Yesterday I talked about the need for economists and political leaders to create an endgame to the current lockdown on our society. The obvious objection to this can be found in the numerous clichés that portray any discussion as an attempt to trade dollars for death.

The governor of New York, for example, scolds, “No one should be talking about social Darwinism for the sake of the stock market.” He argues that, “We will not put a dollar figure on human life.” But even the editors of The New York Times recently described this as a false choice. Shelter-in-place has been necessary, but there must be a time in the future when government leaders must consider the economic and humanitarian trade-offs.

Reopening American society isn’t as much about the stock market as it is about the everyday lives of millions of Americans. Frankly, the wealthy can probably weather the current lockdown, but that is not true of the poor and even middle-class who have no savings to rely upon.

As I mentioned yesterday, income is a strong predictor of health outcomes. People who are poor don’t live as long. Americans who have lost wages and lost jobs are less likely to proper. They won’t eat at well. They won’t go to the doctor. They won’t buy medications because they are simply trying to buy food and pay the rent.

For the purist who argues that we should never talk about trade-offs, we can point to many current examples. Fewer people would die on highways if the speed limit was 25 mph. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found that highway fatalities rose 8.5 percent for every 5 mph in a highway’s speed limit. Cigarette smoking is responsible for 480,000 deaths per year and 88,000 die each year from alcohol-related causes. But we don’t ban either of these. We make policy trade-offs every day.

We need a national conversation about the cost and benefit of our current lockdown.

The country has effectively been in lockdown for weeks, but many are asking when all of this will change. President Trump optimistically hoped Americans could be in church on Easter. Yesterday was a reminder that we aren’t even close to bringing normalcy to our society.

We need to start talking about an endgame, or to use a military term, we need an exit strategy. Epidemiologists and infectious disease specialists rightly focus on the medical health of humans. But economists and politicians need to focus on the economic and social health of a country that has been shut down.

One of the best ideas I have seen came from a New York Times column by Thomas Friedman who writes about “A Plan to Get America Back to Work.” He quotes Dr. David L. Katz, a public health expert at Yale University. He proposes a targeted approach in which we reboot the economy while also calling for the most vulnerable to shield themselves from infection. He also calls for establishing mobile testing and temperature-check systems like Korea.

Ronald A. Klain (who served as President Obama’s Ebola response coordinator) writes that it is time to reopen production facilities, even if it has to be done with fewer workers per shift who are spread further apart. We could even allow some stores to open with limited capacity and hours.

These are good ideas that the president and governors should consider, especially since all of these ideas come from people who certainly are NOT fans of the Donald Trump. But this is an election year. The moment the president or governors mention these ides, they will face a firestorm of criticism. We need an endgame, but there will be a political price to pay for implementing it.

Although America is certainly a divided nation, the divisions between the various tribes are not as great as you might be led to believe. Yes, the social and political debates are loud and intense, but the fringe, rather than the mainstream, gets most of the attention.

A study done by the group “More in Common” discovered “The Hidden Tribes of America.” The researchers discovered that a small group (8%) in the liberal wing and a smaller group (6%) in the conservative wing are the ones who consistently shout, post, and vote while the rest of America is often exhausted by all of the rhetoric.

Here is an interesting contrast. On the one hand, these two groups hate each other and disagree with each other on just about every topic. On the other hand, they are very much alike. Both groups are mostly white, educated, and politically active. They always vote and give time and money to political campaigns.

But here is the relevant fact: the two groups combined only constitute 14% of the American population. In other words, the 86% of most of us watch and listen to these two groups argue and criticize each other while ignoring the many points in common we might have.

This shouldn’t be a surprise to you if you have been listening to my commentaries for any length of time. In the past, I have talked about various points of agreement. For example, Dirk Philipsen made the argument many years ago that you could fill a room with Tea Party members, Occupy Wall Street activists, and concerned Americans and find agreement. He says you would find people concerned about concentrated power, out-of-control change, and concerns about a government that no longer represents the people.

After this divisive election season, we need to find a way to bring the American people together. But we won’t bring people together if we let the two fringe wings of the political spectrum dominate all our discussions.

The term anti-Semitism has been loosely thrown around for years, and used recently to label the president, even though he has Jewish people in his extended family. It is about time to give specificity to a real problem that has often been redefined and demeaned by misuse.

At the core of anti-Semitic thought is that Jews are the source of many social problems and thus the Jews are guilty of everything. This is what is so crazy about this false belief. Supposedly Jews are the reasons for problems in commerce and our culture. Arab countries have 40 times the population of Israel and occupy land area that is 500 times great. Yet, it is Israel that is the problem and must be pushed into the sea. And the United Nations routinely passes resolutions condemning Israel while ignoring significant human rights abuses in other countries.

