I prefer outlets that do their very best to attempt to remain impartial and present a "just the facts and all the facts please" view, even if we all know it's n

I prefer outlets that do their very best to attempt to remain impartial and present a "just the facts and all the facts please" view, even if we all know it's not 100% achievable. I agree with you, this article is not that. If you listen to any economist, healthcare provider, or logistics expert, they will all tell you that this was the prudent choice given the worst-case tail scenario, and that this resource is one that has continuing value for some time. But this article takes all that information and manages to paint that information in a negative light. It is "an opinion of the author" piece that even manages to express the opposite opinion FROM the expert opinions it reports.