[taeric]

To be fair, that implicit assumption is pretty strong. There is an absurd bias to push kids back in schools so parents can get back to work.

Still, your points stand that there are some good studies showing kids are not necessarily the major spreaders. It is somewhat surprising to me, but it is data.

[orangecat]

There is an absurd bias to push kids back in schools so parents can get back to work.

Why is that absurd? Millions of Americans (mostly women) have had to work less or leave their jobs entirely in order to take care of their children, which is a major hit to both their finances and careers. It's a huge cost.

It is somewhat surprising to me

It shouldn't be if the media had been doing their jobs, but due to either incompetence or bias they haven't. People really don't seem to realize that schools have been open in large parts of the US (and many other countries) for months, and it hasn't led to mass infections of students or teachers or parents.

[taeric]

I'm far enough on the liberal end that a living income makes sense to me. Raising your kids is a job. And it is of value to society that one can do that well. Juggling low paying jobs is not beneficial.

[geoduck14]

I work from home. My wife stays at home and takes care of young kids.

We sent our 6 yo back to (in person) school because computer school was a bad idea.

I have a friend who teaches high school. He is SO relieved to be ending computer teaching.

I think so people want in person school so parents can work, but plenty of people want in person school because it IS better.

[taeric]

I empathize. We had to switch to home schooling because we couldn't keep home internet.

I also think in person is better than remote. I can still think the bias to make it look safe to send kids back to school feels forced.

[snark42]

> but plenty of people want in person school because it IS better.

For some kids, lots of data showing some kids thrived and improved while others suffered.