The murderer who rushed into the Pittsburgh synagogue and killed 11 Jews certainly believed that Jews were the problem and needed to be killed. If you read some of his Gab posts, you would be horrified by his anti-Semitic words and images.

Dennis Prager reminds us that Jews understand this hatred. On Passover, they read from a Jewish prayer book these words: “In every generation, they arise to annihilate us.” Notice it doesn’t say “persecute us” or even “enslave us.” Anti-Semites wants to kill all Jews and eliminate them from this planet.

The level of this hatred isn’t just irrational; it’s demonic. That’s about the only explanation you can have for people possessed by a level of hatred that makes no sense. Jews number 18 million in a world population of 7.5 billion. Israel occupies a land mass no bigger than New Jersey. Yet, Jews are the problem, and Israel is the problem. This only makes sense when viewed through the lens of spiritual warfare.

The U.S. Constitution reminds us that the responsibility for our government rests with “we the people.” In order for us to be effective, we need to know something about our government and our history. Citizens in countries ruled by dictators don’t need to know much since the major decisions are made for them. But we Americans should be educated and informed.

Unfortunately, we are not well educated and informed. A study done by the Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation discovered that only one in three (36%) Americans could actually pass the U.S. citizenship test. And I might add that you only have to get 60 percent of the questions right in order to pass the test.

For example, a majority (57%) did not know how many justices serve on the Supreme Court. Nearly three-fourths (72%) could not accurately identify which states comprised the 13 colonies. And only a quarter (24%) even knew why the American colonists fought the British in the Revolutionary War.

Most disturbing was the fact that young people performed worst on the test. You might excuse an elderly person for forgetting some facts about government or history. But less than one in five (19%) under the age of 45 could pass this test.

In previous commentaries, I have proposed a solution that some states have considered. Require students to pass the citizenship test before they graduate from high school. Consider the fact that a naturalized citizen probably knows more about America’s history and structure of government than someone who was born in this country.

Young people in America cannot pass a citizenship test for one of two reasons: either they weren’t paying attention in class or they weren’t taught this material in the first place. Let’s require students to pass a citizenship test before graduation. We require it of people who want to be American citizens. Why not require it of students who are already citizens because they were born here?

A recent research paper concluded that first responders are more likely to die by suicide than in the line of duty. The Rudman White Paper on Mental Health and Suicide of First Responders is a chilling look at the sobering statistics of the lives of men and women who protect us each day.

The paper explains that, “Police and firefighters, when compared to the general civilian population, are at heightened risk for depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and suicide.” We should remember that people in these professions “have front row seats to the horrendous aftermath of natural disasters, terrorist attacks, violent domestic 
disputes, traffic accidents, and more.” In fact, one study concluded that police officers witness 188 “critical incidents” during their career. No wonder their rates of PTSD and depression are as much as five times higher than the rates within the general population.

Another reason for suicide is the reality that so many first responders have prior military experience. That means they are piling onto their career more “incidents” after already having a previous career rife with trauma. They may be strong, brave, and resilient, but they are only human.

Another concern is the unwillingness for men and women in these professions to seek help. Often they want to avoid the shame and stigma that might come when they ask for counseling. And these same barriers often prevent families from talking openly about the suicide of a loved one.

One obvious solution is to break the silence that surrounds this issue of first responder mental health. That is why I wrote this commentary. We need to support our first responders and ask them to get help so they can continue to keep us safe.

Most Christians understand that the problems facing America are not going to be solved in Washington. But it is noteworthy when a sitting U.S. Senator says that, “Politics Can’t Solve Our Political Problems.”

That was the title of a commentary by Senator Ben Sasse. He believes that the tribalism in our nation has a deeper source and is tied to loneliness in America. We are relational beings and want to be in tribes. He observes that, “the traditional tribes that have sustained humans for millennia are simultaneously in collapse.” Those would be family, friendships, and communities of worship.

At the core of this is loneliness in America. It is not a new problem, a quarter century ago I wrote a book with the title Signs of Warning, Signs of Hope. One of the chapters dealt with a “crisis of loneliness.”

A book we often quote on our radio program is Bowling Alone written by Harvard social scientist Robert Putnam. We no longer are involved in community. We often move and have few friends. We have few shared projects and belong to fewer civic groups.

