#the rise of streaming and the covid-helped movies-to-streaming was a disaster because

[fuckyeaharthuriana]

I FORGOT SOMETHING -

There is also the franchise element thing. I think it is like Marvel stories and DC stories. People are kind of bored of having to watch the "origin" stories over and over again. Often, with a long arthurian story you end up having to start from the beginning - Arthur growing up, the sword in the stone, Arthur becoming king - which is the same story repeated over and over again. Yes, it might be different, and yes most people are not going around knowing the ABC of arthuriana, but there is this vague cultural knowledge of what the story entails, especially the whole "Arthur becomes king", which might make it feel repetitive.

I think there is a reason why ONLY ONE of the last 15 movies (now till 2016) is about the start of Arthur pre-king time (King Arthur: The Legend of the Sword from 2017). All the rest is only referencing arthuriana or about the end of Arthur or another arthurian character.

The last tv show that was successful in adapting "the starting of Arthur" was Merlin BBC from 2008. Cursed, The Winter King and Camelot starz all failed. Why? I am unsure. I suppose it was still a time where people were following series episode by episode and were more accostumed to episodic adventures instead of the new tv show model we have now. Camelot Starz failed because it tried to be Game of Thrones with the blandest protagonist ever, but I think Cursed and maybe even The Winter King would have not failed back in the time of the old television.

Do you think The Great Arthurian Movie To Rule Them All will ever be made? I know many think that it's Excalibur but we do really need for this century a movie (or perhaps a 2/3 movie saga, but no more) that covers Arthur and his world from his dark begetting at Tintagel to his last travel to Morgan's realm Avalon.

Ohh how I would love it. Unfortunately, I do not think so. I AM SORRY THIS IS GOING TO BE SO LONG

It looks like the movie industry in general is not doing so good, and I do not see them investing in a movie saga on King Arthur after the past flops. I do maybe have more hopes for smaller movies (smaller in scope/plot) like "The Green Knight", so nothing that comprehensive but maybe themes used here and there.

But yeah, I feel like it could only happens if/when we first have a very big success now. Merlin BBC was very successful I feel and it kind of gave rise to a bunch of movies and attempts, but after Camelot Starz, Cursed, the Winter King, the 2017 Guy Ritchie movie - it looks like it is failure after failure.

It is a pretty harsh space nowadays. People have been "trained out" from going to the movies during the main years of the pandemic, with studios sending their movies to digital very early (and sometimes directly). And old small tv-trashy movies are in such small number, because the competition is so high - you cannot throw it on some tv channel and force people to watch it because now people choose. Movies, shows, videogames - it is harsh out there.

Regarding tv shows, I have a bit more trust, but the streaming model also killed the old build up. Now it is one season or you get the axe, and with the competition it has to be a very good show or a very big name attached to it, or someone who insists on insuring that they will have multiple seasons (thank you "The Dragon Prince: Mystery of Aaravos", I had no doubt it would have been axed on s2 without an agreement).

I do have small hopes for tv series and maybe a new Camelot musical movie still. Maybe my hopes are silly, but if Wicked is a success it would be another in a series of movie musicals that were successful or well received. And regarding tv show, if there is a popular enough novel or series of novel in the future maybe we will have one. They really dropped the ball with the Winter King.

BTW, I just wanted to say, these last few years are a on the side of the less-arthurian-media (movies and shows) years. These are the last arthurian movies, all from 2021-2020:

We have three moves in the Fate series, which is the one successful arthurian franchise, alongside Kaamelott movie (another successful arthurian franchise), then we have two animated movies that are just arthurian-themed, then "Arthur and Merlin" which is from a smaller studio, and finally "The Green Knight" which is the one big studio movie there and it was also a success (it made a few million more than what it spent).

2022-2024 no arthurian movies.

If we look from the 60s till now we usually have at least a movie a year with sometimes a year being skipped. The other longer time was 1985-1987 where we had no movies, so we only have these two gaps.

For series, I have more hopes. I actually also hope for a full arthurian anime too. We had a lot of arthurian popular stuff from Japan: Nanatsu no Taizai, the whole Fate franchise which has multiple movies and series, plus there have been two arthurian musicals in the past few years.

So who knows! Maybe the next big arthurian "full on Arthur story" might end up being an expanded Camelot musical movie, or an anime!

[jonboudposts]

Anxiety Fix on a 24hr Loop

Lo-Fi beats to study or relax to; late night ambient from the Blade Runner soundtrack on a one-hour loop; Chapo Trap House movie review shows all strung together with some quiet tones playing underneath, so slight you barely notice, along with the wonderfully unique artwork; dark ambient and late night chill (or in the middle of the day, whenever you feel the need).  These are some of the videos you can find on YouTube now to provide entertainment, but more so to perhaps produce a calm feeling during turbulent times; giving you the sound of a different world, or even listening to a few imaginary pals discussing what film best sums up this terrible era.  

I will not pretend to know any historical details of how long these genres have existed, either in musical or looped video format.  I do not know how the algorithm works to put them in front of me or anyone else.  They just show up as I sit here like everyone, waiting out the time and hoping we survive.  

