The coronavirus pandemic has given us more economic news in days than we usually experience in years. Things are happening at a pace I’ve never seen. And I’m old enough to have experienced the 2008 financial crisis. In the short term, this is way worse. There are some truly bizarre graphs with unemployment claims and a line so steep the last data point looks more like the border of the graph. The economic damage of Covid-19 is huge.

Thankfully, governments around the world are stepping on the gas pedal – which also means the space of possibilities is expanding rapidly. Where there used to be years of discussion – “It’s impossible, we can’t afford it!” – social insurance programmes are now rapidly being deployed. The US government is considering spending $2.2tn to fight the economic fallout from Covid-19 – the biggest stimulus package ever in the US. But even so, it’s still small compared to what some European countries are going to be spending (as a percentage of GDP).

Those numbers are gigantic. So with that in mind, our weekly reads are all around trying to make sense of the economy in one way or another.

This podcast takes you behind the numbers Tim Harford has been one of my heroes ever since I started writing about numbers. This "undercover economist" is not only a great writer, he’s also an excellent podcast host. In More or Less, he takes a deep dive into the world of numbers. Not only economic figures, but the wide range of statistics that influence our daily lives. The most recent episode is a coronavirus special. Renowned statistician David Spiegelhalter describes the risk of coronavirus compared to "normal risk", a reporter interviews experts on why Iran’s coronavirus statistics seem dodgy, and a Financial Times reporter explains more about the impact on the economy. Always a tad geeky, this is my favourite numbers podcast. (Sanne, Numeracy correspondent) BBC Radio 4: More or Less (listening time: 28 minutes)
In a pandemic, women do worse economically "A pandemic magnifies all existing inequalities," writes Helen Lewis, even as she acknowledges that the physical illness brought on by the virus affects women less than it does men. "We are not just living through a public health crisis, but an economic one." The writer’s intuition to think about how the unpaid economy will fall mostly to women over the next months of lockdown is astute. A tweet by a barrister in London did the rounds last week, sharing a sign she had drawn up, with words to the effect of: "this woman in your living room is a barrister, not your mother". Lewis looks at all the clues from past pandemics that proved that the burden of care was on women, impacting maternal mortality or economic security for small business owners. Coronavirus is here. Do we still have a chance to safeguard women’s economic futures? (Nabeelah, conversation editor) The Atlantic: ‘The coronavirus is a disaster for feminism’ (reading time: 12 minutes)
Banks for people? Well, I never! I grew up with an account at a local credit union, where the bank teller was my friend’s mum. They sponsored the local sports events and were just very much part of the community, like the baker, or the guy that owned the ice cream shop. I didn’t realise this wasn’t usual behaviour for a bank (or, indeed, that a credit union wasn’t a bank) until years later when I moved to the city, switched my account to one of Australia’s biggest banks, and my brother explained that the interest I was receiving was coming from investing in the arms trade. That’s when I realised that banks have a bad reputation (well, that and 2008 happened). Part of the move from an extractive economy to a regenerative one that it’s clear *has* to happen in the next few decades can come from banks. We’re not going to get rid of them. This article shows that banks don’t have to work for the richest 1%. They can invest back into their own communities and use people’s money to actually improve lives (even if there’s still a lot of work to be done). (Imogen, engagement editor) Yes! Magazine: ‘What a public bank can do for real people’ (reading time: 15 minutes)

The best of The Correspondent on the economy

Colour photograph of a warehouse showing boxes. Outgrowing growth: why quality of life, not GDP, should be our measure of success Mainstream economics still thinks growth is essential, but this blind belief in GDP is just enriching the rich and killing the planet. We don’t need more growth to improve people’s lives. By working less, buying and producing less, and investing in public services, we can improve quality of life – and fight the climate crisis. Read Jason Hickel’s article here Poverty isn’t a lack of character. It’s a lack of cash Our efforts to fight poverty are often based on the misconception that poor people must pull themselves up out of the mire. But the relentless struggle to make ends meet has serious effects on the brain. Poverty is not a lack of character – it’s a lack of cash. Read Rutger Bregman’s article here