On the other hand, we don’t want to be left out. We don’t want to feel the “same isolation we felt at the edge of the cafeteria or as the last kid picked for kickball.” So we yearn for a group (often a political ideology) as the basis for our intimate connections. Our cable news tribes offer a common experience.

To reverse these trends we need to read his new book, Them: Why We Hate Each Other—and How to Heal. In his commentary, he shares how he and his wife “put down roots” in a small community and became friends with people from every race and income bracket. We must find ways to replenish the social capital and reverse the tribal conflict in our culture.

Have you found yourself tipping generously these days? Americans are of a mind to be generous with those working hard to deliver food and supplies and the things we need during social distancing. But fears and uncertainties also arise. Even for people who are fully able to pay their bills, the specter of some disturbing economic scenarios gives rise to the temptation to cut back on giving to ministry for the time being.

We should do our best to fight against that impulse by continuing to donate to the ministries we have been supporting, and even increasing our giving if we can.

Many ministries are modifying or adding to their programs in order to address the effects of the covid-19 pandemic. We have an opportunity to help them do that.

Churches that aren’t meeting are suffering financially from not being able to pass the offering plate. But they’re spending to ramp up community outreach, online innovation, mailings and other ways to stay connected.

Christian colleges and universities still have to pay the bills even as they develop online offerings and other means of keeping students on track to finish the school year.

Any missionary or overseas ministry you support has likely had to regroup or refocus in some way in order to deal with the coronavirus. Overseas evangelistic and relief organizations now have to spend more because the nations they work in are ill-equipped to deal with covid-19 due to bureaucratic chaos, insufficient healthcare, and subpar sanitation.

Media ministries, especially Christian radio outlets, need reliable support to maintain and enhance their efforts to encourage families through music, teaching and commentary.

As government passes laws to preserve businesses and individuals harmed by its efforts to contain the pandemic, the Left capitalizes on the crisis to sneak in socialist policies. Think tanks and groups that seek to advance conservative values need resources to prevent the carnage that could follow

Now’s the time to give, if you can.

A study by the Manhattan Institute explains why it is so hard for middle class families to make ends meet. The author, Oren Cass, distilled his research down in a Twitter post. “In 1984, the typical male worker could cover a family of four’s major expenditures (housing, health care, transportation, education) on 30 weeks salary. By 2018 it took 53 weeks. Which is a problem, there being only 52 weeks in a year.”

Christopher Ingraham wrote about this in the Washington Post, saying “This chart is the best explanation of middle-class finances you will ever see.” The chart shows the annual expenses for a family of four and plots on top of that the median male income. The margin between income and expenses gets smaller each year until the annual household expenses exceed the median male income.

The chart in the report helps to explain why families feel the financial pinch. The cost of basic necessities has increased faster than male income. Until recently we have had a booming economy with a record-setting stock market. But many families are still struggling to bring in enough income to cover housing, health care, transportation, and education.

The research focuses on male earnings because historically men were responsible for providing for their families. In the past, they were often the sole breadwinners. Today they are still seen as the primary providers for their family. Oren Cass concludes that the typical male worker a generation ago, “could be confident in his ability to provide for his family not only the basics of food, clothing, and shelter but also the middle-class essentials of a comfortable house, a car, health care, and education. Now he cannot.”

That is why it has become more and more difficult for families to make ends meet.

As we all know, the virus crisis has created a financial crisis. Companies and businesses cannot survive for long when they are closed down. But the greater crisis is what could be called a paycheck crisis. People who live paycheck to paycheck cannot go for very long without dire economic consequences.

One survey last year by Bankrate confirmed what previous surveys originally discovered. A majority of Americans are economically vulnerable. Their survey found that only 40 percent of Americans would be able to pay for an unexpected $1,000 expense from savings. That expense could be an emergency room visit or even car repair. The percent confirmed previous surveys from 2014 through 2018.

What about the remaining 60 percent? More than a third would need to borrow money in some way. That could be through their credit card or perhaps through a personal loan from family or friends. Another 14 percent would reduce spending on other things, while 10 percent didn’t really know what they would do.

The current economic downturn may cause many of us to rethink our priorities. What Americans used to consider luxuries are now considered necessities. Most Americans (80%) own a smartphone. That same portion of households own at least one high definition flat screen television. A majority (60%) of Americans dine out at least once a week. A significant percentage (20%) of American families dine out three or more times a week.

Changing habits might be a possible short-term solution. But most Americans are already hitting a financial wall. They may welcome the government check of $1,200 being promised, but what they really need is a job and a steady paycheck. The virus crisis is making it very difficult for more and more Americans to pay their bills.