I understand these mixes can be good for chilling and taking drugs to, but I have no idea as I do neither.  But they are certainly about 'switching off' and this is the standard position of our time.  Long before a pandemic drove us into despair, being non-engaged is clearly the manner the most powerful would prefer, as always.  Companies like Amazon do not want anyone challenging them on the mad level of profit they have made while we all stay home and try to avoid death – many of their workers worldwide have not been so lucky.  Governments including in Britain do not want you holding them to account from prioritising their economic benefits and friends over our lives. They have even made it near-illegal for us to protest this too loudly.  

The rise in mental health problems like depression and anxiety predates Coronavirus and lock downs and it has given it a damn good  kick up the agenda, at a time when our wonderful health service is under more severe threat.  Part of this means more mental health trauma going untreated, as mental health services are cut all over the place. Now, the corporate culture dominating society and economic systems, guilty of causing your pain, might encourage you to sit in a dark room with the Songs for Lonely Rainy Nights video playing, perhaps while you unpack years of pain all by yourself.  So long as you are not being a drain on the public purse or reminding us that Britain, among other countries, has always been pitifully weak at dealing with mental health.  We cannot afford to treat your problems; we need that money for the Health Secretary's next door neighbour to provide PPE they have never seen.  

While we are unable to travel, you can take a mental trip with Dark Music from the Shadowlands; maybe add a city walk video in while it plays as if on your listening device, as you trip through the streets of a far away city or two, looking for record shops and a good cup of tea.

I love these videos.  They help me discover new music and think of being out in the world.  I rarely pick up any artists who really resonate, but the ability to discover is the important thing.  I also hope they really help someone deal with any anxiety or stress brought about by this life of never-ending grind and struggle.  The endless Chapo streams are in fact just what I need to keep going.  But I also fear falling backwards into the dying world of late-period capitalism and the death drive of neo-liberalism that has individualised all the problems it caused.  I fear we make the same mistakes with an even more vulnerable population, battered by economic insecurity on maximum and mental problems increased by the fear and isolation of the last year.  

We must resist looking to social media groups to treat our mental health issues.  The value of peer support and self-help cannot be underestimated; online, IRL and when they can be there to support mental health professionals.  That part cannot be replaced.  The empowerment and boost that comes from sharing with those in the same situation and who have lived experience cannot be underestimated either.  

However, these groups should exist in support of mental health professional. What worries me is weather, due to a lack of services and our re-emerging Age of the Individual and those influenced, people are looking to these videos and groups as replacement for real mental health treatment.  Just because colouring in, yoga, meditation, mindfulness and terrible music works for Jack and Daisy, do not assume they have your mental health issues sorted.  Will this become the 2020s version of the 1980s 'pull yourself together'?  

Our mega bosses like Amazon and Google will drive you to breakdown as they further remove our barren workers rights and freedoms.  They might give their employees a play room and ping pong table, but not a union.  Free yoga is not what we all need; good quality jobs and working life is, with resistance to being reduced to a consumer machine.  There is no YouTube video to deal with that; not even The Joy of Painting.  

The Covid-19 disaster made sure we know who stops the world from collapsing and what really makes a community. Let's not give back power to those who led us to the disaster in the first place.   Finding a home in the wide open range of YouTube is not a bad thing either, unless it takes you away from where we really need to be; holding the powerful to account, demanding better for everyone and changing the horror of our material existence.  

[andrewdburton]

My 2020 in review: Steps in the right direction

Are you all ready for this? It's one of my favorite days of the year! I just spent an hour entering data in Quicken, then another thirty minutes analyzing it. It's time to run some numbers.

How well did I do with my financial goals last year? Was I able to cut back on dining out? (Hint: There was a global pandemic. What do you think?) Did my net worth rise or fall? Let's take a look.

First, let's review where I was at the end of 2019.

Quite simply, I was a mess. Objectively, my life was good, but subjectively it was a disaster. My mental health was in shambles. Depression and anxiety were crippling me and truly affecting my relationships with other people. I felt like I was in the middle of a prolonged car crash.

The good news is that, for the most part, 2020 was much better from a personal perspective. Yes, I understand that 2020 sucked for a lot of people. And it was the most tumultuous year our country has seen in a generation. But for me, personally, the year was mostly good. I'll explain why this is in a bit, but first lets look at the Big Picture.

My Net Worth

Here's my end-of-year net worth from each of the past three years. (These numbers do not include the value of my business or this website.)

At the end of 2018, my net worth was $1,334,227 — a 15.2% decrease from 2017.

At the end of 2019, my net worth was $1,437,543 — a 7.7% increase from 2018.

At the end of 2020, my net worth was $1,373,233 — a 4.5% decrease from 2019.

Now, on paper a decrease of net worth amounting to $64,310 might seem scary. Maybe it's because I'm in a better mental space than last year, but it doesn't bother me. This may also be due to the fact that I realize most of that drop comes from Zillow's valuation of our home.

At the end of 2019, Zillow said our country cottage was worth $495,749. At the end of 2020, the home was valued at $437,127, which is a drop of $58,622.

Yes, I realize using Zillow to track our home value is…erratic. And it leads to fluctuations like this. Still, I feel like it's a solid enough source for home values, and it gives me some sort of number to go on.

That's one way of looking at it. But looked at another way, things are a little dicier. You see, I currently live off of my investments. Most of those investments are in retirement accounts, which I can't touch (unless I want a tax penalty) for another eight years. At the start of 2019, my regular taxable investment accounts contained $269,264. Today, they have $197,117. That there could also be my drop in net worth.

One thing is certain, though. That $197,117 isn't enough to get me to age 59-1/2 at my current level of spending. I need to spend less, earn more, or (preferably) both.

Now, let's look at some of the numbers in greater detail.

Note I'm still tracking my money in Quicken 2007. I continue to try new money apps but none of them is as good as this clunky old program.

Having said that, I didn't track my spending from May 12th to October 1st last year. I wasn't spending anything, so I thought the process was pointless. (In retrospect, I wish I had continue to track the numbers because they would have made a good baseline.) Because of this break, I have no way to know exactly what I spent over the course of the entire year. But I do have complete numbers for the first quarter (mostly pre-COVID) and the last quarter.

Food Spending

A year ago, I declared that my financial goal for 2020 was to spend less on food. I'm pleased to report that I achieved this goal although I had some help from a global pandemic. The COVID crisis kept me (and most people) at home. Yes, we did eat out now and then, but it was rare. And it was outside, when possible.

Here's my food spending from 2020.

From January to March, I spent $1700.91 on food (or about $566.97 per month). Of this, $1189.28 ($396.42 per month) was on groceries and $498 ($166 per month) was on dining out.

From October to December, I spent $1751.26 on food (or about $583.75 per month). Of this, $1427.81 ($475.94 per month) was on groceries and $323.45 (107.82 per month) was on dinging out.) I should also note that the bulk of this food spending was in December ($663.32 on groceries, $92.00 on our only restaurant meal, and $755.62 total).

So, yay! I met my goal! My monthly food spending dropped from $1053.28 in 2019 to $575.36 in 2020. If I had tracked the stats during the middle of the year, that number would be even lower.

To put things into perspective, here's a tiny spreadsheet comparing my monthly food spending over the last four years. Numbers from 2019 are incomplete. And numbers from last year are for the first quarter and laster quarter combined. (Again, data is missing for the middle of the year.)

That looks like some solid progress to me.

And you know what? I'm willing to bet that a big part of that drop in spending is because I drank less alcohol in 2020. Technically, I don't want my alcohol spending to appear as “food”. I have a separate category for booze. In reality, I'm lazy and I rarely separate beer and wine purchases from other grocery purchases. So, I think some of that drop in food spending is because I was drinking less.

Let's talk a little more about that.

Booze Spending

Perhaps the biggest win for me in 2020 — financially and otherwise — was my decreased dependence on alcohol.

I had two stints last year during which I was alcohol free: January 1st to mid-February, then Independence Day to Halloween. And since I “fell off the wagon” at the end of October, I've done fairly good about minimizing my alcohol intake. (I refuse to keep whiskey or wine in the house. If I'm truly craving a beer, I drive to the store to buy one. Or two. This policy has really helped me cut down on how much I consume.)

In 2019, I was spending roughly $200 each month on alcohol. In 2018, this was closer to $300 per month. Holy cats! In 2020, I spent zero on alcohol for half the year. During the six months I tracked my expenses last year, I spent a total of $227.07 on booze — $37.85 per month.

My marijuana expense was also down. Pot is cheaper than alcohol in the first place, but I was also trying to reduce my use of weed while I was trying to cut out alcohol. I spent maybe $20 a month on the stuff in 2020.

As an added benefit, by cutting out alcohol I was better able to lose weight. I'm currently down more than 25 pounds since July. (I want to lose another five or ten pounds, then turn my attention to building strength once more.)

Best of all? My mental health improved! In September and October, after being alcohol-free for a few months, I was enjoying peak performance. I was happier and more productive than I have been in years. This benefit to reduced alcohol use is the best benefit of all and the one most likely to keep me away from the stuff.

Now, as I mentioned, I've resumed drinking some. I've had four beers in the past week, for instance (including New Year's). For now, I'm okay with this. My mental and physical health seem great at this level of consumption. But there's still a chance I'll opt to give up the stuff completely for an extended period of time. (I have a sticky note on my work computer with a question that Tom asked me in October: “What's the postive for you in using alcohol and pot?” Great question.)

Big Spending

The sorest spot in my budget over the past few years has been big expenses. In 2015, I spent $35,000 on an RV. In 2017, we sold the condo and bought this country cottage, then poured money into repairs and upgrades. In 2018, we spent more on remodeling.

Well, last year didn't have any major home expenses but I did replace my Mini Cooper, at long last.

At the end of June, I spent $40,000 on a 2019 Mini Countryman SE All4. This seemed like a good idea at the time. In retrospect, the purchase wasn't the smartest move. The car is fine — it's not great but it's not bad — and I enjoy driving it. I especially like that most of my driving is now electric (and that I'm averaging 53 miles per gallon.) But I don't drive often enough or value vehicles enough to justify having spent this much on a car.

