Hello Quartz readers,
Yesterday, Moderna became the second pharma firm (after Pfizer/BioNTech) to report promising clinical trial results for a Covid-19 vaccine: The company said a key study for its vaccine candidate showed an efficacy rate of 94.5%.
Both Pfizer and Moderna are making mRNA vaccines, a model that could massively accelerate the process of making vaccines for future pandemics. Here’s what you need to know:
- How mRNA vaccines could change the future of vaccines
- How Moderna’s Covid-19 vaccine stacks up against Pfizer’s
- The vaccine cold-storage conundrum
- What we (don’t) know about Operation Warp Speed deals
If you’ve got a burning vaccine question, send it our way.
Okay, let’s get started.
A tax on both your houses
Working from home may be safe and cozy, but it’s also a privilege with significant economic implications. As millions of white-collar professionals go remote, retail, food, and other businesses that rely on buzzing office districts are suffering losses, layoffs, and bankruptcies.
Deutsche Bank Research has a way to reduce the impact of this inequity: In a new report, the bank argues for a work-from-home (WFH) tax on those who choose remote work once the pandemic has ended. If a company closes or repurposes its offices so employees have no choice but to work from home, tax the employer, the report says. The money would be used to create subsidies for a country’s lowest-paid workers.
The hypothetical tax—5% of one’s salary for every day a person works from home—would not apply to the self-employed or those earning a low income, or during government-mandated lockdowns. For someone earning $55,000 in the US and only going into the office two days per week, a tax would equal just over $10 per WFH day, equal to a commuter’s typical spending on things like coffee, transportation, and, presumably, real pants.
Such a tax would raise $49 billion per year in the US, according to the report, as well as €20 billion annually in Germany and £7 billion per year in the UK.
Luke Templeton, the strategist who led the research, warned that non-believers would say “engagement with the economy is a personal choice and they should not be penalized for making that decision. Yet, these people should remember that governments have always backsolved taxes to suit the social environment.” He points to the 18th century UK practice of taxing households according to the number of windows in a home, an imperfect system that served as a form of income tax when citizens were not yet ready to accept the latter.
But critics of Deutsche Bank’s proposal are quick to suggest the government tax wealthy business owners and billionaires, rather than workers who are now covering the costs of internet access and other expenses employers normally pay.
“[The] same economists who say people working from home ‘are contributing less to the infrastructure of the economy whilst still receiving its benefits’ advocate less corporate regulation & do not value care,” Maja Korica, a management professor at Warwick Business School in the UK, wrote on Twitter, quoting the Deutsche bank report. “We should ignore them 100%.”
Gloom and boom
Just two months ago, a host of global economic experts shared an extremely pessimistic outlook for the Indian economy. Today, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley have a much more bullish view of the country’s prospects.
The main reason for optimism is the view beyond 2020. Goldman expects the Indian economy to contract 9% in 2020, but estimates that it will see 10% GDP growth in 2021 and 7.2% in 2022. Morgan Stanley expects GDP growth to be at 9.8% in 2021 and 5.7% in 2022. Wrote Morgan Stanley in a recent report:
Covid-19 infections appear to have peaked, high-frequency growth indicators are coming in strong, government policy action is beating expectations, and Indian companies are picking up activity through the pandemic. Thus, we expect growth to surprise on the upside.
The road less traveled
As end-of-year celebrations approach, the CDC and other public health organizations are issuing guidance on traveling, if you must:
📅 Timing. Ideally, individuals would be able to isolate themselves for 14 days before leaving for travel, or quarantine for two weeks after arriving at their destination.
⚕️Testing. Diagnostic test accuracy varies widely, and the CDC doesn’t recommend using them to enable gathering. For the best shot at an accurate result, take a molecular test two to five days after your last exposure to people—and then isolate yourself while you wait for your results.
🚗 Traveling. Cars are safer than planes, trains, or public transportation. Once you’re actually at a gathering, experts recommend keeping it small, outdoors (if possible), and masked during downtime.
Any kind of holiday travel increases the risk of transmission, so if you do choose to travel, wear a mask (and properly). Isolating for two weeks afterward will also ensure that you don’t pass along anything you may have picked up.
Head, over heels
High heels have been a fashion staple for decades, but the pandemic has only accelerated trends toward “casualization.” Between March and May 2020, sales of dress shoes dropped 70% and have yet to rebound. Here are some key dates in the history of the shoes everyone loves to hate:
~0 CE: Male Greco-Roman actors wear thick, cork-soled platforms to exaggerate their height when they portray gods and royalty.
1670s: Louis XIV of France issues an edict barring non-courtiers from wearing red heels.
1940s: Pinup girls, whose posters are widely distributed during World War II, cement the relationship between femininity and heels.
1951: French designer André Perugia begins marketing his 4-inch needle heel, one of the first stilettos.
1993: Supermodel Naomi Campbell takes a tumble on the Vivienne Westwood runway in 9-inch platform heels.
2019: The #KuToo movement (a play on the word kutsu, for shoe, and kutsuu, for pain) in Japan aims to end sexist dress codes mandating high heels.
2020: Sales at Jimmy Choo, known for statuesque stilettos, decline 23% as lockdowns shutter stores—and any place someone might bother to wear high heels.
Step into more fascinating heel history with our Quartz obsession email on the subject, and sign up below to get a weekly obsession delivered directly to your inbox.
You asked
Why are governments in places with rising Covid-19 rates closing bars and restaurants at 10pm?
It’s happening in New York, Massachusetts, and Colorado. And no, it’s not because the virus is nocturnal. This tactic has little to do with epidemiology and everything to do with human psychology. The later it gets, the drunker people tend to get, and the more likely they are to bend or break rules they might otherwise respect, like staying six feet apart and wearing a mask. Curfews are also a way for governments to restrict people’s movement, particularly in high-risk places like bars and restaurants, without the economic impact of a full lockdown.
Still, experts aren’t sure these curfews do what they’re intended to: They might shift risky behavior to harder-to-regulate environments like private homes, or restrict the hours in which patrons can visit a business so that there’s more crowding.
Essential reading
- The latest 🌏 figures: 55.3 million confirmed cases; 35.6 million classified as “recovered.”
- Risk profile: Nearly 20% of Africa’s Covid-19 deaths are linked to diabetes.
- New agency: How the US can help WHO change for the greater good.
- Don’t trip: Airbnb refunded $1 billion in bookings this year.
- Trade off: Covid transmission fears are disrupting the mink fur industry.
Our best wishes for a healthy day. Get in touch with us at needtoknow@qz.com, and live your best Quartz life by downloading our iOS app and becoming a member. Today’s newsletter was brought to you by Alex Ossola, Lila MacLellan, Prathamesh Mulye, Marc Bain, and Kira Bindrim.