![]() To investigate the weather-pandemic nexus, we collect a unique dataset covering 3376 counties in 114 states/regions from nine countries (Austria, Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Italy, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, and the United States) between 1st of January 2020 and 31st of December 2020, at a daily frequency. Thus, while the epidemiological channel implies lower cases during higher temperatures, the direction of the effect of weather through the social channel is not clear a priori, which may explain the conflicting results of previous empirical studies. From a behavioral perspective, weather alters mobility levels, social distancing, and location of social gatherings, which in turn affects the spread of the virus across individuals 19, 20, 21. Since higher temperatures harm the lipid layer of the virus 10, 16, 17, the viability of the SARS Coronavirus is substantially impaired at higher temperature levels 18. From an epidemiological standpoint, the survival and spread of a virus depends on the temperature of its environment. Weather can influence virus contagion in two distinct ways. Although a range of studies has provided empirical evidence for the negative relationship between temperature and contagion 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, several scholars come to contrasting conclusions by showing that the containment potential of weather differs substantially with respect to effect sizes, significance levels, weather indicators, regions, and time periods 11, 12, 13, 14, 15. Like other epidemic diseases, the trajectories in many countries show strong seasonal patterns with fewer cases during summer and more during winter. Rather than waste taxpayer funds on needless bailout programs, Congress should increase funding for farmers offering to take steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that are designed to help them better withstand the extreme weather caused by climate change.The effect of weather on the spread of the coronavirus is one of the most investigated research questions since the onset of the pandemic 1, 2, 3. A Senate Agriculture Committee report discovered the payments were skewed to Southern farmers, who were less affected by the trade war. But experts have found that the cap has not stopped them from receiving subsidies, leading to waste in the MFP and CFAP.Īnother study found some farmers getting paid twice for the same crop. ![]() But when Biden’s USDA tapped the fund to pay for measuring the climate benefits of various farmland practices, many of the same people objected.Īn income cap on farm subsidies is intended to stop the wealthiest people from getting payments. At the time, congressional Republicans supported the measure. To pay for the two programs, Trump’s USDA tapped a little-known fund called the Commodity Credit Corporation. In 2020, federal spending made up nearly half of total farm net income, according to the USDA. In combination, the MFP and CFAP outlays caused total federal farm spending to soar, from $16.2 billion, in 2017, to $44.1 billion, in 2020, a record level. The CFAP paid $30.8 billion for the two rounds of funding in 20. The MFP paid $23.2 billion for crop years 20 to compensate farmers for losses driven by tariffs China placed on agricultural imports from the U.S. ![]() Other notable recipients of Trump-era disaster assistance include the billionaire governor of West Virginia, Jim Justice.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |