing semi-automatic weapons to a rally at the state Capitol.

Civic insanity.

Our nation has had two other encounters with governance according to the Me.  The first was the original Articles of Confederation ratified at the end of the Revolution, which created a Federal government that was only a weak shell and ceded almost all power to thirteen states.  It went so well that six years later, the Articles were replaced by our Constitution.  The second was the Confederacy.  Nominally a nation of sovereign states that heavily espoused states rights.  By the latter half of the war, the Confederacy suffered crippling problems as different states opted to withhold money, supplies and men from the central government in order to support their own needs.

Some of our greatest national moments occurred during the Commonweal moments of the We.  We eliminated slavery through a Civil War which incurred more death and national destruction than any other war in our history.  We beat totalitarianism and did it twice in a quarter century, almost just to prove a point.  We expanded our educational structure during these conflicts through a series of Commonweal political acts – The Morrill Land-Grant Act of 1862 and The Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944 during two of these conflicts.  We put a man on the moon and expanded the frontier of space because as a society, We willed it so.

We have now lost more than 90,000 of our citizens as I write this and an untold number of thousands of those deaths could have been prevented.  Our Chief Executive minimized the notice, hampered preparation and then abdicated all responsibility to the individual states, who have been left to fend on their own domestically and internationally.  Don’t like social distancing and lockdowns?  Look to Washington, DC and ask if things might have been different had 50 individual governors not had this dumped in their laps.

Once again, the Me has failed.  It’s time for the We.

 

 

Re-Boot: The Pandemic Food Price Index (FPI)

What is happening to the price of a market-basket of food due to the economic effects of the Covid-19 Pandemic upon:  (1) the upheaval in the supply chain; (2) the collapse in aggregate family income?

This two-pronged question is the reason for the resumption of the PracticalDad Price Index after an almost four year hiatus.  We know from the US Department of Labor’s report for April 2020 that food prices rose by the highest monthly amount in 46 years due to the supply chain upheaval.  It’s bad, but it only gives for general food groups (meats, vegetables, etc) and doesn’t go into further depth than that.  This kind of information will also miss the impact of the supply chain’s efforts to mitigate the cost increases and attempt to keep foods affordable for the shopper.

The modified index (for the original Index introduction, see here) will focus solely upon the original 37 foodstuff items from the original index, broken into categories of Meat, Dairy, Bread, Staples, Cereal, Produce and Grocery items.  The pricing will occur within the first five days of each month at the same three groceries, each unrelated to one another.  The groceries represent three separate tiers of size:  local, Mid-Atlantic regional chain, international chain.  The prices for the items from the three stores will be averaged and the the mean prices added to find the total cost for the composite basket.  The total for the composite basket as of the pricing for May, 2020 will serve as the index baseline of 100.  The total for the month composite baskets moving forward will be likewise totaled and their results shown as a comparison to the initial index level of 100.

Caveats:

  1.  This is not meant to be representative of national trends.  This is three store survey in a single county and is meant to be a data point in a larger picture.
  2. I will discontinue the Index if I believe that the supply chain is so kinked that I cannot present an accurate picture in good faith.
  3. I cannot objectively verify inventory quantity within the stores but I can provide anecdotal commentary about what I am seeing and that can serve as anecdotal evidence.
  4. Within the past month, I have noted that products that are simply gone from the supply chain have not only disappeared from the shelves , but the shelf labels themselves have been removed or covered over with blank labels.  If the item is not on the shelves but the label is present, I will treat that item as temporarily out of stock and report the price as listed on the shelf label.
  5. The items priced are almost all store- or off-brand, which would be purchased by a shopper attempting to extend a fixed food budget.  There are rare instances in the Index in which a name-brand product is used and that same product will be priced moving forward to assure consistency.
  6. Pricing will occur, whenever possible, in the morning.
  7. If new alternatives are offered for an item, as happened continuously in the old Index, that alternative will be used then and afterwards to assure consistency.  The same will happen with package sizing.

The May 2020 FPI results are shown in the linked pdf below.  Note that a few items are not listed in two columns; these items were part of the original survey and they were not available in those stores, even searching for shelf labels.

The Total Cost of the May 2020 FPI is $88.51 and that amount will serve as the Index level of 100.

FPI Base Results – 5/20

 

 

 

Life in a Time of Corona: Accommodations on “Re-Opening”

Mr. Murdoch, what are your orders?

Full ahead and no course change, Mr. Hichens.  Let’s see if Titanic lives up to her press!