I don't want to say this was a dumb move…but I think it was probably a dumb move.

Time will tell.

Looking ahead, 2021 should have zero large expenses. I hope. We've performed all of the repairs and upgrades we need to do on the house. (I say that, yet I'm worried about the foundation settling.) I just bought a car. My health is good. We have no big trips planned. Our food spending seems to be under control. I have high hopes that 2021 will, at long last, be a year without major outlays. Fingers crossed!

Final Thoughts

Honestly, nothing else about my spending worries me. There were a couple of categories that saw increases last year — books and movies — but this doesn't bother me. COVID has led me to read more and to watch more shows. These forms of entertainment are relatively inexpensive. All the same, I'll keep an eye out to be sure my book and movie spending doesn't become problematic.

Here are a couple of final thoughts after crunching the numbers.

My new electric hybrid is amazing when it comes to fuel costs. It has an electric range of roughly 16 miles. That doesn't seem like much, but it coveres 90% of my driving. I'm getting 53 miles per gallon overall. I last put gas in the tank on November 8th and it's still half full. (The downside is that it only gets about 23 mpg when using the combustion engine.) My fuel expense has dropped from $100/month to $20/month.

My spending on streaming services boomed at the end of 2020, but part of that is because I'm researching and writing a GRS article on the subject. Three TV-replacement services totals $200/month! But I only had those for one month. (And, in retrospect, I should have made them a business expense.)

The bottom line? Last year was pretty good for me. I'm certainly starting 2021 in a much better mental state than I started 2020. Things aren't perfect but are they ever? I have a good life, an amazing partner in Kim, and I'm currently enjoying the work I'm doing here at Get Rich Slowly and at my newly-revived personal site.

Looking ahead, I don't have any specific personal financial goals. I guess that I want to increase my income. To that end, I'll continue channeling my renewed focus on this website.

2020 was a mixed bag for the business side of Get Rich Slowly. The initial expenses in re-acquiring the site have been paid, so my costs were a lot lower last year. That said, so was revenue. The site earned something like $72,000 (before expenses) in 2019. In 2020, that fell to about $30,000.

Some of my colleagues make big bucks from their blogs. I don't. I'm okay with that, though, because I recognize that many of the decisions I make are deliberately reader-centric, which means I'm foregoing easy money. Still, it would be nice to boost revenue so that I could draw income from the work I do here. Let's see what that looks like going forward…

from Finance https://www.getrichslowly.org/my-2020-in-review/ via http://www.rssmix.com/

[orbemnews]

