Sure, but many people have colds. Did you report a runny nose? Did you have a fever? If yes and no, then it's probably not COVID-19 and there's not much point testing you.

Regardless of how reasonable things seem at the moment, when it comes down to it I trust the Australian authorities and healthcare system in a way that I just don't for the US.

You don't go in to get tested if you are suspected of having coronavirus. If the management is still in the contact tracing phase, they will send someone to you to take a swab.

If you have symptomatic CV and you go to a hospital waiting room to be tested, you have done a bad thing.

if you have the symptoms for the cold, and don't have the symptoms for covid-19, then why would they test you?

There is no clear-cut distinction between the symptoms of the two - it's more an "if you hear hooves, think horse not zebra" thing. The New York Times article in the grandparent post literally points to the fact that Tom Hanks could get tested for coronavirus based on symtoms that were just like a cold as proof it's much easier to get tested in Australia than the US.

Except that if you read the ABC article, Australia only tests people who both have symptoms consistent with the disease AND either have travelled to an affected country or had contact with a confirmed case. Also, the US press has managed to convince a large (or at least vocal) chunk of the American public that if they can't get a Covid-19 test based on their cold-like symptoms it's somehow proof their healthcare system is falling behind the rest of the world in testing as part of a Trump cover-up, and it's leaking to the rest of the English speaking world. It's all over social media.

> points to the fact that Tom Hanks could get tested for coronavirus based on symtoms that were just like a cold as proof it's much easier to get tested in Australia than the US.

I think this just points to the ease of being tested if you are Tom Hanks.

Colds and flu have different symptoms.