2021年1月6日 星期三

A Cure for the New Year’s Scaries

What is time, anyway?

A Cure for the New Year's Scaries

Niv Bavarsky

I’ve always found the turn of the calendar year difficult — coming down off the adrenaline and joy of the holidays and crashing into several solid months of work, school, dark and cold. I try to temper that letdown by planning things to look forward to for my family, and for me: a trip to visit my in-laws in California over the kids’ school break, dinner with old friends or a comedy show with my husband.

I can’t make any of these arrangements for 2021, and I can’t do the typical summer planning that starts around this time. Who knows if there will be camp this year? Every time I try to project a future in my mind, it feels like my brain is traveling down a smooth road and then slamming into a brick wall.

It’s well-established in psychological literature that uncertainty stokes anxiety, which naturally has been spiking across the world during the pandemic. It strikes me that perhaps the key to getting through this uncertain time is to reframe our concept of time altogether. Just because the Gregorian calendar insists that this is a New Year, and a million headlines claim that it’s time to start fresh (and get that step counter!), we don’t have to think about it that way.

After all, our units of time, like the workweek, are a human invention we have collectively adopted, as Judith Shulevitz, a cultural critic and the author of “The Sabbath World: Glimpses of a Different Order of Time,” pointed out to me. Part of the way humans have long structured time is through gatherings and festivals — whether they are weekly, like the Sabbath, or seasonal, like Easter or Passover, or the secular equivalent, Spring Break. “The point of festivals is collectivity,” Shulevitz explained. “These are times when the work routines are broken, a time for friends and family that is of a different quality” than a normal day.

We can’t see friends or plan for festivities months in advance, since the vaccine rollouts and virus trajectories are so unclear. “You have this uninterrupted block of time, and you can’t rely on any of the markers of the passing of time that helped you break it up and structure it, so it’s depressing,” Shulevitz said. It sure is!

So how do we get through the next few months without continuing to run into that mental brick wall I find myself hurtling toward each night when I try to fall asleep? Shulevitz suggested communing with the natural world. She started tending a garden for the first time in 2020. “All I can think of is when are my bulb flowers going to come up?” she said. “That’s what I’m looking forward to, that I know is going to happen. It’s the rhythm of the earth.”

ADVERTISEMENT

While I can look forward to longer and warmer days, I’m more of an indoor cat and I live in the city, so you won’t find me elbow deep in soil. My solution is to try to get into the head space of my 4-year-old, who has no concept of time and greets each day with ebullience and hope. For her, everything that has happened in the past is “on the other day,” which could mean last week or last year. Everything in the future is “on the next day.” At any point, on any day, I can kneel down and offer to play dolls with her and enter into her consciousness for however long I can stand it.

My daughter’s notions of time, and my attempt to live with her in those moments, remind me of this passage from Heidi Julavits’s book “The Folded Clock: A Diary,” which eschews a strict chronology for a more meditative approach:

Today I spun tops with my son. We did this for six straight hours. So much of the pleasure of hanging out with children is successfully losing yourself, if only for a minute or two, in the activity with which you’re both engaged. Suddenly, I am drawing a shoe that makes us both happy. The cogs of the day smoothly and quickly turn. Once I’ve finished the shoe, however, I am back to wondering — how can this day not mostly involve my waiting for it to be over? Yet when this day has ended my child will be older and I will be nearer to dead. Why should I wish for this to happen any sooner than it already will?

My 4-year-old is undoubtedly my last child, and I know from my older daughter that 4 is the last gasp of earnest babyhood, before sarcasm and self-consciousness take over. One of the few unmitigated joys of the pandemic has been that I get to see more of her and her sister in these particular moments in their lives, which otherwise would have passed more quickly and without reverence.

Instead of a festival where we collectively greet each other in the outside world, we are turning inward together — into ourselves, our homes, our families. I might not be able to look forward to leaving my house during my kids’ February break from school, but I can look forward to sinking my fingers into my older daughter’s hair in the middle of a Tuesday, because she’s decided she wants a ponytail, and I’m here to make one.

ADVERTISEMENT

P.S. Follow us on Instagram @NYTParenting. If this was forwarded to you, sign up for the NYT Parenting newsletter here.

Tiny Victories

Parenting can be a grind. Let’s celebrate the tiny victories.

My 3-year-old daughter loves to role play and has started tucking ME in at night. She reads me a book and sings me a song, then my husband goes and puts her to bed! It’s a routine now and I’m not fighting it. — Debi Taverna, Austin

If you want a chance to get your Tiny Victory published, find us on Instagram @NYTparenting and use the hashtag #tinyvictories; email us; or enter your Tiny Victory at the bottom of this page. Include your full name and location. Tiny Victories may be edited for clarity and style. Your name, location and comments may be published, but your contact information will not. By submitting to us, you agree that you have read, understand and accept the Reader Submission Terms in relation to all of the content and other information you send to us.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for NYT Parenting from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

歡迎蒞臨:https://ofa588.com/

娛樂推薦:https://www.ofa86.com/

2021年1月5日 星期二

Why Georgia matters

Infrastructure week might finally happen.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell arrives at the U.S. Capitol in Washington on Jan. 3.Stefani Reynolds for The New York Times
Author Headshot

By Paul Krugman

Opinion Columnist

Two Senate seats in Georgia are on the line today, and with them control of the Senate. I have no idea what, if any, effect The Phone Call will have on the outcome. But what’s really on the line?

Clearly, this election isn’t about what the two Republicans are trying to make it about. No, their opponents Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock aren’t Marxists or socialists of any kind. And the truth is that even if Democrats win both races, they won’t have the votes for an expansive progressive agenda: The deciding senator will be West Virginia’s Joe Manchin, and I don’t think even Republicans could portray him as a Marxist (although on second thought I could be wrong about that.)

But if Democrats do take those seats, they will control the Senate’s agenda — and perhaps even more important, Mitch McConnell won’t. This will have major economic implications.

I’m not very worried about the next year or two. As I wrote last week, this isn’t like the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, when an overstretched private sector needed extended support from deficit spending, and Republican-enforced austerity took a serious toll on recovery. I expect a rapid short-term economic rebound once we have widespread vaccination, even without new fiscal stimulus.

ADVERTISEMENT

There is, however, a longer-term need for a big increase in public investment, for multiple reasons. It would help sustain the economy beyond the vaccination bounce; it would help repair our decaying infrastructure; and it could be an important part of a climate strategy.

How should we pay for this surge in public investment? We actually don’t need to pay for it at all. Even before the pandemic we were an economy awash with more savings than the private sector wanted to invest, so that the government could borrow money very cheaply. In effect, markets have been begging Washington to borrow even more, and it would be good for everyone if Congress obliged and used the money to invest in the future.

And the politics look good, too. Polls suggest strong support for a major infrastructure bill, and this support extends to red as well as blue states. Infrastructure spending would surely pass the House, and would probably pass the Senate with bipartisan support if it ever reached the floor.

But in that case, why didn’t Donald Trump ever deliver the infrastructure legislation he promised on the campaign trail? Why did “It’s infrastructure week” become a running gag line?

ADVERTISEMENT

Part of the answer is sheer incompetence on the part of the outgoing administration. Trump surrounded himself with people who had absolutely no policy chops; they didn’t know enough to legislate themselves out of a wet paper bag. (The one exception was trade policy, where Robert Lighthizer, the protectionist U.S. trade representative, actually knew his way around.) So Trump basically relied on Republicans in Congress to fill in all the details of his policies.

But those Congressional Republicans, Mitch McConnell in particular, didn’t want a big infrastructure bill, even though it would have helped Trump politically. McConnell’s objections probably flowed not from concerns that such a bill wouldn’t work, but from fear that it would — and in working, would help to legitimize an expanded role for government.

And if McConnell wouldn’t let infrastructure come to the floor with a Republican in the White House, he certainly won’t let it get a vote if he’s still majority leader under Joe Biden.

So a few thousand votes one way or the other in those Georgia Senate races could either unlock trillions of dollars in investment in our future, or keep that potential locked up for years to come.

ADVERTISEMENT

Quick Hits

The O.E.C.D., which supported austerity after 2008, now warns that it would be a really bad idea.

Should we just give people money? Maybe not, if they’re going to put it into Bitcoin.

Adjusted for inflation, government borrowing costs are negative.

But McConnell spent the whole pandemic making sure we didn’t invest.

Feedback
If you’re enjoying what you’re reading, please consider recommending it to friends. They can sign up here. If you want to share your thoughts on an item in this week’s newsletter or on the newsletter in general, please email me at krugman-newsletter@nytimes.com.

Facing the Music

But actually I do understand, at least well enough.YouTube

Is there another mother-daughter duo this uplifting?

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for Paul Krugman from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

歡迎蒞臨:https://ofa588.com/

娛樂推薦:https://www.ofa86.com/