>>And yet most of those measures are very expensive to implement, and in fact they are resisted by various groups. They don't want to do anything.

Yet many school districts shut down in person schooling altogether. The notion that they'd be willing to acquiesce to this very extreme demand from teachers unions, but not much milder demands like those you mentioned, is hard to believe.

>>I mean, we're talking about an entire state here.

You can find an outlier state for any given statistic, so it is in fact an anecdote.

>>It's more than an anecdote is an ever-growing list of obituaries.

It's an anecdote.

>>The shortages are not an anecdote, it's a systemic failure of which we can identify the cause. And the solution isn't "Let's just get back to school"

There is no analysis done to see how much of that could be attributed to in-person schooling leading to COVID deaths among teachers, and the comparing the social/human cost of that to the cost of children missing out on in-person schooling for a year, because the teachers unions are interested only in advocating for their employees, not in genuinely searching out to find the best policy for the public interest.

They have already made their mind up on what the correct conclusion is, and they are just searching for arguments that could plausibly support it.

>>Even if that were true, if a teacher gets covid outside of school and can't come in to work, who is going to teach the class that day? Please just answer that question, keeping in mind there is a substitute and teacher shortage due to covid.

I don't understand why all in-person schooling has to be shut down because some teachers cannot attend class. There are still many teachers available that can do in-person schooling. Why not at least have them do in-person instruction?

>>The link you provided does not say that 30-40% of minorities students are not learning due lockdowns. That may be one aspect of it, but it also goes on to note that black and Hispanics

It says specifically that they were not learning via remote instruction. Here's a graph that lays it out:

https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/public%...

So you're mischaracterizing what the linked page is asserting. It is absolutely claiming that remote education led to massive education losses for a significant fraction of minority students.

This is absolutely for the school shutdown position, which makes it unsurprising that you're not willing to accept the conclusions of that analysis, and are even mischaracterizing what they are.

The rest of your arguments are just rehashing points I've already rebutted, or more of the case of you demanding definitive proof from every conceivable indication of damage from lockdowns, while accepting every claim of harm from the absence of a lockdown.

>>I don't know what you're trying to say here. You're just minimizing people's stated reasons of grievance.

I'm not even commenting on their stated reasons, which are orthogonal to my point about what triggered the riots. I'm pointing out the fact that the riots were triggered by the George Floyd video. That's not a disputable fact.

But any fact that shines poorly on the lockdown, you feel compelled to dispute. This is the typical case when debating unionized teachers who argued, under the lockdown philosophy, that schools should be shut down for a year or more, in favor of the disastrous remote learning that led to so much educational loss for children.