One thing I've been continually amazed at is how so many of the pandemic debates have treated pandemic mitigation through an indefinite lens that is static.
We saw this with the flatten the curve debate as though delaying infection was valueless and infection was inevitable.
I've been in the No Man's Land on the school/kids debates this pandemic of taking Covid in kids seriously but also thinking kids can do in-person school successfully with mitigation.
But it really is weird how people like Glenn frame things like this at this stage when a vaccine is on the way. I'm still for in-person school right now, but the remote school side of this debate isn't arguing for indefinite remote schooling. Kids are going to get vaccines soon. The other side of this debate is balancing say 3-5 months of remote school for child illnesses that could soon be prevented with vaccines.
If we had an effective vaccine for car accidents coming soon I'd say we'd be nuts if we didn't drive less till then.
Maybe the costs of not doing in-person school are high enough, but be honest about the cost benefit horizon of the choice set.