It’s abundantly clear that the social distancing effort will be abandoned and the process of “re-opening” will move ahead, damn the cost.  The question now is this:  what accommodations should we make to live in a society which demands that life returns to pre-pandemic patterns despite the ongoing presence of the virus that disrupted those patterns in the first place?

My family’s personal adjustments will be driven by what we decide because there is no longer any meaningful public health guidance from the government.  The incompetency is glaring and stunning, all the money that we have invested over decades in a federal public health infrastructure to help manage such events completely pissed away.  After ignoring and downplaying the virus so that the impact was worsened, the President finally issued a framework for managing a return of societal functions over a two week period of virus metric declines.  Only a day later, he undermined it with a series of tweets to “Liberate” three separate states from social distancing and lockdown measures.  That none of these three states even came close to meeting the new guidelines was irrelevant.

The majority of states are now moving ahead with “re-opening” despite any lack of control of the virus that even meets the President’s own metrics.  Neither is there any meaningful testing to ascertain the spread of the virus until it shows up to burn through through a locality’s hospitals.  Indeed, the President has effectively removed any public health aspect from this process by shelving the guidelines set out by the CDC.  The guidance for a public health pandemic is now managed solely by political and economic criteria.

What is happening is, in a sense, a darkly hilarious irony.  A verbose and gun-toting minority – in their fear of any potential abridgment of their preferred freedoms under the Bill of Rights – embraces and lifts up a Chief Executive who has actively transferred all responsibility for management and action for a national crisis to the states, resurrecting a style of government which existed last under the post-revolutionary Articles of Confederation.

You remember that one?  Yeah, that one.

The one without a Bill of Rights.

Because things can’t get any more local than the molecular level of the family, what might we consider?  The important point to remember is that we must somehow lessen our risk and decrease our exposure to the virus if we cannot socially distance or isolate ourselves.

First, consider how to manage with elderly parents and other relatives.  What are the contact and exposure rules if you have to visit or take them to appointments?  What is the status of their paperwork and executors?  What is the default plan in the event of your own illness?

Second, make sure that the personal affairs are in order.  Take to heart the philosophy of The Next Man Up.  Assure that the wills and various powers of attorney are in order should they have to be utilized.  This also means considering the inclusion of secondary executors and decision-makers.  Note the critical passwords and pass that information to your executor.  While the virus most impacts the elderly and immune-compromised,  there are all age levels in the ICU and even children are being affected with their own issues.

Third, make a re-usable mask part of the daily routine.  The notion of a truly disposable mask is dead as even healthcare providers are having to extend their usage for lack of availability.  I don’t know enough about the availability of gloves but anticipate that I will save those for high traffic public areas such as grocery stores.

Fourth, assure that there is hand sanitizer in every vehicle and use it after each venture out of the vehicle.  That also means finding an alternative source for hand sanitizer and re-using the existing bottles if the replacement sanitizer comes in large quantity containers.

Fifth, consider the use of a small notebook in the glove compartment to note where I’ve been on different days in the event that I contract Covid-19 and contact tracing efforts are made.

Sixth, broaden the family’s food supply chain so that there’s not a complete dependence on the grocery store.  If possible, plant a garden or join a CSA to provide a wider access to a dependable source of food.  Even within the grocery store, consider widening your preferential supply chain by purchasing food items not being purchased by everyone else.

Seventh, what is the process for returning home from work or another outside exposure?  This is a real thing for healthcare workers in hard-hit areas because they don’t want to expose their own families.  What processes should you adopt within the household?  It might range from disrobing in the garage and leaving clothing in the laundry room prior to a shower, to a simple hand-washing upon returning home.

Eighth, decide whether the trip or errand is worth the exposure.  Do a more thorough job of planning so that only one trip is required instead of multiple return trips.  If it isn’t necessary, is it sufficiently important enough to justify the exposure?  Visiting a movie theater might not be worth the risk, but traveling out of state to take a kid to college for the first time?  That would likely be worth the risk with proper precautions.  Assuming that it happens, of course.

Ninth, reconsider the shopping habits.  In this environment, ignore the economic establishment thinking that the public is hoarding cash and ratchet down the discretionary spending to what is necessary.  If you do have money available for discretionary spending, then give serious thought to directing it to the food banks that are now serving a significant portion of our citizenry.  Consider another charity or simply rebuild your own finances to your comfort level.  If you shop online to avoid exposure in a bricks-and-mortar store, decide if Amazon is the go-to site or if it’s possible to spread that cash to other online stores instead of further enriching Jeff Bezos.