How one daring resolution made 'Trolls World Tour' crucial film of 2020 “[Theaters] had been fairly upset with us as a result of they thought that we had been overreacting. Even individuals inside the corporate thought that we had been just a little loopy for doing it,” Langley informed CNN Enterprise earlier this month. “However we simply felt that it was higher to form of plan for the worst and hope for the perfect.” “In fact, now 2020 — pardon the pun — being hindsight,” Langley added, “it was the perfect resolution we may have made.” And it would not be Langley’s solely daring resolution this 12 months. Hollywood modified in 2020. The coronavirus pandemic delayed main movies, shuttered theaters worldwide, stalled productions and ushered in streaming because the dominant leisure platform. To say that this 12 months was a turbulent one for the movie trade could be an understatement. It was transformational. Nonetheless, all alongside the way in which, Common was forward of the curve. Underneath Langley, the studio’s gambles in 2020 — from releasing the animated movie “Trolls World Tour” on digital to negotiating a brand new cope with AMC Theatres — created a highway map for all of Hollywood at a time when the highway was shifting by the day. Trolls take Tinseltown The unique “Trolls” movie was a modest success. The 2016 animated film introduced in practically $350 million worldwide and garnered lukewarm critiques. The Hollywood Reporter referred to as it a “vibrant-looking however awfully recognizable animated musical comedy concoction.” It was launched, made some cash, after which was principally forgotten about. However its sequel, “Trolls World Tour,” could also be remembered for altering the trajectory of the film enterprise without end. As Covid-19 instances spiked in March, Common made the audacious resolution to make a few of its movies which had been already in theaters obtainable on-demand instantly. The checklist included “The Invisible Man,” “The Hunt” and “Emma,” however the film that made the largest splash was “Trolls World Tour.” The Comcast (CMCSA)-owned studio introduced that the DreamWorks Animation manufacturing could be obtainable in residing rooms on April 10, the identical day it was set to open in theaters — an unprecedented transfer that foreshadowed a lot of what would occur over the remainder of the 12 months in Hollywood. “We had an enormous shopper product program on the movie, and there was simply no manner that we may transfer it out of the 12 months,” Langley stated. “We actually needed to get it on the market to our viewers. So, sure, we made the daring resolution to place it into the house and use the digital market to have the ability to try this.” The rise of streaming and video-on-demand has led studios to grapple with theaters for years over what is called the “theatrical window,” the size of time a film performs in theaters earlier than it’s provided on different platforms. Studios are keen to usher in income from all sources, however field workplace returns can nonetheless be large, so shortening that window has been a contested level of dialogue in Hollywood. Theater operators, in the meantime, are eager to protect exclusivity to entice clients to exit, fill seats and purchase popcorn. “Trolls World Tour” upended that longstanding precedent. “It was the primary experiment through the pandemic of sending a movie made for theaters on to the house. That, in itself, may be very important,” Shawn Robbins, chief analyst of Boxoffice.com, informed CNN Enterprise. “It set the tone for the way films could be launched through the pandemic.” Because the well being disaster dragged on, different studios adopted Common’s lead. Warner Bros. launched “Scoob!,” a Scooby Doo animated movie,” on digital, and Disney (DIS) launched its a lot anticipated massive finances live-action remake of “Mulan” on Disney+, albeit for an additional charge. “We’re all attempting to determine what the brand new regular is as these developments that we had been seeing within the trade earlier than the pandemic have now actually come house to roost,” Langley stated. After the “Trolls World Tour” digital launch, every thing remained copacetic between Common and theaters. The movie discovered an viewers on-demand, and theaters had bigger issues simply holding their marquees lit. It was your customary Hollywood completely satisfied ending — till the “Trolls'” numbers got here out. A brand new mannequin In case you stated final 12 months that the world’s greatest theater chain would ban considered one of Hollywood’s greatest studios, nobody would have believed you. In case you stated that the spat was over “Trolls World Tour,” trade insiders would have beneficial searching for skilled assist. However that is precisely what occurred. In April, CEO Adam Aron introduced that AMC (AMC) Theatres would now not be displaying Common’s movies. In a letter to Langley, he stated that the choice was triggered by a quote within the Wall Road Journal from NBCUniversal CEO Jeff Shell revealing that based mostly on the success of “Trolls World Tour” his studio anticipated to “launch films on each codecs.” The sequel earned practically $100 million in rental charges domestically in its first three weeks. AMC’s risk wasn’t prone to maintain, given the symbiotic relationship between the businesses: AMC is the highest movie show firm and Common is the house of worldwide blockbusters corresponding to “Livid 7,” “Jurassic World” and “Minions.” However the momentary rift led to a landmark deal that doubtlessly created a brand new theatrical mannequin for all of Hollywood. “I believe the largest danger that we took in 2020 was placing ‘Troll’s World Tour’ into the house… It was a daring transfer. It was a vital transfer, and it was a transfer that in the end yielded this historic deal,” Langley stated. “On the time, we had no line of sight into what the end result could be. And there was a time frame the place we had been referred to as to the mat by exhibition, within the press and our rivals thought that we had been loopy.” Underneath the brand new association, Common’s movies may have three weekends — or 17 days — of in-theater exclusivity, moderately than the standard 70 to 90 days. After that, Common and its sister studio, Focus Options, has the choice to launch movies on video-on-demand platforms. Common has since made comparable offers with different chains. “Each time we launch a film, it is like launching a small enterprise,” Langley stated. “We now have to like it, after all, however now we have to have a enterprise mannequin and a enterprise rationale that permits it to work. We have to maintain our distribution ecosystem wholesome. And this actually helps us do it.” Based on Robbins, Langley had “confirmed to be a captain” of the trade earlier than 2020. Nonetheless, this 12 months additional showcased her perception and skill to adapt to a enterprise whose future felt something however sure. “I believe the long run will be very vivid for the trade if cooler heads prevail and leaders like Langley stay on the desk to assist determine what that future appears to be like like,” he stated. Hollywood finds a manner Hollywood is altering. Langley is aware of that. “It is now a 100-year-old enterprise blended with a ten-year-old tech enterprise,” she stated. “I believe we’re studying whether or not or not we will all get alongside.” For Langley, the dangers she took in 2020 weren’t nearly surviving one of many trade’s wildest years, it was additionally about discovering a path to a future that arrived sooner than anybody anticipated. If something, the pandemic accelerated a decade-long shift to streaming and gave studios an excuse to catch as much as Netflix: WarnerMedia, CNN’s mother or father firm, introduced earlier this month that it could launch all of Warner Bros.’ 2021 movies in theaters and HBO Max on the identical day, collapsing the theatrical window to zero days. This selection precipitated shock waves which might be nonetheless being felt all through Tinseltown. Disney introduced dozens of recent Star Wars and Marvel sequence going direct to Disney+, two manufacturers that helped it earn a staggering $11 billion field workplace haul in 2019. And NBCUniversal — Common’s mother or father firm — launched Peacock, its personal streaming platform, earlier this 12 months. By no means earlier than has the way forward for moviegoing been in a lot doubt. But, Langley would not assume that it must be a winner take all battle. “I imagine that there’s sufficient to go round for everyone,” she stated. “And I believe all boats rise after we’re profitable. I do not assume it is binary.” For Langley, the theatrical expertise hasn’t reached its ultimate act but. “In powerful occasions, individuals look to the films to take them out of their actuality, to encourage them,” she stated. “And I believe that that’s going to be true greater than ever on the opposite aspect of the pandemic.” Supply hyperlink #bold #Decision #Howonebolddecisionmade'TrollsWorldTour'themostimportantmovieof2020-CNN #important #Media #Movie #Tour #trolls #World

[absurdfuture]

The Pre-pandemic Universe Was the Fiction

What the coronavirus outbreak reveals is not the unreality of our present moment, but the illusions it shatters.

