Jess, I really appreciate your questions. I wanted to point to one of the reasons that the article appealed so strongly, not quibble with its conclusions. So my remarks were focused on the way that Gambuto's article appealed rhetorically to a conspiratorial mindset -- unveiling some kind of nefarious alliance between gov't and business to gaslight the public. He tended to conflate the two, while I think the situation is quite a bit more complex. First, I think the administration is trying to pretend that the pandemic isn't really a pandemic by suggesting that death rates are a hoax or that only those with co-morbidities are prone to death (among many other false statements), which is different from trying to resume life as before a pandemic. Resuming pre-pandemic life is actually a laudable goal, even if quite elusive at this point. When it comes to schools, notwithstanding Trump's efforts to reopen, which you point out, state and local governments have been weighing pros and cons, and there are many issues when it comes to remote learning vs. in-person instruction (quality of education, childcare, food insecurity, issues of abuse), that people far more knowledgeable than myself have debated. And I agree entirely that business will use the pandemic purely as a marketing opportunity, but I don't think they're trying to pretend we're not in a pandemic. Gambuto's point was about being awakened to the role of capitalism in our everyday lives and the power of the collective to make different choices. But even there the situation is more complex, and he acknowledges that business isn't inherently evil. That businesses would seek to survive in a pandemic by pivoting and marketing themselves differently in some ways is to be expected.