This is meant to be a point-of-departure for the planning moving forward instead of an exhaustive and comprehensive list.  Consider your own circumstances and risk tolerances.  But do it now so that you are ready for when the re-opening takes place.

Resurrecting the Price Index: Rationale

We are again in Terra Incognita and our only guides are a few accumulated studies of a hundred year-old predecessor pandemic.  This is like trying to find the most efficient route from New York to Salt Lake City using a 1932 Rand McNally map.  The fear is palpable and not least of which is the concern about the national food supply, especially since John Tyson of Tyson Foods took out full page ads warning that the food supply chain was breaking.  While this piece was going national, there were also warnings about the virus having an inflationary impact on food prices.  Are there serious problems?  Absolutely.  Are they as terrible and fear-inducing as it appears?  Not necessarily.

Societal shocks happen and they are always followed by fear, if not outright panic.  Our history is that we have had problems with food prices and supply before, most notably during the Second World War, and we managed to survive.  What is different is that Franklin Roosevelt’s government had sufficiently advanced notice that there would be another war and had begun thinking ahead.  Today?  Well…that depends to whom you are talking.  The simple reality is that there are no easily ascertainable data points to assess developments at the retail grocery level and the lack of data feeds uncertainty and fear.

This is why I am resurrecting the original PracticalDad Price Index – which I calculated monthly from November 2010 to September 2016 – and modifying it to follow activity within the grocery stores.  The original index was created as a kitchen table project to ascertain the impact of the Federal Reserve’s novel Quantitative Easing programs upon food prices in my vicinity.  It was calculated both to satisfy my own curiosity and to serve as a small data point for a larger online community.  It’s one thing to read wonkery, but another to actually see it in concrete terms.

The modified market basket, methodology and results will be covered at length in the next article.  For now, let’s go from pondering questions of inflation at the molecular level of three local grocery stores to a more global perspective on prices and inflation.

Understand that inflation is simply the decrease in a currency’s value, as measured by it’s purchasing power for goods and services.  There are three principal reasons for this.

First, there is demand, such that people are willing to spend more for that item with the supply of that item being relatively constant.  The stunning rise of a single Bitcoin is an example of that but that glorious moment in our history when Americans believed that a house was an ever-increasing investment works as well.  Our realization that a house wasn’t so is a good example of the inverse, deflation.

Second, an inflationary or deflationary effect can arise out of a good’s supply.

The oil supply shock of the 1973 OPEC oil embargo caused prices to spike simply because there was an immediate halt to the flow of oil to the US with no corresponding decrease in demand to offset it.  In economics parlance, this was a simple shift in the supply curve to the left with demand being equal.  The shift from Intersection A to Intersection B resulted in a rise from a price of P1 to a price of P2.  Real life, unfortunately, was quite a bit messier.

Finally, the purchasing power of a currency can be affected simply by the sheer amount of money available within the system.  What most have forgotten is that inflation for food – particularly meats – was already an issue prior to the 1973 Embargo.

There were calls by housewives for “Meatless Meals” as a push-back against grocers and protests broke out across the country.  Housewives blamed grocers and the grocers pointed their fingers at farmers, who kicked the can of blame to the feed producers.  Where did the final responsibility rest amidst this idiot firing squad?  Actually, it was a result of the persistent and signficant increase in the amount of money within the economy starting in the 1960s.  The Federal Reserve itself terms that era as The Great Inflation and notes that the period began in 1965 and ended in 1982.  Why those years?  Because 1965 saw the beginning of LBJ’s Vietnam build-up as well as the inception of his Great Society programs.  And 1982?  That’s when then-Fed Chairman Paul Volcker turned off the tap and ratcheted interest rates to nosebleed levels to rein in the resultant inflation.

There is nobody – absolutely nobody – who can tell how this plays out in the grocery aisles.  There are competing articles about incipient inflation and incipient deflation, which is really where the mass of Americans have been stuck since 2009.  So take a side and argue away because each argument has merit and honestly, the act of arguing serves nothing better than to satisfy a primal intellectual urge, a form of mental masturbation.

What this C-19 Pandemic has managed to do however, is create a situation in which all three factors are now simultaneously in play amidst the real economy.  In the short term, the supply of specific food groups is curtailed and all things being equal, there should be a spike in the prices for those groups.  But all things are not equal here because while there’s the supply question, the American people have suffered a cataclysmic – and that’s an appropriate word for these circumstances – demand shock in loss of income, strained as it already was for the past decade.  Refer back to the Supply/Demand chart shown above.  The family income supported Demand curve hasn’t so much been shifted left as it’s been tossed into the bottom corner like a broken corpse.