Years ago, I started writing a short story, the premise of which was this: All the clocks in the world stop working, at once. Not time itself, just the convention of time. Life freezes in place. The protagonist, who works in a Midtown Manhattan high-rise, takes the elevator down to the lobby and walks out onto the street to find the world on pause, its social rhythms and commercial activity suspended. In the air is a growing feeling of incipient chaos. I got about midway through page 3 and stopped. I didn’t know what it meant.

One word I’ve been hearing a lot lately is unreal. Mostly, I hear it from my own mouth, because I haven’t left the house in a month, but also I hear it from friends on Zoom or Skype, and from the news on TV or online. Unreal, or its variations: not real, surreal, this can’t be real.

Of course, the global catastrophe unfolding is nothing but real. Stock-market convulsions have destroyed, in a matter of days, nest eggs built over decades. More than 16 million people in the United States applied for unemployment over just three weeks. The case count and death toll grow with each refresh of the page.

And yet some part of me still doesn’t want to accept that these calamities are really happening. Not really. What does it mean to say that this doesn’t feel real? The feeling seems to derive from the assumption that life before the pandemic, “normal” life, was real. That we have departed from it into strange territory.

But what if it’s exactly the other way around?

What the current crisis and our responses to it, both individual and institutional, have reminded us of is not the unreality of the pandemic, but the illusions shattered by it:

The grand, shared illusion that we are separate from nature.

That life on Earth is generally stable, not precarious.

That, despite what we know from the historical and geological and biological record, human civilization—thanks to advancements in science and medicine and social and governmental structures—exists inside a bubble, protected from the kind of cataclysmic event we are currently experiencing.

What I’ve learned in the past few weeks is that this supposed technological bubble was just that: a thin layer that popped easily.

The stronger bubble, the one that persists, is the psychological one. Even as our stark new reality becomes clear, it remains hard to accept that “normal” was the fiction. It will take some time to let go of the long-held, seldom-questioned assumptions of everyday life: that tomorrow will look like yesterday, next year like the last.

These assumptions are a luxury. For me, they are a cross product of my intersecting privileges: born in the United States, to professional parents, at a point in history where my life has proceeded, for the most part, through a series of economic booms without major socio- or geopolitical upheavals. Or at least with upheavals far enough removed so as to allow me to feel physically and mentally insulated. Living with these assumptions for so long has created a kind of expectancy as to how things tend to go, that my life has to make some kind of sense.

But what if it doesn’t? Quantum mechanics might provide a useful, if rough, analogy. At a fundamental level, physical reality defies our most basic intuitions about causality and locality, which is to say about time and space. Our senses and perceptions evolved to evade tigers and catch food, not to understand the properties of photons and subatomic particles. Despite more than 100 years of effort by the world’s leading physicists and philosophers, the quantum realm remains incomprehensibly bizarre. As it turns out, science fiction cannot invent anything weirder than the brute reality of the universe itself. The fact that we cannot comprehend it is a form of environmental mismatch.

We may face a similar type of conceptual difficulty in grappling with a pandemic. Our brains may not be naturally suited to dealing with problems of this scale or nature. Even our language, our concepts, are inapt tools, artifacts of our previous reality. Unprecedented, historic, we proclaim, with each new, grim milestone. As if precedent and history have bearing on a virus that seeks only to maximize copies of itself.

Perhaps most revealing is how we say the damage, the fallout, and the speed at which things are happening feel unimaginable, a word telling both in its rightness and wrongness. We “imagine” this kind of disaster all the time, in our dystopian-novel trilogies, our bingeable streaming miniseries. And most famously, in our summer popcorn global-disaster blockbusters, a well-worn genre that derives its pleasure and dread from the same source: literally imagining the worst. We enter dark, cool theaters in the middle of July, portals to other universes in which various doomsday scenarios play out. But here’s the key: We’re always behind a scrim of safety, a barrier between what we think of as possible and impossible. We watch these movies as tourists in an alternate reality, knowing that our round trip lasts two and a half hours, and then we will be home, safe in the real—and boring—world.

And of course, novel, we call it, but SARS-CoV-2 has been around in some form for thousands of years or more. It is novel only to us, Homo sapiens, the one species that imagines its survival, its success, as the central narrative of the story of this planet. A story with a beginning and middle and end. A story that has structure and rules. A story that means something.

In the current chapter of this story, there are ostensible villains: some members of the Trump administration (including the president himself) and officials at the state level who have been reckless or incompetent or self-interested or shortsighted or all of the above. There are heroes as well: certain governors and mayors, science advisers and health-care professionals, individuals who, in a time of uncertainty, have performed with courage, duty, expertise, and sacrifice.

