Which test? What kind of distribution did that test have? What kind of distribution capacity did that test have? What kind of false positive rate?

Classic "the [solution] that exists isn't good enough, therefore we can't use it at all!"

A pandemic is not the time to be picky - if anything, a high false positive rate helps. Would you rather 10 people quarantined, of whom only 2 are sick, or all 10 released into the wild because no test kit (of any sort) was available?

Even without a test you could quarantine people who get off flights. We've been doing it for years with pets traveling from specific countries.

To be fair, a test with high false-negative rate would be problematic. 10 people released into the wild, who think they don't have it, is worse than 10 people released into the wild who are uncertain about their status.

Not saying that's what happened here (perfect is the enemy of the good!), just that it could be worse. It could always be worse.

I would rather anyone with symptoms and ability to self quarantine instead of burdening the economy and healthcare system.