Our present drama is playing out amidst these first two factors of compromised Food Supply and cratered Family Income, contesting one another like fighters in the late rounds of a championship bout.

But the third factor, the Money Supply, is waiting quietly outside of the ring and that is what literally awakens me on the occasional night.  In the wake of the 2008 Financial Crisis, the Fed’s three QE programs created trillions of dollars and in the process extended the Fed’s balance sheet to amounts previously unimagined.

Growth in M1 (1975 – 2015)

That it didn’t tear Joe Six-Pack a new one is a testament only to the fact that the economic, legislative and electoral policies since the repeal of Glass-Steagall literally created two stand-alone economies:  one awash in wealth for the uber-wealthy and another that diminishes the American Middle Class a little bit more each day.

My wife once asked me, if the goal was to create inflation, where is it?  The inflation is there.  It is encased in the equity markets and the prices for exclusive properties in places like New York, San Francisco, the Hamptons and Potomac, Maryland.  It is encrusted in the wealth accrued to billionaires and near-billionaires and their purchases of art, excess consumption and doom shelters in New Zealand.  It is wrapped up in projects such as Jeff Bezos’ effort to create a ten thousand year clock as a monument to long-term thinking, the vicious irony being that it’s financed by a predatory reliance on short-term quarterly results.  And the inflation is locked away in the purchases of items of alternate value such as cryptocurrencies and precious metals, which are now physically almost unobtainable despite having a stable paper price.  Go figure that one out.

As global economies pursued this race to the bottom with their respective currency values, the Fed acknowledged that it had to begin raising interest rates to something remotely approaching historic normalcy.  It’s not surprising that the stock market became cranky during this period because it’s flow of cheap credit was threatened.  There’s a reason that President Trump demanded zero and negative rates from the Fed, regardless of the damage that these rates do to real activity.  But in the immediate aftermath of the Pandemic’s onset, the response was to salvage the economy by again dropping rates and extending lifelines to a wide variety of corporate and financial entities.  The result of these lifelines from the government and the Fed?  $6 Trillion in the course of the two month period ending April 15, 2020.  That money is now coursing through the bond and equity markets, which have stabilized since the roll-out of the various programs.

Yet the average American gets a one-time check of $1200 with an additional $500 per child.

At the end of the day however, our economy is built upon the premise that Americans must spend for any recovery to happen.  That’s why the Administration pushes to get the economy re-opened and money flowing, even though the infection and fatality numbers in many areas still fail the President’s own criteria for re-opening.  That is why we hear establishment commentary conflating legitimate saving with ridiculous terms like “hoarding cash”.  Sure dude, I can’t cover a $400 car repair but yeah, I’m good for a beach week to help the economy.  Ultimately, the average American will not be able to consume unless the Federal Government renders real and meaningful assistance and the two bifurcated economies are rejoined in even the loosest fashion.  Whether it is debt relief, guaranteed income or any number of other programs that remove the noose from the neck of the 99% and/or ratchet down upon the 1%, the economies must be rejoined and a re-balancing must take place.

That’s when the trillions of dollars set loose since 2009 are liable to return.  If it happens, that money will begin flowing through the real economy and we will be set up for a replay of The Great Inflation, except that the Americans of this generation won’t have the financial health of their great-grandparents to survive.  The resultant inflation will ignite and what we witness in the next year will be child’s play in comparison.

It is possible that these fears won’t be realized.  But make no mistake that the American economy – and the political body – is seriously ill.  One of the criticisms of the repeated actions of the Fed’s QE programs is that it’s akin to treating cancer with copious amounts of painkillers.  The patient feels better but the cancer continues unabated.  At some point, the treatment must occur in all of its unpleasantness.  As a survivor of cancer and any number of other medical issues, I attest to the value of a painkiller in the moment; I also understood in the moment that my survival was predicated upon a simple submission to the treatment and all of the side-effects.

Apart from the sheer ability to draw breath for yet another day, there’s an upside to survival.  It is the understanding that despite the worst fears in the moment, they are at that time, only fears and not guaranteed realities.  You learn to acknowledge the fears and set them aside, managing your life one step at a time and taking each step as it comes.  The fears are there.  They are real.  But until they actually occur, they can be managed one step at a time.

So it will go in the grocery store.  We will manage as best that we can because that is ultimately all that we can do:  our best.  In the meantime, I will work to put a recognizable face to the abstract notion of the cost of food and the reality of the supply chain.  That will be the next article:  The new Market-basket.