But the reality is, zooming out to the largest scale, fighting the pandemic effectively requires us to take actions that go against our instincts, our intuitions, the things we evolved to be good at. Cooperation—farsighted, strategic, collaborative action—is required to defeat an adversary that relies on our physical cohesion. We can find meaning in how we fight it, but relying on our old illusions, assuming that we, as humans, will prevail, is dangerous. Life, for us and the virus, is about genes propagating themselves. No amount of magical thinking or bluster or can-do attitude can change that fact.

As we hear reports of peak deaths and curves flattening, the quiet wonderings about when life will return to normal will get louder every day. As the whispers grow, it will be important to remember: Things don’t have to be resolved in a way that works out all right for us, or for our economy, for any particular systems or ways of living. Things aren’t necessarily going to be okay in a reasonable timeframe just because we want them to. To think otherwise is to succumb to the fiction, a sheltered, resource-rich mindset (presumably not shared by the billions of people who have long lived in volatile conditions and are thus under no such illusions).

Five hundred years ago, Copernicus re-centered the universe away from us, outward. The COVID-19 outbreak is a reminder: The world isn’t for us; we are part of it. We’re not the protagonists of this movie; there is no movie. After all the suffering and wreckage have subsided, one good thing for our long-term viability will be to have changed our ways of thinking. To have regained a humility.

I say humility because, as it turns out, unimaginable says more about the limits of our imagination than about reality itself. What we really mean when we say that this pandemic feels “unimaginable” is that we had not imagined it. Just as imagination can mislead us, though, it will be imagination—scientific, civic, moral—that helps us find new ways of doing things, helps remind us of how far we have to go as a species. How little we still understand about our place in this world—terrifying and awful at the moment—but also how much we still get to discover. How fragile and rare our ordered structures are, our fictions, and how precious. How next time, we might rebuild them, stronger.

[flipfundingstuff]

Industries That May Struggle to Bounce Back After COVID-19

Small businesses are critical to the American economy. In fact, the country is 95% dependent on the goods and services provided by small businesses. Harvard Business Review reports that small, locally-owned companies employ approximately 58.9 million Americans and account for 47.5% of the private sector workforce (44% of the US economy overall). This sector was thriving until the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has caused an unimaginable disruption to daily business operations.

As a majority of American consumers practice social distancing and stay at home to mitigate the spread of the virus, the small businesses deemed “nonessential” have been forced to adapt or otherwise close their doors temporarily, causing major revenue losses. Some businesses may not feel any immediate effects as they adjust their service offerings in this new market, but the long-term economic impact of coronavirus could be catastrophic if small business owners don’t take preventative measures now to protect what they’ve built. 

This article discusses which industries are at risk, what you as a small business owner can do to increase your chances of surviving and then thriving, and how you can apply for federal disaster business loans for your at-risk company during this difficult time. 

Industries That Will Be Heavily Impacted by Novel Coronavirus

Due to novel coronavirus, people are no longer dropping off their dry cleaning, getting their nails done, picking up coffee every morning, going to pilates, or hitting local fashion boutiques to freshen up their spring wardrobes. Instead, consumers are hunkering down in their houses, ordering goods online, and minimizing their interactions with the outside world out of concern for public health. It’s easy to see why the nation’s capitals are reporting that business is down by 40%. 

It is the same story in China and around the globe, and it’s impeding the ability of many businesses to get imported goods from their main supply sources. The NFIB Research Center says that 39% of small businesses have already felt the effects of supply chain disruptions and are struggling to maintain their businesses as a result. The 43% who aren’t feeling the effects expect to be impacted within the next 3 months if these trends continue, and the last 18% surveyed simply don’t know what to expect. Below are the industries experiencing the most impact:

Retail

The retail industry supplies goods that many people consider to be “wants” rather than “needs,” so when consumers scale back and make cuts to their budgets during a crisis, retail is one of the first industries to slide down the priority list. According to Ray Wimer, an assistant professor of retail at Syracuse University, retail stores usually experience the majority of the impact, and this holds true for the COVID-19 pandemic as well—but not only because of a lack of consumer demand. 

The World Trade Organization says that more than 37% of global textile exports come from China and that most luxury manufacturing occurs in Italy. These 2 countries have been hit hard by the coronavirus, and their workforces have drastically decreased in numbers as a result of the lockdowns they’re experiencing, which has made it difficult for them to continue producing the exports that American retailers of all sizes rely on them to supply. These supply chain problems and falling sales have created the perfect storm for a great number of small US retailers, forcing them to close up shop.

Travel/Tourism and Hospitality

We’ve all heard how airlines, hotel chains, and other large companies in the tourism and hospitality industries have been impacted by COVID-19, but what about smaller communities that have been hurt by the decline in tourism? Locally-owned motels, tour guides, souvenir shops, and other tourism-centered small businesses are now struggling to survive as travelers are advised to stay home. 

In New Hampshire, for example, tourism is the second-largest industry, bringing in over a billion dollars every year. Small towns like historical Peterborough draw in visitors from all over with breathtaking nature views and rich culture, but without travelers, this community has felt a severe economic impact as the sharp decline of travelers has caused a sharp rise in unemployment.

