'Peak Globalism' - ending along with 'peak virus', is not an active topic at the moment in many circles, but contemplating it should be. That's a part I have referenced before, mostly relating to the Administration's efforts for a more self-sufficient United States, during the 'trade war' battles, which it's pretty clear neither the Chinese nor Americans expected to transition to a sort of 'viral' warfare situation. Today, I'm thinking a bit more-macro here.   

Certainly, as I've mentioned, regardless of holding China 'to account' in the wake of this epidemiological crisis, it would never have been China's intent to expand their hegemony in this way (at this time) and infuriate as well as sicken, essentially their relationships with neighbors, and the entire world; exemplified by their efforts (more notable than ours at the moment) trying to offset that by shipping medical supplies.. everywhere.  

Nevertheless the 'trade wars' got sort of settled (well on their way), a need for U.S. supply-chains to diversify, was well-underway before Covid-19 hit, and it was already a turning-point, but one towards 'balanced globalism' I think, rather than scurrying away from it just as fast as feasible.

So in that respect, I speculate it's going to be known as quite an historical (as well as hysterical) 'turning point' in this century. So President Trump in a sense will have less opposition to reduced 'global integration' ahead, as for that matter some of the EU members have their own ideas on that and not always in-lockstep with Brussels.    

However this also means personal lives will be a bit more constrained (I'm optimistic that won't means special licenses to fly or go abroad to prove in a sense being negative for Covid-19 and also not being a Senior Citizen). I exaggerate a bit there; although some variation could actually be in-place, pending both an effective drug (even if hydrogy-chloroquine is helpful, it's most likely going to be sub-optimal in terms of knocking-out the virus) and proven vaccine. I think that, not a grand-conspiracy with big-pharma, is a reason why Dr. Fauci hasn't wholeheartedly endorsed the old malaria drug (if it were just because of links to Big Pharma and so on; then Bill Gates is unlikely to have funded over $6 million for the current NYU 'Trial' of it).    

Aside the (often near-confrontational) debates about merits (or lack) of the hydroxychloroquine / Z-pack combination to reduce Covid-19's impact, it's rarely a debate about the idea of an 'outbreak' of international cooperation, somehow erupting after the pandemic subsides, though to a degree it will likely improve or move somewhat towards where it was, but not that far.

The United States omnipotent economic and global stabilization image for sure was already challenged, but now it's virtually hobbled, somewhat. So I hope there are no adventures to reassert it required, nor that China takes advantage (if they're even able) of our temporary incapacities (that we do as a nation proclaim not impeded, but they obviously are somewhat). Not that we have that big a problem, but in 1918 some say mortality actually was greater from the Spanish Flu than from the war.  

In-sum: for awhile I've suggested the market would rebound as soon as a 'neutering' if not curative drug 'takes death off the table' with Covid-19 for a substantial portion of even serious cases. We may be getting there, while a slew of media, medical and Government types fiddle as New York burns in a sense. We don't expect H-C to do more than ease recovering from a C-19 (Covid-19) serious case; sub-optimial is good enough 'for now'.

And by the way while there may be valid discussions about relationships, whether between Government and pharmaceutical industry or foundation support, there is no embrace here of either extreme ideas (one is that the entire affair is some sort of conspiracy to promote globalism, when just the opposite pressure is exerted).  

 And the other relates to Bill Gates somehow resigning from the Boards of Microsoft (MSFT) and Berkshire Hathaway (BRK-A), (I guess he seemingly is engaged in more than playing bridge with Warren Buffet these days), to engage in a plot to resolve 'climate change' by ending the Industrial Revolution's late phase in one-fell-swoop. I'm waiting for the conspiracy crowd to say he'd sold some MSFT stock knowing what was coming. It's panic inspired by a desire to follow money and somehow trace 'blame' to anyone 'but' China; and China has been spending a lot to deflect their culpability in all this.

Bottom-line: the virus itself may be the stepchild of a covert drama that I have tried to trace a bit from Manitoba (arrests) to Harvard (arrest) to the Boston Logan flights (arrest); to consulting fees for the Wuhan bio-lab. At the same time we presumed primary identified nations have no interest in it morphing into the horrible exponentially-growing parasite it became. Yes time was of course lost; yes people were wrong at stages (Dr. Fauci was originally not disputing the Democrat (or Republican) leadership teams, who thought a 'travel ban' was a mistake, really and that's unusual since an epidemiologist should know that would help, so it is one bothersome aspect that nags but his actual approach is actually what seems to work at this point. He also is not opposed to H-C but wants to see the data).  

And yes, both political parties (it's human nature) tended to downplay the chances of it becoming 'pandemic' or listening to (and recalling my doubts about) WHO saying it was all ok, while half of their directors disputed that conclusion, further attests to poor advice from professionals at a moment when there was still time.