I don't know that fully subsidizing testing would necessarily be enough to satisfy demand for testing, but at $100 per test x 300M Americans x call it 1 test pe

I don't know that fully subsidizing testing would necessarily be enough to satisfy demand for testing, but at $100 per test x 300M Americans x call it 1 test per week, you're looking at $30B per week to test everyone every week, if testing really can scale up that far. Which is (extremely) expensive but still less than the current stimulus packages and economic damage. I actually kinda wonder whether the ROI is high enough that it makes sense for some of the bigger investment funds to subsidize these tests. There are $4T under passive management in the US, so it would cost less than 1% of that number to test every American once at current market prices. If doing so would boost the market by at least 1%, it seems like it would have positive ROI to do so (and I for one would be happy if the index funds I'm invested in did so).