Entertainment

While streaming services and online entertainment platforms thrive in times like these, local movie theaters, playhouses, independent filmmakers, and film festivals suffer as they’re forced to close their doors and halt production for weeks and months at a time. A recent report stated that the film industry could take a $5 billion hit by delaying major movie releases. Sporting events, concerts, and other such events are also being canceled, causing major losses for many industries at once.

Food Service

The food service industry employs over 16 million people and propels the economy in a vast number of communities. For those food establishments that haven’t been able to offer delivery, drive-through, or curbside pickup, consumer dollars are instead being spent at grocery stores. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that spending in this industry will temporarily drop 80% over the course of this pandemic. 

Is Your Industry at Risk?

IBISWorld is a trusted industry research company that employs skilled analysts who use market trends, demographics, and economic data to provide helpful business insights to companies of every shape and size. This information empowers them to make smarter and better-informed decisions for their companies. If your business doesn’t fall under one of the industries mentioned above, IBISWorld has analyzed every industry by country and has provided an estimate of its fiscal risk during the COVID-19 outbreak. 

You can use their “Industry Exposure” tool to get an in-depth look at your risk and help your small business improve its defense strategy accordingly. 

The Silver Lining

Small business owners can take comfort in the fact that COVID-19 is not unprecedented. The outlook might seem bleak for nonessential industries, but after some time has passed, everyone will recover just as they have in the past. Consider this:

The world didn’t end after Y2K 

We traveled again after the 9/11 attacks

We overcame SARS in 2003, and Chinese hotels made a full recovery from the impact of that outbreak after just 4 months

The 2008 fiscal crisis did not destroy the country

We survived the 2009 swine flu

ISIS did not succeed in taking our freedoms in 2015

Coronavirus will also soon be a distant memory that we learned from. The day will soon come when the country will change out of pajamas and go shopping for new clothes. We’ll turn off our TVs and see a play with our friends. Businesses in every industry will have customers again. 

Until that time comes, there are things you can do to survive the pandemic and stay afloat. Consider changing your supplier so you aren’t dependent on struggling countries. Increase the price of your goods and services for the sake of cash flow. And last but not least, consider taking out a COVID-19 small business loan.

Funding Options Available to Your Industry

Earlier on in March, the US federal government slashed interest rates almost to zero in an attempt to counteract the economic impact of coronavirus, which is more than it has since the 2008 recession. Now is the perfect time to take out a small business loan while interest rates are as low as they can possibly be, according to Forbes. 

The United States government and other governments worldwide are creating loan programs to help small businesses survive the pandemic and cover funding gaps while business is down. On March 27, 2020, President Trump signed the CARES Act into law, which provides relief for families and businesses that have been negatively affected by the coronavirus. Approximately $350 billion has been reserved for small businesses in a government stimulus package to help prevent layoffs and closures while employees practice social distancing and stay at home. 

Your company could qualify for cash flow assistance under the CARES Act for up to 8 weeks if you have 500 workers or fewer. Additionally, your loan could potentially be forgiven if you maintain payroll and use the loan to cover the cost of rent, mortgage, and/or utilities. 

The act also includes:

A Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) for continued support of employee salaries, payroll, and more

The cooperation of the Small Business Administration with state governments to provide $2 million disaster recovery loans (EIDLs) to small businesses to make up for the temporary loss of revenue

Business tax changes, including delayed employer payroll tax payments, advance tax credits for necessary sick time/PTO, and an employee retention tax credit

This situation is continuously evolving, so keep up with local news sources to find out how government funding can support you through this tough time.

What Can You Do Now to Get the Funding You Need?

First and foremost, talk to your banker about the expanded SBA section of the CARES Act, as these institutions are in charge of administering SBA small business loans. You’ll also want to make sure you have the documentation needed to apply for loans and prove that you’re in good financial standing. This documentation includes tax returns, operating agreements, bylaws, certificates of good standing, statements, payroll information, and more. 

You should also get in touch with a Lendio funding manager to discuss your options and what kind of funding you need to keep your head above water. We can help you decide which financing option is right for you and give you better approval odds for:

The Paycheck Protection Program

SBA loans

A business line of credit

Short-term loans

A merchant cash advance

A business term loan

And many more

Apply for a COVID-19 Relief Loan

The second quarter of this year will surely test the limits of small businesses, but you can keep your head above water by securing business capital and remaining vigilant. A recession doesn’t have to be the end of your business if you rely on the coronavirus small business loan options available to you. Interest rates are lower than they’ve ever been, so there has never been a better time to apply. 

To ensure that your industry is able to bounce back quickly after this economic crisis, turn to your primary financial institution to learn about all your COVID-19 small business loan options. If your company is reasonably healthy, you could get approved quickly and have critical funding in your hands in as little as 24 hours. All you need is some basic documentation ready to apply for these SBA small business loans. Get started today.

The post Industries That May Struggle to Bounce Back After COVID-19 appeared first on Lendio.

from Blog – Lendio https://ift.tt/3aw3aUv via IFTTT